HomeMy WebLinkAboutCFE 051203 Ors nee County
Commission for the Environment
c / o PO Box 8181
_ HiIkboroug , NC 27278
ftftiii0oi mg
Memorandum
To : Commission for the Environment
From : Cara Crisler and Richard Whisnant , Co - Chairs
Date : May 5 , 2003
Re : May 12 Meeting Agenda
Please find attached the agenda and materials for the next meeting of
the Commission for the Environment , on
Monday, May 12, 2003
7: 30 p . m .
Southern Human Services Center
2505 Homestead Road
Chapel Hill , NC
If you have questions , or will be unable to attend , please contact Carol
Melton ( 245 - 2590 , cmelton@co . orange . nc . us ) by the Friday before the
meeting .
i
i
i
AGENDA
Orange County Commission for the Environment
Ma 12 , 2003
0 0
Homestead Community Center
Homestead Road , Chapel Hill , NC
Time Pg Item Title
7 : 30 I . Call to Order
7 : 30 II . Additions or Changes to Agenda
7 : 32 2 III . Approval of Minutes (April 14 )
7 : 35 9 IV . State of Open Space 2002 - Triangle Land
Conservancy
Lorelei Costa from TLC will be present to present this recent report on
regional open space . Please see Attachment # 1
7 : 55 15 IV . Air Quality Issues and Opportunities
There have been several recent items and discussions regarding air
quality activities . Please see Attachment 2 for a summary presented at
the April 29 Assembly of Governments meeting
8 : 15 V . State of the Environment Recommendations —
Further Follow - up Discussions
The Commission may wish to further discuss feedback received from
the Board of Commissioners on May 6 , and the types of follow - up
needed to pursue the recommendations in the report, both here and in
committee breakout sessions
8 : 30 VII . Committee Breakout Sessions
9 : 00 VIII . Adjournment ( Next Meeting — June 9 )
M
ORANGE COUNTY
COMMISSION FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
DRAFT Meeting Summary
April 14, 2003
Homestead Community Center, Carrboro, NC
Members Present : Laura Cotterman , Charles Daniel , Annette Jurgelski , Kenneth
Meardon , Hervey McIver , Dan Okun , Richard Pratt , Johnny Randall , Mark Smith ,
Julie Tucker , Rebecca Vidra , Chris Wachholz , Richard Whisnant and Lindsay Wichers
Excused Absences : Cara Crisler
Guest : Judy Kincaid , Durham County Environmental Affairs Board
Staff Present : David Stancil , ERCD Director ; Rich Shaw , Land Conservation
Manager ; and Carol Melton , ERCD Staff
I . Call to Order
Whisnant called meeting to order at 7 : 30 p . m .
II . Additions to the Agenda
Daniels requested adding a report from a recent meeting of the Water Committee
for discussion . Shaw noted that each CfE member received a tote bag as a gift of
appreciation and thanks from the Board of County Commissioners for the work and
time volunteered by each member . Commissioner Gordon expressed her
condolences for having to miss this meeting and sends her appreciation for the
dedication and work of each CfE member .
III . Approval of Minutes ( March 10 )
Meardon noted that the minutes indicated that information about an energy
efficient milking machine that he offered was referred to the Agricultural
Preservation Board ( APB ) . Meardon asked who is responsible for getting that
information to the APB . Shaw offered to convey the information to the board .
MOTION : Okun motioned approval of March 10 , 2003 minutes . Seconded by
Vidra .
VOTE : unanimous .
IV . Environmental Summit Debrief
Members discussed what worked well with the March 29 Summit and identified
ideas for improving for future summits . Whisnant gave a special thank you to
Randall for his work in arranging the event at the NC Botanical Garden .
The following are ideas that were suggested for future consideration .
Page 1 of 7
Draft April 14 , 2003
• Greater efforts are needed to advertise the event to increase attendance
( although this year ' s attendance was adequate for the Totten Center )
Would need larger meeting room for a larger attendance
Schedule the Summit at a time where there is no other competing event
• Develop a brochure to promote the next SOE report and environmental
summit ( Brochure should include presentation information , similar to Lands
Legacy Program brochure )
• Follow - up summit with another press release
Make the SOE report available on line ( Done ; available on ERCD web page )
Make Dave Stancil ' s PowerPoint presentation available on line
Advertise availability of SOE report in News of Orange
Get high school students involved ( just as Hillsborough uses high school
students in the annual Candlelight Tour )
• In place of the SOE report at the 2004 summit , identify people in community
who are key in implementing CfE recommendations ; solicit their involvement
with special invitations .
• Expand invitations to other non - profit exhibitors
• Conservation Award at next year ' s summit
• Cut back on refreshments or don 't offer any refreshments
• Hold the next summit at Stanback Middle School
• Need advocates ; lobby teachers ; contact school administration
• Use Natural Areas Inventory update as focal point of next year 's summit
( Bruce Some would be good keynote speaker )
• Don 't rely solely on PowerPoint presentation ; include dialogue in order to
connect to participants
• Reduce the narrative in the next SOE report
It was noted that Chuck Roe mentioned this was not the first Orange County
Environmental Summit . According to Roe , the first event of this kind was held in
1978 . Shaw offered to contact Roe to learn about that event and to report back .
Members discussed ways of involving students . One idea was distributing the SOE
report to ninth grade teachers and asking them to use the contents for student
projects . Another idea was to have a student poster contest at the next summit .
Members discussed the idea of establishing an Orange County environmental issues
listserve to publicize events , including future summits , and to publicize the SOE
report findings and recommendations .
Members discussed the proposed Conservation Award and the reasons for
eliminating it from this year ' s summit . It was noted that the nomination process
and selection criteria had been finalized . It was suggested that the CfE discuss with
Commissioner Gordon to get a better sense of how to gain BOCC authorization to
move forward with this project . It was decided that the Environmental Education
Committee would take the lead , including finding out the process used by another
advisory board for the annual Pauli Murray Human Relations award . [ That award is
administered by the Orange County Human Relations Commission]
Page 2 of 7
Draft April 14 , 2003
V . State of the Environment Recommendations and Follow - Up
Members discussed the overall efforts and the goals matrix for 2003 in conjunction
with how to implement recommendations from the SOE report .
Daniel noted concerns raised that the findings from the adopted WRC report had
been generalized in the SOE information and needed to carry forward the
recommendations from the WRC report . Whisnant reported that some folks , that
were at the summit , were not clear on what the CfE was recommending should
happen with the report and , that the WRC report had not made it ' s way onto any
agenda in a set of action items . If we want to see any of our recommendations
happen we need to have a strategy to keep the critical issues alive .
Daniel reported on a Water Resource Committee meeting held on April 3rd to
discuss the previous work and the final reports . He reviewed the work of the earlier
Water Resource Committee from 1992 - 2002 , which included the following .
• Primary focus was on ground water
• Series of studies completed by Orange County and U . S . Geological Survey
• County spent $ 200 - 300 , 000 that was match with federal funds
A number of reports were published and distributed nationally
• Presentations were made to the BOCC
• A couple years have passed ; all the reports and recommendations on hold
• CfE has been asked to revisit the study findings and to continue to advise the
BOCC to move forward on implementation
Members discussed strategies for implementation .
• Develop a set of action items for implementation
• Give commissioners an understanding of what is needed to accomplish the
necessary actions
• Get on BOCC agenda ; present informations give commissioners opportunity
to ask questions of CfE representatives
• Establish a county position to help implement these recommendations , such
as a professional hydrogeologist associated with TJ COG
Shaw reported that the BOCC has scheduled a report on the SOE for May 6 . Stancil
will make a short presentation . Members discussed ways of promoting the CfE 's
recommendations .
Members asked Judy Kincaid how the Durham Environmental Affairs Board went
about implementing their recommendations . She said presentations were made to
the Durham BOCC and City Council . She said highlighting the indicators is just the
first step , and that the City and County need to devote staff time and resources to
follow - up and develop implementation plans , and to set objectives and targets .
Kincaid said Durham 's indicators report did not include targets , nor did it include an
action plan . Managers were interested , but Durham has severe budget problems .
Kincaid said the Environmental Affairs Board is applying for grants and is interested
in exploring joint application with Orange County . Members discussed this
possibility , and noted that Orange County has worked successfully with Durham
County on the Little River Park project .
Page 3 of 7
Draft April 14 , 2003
Daniel added that the WRC talked about expanding their work to cover the multi -
county region . Members discussed the idea of exploring a joint funding proposal for
a staff position , as the budget restraints are likely to allow the creation of new
positions for air quality or water quality . Randall added that it would be good to
have some projects in mind to go with the recommended position . Whisnant noted
that the same idea was presented in the air quality section of SOE report - to
collaborate with other counties on air quality work . The group agreed to ask Stancil
and Kincaid to get together to investigate joint funding possibilities .
