Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-06-2003 - 6cr ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: May 6, 2003 Action Agen a Item No. k2 - C, SUBJECT: Triangle Land Conservancy "State of Open Space 2002" DEPARTMENT: Environment and Resource PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN) No Conservation ATTACHMENT(S):- 1) State of Open Space 2002 Executive Summary (Copies of the Report were mailed directly by TLC. Extra copies will be available at the meeting.) 2) Slideshow Handout 3) February 3, 2003 Letter to the Editor from Commissioner Brown INFORMATION CONTACT: David Stancil, 245 -2590 Rich Shaw, 245 -2591 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 732 -8181 Chapel Hill Durham Mebane 968 -4501 688 -7331 336- 227 -2031 PURPOSE: To receive a special presentation from the Triangle Land Conservancy (TLC) on their recent report "State of Open Space 2002, The Status of the Triangle's Green Infrastructure." BACKGROUND: In late 2002, the Triangle Land Conservancy completed this report on the Triangle region's open space. This is the second production of this report, following the State of Open Space 2000 report. The report explores land use changes in the Triangle since the last report, catalogs new open space that has been protected, and reviews new conservation initiatives and ways to strengthen protection efforts. The report also contains a special section on Orange County's Lands Legacy program as a model for local government partnership and conservation. Representatives from TLC will be present to make a brief presentation on the findings of the report. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board receive the presentation and provide feedback as desired. State of Open Space 2002 Triangle Population, 1930 - 2000 1.2 ■ Wake 1 ■ Orange e ® Lee o.8 0 Johnston ■ Dwham e o.6 ■ Chatham 0.4 0 a p° 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M Q N M O M a a a ON a a o About TLC • Non - Profit Land Protection Organization • Founded 1983 • Service Area: Chatham, Durham, Johnston, Lee, Orange, Wake , • 4,540 AcresT'r'gtected o Own 1.412 Arras (4 Properties Open to Public) • '2,162 Acres Arotected by'Easements Assisted in Piotw`w 391. Acres., 575 Acres Transferred What is Open Space? Defined by Funclion Developed Land Per 1,000 People In the Triangle's Urbanized Areas, 1950 - 1990 400 0 350 0 a 300 °0 250 200 p 150 100 50 0 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 IQ 11 1 i Between 1997 -2002, estimated increase of 72,000 acres of developed land 2 Protected Ouen Suace By Ownershi Land Trust and Other 3% University / 11% U.S. Arrny -�^- Corps of Local, r F , Engineers Government 57% 13 % Corporate 14% Other State Agencies State Parks 2% 5% Total: 155,693 Acres Local Funding Has Increased 2000: $37.3 Mill. — 2002: $63.6 Alill. $l5 mill. bond in Wake • $20 mill. bond in Orange $2.5 mill. bond in Garner • $12.5 mill. appropriation from Cary, plus $1 mill. annually Payments -in -lieu, state and federal grants, impact and utility fees Acres Protected, Jan. 1, 2000 through June 30, 2002 3 Many Agencies Falling Behind Goals Half -Way Point on Five -Year Goals • Counties: Average 9.5% • State Parks: 4% • Non - Profits: Average 32% — Triangle Land Conservancy: 58% • NC Dept. Cultural Resources: 52% • OWASA: 576 Acres, Goal 500 -1,000 $$ State Budget Crisis $$ • Local gov'ts receiving less money from State • State trust funds are endangered • State parks plans delayed • Million Acre Initiative is neglected Million Acre Goal: Triangle Is Not Doing Its Part By Area 1 Triangle Portion: 63,000 Acres 6,300 Acres Per Year 1 39% of Goal By Population 1 Triangle Portion: 150,000 Acres 15,000 Acres Per Year 1 16% of Goal Other Challenges • Interagency cooperation is lacking • Development and open space protection remain haphazard • Stewardship • "Protected" open spaces can be converted • State law gives little authority to local gov'ts • Urban -rural divide in protected open space and funding 5 4 Pillar 1: Open Space Planning • Identify priority areas for protection • Specific short- and long -term strategies and action steps • Approved and adopted by local governing body • Local plans and regional plan • Outstanding example: Wake County Pillar 2: Acquisition • Reliable, diverse funding, including a dedicated revenue source • Urge State to take leadership role in funding • Dedicated, full -time staff • Outstanding example: Orange County Land Protection Proeram Foundation Funding and People Triangle GreenPrint • Summit of land protection agencies • Brainstorm protection strategies • Delegate responsibilities • Needs political and financial support P402 5 Please consider the following letter from Margaret Brown, Chair of the Orange County Board of Commissioners, as a letter to the editor. Letter to the Editor: In a January 25th article ( "Region Steps Up Effort for Land "), the writer asserts that the new Triangle Land Conservancy report State of Open Space 2002 finds Orange County among local governments "lagging on [its] land protection goals." However, a careful reading of the report would find that Orange County, with its Lands Legacy Program, has in fact been very successful in its first two years of existence. Since the program's enaction in April 2000, Orange County has protected 800 acres of critical natural and cultural resource lands, including several new park and nature preserve sites. Conservation easements on an additional 460 acres are currently well underway. Funds authorized by Orange County voters have been leveraged with almost $2 million in State and Federal grants toward these acquisitions of natural areas, farmland easements and park sites. The County has partnered with other local governments and Triangle Land Conservancy in several of these acquisitions. In fact, the report itself highlights the Orange County Lands Legacy Program for its success, and offers it as a model to other local governments in the region as a way to partner with conservation agencies toward land conservation. The report also notes that Orange County has protected more land than Durham County and Wake County combined during the study timeframe. To be sure, there are many acres of important resource lands in Orange County that remain to be protected, and the County has set very lofty goals, but the implication that Orange County is lagging in protection of important resource lands is misleading. Margaret W. Brown Chapel Hill (The writer is Chair of the Orange County Board of Commissioners)