Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 09-30-1993 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY ASSEMBLY OF GOVERNMENTS SEPTEMBER 30, 1993 The Orange County Assembly of Governments meeting was held on Thursday, September 30, 1993 at the University Presbyterian Church, 309 E. Franklin Street, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. COUNTY ** ISSI* SENT: Chair Moses Carey, Jr. , Commissioners Verla Insko and Alice Gordon. COUNTY 00 ISSI ' m' ABSENT: Commissioner Stephen Halkiotis. ' " :*' * OF ID " SENT: Alderman Hilliard Caldwell and Mayor Eleanor Kinnaird. S 'EL HILL $ as CIL " SD : Council members Mark Chilton and Joyce Brown. HILLS:W' s CSI BO, ' 0 OF ois ISSI$ DI PRESENT: Mayor Horace Johnson and Commissioner Bob Rose. I ' SD CTION: Council member Joyce Brown welcomed the audience and introduced the steering committee for this event. David Godschalk, Professor of Planning at the University of North Carolina, introduced Dr. John DeGrove, the Director of Florida Atlantic University/Florida International University Joint Center for Environmental and Urban Problems. 40' TING VISION c* $ is ITY'S FUTURE AND m *PING A v . D IN S # . Dr. DeGrove stated that there was not one "solution" to the issue of growth management. These are complicated issues which must be discussed openly. Discomfort will result from this discussion, however, that is a necessary part of the creation of a countywide land use plan. He indicated that there are certain issues that all regions have in common. Some of those issues are land use planning, water/sewer, surface/air transportation, solid waste, affordable housing, and endangered species. It is vital that there be a countywide plan and a regional plan. Even where a countywide plan is in place and working well, it can become nonfunctional if the region's plans are in opposition to the county's plan. A review of several regional plans from across the nation made clear the common concerns and issues. ATLANTA ' D IONAL *$ ISSION: Georgia has adopted a statewide growth management system. They have come to realize that planning in isolation, or using "home rule" does not work. SAN DID** ASSOCIATION OF GO D I IN S: DeGrove indicated that this Association was not an especially strong organization until they were recommended to be the Regional Planning and Growth Management Board and with that title they were also given authority. This was critical to their mission of being a well planned community. 1 DANE COUNTY: This community is similar to Orange County in that the rural community is not overly supportive of the urban population. The elected officials are working toward reaching consensus and they are making progress toward a county-wide growth strategy. Dr. DeGrove indicated that having a vision for future growth is absolutely necessary for the planning process. He suggested gathering all of the key stakeholders to focus on the vision for the future. After the vision is in place land development regulations will move in that direction. A consensus of stakeholders is painful to build but essential for success. A,SAPL, I. BAY: This area has six linked visions. Development is concentrated in suitable areas which allows for more sensitive areas to be protected. Growth is directed to existing population areas which helps protect resource areas. Comprehensive planning is critical for the overall health of any community as it grows and develops into the future. Protecting the environment can be accomplished only through regional and statewide planning. ORANGE COUNTY: A comprehensive, coordinated regional growth strategy is vital. Universities must be included in the growth management system and must help devise a way to offset the infrastructure demands. This "offset" needs to be mandated. Concurrence also needs to be mandated. Communities must determine to "pay as they grow" and not assume that growth pays for itself because it often does not. A fair system of Transferrable Development Rights (TDR) is also critical to future planning. There are many clear signals regarding what is the right thing to do. Leadership is needed in order for communities to move in that direction. Dr. DeGrove completed his presentation and introduced the panelists. A complete listing of the panelists follows: Moses Carey, Orange County Commissioner David Godschalk, Professor of Planning Joe Hackney, NC State Representative Paul Hardin, UNC-CH Chancellor Bob Hogan, Farmer/Developer Sally Jessee Brown, President, Marin Properties John Link, Orange County Manager Bob Rose, Hillsborough Town Commissioner Allen Spalt, Citizen Activist Bill Strom, Citizen Activist Elizabeth Walters, Dairy Farmer Stick Williams, Area Manager, Duke Power Company In response to the question "is there a future for agriculture in Orange County?", the following responses were given: Elizabeth Walters commented that rural Orange County does have problems. The Agricultural Districts Advisory Board, of which she is a member, has compiled suggestions for the Board of County Commissioners. Those suggestions will be presented to the Board in the near future. Special zoning for "agricultural 2 priority areas" in order to direct growth away from agricultural areas is one of those suggestions. Bob Hogan commented that the areas around Chapel Hill which are suitable for farming are already developed beyond the point of needing this type of planning. Commissioner Carey stated that a vision has been talked about for years. Discussion has been ongoing about Transferable Development Rights (TDR) and Purchased Development Rights (TDR). The breakdown occurs when decisions are being approached about "sending" and "receiving" areas. The issue of jurisdictional lines and how to transfer across those lines is always a challenge to resolve. After that is resolved it will be necessary to determined how to finance the transferring of these development rights. Dr. DeGrove recommended a solution to the issue of jurisdictional lines which is being used in some areas. That would be to establish a multi- jurisdictional Commission and to request power from the Legislature so that the jurisdictional