Other follow - up comments on the SOE report included :
• Develop a short , bulleted brochure that includes highlights from Stancil
presentation
Executive Summary needed to give out at the May 6tr, BOCC meeting
• Other members felt it ' s important for BOCC to see the whole report
• Something less complicated needed for the general public and / or schools
Shaw reported that ERCD has a draft executive summary that can be edited for
distribution and that staff could develop a brochure , similar to the Lands Legacy
brochure . Members asked staff to get this done . Cotterman agreed to work on this
project with staff .
Members continued discussing their ideas for follow - up and for getting the SOE
recommendations before the commissioners . Members discussed getting the SOE
report to middle school and high school science teachers , and perhaps also to some
elementary schools . Randall suggested going directly to school superintendents to
suggest using the SOE for curriculum planning and to promote the summit .
Wachholz suggested taking the PowerPoint presentation , combine it with elements
from the executive summary and produce it in larger , cheaper quantities along with
a reference that the full report can be download from the ERCD website .
Whisnant suggested the Environmental Education Committee look into ways of
getting students involved in future summits and getting schools to use the SOE
report . Wachholz suggested a school poster contest to promote next year ' s
summit . Smith suggested CfE members be available to go talk about some aspect
of what we do and to introduce the SOE . Randall suggested that the next intern for
ERCD be an " Environmental Education Intern " and for that person to take on this
project . Members thought this was a good idea .
Whisnant suggested getting with other county officials who are certified
environmental educations in the county who already have this job and get them the
report . Jurgelski said the Audubon Society certifies volunteers for environmental
education and it may be a starting point to find a person for this task .
Smith and others agreed it is important to get on the commissioners agenda and
suggested that members show up for the presentation on May 6t " . He suggested
Page 4 of 7
Draft April 14 , 2003
,U
working with the Triangle J COG rather than the County funding a new position .
Vidra added that the BOCC should be interested in the CfE 's recommendations .
Whisnant suggested that committees use the break out sessions to discuss
recommendations and prioritize goals . He asked the committees to consider
whether members are ready and willing to lay out an implementation plan for any
of the goals or has the CfE done its job . He suggested incorporating the
recommendations into the matrix work plan and reporting back to the whole group
after the breakout sessions .
Waccholz said that it seems like the CfE is not addressing the impacts of residential
development , as it should . Residential development seems to be one of the larger
pressures on the environment along with some of the air quality issues .
- - Committee Breakout - -
Members reconvened to give committee reports on what ought to be included in the
CfE goals for 2003 . Stancil confirmed that he is on the May 6th BOCC agenda for
initial presentation of the SOE report .
Air Quality Committee - Tucker reported on four recommendations in SOE
report .
• # 1 and 2 would wait until the County has completed an emissions inventory
• # 3 is part of the recommendation to have countywide emission inventory
• The Committee is preparing responses to the following questions anticipated
from the BOCC .
o If we do a county emission inventory how does it relate to statewide
timeline for air quality information for non - attainment purposes ?
o What pollutants would we cover in the inventory ( e . g . , ozone ,
particulate matter ) ?
o Would it be greenhouse gases ( part of ICLEI ) ?
o What are pros and cons of producing a local inventory verses waiting
until the state has to prepare one of its own ?
o Coordinate inventory efforts with adjacent counties
Whisnant said it sounds like the top priority is to complete the inventory . Tucker
said the CfE needs to know what the County would do with the inventory . The
BOCC will need to see a clear purpose in order to commit the necessary funds .
Whisnant reported that Kincaid said the Durham Environmental Affairs Board was
interested in looking into some type of joint effort with Orange ' County on grant
funding for the ICLEI Inventory and energy saving issues .
Biological Resources Committee - Cotterman said her committee used the work
plan as guide and identified the following priority issues :
➢ Complete the update to the Inventory of Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitat
➢ Complete the Natural Areas Element of the Comprehensive Plan
Page 5 of 7
Draft April 14 , 2003
Dq
➢ Develop some kind of higher - level conservation planning effort for connecting
natural areas ; incorporate into the Lands Legacy Program . BRC set June
2004 target date with a " high priority . "
➢ Ongoing issues - review and advise staff on Lands Legacy acquisitions .
➢ Review and promote sustainable forestry programs on hold for now , although
still considered a high priority .
Water Resources Committee - Whisnant reported using the 2001 WRC report
recommendations as a starting point to set goals and identify high priority tasks :
• Radon investigation program within county
• Ground water monitoring program ; potential contamination sites
• Compile of data from existing reports from state and federal agencies
• Develop water budget ( or hydrogeology budget ) for county watersheds
( This will provide information on groundwater recharge rates , groundwater
availability , and the effects of land use changes on the hydrology . )
• Recharge rates and sustainable yield
• Establish a well protection radius for new development
• Promote conservation through reclamation
• Establish a county position to work on groundwater issues
• Work with staff on developing a package for the BOCC
Okun reported that OWASA is looking into water reclamation . He explained that
planning for reclamation is urgent in order to have it ready for campus growth in
the next 5 to 10 years . Okun said he would prepare draft letter from the CfE to
BOCC suggesting that the OWASA appointees be asked to promote reclamation and
to urge OWASA to pursue reclamation seriously .
Tucker pointed out how a few of the committee goals conflict with others , but also
how some goals complement others . She said CfE could consider combining
recommendations from air quality transportations issues to make sure the UNC
campus expansion is sustainable . Whisnant added that the Water Resources
Committee recommends establishing a new staff position that would focus efforts
on ground water issues rather than the group advocating larger lot sizes .
Daniel suggested adding a goal of WRC develop a plan to link the surface and
ground water programs together .
Environmental Education Committee - Wachholz reported that committee
members need to know what elements of the website need to be updated . The
goal of developing a folder of educational materials was discussed previously , and it
was decided that the committee would , instead , develop an education strategy on
county environmental issues , programs and resources . Jurgelski volunteered to
contact the School of Journalism to seek volunteer writers . Wachholz agreed to
present the SOE report to schools twice a year . Jurgelski said it would be good to
have a display — similar to the Lands Legacy Program display - - that includes air
quality and water quality information .
Page 6 of 7
Draft April 14 , 2003
Whisnant noted that another environmental education effort identified earlier was
to get the schools involved with next year 's summit , and also to get Stream Watch
groups involved by providing exhibits or information .
Meardon recommended that some of the large maps on display during the summit
be posted along with copies of the SOE report in the different county libraries . He
noted that the younger school - age children are eager to learn and carry home the
important environmental concerns to their parents . ] urgelski suggested getting a
graduate student from the School of Education to do some training .
VI . CfE Goals for 2003
Previously , at the March meeting the CfE reviewed the 2002 - 03 activities as related
to the established BOCC goals and identified additional concerns . Staff drafted a
matrix of these items for prioritization at this meeting . Members discussed goals in
conjunction with SOE recommendations follow - up .
Stancil confirmed that he would make a short presentation of the SOE report to the
BOCC on May 6th . It was suggested that Stancil mention how much work went into
producing the report and to identify key issues and recommendations . Committee
chairs were asked to assist Stancil with identifying priority issues .
] urgelski reported hearing the SOE report referenced at a public hearing in
Hillsborough on the proposed asphalt plant . Tucker reported hearing a group of
people discussing the indicators at a local restaurant .
Whisnant noted that the next meeting would be May 12 , 2003 at the Southern
Human Services Center .
MOTION : Pratt motioned for adjournment , seconded by Cotterman .
VOTE : unanimous .
The CfE adjourned at 9@45 p . m .
Page 7 of 7
Draft April 14 , 2003
� i 4 }
ATTACHMENT # 1
State of;Open Space 2002 About TLC
. ; -• % ':� pia.}v.= r . .d'
' ' =` -} JOo • IN Land Protection Organization
yn, ��. � y 3
s�� _:.0 , ed 1983= : : • Found
bt
VO2 ,� _ _ .. `.;, , • Service Area; Chatham, Durham , Johnston,
Sod So<_ry; Lee, Orange, Wake
x
i s I.
• . 4 ' 540 Acres Protected
Own 1 ,412 Acres (4 Properties Open to Public
- ' F •24162 Acres Profected UyEasewents
- Assisted in Proteoixng 391 Acres .iImp 00 ear 575 Acres Transferred `
.VL — _
State of Open Space 2002 What is Open Space ?
Defined by Function
• Update to SOS 2000 Wildlife and Native Plant Habitat
Water uali � .Protection and Flood Prevention
• Ex mines land use :changes m :the Triangle Q : . ri .
• ogs riewl -protected open
Catal space • Agriculture and Forestry
• taecreation 4.
• Reviews hew .6�iselVation initiatives 5x
r ,fTy - ' Sense of Pace '
Offers .recommenodations to strengthen °', .,Loa
• Educafxon , t
= :' "pro"tection e; fbolls w -µ = r _ ;
',`L � . • Air Qu ality �tipioy�rlient . '
.. ,,.
to w
..
