Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 11-21-2000-5bORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: November 21, 2000 Action Agen~,a Item No. ~~ SUBJECT: Referral of Shaping Orange County's Future Report DEPARTMENT: ERCD PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No ATTACHMENT(S): Draft 8/28 Public Hearing Minutes List of Advisory Boards Draft Resolution INFORMATION CONTACT: David Stancil, 245-2590 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 732-8181 Chapel Hill 968-4501 Durham 688-7331 Mebane 336-227-2031 PURPOSE: To refer, via the attached resolution, the Shaping Orange County's Future Provisional Report to relevant advisory boards. BACKGROUND: The Provisional Report from the Shaping Orange County's Future Task Force was presented at public hearing on August 28~'. A facilitated Assembly of Governments meeting is scheduled for January 29`h to discuss the report. A resolution referring the report to a list of 18 advisory boards is attached. The resolution asks the advisory boards to consider whether sufficient time exists for their review and comment prior to January 16, in order to have advisory board comments back to the Board in time for the January 29`~ Assembly of Governments meeting. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board adopt the attached resolution referring the Provisional Report to the list of advisory boards. The Manager also recommends that each advisory board consider, as soon as possible, whether their review can be completed in time for comments to be transmitted to the Board by January 16, 2001, and whether opportunities exist for boards to consider the report jointly. The Manager further recommends that the Board authorize the two members of the SOCF Steering Committee to meet with their counterparts to develop a format and plan for the January 29`h meeting. Slas /o~ 0~1- ~'~ 1 5. SHAPING ORANGE COUNTY'S FUTURE REPORT - 2 Environment and Resource Conservation Director David Stancil gave this report. He 3 presented a PowerPoint presentation. The Shaping Orange County's Future task force included 4 30 citizens who met far three and a half years and developed some recommendations in April 5 2000. The task force was asked to develop a quality growth strategy for the entire County, develop 6 a community building component to the strategy, and develop a process for maintenance of 7 community in every part of the County. The task force made some projections of the growth in s Orange County by the year 2030. Taking the growth in Orange County over the past 30 years, the 9 population in the year 2030 could be 178,740. The task force also projected that 46% of the to County's land area would be developed. 11 Ellen Ironside summarized several areas of the SOCF report. In summary, she noted 12 the values that the task force identified as follows: 13 14 1) sustainable renewable use of resources and environmental stewardship through. 15 joint planning, cooperation, and action; 16 2) towns which are friendly and accessible, centers of education, culture, and civic life; 17 3) places where individuals and neighborhoods thrive along with businesses and 18 institutions that serve their needs; 19 4) rural areas which retain natural visual and economic resources by maintaining the 20 integrity of forests, streams, and open space through voluntary incentives, thus 21 preserving the land's continuing potential for agriculture and other uses; 22 5) the development of children and youth as well as adult citizens in various phases of 23 their lives, by providing excellent elementary and secondary education, cultural 24 experiences and life-long teaming opportunities; 2s fi) a strong commitment to the well-being of all individuals, young, and old, of any race 26 or ethnicity, and with any disability by providing for basic physical and social needs; 27 7) governance that provides necessary public services efficiently, proactively 28 establishes collaborative ties within the region and state, encourages civic 29 participation, and is fully representative of all the County's citizens, responsive to 3o their needs, consistent and fair, .socially just in decision making, and accountable for 31 the promises made on behalf of citizens; 32 8) a shared sense of community -civil, collaborative, vibrant, friendly, caring, and both 33 diverse and inclusive where citizens feel responsible to and for one another, where 34 involvement in community life is both encouraged and anticipated, where the 35 contributions of all are welcome and respected. 36 37 Norm Gustaveson made reference to the recommendations and asked that the Board of 38 County Commissioners read the recommendations very carefully and look at the issues which are 39 identified in the report. He said that in looking at the governmental structure, the concern was the 4o issue that somehow all parts of the County should be represented an the County Board of 41 Commissioners. A second big question is the interlocal and regional planning. The idea, of a 4z growth management board may be one of the best ways to keep track of growth in the County. He 43 said that it is hoped that two-thirds of the future growth will be placed in those places that already 44 have water and sewer. The report suggests an evaluation of a growth management budget. He 45 said that the big question was the importance of being sure the open space in Orange County was 46 not lost. 47 Carl Shy talked about transportation and environmental water issues and a diverse 48 economy. He said that the vehicle miles traveled were expected to double by the year 2030. The 49 major way to reduce the number of vehicle miles is to place incentives or restrictions on the use of So cars. The report has several suggestions to be sure that the vehicle miles do not double in the 51 next thirty years. These include park and ride lots, public transportation nodes, low emission 52 vehicles, etc. Regarding water quality, the committee hopes to drive growth away from 53 watersheds. The task force hopes that incentives will be used to encourage people to use Less 54 water. The conservation of water will reduce the cost of new reservoirs and water supply. 2 4 S 6 7 8 9 to 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 zl z2 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3S 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 4S 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 Regarding the economy, the main recommendation is that the task force thought the County could be more progressive in encouraging new businesses to come to Orange County. In general, the County and Towns could support the startup of businesses through a variety of means and make developing regulations more flexible to accommodate new businesses. Peggy Pollitzer said that the task force wants to encourage both public and private initiatives to make affordable housing a reality in Orange County. This would include governments, non-profits, and for-profit corporations to take an interest and make a real effort to provide a wide range of affordable housing. The task force also recommends asking UNC to develop affordable housing for its students, staff, and faculty in proportion to their increases. Regarding Human Service Priorities, she said that it would require significant effort to promote healthy behaviors on the part of