lines are not at issue. He stressed that it was critical to actually reach closure rather than to stop short of final resolution. He also suggested that the counties and municipalities consider changing from a "Dillion's Rule" form of government which requires that the Legislature give permission for all changes. Rep. Joe Hackney indicated that the "Dillion's Rule" is not the issue here. The Legislature grants almost all Board of Commissioners requests. Sallee Jesse Brown commented that "infill" has been considered unacceptable in Orange County. She would like to see higher density be permitted in appropriate locations. Allan Spalt stated that a clear vision is lacking for this community. Dr. DeGrove indicated that although sprawl may initially appear to be less expensive, in the longer view it is much more affordable to repair and upgrade older infrastructure than it is to allow sprawl. Commissioner Rose indicated that although Hillsborough is in better financial shape than it has been in the past, it needs to increase its tax base in order to survive. John Link indicated that Orange County, Carrboro, Hillsborough and Chapel Hill have been working together over the past several years. Learning to "reason together" is an ongoing goal. He indicated that within the next 9 months the county will address many issues, including the following: rural character study volunteer farmland preservation programs -a Purchased Development Rights (PDR) proposal with a land evaluation system to protect the proper farms will be presented to the county a growth impact analysis to determine which kinds of growth will be positive economic district proposals 3 Much dialogue is needed during these upcoming months. The University is also a major stakeholders and needs to be included in the dialogue. Chancellor Hardin commented on the issue of the University helping to pay for infrastructure. He stated that all of the concerned parties need to go to the General Assembly together and ask for the infrastructure. At the present time the University is involving the community as well as units of government in an ongoing dialogue concerning the future plans for the Horace Williams Airport property. The University wants to grow responsibly. He indicated that the Legislature needs to be included in the current conversation between the university and local elected officials. Stick Williams indicated that Duke Power is developing a good relationship with the university and local governments. He commented that a county vision will be difficult to accomplish because often the most vocal citizens direct what happens regardless of what appears to be the best course of action. He asked that we remember that the University is the reason most of us are in this community. It is a state resource and having a veto power over one of the engines that causes the state to grow could be disastrous. Chancellor Hardin indicated that the passage of the $300 million dollar bond is critical to the future of the university as well as local community colleges, state parks and water and sewer. Neil Pedersen stated that communities need to cease being in reaction mode about building schools and future housing development. Commissioner Gordon stated that the Transportation Advisory Committee is attempting to develop a multiemodal approach including bikeways and pedestrian pathways. The Department of Transportation (DOT) is not responsive to local requests. Commissioner Rose agreed that DOT is unresponsive and asked what could be done. Dr. DeGrove suggested contacting the Governor. Rep. Joe Hackney indicated that DOT is attempting to be more responsive. The Triangle Transit Authority (TTA) is planning for light rail. DOT has historically been a highway agency. This is changing, however, it will not change swiftly. The TTA is working toward this end. Dr. DeGrove stated that Greenways and Open Space must be purchased. Affordable housing and the purchase of environmentally sensitive land is necessary for the health of a community. This will require matching funds from the state. The Nature Conservancy is in a position to gather information on where the public stands on these issues. People will vote to purchase the land if they understand what is at stake. David Godschalk indicated that the lack of consensus between the rural/urban residents prevents many necessary solutions from being implemented including greenways. A process must be implemented which would allow consensus between rural/urban residents to be reached. A comprehensive plan for the county needs to be in place so that each proposed development does not lead to a major 4 fight. Sustainability in regard to the balancing of all of these components is also necessary. Clarity about our urban areas and what they will be like needs to exist. We must educate the public regarding high density, infill and mixed use. All of these terms have undeserved negative connotations in Orange County. Lastly, movement systems are necessary for a healthy, vibrant future community. The remaining panelists added the following to the list of concerns: *rezoning needs to be enabling rather than defensive. *future development must include the participation of all of the people involved. *stamina and empathy are necessary ingredients of consensus building. *commitment to the "process". *remember the regional perspective. Involve the state. *include planning for economic growth. *rural residents, both farmers and non-farmers, need to be heard. *watershed protection/funding by state. *reach consensus between tax base and economic development prior to decisions been made. It was suggested that the "Shaping. Orange County Steering Committee" which was established by the Public Private Partnership, could be used to help reach consensus on a county-wide vision. Sallee Jesse Brown stated that the first subcommittee meeting will be October 28th. The meeting will be open to the public and all comments are welcome. The first meeting will focus on the Steering Comlittee's vision. There being no further comments the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Kathleen Baker Deputy Clerk to the Board 5