... . ...o. -; ^_!gin-_- . . .s. . . .: :. . • ' . . - .: _:... . . . :. .:. - -
Triangle Population, 1930 - 2000 Developed Land Per 1 , 000 People
In the Triangle' s Urbanized Areas , 1950 - 1990
1 . 2 ® Wake 400 353
■ Orange =� 350
0 1 El Lee 300 287 303
a 0. 8 ❑ Johnston o s T t
® Durham o 250 219
0 0.6 ■ Chatham 200
0.4 a, 150 122 LL
= A
R. 100 = 3
a: 0. 2 _ W T.. ?so
Y
M Q N Co
n m a o
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990
w"MI Orono!
Land Use Change in the Triangle
19824997
1400 0 Between 1997- 2002, estimated increase of
1200 d 72 , 000 acres of developed land
,n - :
WL I0100 . r_ 01982
ol.IJlot
, 01987
Unit ana 'to L� ; 01992
to
01997 : . :.
; lot
•- . . .tp' _ i olIl
L
'•� xo
to
�a v ,!'.- ti :;ram: r Y. _ ' C i_
to
o -t _ r t .
400 re to
ot- IV too
200 t1': " 1W ' +r' TV
' 1, ' is• �t ,::':•
Mom^ :' _ , qgw G. e—:=��{•�.?�ot't<� tint y . ':: _ .
:"�; °` 2 Vz times the size of Cary .
.ti ill's
A deulture Forest Urbanized
t?'+- atr " ' F•- ��s• -- fir.- u
G. ��Voltoo
: Sn sue• �•§�Si.'+S:.i ,,.r•�,�C. y- ,q;�5< c���� .e.,.0 - _ .
� i; . , },-'•,. `• .h• "J.�t��:s ,tr i;a<,3:_fs?�rS .r- Pc , -
IyiowWT
=a'�- :i t-` � " ^'yy`,4e.' L t..^%:;.• !� �• • r- ire- : t'�•"i<��.' - cu_r._ - �� . .otbovw
.. _ '•e- - ... :. ��.-
y o1••I?'�i r.:nlYLLl .s.T. R�_{" w:. L p �— {j�j h •Yrr- .+ may, ._ •" _ -
Itoo
3••,{ : r : ,�,`c.-'t?. - 'it!;� .::�o't-•'rr:ix � . i:, ''J �, V •yyl.r� -'_ y. 5*• ; `•N t.' . r .. .� - ;�'T-l;:LG _
1 n •':�i„ t - v�P �F a; ' .� _a +.a 'sta i.'••ptc: ' _ t ;s' : • :` ,> .,. i�,'>
tv`�i-nC4� v?:: is }_` .•SiSa, 1.:Y "`l�•tuSl!` =1.s. .:t 'a't�``^• `.� ..tt:.. _ � ;.TR' g.. - _ t '
!:t. 5:;� >�;t:,. _':.'�(-k, - :•1 .- ,.n. Ufa.•.i= .6 {�4r, . - '1 %,+..; :,.� - - - .4A ,7-, y •
y� . . �•j�asvf _ .r.. . "d;•`. ,r +v..�� ,n„ - 'Lli'�-:n. e .. .
to
^"-T •F�: .'n rill. _� 'i V ?= =V — .;+1ne4 .� 1:. * t �n) 'ti+ ':': F.. ��.,a
_ �sri,:t= ;'t': ,ti. !1,�[7• 3r" -. t' •:"! : - s'.,r• cy% :S.'•x'. + J_^-:�i!T:'" 7:.�•.ti"v�;e? '_'c1D . . ,
"r 4�: . t':`. ^*t•' t: ` 'Ps ��'i. .Y- rx„y'f ..<u,. :,.i
- ^'a . . :'= 'St.-may .. _ A _ ', ,t?•x l�yr: n}:. tea: ..r .<F., �- K.= t.- .�. _ •a., . . v....ti:.:u y`..'�.��
..2 ii � .. •.iT. �i':� -4'._I�,t... . , f�f- �.,_ ..L.. "•T ••:+?.. . ,1• .r,:� T y� C
Y{'` :•:1F ...., . vy,-S..r ,_xo. . �.% % -.:•-:' .L".._ - � .y `� ��,1r
rs _.� �� '�=`'�:� �• : ?- - �:r'::- 5 • :.a5 �.V=:1`., •-tt.t:_ _n. � ..•Tye .+.�. " .l•� .� 'k -,,S'. "•J.^ >,<_. -
r`j� _` •: t : ;:•ram -<'<c.. .i.� ':;iil^ ._ _ ,.rc: r�� � • rY; oN" + '�: k , . .:: .7 • � .7�:aF:�' . . 't ^'�'s'�. c}'
; , • _ ;ri :� .T_:x ,v � _ r„ s�., u ,. �G. <� k L y - r "�i�•__ E4� « 3w. : .l � i z+
^�•� - •'}"�. _ - r 'i�r�t ..;c%aT'y�--i. .,�} {.y r• 1 �'�'z: ' ,:•�. - 'y'}',+•S�: _�L . {„ i 7 . r Y'"t.�.T • it.Aj 3.- �. 4.•�••��' .
• 4� _ - p `.�cll•r^. -i'ti�-S`•.-�'l7•t_.._', .'lf ' F 'r3 �; •i . ' ^5�• "tt = 1w;Y"^��
{�],- �•ti i"= -i:N•, • .nFi rl< iirt'-F-'2�£u�:L+ rr= v. !;F /.0 •� .�f- �' '•y'T4 r. ' _ • � 3..Y•'r..� n� .� x 1,yo. �•. '-4 T�_l
MALI
door
Protected Open Space
What is Protection ? in the Triangle , by County
L` Chatham
r: . . Wake $" '
• Management ent of Land �
:' 4 ' .
►i (i• . .: : - s. �' � 1101't^y/-�1 «' i
, ,, " . Vol . �k`°`�5. Total .
r , = t l ,_ '. . •r; r - �s t 155 ,693 Acres
p �' is . :'.. � j . ,*IT , `4yY�;.::?:: . .� -
=, rr ,•�.q:,,tip; ajs .�, s ��u
•i'S . ` - 't., f::a4 E:lt:t�^ .. , _, "i. :.Pu. .J1._�rtt .`:; -
;K , W + >� , . " '-':�" a" r> Orange
c ;Fk T.rsor F �x .�i -, p Durham
Tool + a � 9 /
3 K117
. raTAl,a< .,. Lee
oil -,« .: i —1` Z % Johnston 3 "/,
- if ? _ .� �� . .n •,S;.11+ <a 6t. 1 . fit :• • .
2
Protected Open Space
• � 1 1
University
Corps of
Local Engineers
Government gwff 'gop � Fee.
. .
• e • •
Corporate
• • •
Other State ...
155,693 Acres
to IV .
.A;_. ( P� , I' +'Fr• :' . i F --1;��. {_ �7*.>•i, ef; :• ��+ -y '!rt;�Igo oI 'Fa;)y.�• "`-.��::�!,''F• -
me
r' x ,� :, �� `� �. Mork II,.
to ri : _ r+`&-. 'yam ., -ems^ g - :.* pr ' . r q }
+•.. ,5:: " T.r n--.f cr' � G� c �ti - ' . P.} fir.
4,t we IV
; IV fell
a A
�` " .(. ( _.• IV
�.'U t. S ra„R � ' J" �• ..: • . Y•: f1 fir.
FF
row M ! a
+ " � rs� �-.., t�w w.
It FIAM y
r: w 7
to
? .o � �y� '•_ fi . I`, ram- . - -.
Fg
fez�I �� jam. _ ( 0.- •Sg ` 1 . ::''^ '.='( . _. . .� _ - IF
Ma
Fee
It tom : .. r : _. �• r -
7 TT, _ if
IFF
Fogg
_
a� • _�r�-z6t o s �f ' iv !n ' iceXPI _ fewer FF I -
F 'N i'�i^rf:ffof 666
` ^ic 3 :;►,. ' r+ '�1.=`
Fee
eT
off
W, Felt
go
s•rlOgg'JoPia,
i' — 1 l �' -� ` of 6. 1 IF 0
,ry�.�,Tr mot` K.-Jogg
. .,1�
IF ? Y T� '
I tot
ff
.r=t 1^-1F1 .Y':[c! t:' l•"T A19. Vf V. d.
u=!• 4.'.:f l: •�• .'. }�(-:i !� ILY�L• .-r^YCr'4'{I::�r . '` �. .r� i fC=�('EF4r,
t:t - . , ti_w Vic. -.R = F\'f,i r�• 1.�^'�`."_'^'�i_.:= -[. '•`It
r For 00 .
fFo
oifor
_'•'- I:=•pi' F _ :-. S ' , .4'.. '¢yi-�'' %' rl• ' : i: L. LZZ� : ��ti . �F• fl ; aF "6Er• 6
At
It
z i r �
Local Fun1 i 1 C3 _ y] h f — RVD4 ry. rC} FdF y
let 'dIgI,190$ 616 —. . am000 I
F, go Feee .�
ge
Fee
j "
WFIFF
S0 , OFFh •$ 20 mill . bond in Orange It W M ree 1 0 . Fero
Y •ti_
ake
C r '
to I
$ 2. 5 mill . bond in Garner
TI If
W, $ 12. 5 mill . appropriation
44
from Ca 'IFFY annually
Ft
I.
y +,yam
ho tilt-
an
, : ateir
� -
-
FF
nts�inmlieu, state
f �-
- �.k. _: •ram; k t ljl `
federal grants , impact and
4po
utility fees
I I t 6
r' Phole by Ben Ifilchings, TXOC
t4l� off
1 f
,hcf t X tlri.
r ' '_ 1 ' . 'I � inE;Tt-.2' rl�•d � .if', t (f —_ �y
40
41
t • , ' : ice ��: , � , • ' t i � 'L .i ! �.'J f' .J?
t.