the citizens. The task force also recommends adequately funding and providing community-based services to meet the demand for mental health, mental illness, and substance abuse. The task force also has recommendations in the report on senior citizens, childcare, public safety, education campaigns, and the needs of the Latino population. Regarding K-12 education, the task force is encouraging cooperation between the two school systems and asks that the County and school systems consider the appropriateness of school merger. The task farce also encourages increased cooperation between the administration of the two systems and to look at whether merger is a possibility. The task force would also like for the Board to look at adult education. The task force feels it is important to the citizens to have a continuing education program. Also, English as a Second Language is a critical component of bringing everybody in as an equal opportunity. Ellen Ironside talked about the citizen's roundtable. The Govemments would actively pursue community and citizen involvement in decision making. An ongoing citizen's roundtable modeled after the SOCF Task Force was relied upon by the Town and County govemments to provide an avenue far citizen's concems to be transmitted and heard by the elected bodies. The roundtable is charged to examine issues, gain broad citizen input, come to consensus, and make recommendations to the goveming boards to give serious weight and consideration to this input. The roundtable is also charged with monitoring implementation of the adapted SOCF recommendations and examining the County's vision for any necessary corrections. The roundtable members are volunteers who are selected for appointment by each of the goveming boards in the County to reflect the diversity of Orange County citizens. The roundtable will use facilitation and dispute resolution techniques in working with community issues. PUBLIC COMMENT James Carnahan spoke on behalf of the Village Project, an ad hoc group of citizens (designers, planners, and environmentalists). They want to promote alternatives to sprawl by supporting traditional patterns of land use and transportation. Their primary goal is preservation of the rural landscape. They are commenting tonight about the environment and land use section of the task force report and support its call to, "identify areas of the County in which to promote denser mixed use development and channel growth into these areas." They ask the County Commissioners and the task force to consider two items. They ask that the County Commissioners consider the North Carolina railroad between Charlotte and Morehead City as an alternative transportation corridor along which to concentrate the growth. The Village Project believes it would be prudent and exciting to plan transit villages for several sites along the railroad line. Secondly, they strongly support the earlier language of the task force report, the proposed rural villages as growth receptors at appropriate sites in rural Orange County. He said that this would require some growth focussing mechanism for rural areas, and they support the task force proposal that rural citizens work in small area planning processes to establish a fair and equitable mechanism for directing development into a few sites where compact mixed use communities can grow over time surrounded by large conservation buffers. The Village Project shares the concems about utility issues, particularly sewer, and they concur that extension of municipal services into rural villages is neither necessary nor desirable. Jeff Schmitt was representing about 75 citizens in the County. He commented about the item, Putting Community Building First, which involves convening asix-month study group to 3 1 look at the basis for the representation and the election of the Board of County Commissioners. 2 He said that 47 of the 100 counties in North Carolina elect their representatives on a basis other 3 than fully at-large. He made reference to the executive summary and said that there was na 4 mention in that document of convening a study group to look at the basis for the representation of s the County Commissioners. 6 With na further citizens to speak on this item, Vice-Chair Halkiotis closed the public hearing. 8 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordan, seconded by Commissioner Brown that 9 the Board of County Commissioners take the Shaping Orange County's Future report up at a work 1o session before it is taken to the Assembly of Governments. 11 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 12 13 5 Advisory Boards To Which the BOCC May Wish to Refer the SOCF Report: Planning Board Commission for the Environment Agricultural Preservation Board Historic Preservation Commission Advisory Board on Aging Arts Commission Board of Health Board of Social Services Economic Development Commission Commission for Women Human Relations Commission Innovation and Efficiency Committee Recreation and Parks Advisory Council Solid Waste Advisory Board Visitor's Bureau 'OPC Mental Health Board Housing/UNC Task Force Skills Development Center Advisory Committee * -These are advisory boards which appear to cover topics addressed in the SOCF report. Where there were two boards covering the same topic area, the board with the broader charge has been selected. The advisory boards could be asked to provide input only on the parts of the SOCF report relevant to their charge. 6 A Resolution Referring the Shaping Orange County's Future Provisional Report to Relevant County Advisory Boards WHEREAS, in May of this year the Shaping Orange County's Future Task Force transmitted its Provisional Report to'the elected boards of Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Hillsborough and Orange County, and WHEREAS, on August 28, 2000, the Orange County Board of Commissioners held a public hearing on the Provisional Report, and WHEREAS, an Assembly of Governments meeting has been scheduled for January 29, 2001 to discuss the Task Force report: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED That the Orange County Board of Commissioners refers the Task Force Provisional Report to the attached list of County advisory boards for their review and comment. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED That the listed advisory boards consider, as soon as possible, whether sufficient time exists for review and comment to be completed prior to January 16, 2001, examine the possibility of expeditiously addressing this subject with other participating boards or commissions, and advise the Board of Commissioners as soon as possible of their reaction as to the appropriateness of this deadline. This, the 21~ day of November, 2000. Moses Carey, Jr. Chair, Board of Commissioners ATTEST: Beverly Blythe Clerk to the Board Attachment to Resolution -List of Advisorx Boards Planning Board Commission for the Environment Agricultural Preservation Board Historic Preservation Commission Advisory Board on Aging Arts Commission Boazd of Health Board of Social Services Economic Development Commission Commission for Women Human Relations Commission Innovation and Efficiency Committee Recreation and Parks Advisory Council Solid Waste Advisory Board Visitor's Bureau OPC Mental Health Board Housing/UNC Task Force Skills Development Center Advisory Committee