' e .� _ G,r� a •,�
F pia �� l ' ♦ t - �'� � "lf" �i' :7 :dt::r's' a
Trinndr J Ct.oKii pf C'+ni+mlc,na � �.��.^ � r
('rt+>{�•apLic lnLlrmow
20 Far+wr, 2wa ttinr -,e . � _,i,�.✓� .r .,t.+ wl- r . r ::tti ,�
Many Agencies Falling Behind Goals Million Acre Goal :
Half Way Point on Five4ear Goals Triangle Is Not Doing Its Part
• Counties : Average 9 . 5 % By Area By Population
• State Parks : 4 % 1 1
• Non -Profits : Average 32 % Triangle Portion : 63 ,000 Acres Triangle Portion : 150,000 Acres
— Triangle Land Conservancy : 58 % 6 ,300 Acres Per Year 15 ,000 Acres Per Year
• NC Dept . Cultural Resources : 52 % 1 1
• OWASA : 576 Acres , Goal 500 - 1 , 000 39% of Goal 16 % of Goal
State BudLyet Crisis Other Challenges
• Local gov ' ts receiving Interagency cooperation is lacking
less money from State Development and open space protection
remain haphazard
State trust funds are
c�
endangered Stewardship
State parks plans " Protected " open spaces can be converted
2`= delayed State law gives little authority to local gov ' ts
Million Acre Initiative
_ • Urban -rural divide in protected open space
is neglected g and funding
4
g' ` ' " 'oa�"I` ~� ` `` �Y _Lan.d Prot�.cti:on Program
^• ' � - too • `tip . . A i
� • ri1 -Y IN
IN
---- .=may-.•= ,-
IN
• l ' • ` . • s' " "�s '� 'ti .fir=.�, .:-e.,:`-> fk,;Y; • ` E ti , t
ft,y,, s.=.y `5Vot, r x ._r: •,_ n ;� - , Lei _; <IS�F ;; IttF
INIIIa
oto
re
.0 1° "] yy'!!~�br�ey
to 0�0
Maw
fi
ye �JY ' to
j
aPP-
a ' r ; 71d � " •. � -
' . 4� 1 ` !I IgML�, � ' of
y
INP
L — " ci I _
foundation : Funding and People
Pillar l : Open Space Planning Triangle GreenPrint
Identify priority areas for protection Summit of land protection agencies
• Specific short- and long-term strategies and -
action steps • Brainstorm protection strategies
• Approved and adopted by local governing • Delegate responsibilities
body • Needs political and financial
• Local plans and regional }plan support
• Outstanding example : Wake County
Pillar 2 : ACCLilSltlOn Pillar 3 : Stewardship
• Reliable , diverse funding, including a Local gov'ts. are new to no park ,
`
dedicated revenue source stewardshipIN
-fIN
1'eop'le At least on.e �rr oriitoring visit. per
• Urge State to take leadership role in : :.
-r :
I -: ' _ -
fundin - -
g aI
-
• at
Dedicated, full-time staff Fuzding' euyardshtp �ndowmenf
• Outstanding example : Orange County ' Scia1 care uip�oteetng easements
_Outstaridirig example. LCIN
t Cao
IN
_ ..
5
'167
ATTACHMENT #2
Age
WN
� � Orange County
MIRA.
Environinn- ent & Resource Conservation
,
F
F306 - A Revere Road. / PO Box 81. 81
a� -1 a s
r
}« ; Hillsboro ugh , NC 27278
'Phone : ( 91. 9 ) 245 - 2590 , Fax : ( 91. 9 ) 644 = 33 .51.
let
i.e
i '
AV
MEMORANDUM
To : Board of Commissioners
John Link , County Manager
From : David Stancil , Environment and Resource Conservation Director
Date : April 28 , 2003
Re : Impending Air Quality Issues and Opportunities
At the April 29 Assembly of Governments meeting , local elected boards will
discuss air quality issues . There are a number of impending actions and
implications to be aware of in this realm , related both to our own commitments to
environmental initiatives and to new federal rules for ground - level ozone .
This memo attempts to briefly summarize these upcoming actions and identify
possible opportunities for addressing some of these events . In writing this memo ,
1 have incorporated portions of previous efforts from fellow staff members at
Chapel Hill and Carrboro and from a representative from the Durham City - County
Environmental Affairs Board .
A . BACKGROUND
1 . ICLEI / Cities ( and Counties ) for Climate Protection
Three local governments in Orange County ( as well as the neighboring
City of Durham ) have committed to taking steps ,to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions known to contribute to global warming . These
commitments have been established through memberships in the
International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives ( ICLEI ) and
the Cities for Climate Protection * ( CCP ) Campaign . A summary of both
programs is provided in the Assembly of Governments agenda packet .
The Town of Chapel Hill joined the program in August 1999 , followed
by the Town of Carrboro in June 2001 and Orange County in
November 2001 . The City of Durham joined the program in May , 1996 .
` 2
* - The Cities for Climate Protection Program includes both counties and cities
In addition to membership in CCP , Chapel Hill , Carrboro , and Orange
County have adopted resolutions that pledge to reduce global warming
by completing five steps :
o Conducting a baseline emissions inventory and forecast emissions
growth .
o Setting an emissions reduction target .
o Developing an action plan to meet the target .
o Implementing actions in the plan , and
o Monitoring and verifying emissions reduction progress .
The Town of Chapel Hill ' s activity to initiate the five steps above was
made contingent on obtaining outside resources or assistance to do
so , which has not occurred to date . The Town of Carrboro plans to
conduct the emissions inventory and forecasting with existing
resources , but changes in staffing and other project priorities have
allowed only minimal action . Orange County , as a part of its
resolution , instructed staff to begin evaluating methods of achieving
the inventory , including working jointly with the Towns of Chapel Hill
and Carrboro . The City of Durham completed a county - wide baseline
emissions inventory and forecast of emissions , set an emissions
reduction target , and developed an action plan to meet the target .
This was done in 1999 by a consultant . The City has not taken any
further action on this plan . The Durham City - County Environmental
Affairs Board has recently encouraged the City and County to do so .
As early as the summer of 2001 , the idea of joint progress towards the
ICLEI commitments among Orange County jurisdictions has been
discussed . Staff members from Orange County , Chapel Hill and
Carrboro met periodically over the past two years to discuss a joint
effort . In January 2003 , staffs met again , and discussed possible
funding sources . Due to increasing emphasis on air quality issues in
the regional transportation planning process , the group explored the
feasibility of requesting funds from the Durham Chapel Hill Carrboro
Metropolitan Planning Organization ( DCHC MPO ) . At the same time ,
Orange County ' s Commission for the Environment released its State
of the Environment Report 2002 , and an inquiry was received from
Durham regarding a joint effort via a State Energy program grant .
ORANGE COUNTY
20002
3f
NORTH CAROLINA
CELEBRATING 250 YEARS
3 1 �
2 . New EPA Ground - Level Ozone Rules / Regional Non -Attainment
Ground - level ozone is a major source of air pollution . The primary
sources for this pollution are vehicle emissions , industrial emissions ,
use of various paints and solvents , and some natural sources . Air
pollution from ground - level ozone has been shown to have detrimental
effects on public health ; damaging lung tissue and aggravating or
increasing susceptibility to respiratory disorders .
New Federal standards for ground - level ozone ( an 8 - hour ozone
standard ) have been approved . Based on existing and projected data ,
It appears that the Triangle ' s exceedances of this standard will cause
the region to be designated " non - attainment " for ozone . Other areas of
North Carolina that will also be designated include the Charlotte area ,
the Triad , Asheville , Hickory and Fayetteville .
In April 2004 , the US EPA will designate the Triangle as a " non -
attainment " area . Being designated non - attainment means a series of
more - restrictive requirements for permits for new large industrial
sources , and requires that all new transportation plans must
demonstrate that they will not worsen air quality . If regional
transportation plans fail to conform , Federal transportation dollars are
withheld and transportation projects put on hold ( except for projects
that help achieve improved air quality , potentially including projects
such as pedestrian , bicycle and transit options ) .
Orange County does not have an ozone monitor , and it is expected
that most of the factors contributing to the region ' s impending non -
attainment occur in the neighboring counties . However , as part of the
region , the County will very likely be designated along with its
neighbors . A plan late last year to create an " early - action compact " to
defer some of the ramifications of non - attainment was withdrawn after
unanswered questions and objections from a number of local
governments , including Chapel Hill , Cary and Orange County .
Once the non - attainment status is made official in April 2004 , local
governments have one year ( April 2005 ) to develop local control
measures and create Transportation Conformity Analysis reports . It is
unclear ( pending further elaboration from EPA and the State ) whether
these reports will be generated at the local level or coordinated
through the MPO . It is expected that both local governments and the
MPO , as the regional transportation entity , will be involved in these
analyses of transportation conformity . These reports will be
ORANGE COUNTY
20e02
NORTH CAROLINA
C, EUDRATING 250 YEARS
4
incorporated into a State Implementation Plan ( or SIP ) that identifies
the mechanisms and action steps to reach attainment in the
designated areas of the State . Again , the SIP will likely rely heavily on
information generated at the local and MPO level .
The State ' s SIP to address non - conformity is due in 2007 - 08 , with
attainment levels to be required between 2007 - 2010 .
B . POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITIES
As previously noted , staffs from the different jurisdictions have met on a
number of occasions to discuss the potential to jointly :
• Meet the ICLEI / CCP emissions inventory and action plan commitments ,
and
• Proactively address ground - level ozone and April 2004 non - attainment
The recent State of the Environment Report 2002 has reiterated the
importance of these issues and calls for inter- local coordination . The
potential for exploring projects that meet both needs have been discussed by
staffs . To date , two opportunities have been identified that could be taken by
the County and Towns — opportunities that may be either linked or
considered as independent ( either/ or ) options . It should be noted that these
two opportunities are somewhat complementary and need not be viewed as
either/or choices .
1 . Durham - Chapel HIII = Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization
( DCHC MPO ) — FY 2003 = 04 Planning Work Program
The idea of MPO assistance for the ICLEI action plan was reviewed by
the Technical Coordinating Committee , the staff liaisons that support
the elected official Transportation Advisory Council JAC ) of the MPO ,
and a line item of $ 60 , 000 was included in the draft Planning Work
Program for FY 2003 - 2004 .
The funds proposed by the MPO staff for the upcoming year would hire a
consultant to work with the local governments to complete the first three of
the five steps in the Cities for Climate Protection ( ICLEI ) program for both
Orange and Durham Counties . These are conducting a baseline
emissions inventory and forecasting emissions growth , setting an
emissions reduction target , and developing an action plan to meet the
target . The data collected through this process is seen by the MPO as
useful and relevant information for future transportation analysis , and
ORANGE COUNT'
2602
NORTH CAROLINA
CELEBRATING 250 YEARS
5
it is for this reason that the MPO staff is proposing to help fund the
ICLEI items , as these will also help set the stage for the latter reports .
The allocations may cover up to 80 percent of the project cost and require
a 20 percent local cash match . At a total project cost of $ 75 , 000 , the local
match will be $ 15 , 000 . One method of determining the local match is
based on population . Population proportion and estimated project costs
are shown below .
Govern ment/ Entity Population ( April 2000 ) Percentage Cost*
Metropolitan Planning 341 , 541 100 $ 607000
Or anization
Durham County" 32 , 273 9 $ 1 , 350
Durham City 191 , 041 56 $ 8 , 400
Orange County* * 437022 12 . 5 $ 1 , 875
Chapel Hill 521440 15 $ 2 , 250
Carrboro 171240 5 $ 750
Hillsborough 57525 2 $ 300
* - Cost based on 80 % MPO / 20 % local match
* * - Population outside of municipal limits
If this project is pursued , local matching funds for each jurisdiction
would be required in the upcoming 2003 - 04 fiscal year .
There has been some concern expressed that Durham may not be
interested in providing a local match for this project , as they have
already completed a baseline inventory and action plan . If this
approach is desired , participants from Orange County may wish to ask
Durham City and County elected officials to join in this effort . Should
Durham City and County choose not to participate in the request for
MPO funding for this purpose , the scope of the project would need to
be revised and the local match reapportioned among the Orange
County members of the MPO .
2 . Potential Durham = Orange Joint Program " Integrating Energy and
Environment "
In recent weeks , staffs have met with an advisory board representative
and staff from the City and County of Durham regarding the possibility
of a joint project that would accomplish objectives for the ICLEI and
ozone needs , as well as other related efforts .
A proposal initiated through the Durham County Manager has been
suggested for Durham and Orange Counties to submit a grant
proposal to the State Energy Office . The proposal would fund an
ORANGECOUNTY
20 002
NORTH CAROLINA
C . LLEBRATING 250 YLARS
6
Energy Coordinator that would work half time in Orange County
( potentially including the Towns of Chapel Hill , Carrboro and
Hillsborough ) and half time in Durham County .
The proposal as outlined to date would house the Energy Coordinator
in the Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation
Department for administrative purposes during the Orange County
portion of the project , but the Energy Coordinator could split time
between the County and municipalities in the County ( and could also
work with school systems ) on a proportionate basis . The Energy
Coordinator is envisioned to conduct energy audits of County and
Town buildings ( potentially school buildings , if desired ) , provide
technical assistance regarding implementation of energy efficiency
measures identified as a result of energy audits , and provide technical
assistance regarding the development and implementation of other
energy - related programs within the County and Towns .
This project , as proposed , would provide assistance with
implementation of local action plans developed within Orange County
as a result of the funding through the MPO project ( discussed in the
previous section ) . It would also provide energy expertise to respond to
the recommendations of the Orange County Commission for the
Environment that additional staff resources be dedicated to
environmental issues in the County . The Energy Coordinator would
help tie together non - transportation related energy issues with
transportation related energy issues .
The reason this potential project is being presented on short - notice is
that the State Energy Program grant applications are due May 13 .
Durham County is willing to submit the grant application , pending
decisions by Orange County jurisdiction ( s ) on participation . Durham ' s
portion of the funding would include a program manager that would be
responsible for reporting and paperwork regarding the grant
administration . The Durham program manager would also oversee a
plan development and implementation program in that County
( activities that could be undertaken by existing staffs in Orange
County ) .
The grant requires a minimum of 25 % local match . The total cost of
the half- time Energy Coordinator for Orange County is $ 46 , 872 over
18 months , beginning January 1 , 2004 . ( The energy Coordinator is
proposed to be a contract position , not a staff position . ) The State
Energy Office would pay $ 35 , 154 and the participating local
ORANGE COUNTY
fe
2002
NORTH CAROLINA
CLLEBRATING 250 YEARS
7 21
governments in Orange County would jointly pay the remaining
$ 11 , 718 .
If this proposal were pursued , and all of the jurisdictions in the County
were parties to the project using a population - based proportional
funding allocation , the budget would be estimated for Orange County
local governments as follows :
Government/ Entity Population ( April Percentage Cost*
2000 )
State Energy Office - - - 75 % $ 35 , 154
Total Orange County 118 , 227 25 % $ 113718
Portion of Grant
Oran % e- County* * 43 , 022 36 . 4 % $ 4 , 266 *
- - Chapel Hill 521440 44 . 4 % $ 57203 *
- - Carrboro 179240 14 . 6 % $ 12711
- - Hillsborough * * 5 , 525 4 . 7 % $ 551
* - over two fiscal years ( 33 . 3 % of this amount in FY 03 - 04 and 66 . 7 % in FY 04 - 05 )
* * - If Hillsborough does not participate , this portion of the cost would need to be absorbed
Durham County is planning to submit a grant application ( whether
alone or a joint project as defined herein ) and is prepared to submit
the joint project grant with tentative support from Orange County ,
Chapel Hill , Carrboro and Hillsborough , with further review and a final
decision on participation to be made prior to the summer break .
C . CONCLUSION
The local governments in Orange County will likely face many decision
points on air quality in upcoming years , whether through the emissions
inventories and action plans of the three ICLEI member governments or the
ground - level ozone non - attainment , which will affect all of the jurisdictions .
Ideally , more time would exist to evaluate in greater detail the two possible
programs that are on the table . The two potential programs outlined herein
are complementary , and need not be viewed as an either/ or choice . The
potential for leveraging local funds to meet existing commitments and new
requirements exists — but the window of opportunity for one potential
funding source is short — May 13 to be exact .
The joint " Integrating Energy and Environment " proposal will require a
tentative commitment by May 13 from the County and /or Towns . A tentative
commitment by the Towns and County by May 13 ( contingent on further
ORANGE COUNTY
2002
NORTH CAROLINA
C rLEBRATING 250 YEARS
8
LOA
evaluation of program specifics and a final decision on participation ) would
strengthen the proposed grant application , as well as define whether or not
the proposal is submitted as a joint Durham - Orange project .
The other program , through the MPO , would provide funds to help meet
three of the ICLEI / CCP obligations ( conducting a baseline emissions
inventory and forecast emissions growth , setting an emissions reduction
target , and developing an action plan to meet the target ) . The MPO TAC will
consider the budget with this potential program on May 14 . The " Integrating
Energy and Environment " proposal would build on this effort and set the
stage for energy audits that would likely be needed to demonstrate ground -
level ozone conformity in future years .
With further analysis , the costs and benefits of combining these two
opportunities may be evaluated , and ways may exist to pursue both
programs and take proactive steps to address air quality issues in the
County .
Feedback from the elected boards on interest in the two proposals would be
helpful , and instruction on the proposed grant application and joint project ( at
least in tentative form ) would be needed by May 13 .
ORANGE COUNTY
200 2
NORTH CAROLINA
CLLEBRATING 250 YL• ARS
Update Items
Last Month ' s Board of
Commissioners Meetings
Attached are abstracts of selected materials of interest from the
previous month ' s Board of Commissioners agendas . Where
item is written on the top of the
appropriate, action taken on the
abstract .
For more details on these items , please go to
http • / / www co orange nc . us / OCCLERKS / agenmenu . htm
April 15 Regular Meeting
Regional Evacuation Study
April 21 Worksession
Chapel Hill Township Park & Educational Campus
( CHATPEC ) Interim Report
April 29 Assembly of Governments
Air Quality Issues and Opportunities ( please see
Attachment 1 )
Open Space Provisions in Recently Adopted Rural Buffer
Zoning District Amendments
Carolina North
1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date : April 15 , 2003
Action Agenda
Item No .
SUBJECT .• Regional Evacuation Study
DEPARTMENT : Emergency Management PUBLIC HEARING : (YIN ) No
ATTACHMENT ( S ) : INFORMATION CONTACT :
Evacuation Study Nick Waters , ext 3030
(under separate cover)
TELEPHONE NUMBERS :
Hillsborough 732 =8181
Chapel Hill 9684501
Durham 688 =7331
Mebane 336 -227 -2031
PURPOSE : To receive a report on a study of a seven county region ( including Johnston ,
Chatham , Wake , Durham , Alamance , Guilford and Orange ) that assessed the abilities of
governments to evacuate or isolate all or part of that region in case of emergency and that
identified some available resources within the region .
BACKGROUND : Orange County departments involved in planning for terrorism that had
started addressing the need to evacuate or isolate citizens in part or all of the County in certain
potential emergencies realized that the need for better planning guidance existed . Concerns
were also expressed that some hazards , which threaten the citizens of Orange County , may be
from sources outside the County . There was agreement that the region needed to be included
in a " capabilities assessment " to determine if evacuation was possible .
Following several staff level emergency management meetings , Orange County submitted to
the State a request for anti -terrorism grant planning funds on behalf of seven counties in the
Triangle region . Emergency Managers , local officials and others expressed concern that no
regional plans exist to address quarantine or evacuation and hosting of the counties '
populations . The grant focused on a feasibility study for evacuation of a six county area along 1 -
40 from Johnston County to Guilford County . Among other points , the study was designed to
examine :
How evacuation might be accomplished
What roads would be involved
• The expected traffic flow per hour
How much and what population would be left that could not self- evacuate
• How long an evacuation would take
What percentage evacuation could be done by hour
What local governments would be expected to do
2
The study looked at all the above item and draws some conclusions that are valuable planning
aids for local governments in the region . This study can be used as a guide to ask for
validations of other plans or documents dealing with the evacuation , isolation , treatment or
otherwise caring for large numbers of citizens in the region . Copies of this document will be
made available at the Government Services Center in the Commissioners ' library , all public
libraries in the County , distributed to all Public Safety Planning and Response Agencies through
the county , and posted on the County Web Site under the Department of Emergency
Management . Copies have also been sent to all participating counties and the State Division of
Emergency Management .
Staff will make a brief presentation about study findings and be prepared to respond to BOCC
questions and comments .
FINANCIAL IMPACT : There is no financial impact associated with the presentation of this
report . The study was funded through a $ 10 , 000 State grant to the counties involved in the
study , administered by Orange County .
RECOMMENDATION ( S ) : The Manager recommends that the Board receive the report as
information and provide any guidance to staff on additional information needed or next steps to
be taken .
Ls
Memorandum
To : Board of Commissioners
From . Margaret Brown and Alice Gordon,
CHATPEC Master Plan Work Group Co - Chairs
Date : April 24 , 2003
Re : Interim Report - CHATPEC Master Plan
Since its initial meeting on September 30 , the 23 -member CHATPEC Master Plan Work
Group has been working steadily toward the goal of having a Master Plan to the Board
prior to the summer break . The charge and mission for the Work Group is included as
Attachment 1 ; the schedule for the project is included as Attachment 2 .
As the Board may recall , the Work Group includes members from :
o Chapel Hill , Carrboro and County elected boards
o Both school boards
o Carrboro , County and Chapel Hill parks and greenways advisory boards
o Duke Forest
o The Commission for the Environment
o Interested area citizens
The following table summarizes the group ' s activities to date :
Date Activity
September 30 Initial Meeting, review of Work Group mission and charge and pre- concept plan
October Site visits of the property by Work Group members
October 29 Approval of ground rules , sharing of site visit observations , review of staff s
" Challenges and Opportunities " report (with detailed site information and maps)
November 12 Continued discussion of Challenges and Opportunities report, process for remainder of
project, further site visits . Town/County parks advisory boards asked to identify and
report back on community needs
December Meeting cancelled due to ice storm. Work continues of detailed topographic survey and
cultural/archaeological surveys of site
February 13 Report on community needs as identified by County/Town advisory boards . Review of
draft Master List of potential site facilities (for future discussion)
March 13 Presentations on Joint Planning Area, Carrboro Northern Transition Area Study and
OWASA utility plans . "Dot-voting exercise " conducted to identify potential facilities to
be excluded from master list (non-preferential) . Review of proposal for subcommittees
March 27 Preferential cumulative voting dot exercise conducted. Subcommittee process reviewed.
Initial subcommittee breakout sessions held, with reporting back from both groups
April 10 Work Group breaks into subcommittees - Parks Subcommittee begins design charette ;
Educational Campus Subcommittee reviews infrastructure issues and Carrboro plan
requirements . Group reconvenes to share work and information
t�
Next Steps
As the Work Group continues to develop its proposed master plan, a number of important
activities will take place :
o Each subcommittee will conduct "Design Charettes " (the Township Park
Subcommittee began their charette on April 10) , to develop a vision for the site
that will then be translated into a draft concept plan for the two parts of the site
o The subcommittees will review and refine the individual draft concept plans -
regularly sharing information with the other subcommittee at the close of each
meeting and working to ensure that plans are compatible
o In May, the subcommittees will present their concept plans to the Work Group ,
and the Work Group will integrate the concept plans into a proposed Master Plan
with phasing and projected costs
o The Work Group will hold a community forum to share its draft Master Plan
o The Work Group ' s Master Plan will be presented to the Board of Commissioners
for review and approval in August/September
o Once the Board has approved the Master Plan and addressed the phasing and
action plan for site construction, a Conditional Use Permit application will be
submitted to the Town of Carrboro (it is estimated by Town staff that this review
process will take approximately one year)
Issues for Possible Action
1 . Name of the Site
The working name for the property has been the Chapel Hill Township Park and
Educational Campus (or CHATPEC for short) . At the Board ' s instruction, possible
Occonneechi/Saponi names were solicited from the tribal linguist . Other English names
have also been previously identified . A listing of these possible names is included as
Attachment 1 . The Board may wish to discuss whether to provide the site with a
permanent or another working name .
2 . Additional Instruction on Potential Facilities
The Work Group has generated and refined a list of potential facilities for the park site ,
using the CHATPEC Master Plan Process document, feedback from County/Town
advisory boards , and work group deliberation . This is not a list of all planned facilities ,
but is instead a working list from which the group is identifying potential facilities for all
phases of the project, while looking at site constraints as well as needs .
The adopted Master Plan Process indicated the potential for additional Board direction on
the Master Plan to be provided . The Board may wish to review the list (Attachment 2)
and, if desired, provide feedback to the Work Group on items that should be/should not
be included in the design . The current working list is attached, along with a categorical
assessment of the relative cost of facilities .
29
Attachment 1
Possible Names for Chapel Hill Township Park and
Educational Campus ( CHATPEC )
❑ Twin Creeks Park ( and Educational Campus ? )
❑ Twin Streams Park
❑ Jones Creek Park
❑ Buckhorn Branch Park
❑ Headwaters Park
❑ Ash Grove Park
❑ Meadow Flats Park*
❑ Meadowside Park
❑ Blue Meadow Park
❑ Eubanks Park
❑ Northwest Park
❑ Cate Farm Park
❑ Farmstead Park
- Meadow Flats is a site approx 1/2 mile north identified on USGS maps
Saponi
❑ Taksese Nomp (Tak- Say- Say- Nom-p ) - Two Rivers
❑ Moniese Nomp ( Mo -nee - ay- say Nom-p ) - Twin Creeks or Two Creeks
❑ Latahkoi ( Lah- tah-koy) - Meadow
❑ Latahkoi Asoti (Lah- tah-koy Ah- soh- tee) or Latahkoi Asot (Lah- tah-koy Ah-
soht) - Blue Meadow* *
❑ Moni Nanka ( Mo -nee Nann- Kah) - Still Pond
❑ Yatt Wien (Yah- tt Wee - ayn) - Place of Tall Trees
❑ Moni Yatt Wien - Place of Tall Trees and pond/water
❑ Moniese (Mo-nee - ay- say) - Creeks
after the fall wildflowers that grow in the fall in the meadow
Attachment 2
CHATPEC Work Group
Master List of Potential Uses
Facility Preferences ( " dot -exercise " )
' • ' i . � . �
.
ces
1 Soccer fields Medium 11 1 12
2 Large playground Medium 9 6
3 Wildlife Interpretive Area/Center High 8 6
3 Multi -purpose fields Medium 9 12
5 VIF
ita ar course Low 7 I
3
5 Meadow
Low 7 4
7 Rock- climbing wall Low 7 5
. 11 IF
7 Loop trails unpaved/paved . IF I Low/High 4
IFF
7 Cafe/eating area High 6 1
10 Baseball/softball fields Medium 1 5 2
10 Tennis courts Medium 5 12
10 Basketball courts Medium 5 0
13 Walking/running track High 4 5
13 Cultural/Interpretive Area (house/barn) High 4 1
13 Small playground Medium 5 3
13 Spray park High 4 5
13 Swimming pool High 5 2
13 Amphitheatre High 4 1 0
13 Nature areas (undeveloped portions of park) Low 5 7
13 Habitats (including powerline area) Low 4 4
13 Community garden Low 4 1
13 Shade areas (planted/saved trees) Low 5 4
13 Managed forest area Low 4 0
25 Roller Hockey court Medium 3 1
25 Disc golf Low 3 2
25 Gymnasium High 4 3
25 Volleyball court (outdoor) Low 3 1
25 Horseshoes Low 3 1
25 Chessibackgammon tables Low 3 0
25 Fishing (pond) Low 3 2
2 1Vlountain bike trail Low
IF
. .
25 Hedge maze Medium 4 3
F 25 Picnic tables i
25 Enabling/Sensory garden Medium 3 1 4
25 Water gardens (re stormwater retention) Medium 3 0
25 Sk/3k cross -country course LIF
aw 3 0
IF
. _ :.. _.. _ : . .
39
• _ oo - �
39 Dance floor Medium 12 1
39 Shuffleboard Low 2 0
39 mm Equestrian trails Low 3 8
39 Dog park Low 3 1
39 Art/sculpture garden ? 2 0
39 Riding facility High 2 0
39 Bikeway — unpaved/paved Love/Medium 2 2RV
47 =-
r 1 '
47 Park office Medium
47 Maintenance building Medium
47 Concession stands Medium I = 1 0
47 Bocce ball court Low 2 2
47 Outdoor grills Low
X Community Center High 1 2
"' - • shading = items that are "givens, " recommended to be removed from list
Yellow shading = items that are similar or could be combined
Uses/ Facilities Not Receiving Any " Nominations " (from staff draft Master List ) :
Mini - golf
Par- 3 golf
Skateboard / rollerblade facility
Batting Cage
Croquet
Racquetball / hand ball
Paddleboats
Archery area
Camping areas
Uses/ Facilities Eliminated at the 3 / 13 Meeting
Ice Rink
Exercise equipment facility
Relative Cost :
Low — under $ 50 , 000 per unit ,
Medium — $ 50 , 000 -$ 250 , 000 per unit ,
High — over $ 250 , 000 per unit
� J -
t -!
mom
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
DECISION ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date : Febru , 2003
Action Agenda
Item No . q - �
SUBJECT : Major Subdivision and Rural Buffer Notification and Flexible Development
Amendments
DEPARTMENT : Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING : (YIN ) NO
ATTACHMENT ( S ) ONINFORMATION CONTACT :
Ordinance Amendment p 3 Craig Benedict , Planning Director , ext . 2592
Minutes Nov . 25 , 2002 Public Hearing p 6 Robert P . Davis , Planner III , ext . 2580
TELEPHONE NUMBERS :
Hillsborough 732 =8181
Chapel Hill 9684501
Durham 688 =7331
Mebane 336 =227 =2031
PURPOSE : To make a decision on a Subdivision Regulations amendment to : 1 ) allow flexible
development guidelines to be applied in the Rural Buffer Zoning District , 2 ) enhance the
notification procedures by requiring an informational sign to be placed on major subdivision
proposals in the County planning jurisdiction prior to Neighborhood Information Meetings , and
3 ) increase , at concept stage , the percentage of lots that requires a soil analysis by a soil
11
scientist .
BACKGROUND : During a recent subdivision approval for a tract in the Rural Buffer, citizens
adjacent to the development proposal questioned why there were no resident notifications for
major subdivision proposals in the Rural Buffer similar to those required in other zoning districts .
There was also a question concerning why there is not an open space component required in
Rural Buffer developments . After a discussion of the review standards in the other zoning
districts , it was decided that an amendment to subdivision regulations was needed in order to
create consistent procedures in both the development and the public notification process for
major subdivisions within County- regulated zoning districts . The Subdivision Regulations
presently require that only Conventional Development apply to major subdivisions in the Rural
Buffer . The property owner notification of a Neighborhood Information Meeting ( NIM ) and
mandatory open space provisions are components of the Flexible Development guidelines of
the Subdivision Regulations . Flexible Development is not allowed in the Rural Buffer.
Therefore , there is no NIM and developments have tended toward projects that had either no
open space or an amount less than 33 % . These amendments , if approved , will mandate
application of the Flexible Development standards in the Rural Buffer, provided that proposals
are in accordance with the Joint Planning Area agreement and rules . For major subdivisions in
the Rural Buffer , two - acre lot minimums and at least 33 % open space will be required for all
Flexible Development proposals . The Conventional Development Plan option will still be
optional as it is now in non- Rural Buffer districts . In summary , this amendment means that
2
development proposals in the Rural Buffer shall be submitted , reviewed , regulated Count ' s
processed in the same manner as are other major subdivision projects within Y
planning jurisdiction .
A second provision integrated into the existing Flexible Development guidelines is an
amendment that requires staff to post an informational sign intended to give public notice of the
Neighborhood Information Meeting ( NIM ) on major subdivision tracts . The sign will give area
residents information about the subdivision proposal as well as the Planning Department
telephone number to call for more information . Presently , the subdivision regulations do not
require a sign posting for the NIM anywhere within the County s zoning jurisdiction .
The final change in the amendment is to increase the percentage of lots in the "Yield " plan that
would have to be evaluated by a soil scientist for soil suitability of septic systems when
Flexible Development is being prepared . The current percentage is 1 Owl 5 % of the proposed
lots ; the recommendation is to raise the percentage to 50 /o of the proposed lots . This higher
percentage will require the design of a subdivision to reflect the available soils within a project
at the concept plan stage , not at the preliminary stage .
Notification Procedures in Planning Area Agreement for Courtesv Review
The Joint Planning Area (JPA) Agreement specifies how notification to Carrboro and Chapel Hill
is to be carried out for developments , text and map amendments in the Rural Buffer . County
notification procedure has been to send the entire application to Chapel Hill and Carrboro in
packet form , just as it is sent to the various boards as a part of the County approval process .
Each year, the Planning Department creates a meeting schedule calendar for the Planning
Board . This calendar integrates the BOCC meeting dates into the Planning Board meeting
schedule . By following the proper meeting sequence and dates listed on the yearly board
calendars , the County is assured that no project is approved counter to JPA agreement .
Subdivision Regulation Changes :
A . Allows the Flexible Development Option ( NOTE : Excludes the Village Option ) to be used for
all major subdivisions located in the Rural Buffer, but only in accordance with the Joint
Planning Area agreement and rules .
B . Amends Concept Plan application requirements for all major subdions within the
visi
County' s Jurisdiction
1 . Maintains the mail notification process to adjoining property owners for the NIM
sign on proposed subdivision a minimum of seven ( 7 )
2 . Requires Planning Staff to post a s
days prior to the Neighborhood Information Meeting ( NIM )
a . States date , time and location of the NIM
b . States total number of lots
c . States the Planning Department Telephone Number
C . Raises the percentage of residential lots on the "Yield " plan to show soil suitability for at
least 50 % of the potential lots rather that 1 Owl 5 % as currently required .
These Subdivision Regulation amendments were originally a part of the proposed Special Use
Permit process for Major Subdivisions that was presented at the public hearing in November
2002 . Because other parts of the proposed Public Hearing ordinance are being processed
independently , this recommendation and ordinance have been removed from the Public
Hearing ordinance and are proceeding along a separate track .
au
Planning Board Recommendation : On February 5 , 2002 , the Planning voted 7 - 1 to recommend
approval of the amendments . The only discussion centered on whether the ordinance should
specify Licensed Soil Scientist rather than Soil Scientist . The Board decided to leave the
ordinance as written because Environmental Health reviews the work of the soil scientists in
either case .
FINANCIAL IMPACT : There is no public financial impact associated with this item .
RECOMMENDATION ( S ) : Administration recommends Approval of the amendments .
Planning Board recommends Approval of the amendments .
Planning Staff recommends Approval of the amendments .
4CC[4
3 �
Ac & o 7e�
1 . Planning for Carolina North (UNC's Horace Williams Property)
The purpose of this item is to provide information on the current status of planning for the
University of North Carolina 's Horace Williams Tract .
For more than a decade , the University of North Carolina has been planning for the future use of the
Horace Williams property. A Guide to Physical Development: Summary of the Campus Framework
Plan , prepared by Johnson , Johnson and Roy (JJR) consulting firm was accepted by the UNC Board of
Trustees on December 9 , 1988 . In 1994 the University began new land use framework plans for its
outlying properties which included the Horace Williams Tract. The consulting firm JJR undertook this
task which involved committees from both the University and the two towns as part of the planning
process . The consultants presented the Draft UNC Outlying Properties Land Use Plan on May 23 ,
1996 . UNC land use planning advisory committees from both Chapel Hill and Carrboro submitted
reports/recommendations to their respective town boards who in turn transmitted final comments to the
UNC Board of Trustees in January of 1997 . On January 24 , 1997 the UNC Board of Trustees formally
accepted JJR's plan for the Horace Williams and Mason Farm properties . The University published the
Outlying Parcels Land Use Plans: Summary Report as well as a full technical report during September
of 1998 . Following the publication of the JJR plan , the University of North Carolina began a new central
campus master plan process with the consulting firm of Ayers Saint Gross . In 2000 the work of Ayers
Saint Gross was expanded to include a new look at the Horace Williams property. Representatives of
the University presented a report in February of 2001 to both Chapel Hill and Carrboro that summarized
the Horace Williams Committee's planning principles and the work completed by the consultant team
(see Attachment D). The year 2003 has begun with the planning of the Horace Williams property under
the name of " Carolina North " . "Continuing to build on the foundation of the initial planning efforts ,
Carolina has created an Advisory Committee and associated Advisory Groups to provide input and
productive discussion regarding the planning of Uaro ► ina Nonn . curing ine course or rnlS SemeSlet , ulc
Executive Committee has asked the Advisory Groups to provide input in several specific areas that are
critical to advance the planning of Carolina North . The input from the Groups will be incorporated into
creating an updated development plan for Carolina North that will be ready for presentation and
comment early this fall . "source :carolina North Web Site http:l/carolinanorth . unc .edu/vision ,html
Mission - Carolina North
"Carolina North is a living and learning community , expanding Carolina' s multiple missions , intensifying
innovation and redefining our engagement with the region , the State and the world . Carolina North is an
environment where diverse partnerships are created and new endeavors are born and nurtured .
Carolina North is a place of exceptional energy , beauty and contemplation , connecting to and enhancing
both the original campus and neighboring communities . " Source: Carolina North Web Site
http://carolinanorth . unc.edutvislon .htmi
Also in 2003 , the Town of Chapel Hill appointed members to the newly established Horace
Williams Citizens Committee who began meeting on March 4 , 2003 . The Town of Carrboro
established a Horace Williams Advisory Committee and appointed members in March . A summary
of each advisory committee or group is attached .
The following attachments provide information related to planning activities associated with the Horace
Williams property . .
33 Attachment A
UNC at Chapel Hill
CAROLINA NORTH
If
: . . ..
... _ . . ._ . . . .. .. ... ._ ._ ..._I 'a :. _
•: : :. .v
IV
. ' .M � map
is `
FF
r „ s f1 . o IF r . :..- :Jr An Norfh ai
� `:rs`t tinsibili oi• the -, EXecuit Cor�nrn � tee z> IFFIF =:
�FF+{ wilF be the . ,e, R tY
. t � FF
F, _. .,
� ' :., ; _ .,.AYE .• ...� :
�, _ �:Grou si : K Jl
:. and :foui . . Adviso
it
.,
the ,4dv3sary Cor rnis- F
.t . „QzrS{'. .a; t.a.. .:. _: ... . . E.J. . :
f A' 1. .� t . 4i
ry.. :- 1
r N+ �f .. III) ' J � . . fiis
r teeyr
'.T , r � ,,t i .�y4III
^. rt c ..t .t IV is I I 7 t -I.
r Y s
} i -, '� >, R hiti - - i fr tit' t
Y t l . {. n i S4S :' ••taa �r t •i t t d � ItaT
r - t k F ' y i0$1WIrLCC ,V, - - t
t iT .t - F
tit: oc't 1 L!F.F it +.
rr. "SAC'" .r-;5 ;`t#,.rY +.. ,�7 ` y ' -' ? u, t r . +, Y.fF.
y Jof illim;ttit a dIV -L.4 ' x c x t .�•.-*--cL'te� 134 :. . , . } , . F ! - .a
st
FF
am xrip
r (. . a ; 3
am
r Yy t >� 'y �. rlbiNO �y } %
7 • Ssr t i Eye � 3
Pam
hLE { J y -tf l ' t� E•T's r { says
limitk . . RF.S . :. '.n is
)IF FF
Y.
F L4 c tzsc J 1tVtj
II
S IF s s s 7 r
IF IV FF ` FF is i 4t IV
, q L 1 Fit
r31} ~ ' ynCit a
Itian !;s' _^� f'
am P
p y��tIF
FF ass
Is
< ,t > c N 7. •e'., ,n.�> 4Elk� } '•ptEK 4< IF
t j t�
FF
It
'ism Try ti .i . FIFF
—.fF ;f :� r y3
- z m {
FF
tart
i }
stt:I is "r � it.'
F � n� i % f
-lotsf r n ''j'
It 0 kr6pat if,
5 ..an :. .
, . . : ... . . . J:_ . . . . :
Executive Committee
The Executive Committee will work with all the normal University structures and with
the Carolina North Advisory Committee to accomplish its objectives .
The decision making body for major policy issues on Carolina North is an Executive
Committee with the following members :
* James Moeser, Chancellor * Tim Burnett, Trustee
* Robert Shelton , Provost and Executive Vice * Paul Fulton , Trustee
Chancellor * David. Pardue , Trustee
* Nancy Suttenfield , Vice Chancellor for Finance
and Administration
* Tony Waldrop , Vice Chancellor for Research
and Economic Development
Advisory Committee and Advisory Groups
Accordingly , the following " charges " to the Carolina North Advisory Committee and
its Advisory Groups are designed to provide an efficient and comprehensive means of
gaining input and productive discussion . As a committee of the whole , the charge of
the Carolina North Advisory Committee is to :
* Facilitate the work of its Advisory Groups .
* Plan and conduct plenary session meetings to hear and discuss advisory
reports from the Advisory Groups
* Convey advisory opinions to the Executive Committee via Vice Chancellor
Waldrop
* The Vice Chancellor for Research & Economic Development and Associate
Vice Chancellor for Economic Development will be ex officio members of each
Advisory Group .
3of10
3S
A � � itional
Information items
Commission for the
Environment
Agenda
PAGE 4
Ion
MILLION SOLAR ROOFS
N J
Archi" tect leads wav + .
z in
energy el'41111" clenc
BY MARTY MAND ELL — which is the centerpiece of
AND SUSAN LUSTER its sustainable design strategy
Million Solar Roofs Committee ^ provides natural light for
"No country on Earth has a two-thirds of the daylight- hours,
serious, comprehensive, sustain- and reduces the installed cool-
able, energy program, and the sit- mg equipment by more than
cation is deteriorating rapidly. " 100 , tons. Daylightingdn schools
— Denis Hayes, founder of Earth Day , means energy savings, and .I
tests show it creates a superior
Many people in Orange Coun- learning environment in which
ty think° solar is the solution to attendance improves and . '
grades group :
the worlds energy problems; .
_
which is in direct contrast to Mike Nicklas has a degree in
the majority of U. S . citizens; architecture from N.C. State
who think the continued pursuit University, is a founder of the .
Q. t of petroleum products is OK. . N. C. Solar Energy Association,
Z ( We are part of a statewide and past president of the - Amer-and
n
-� movement toward the .use of ican Solar Energy Society and
0 alternative, renewable fuels the International Solar Energy
Q that has, over the past two Society. He headed the solar. -
U decades, made North - Carolina a section of the United Nations '
national leader *in solar energy. Rio Conference in 1992 and
This growth in solar is large- gave a report on the conference
O ly due to the influence and pro- in Carrboro to a group of 50
Z _ ductivity of architect Mike elected officials . from Orange,
Nicklas and his firm, Innovative Chatham and Alamance coup
=� ties. It is to re ort that his
_ Design in - Raleigh, whose focus p
is on energy-efficient, environ- I issues of ustainability areas.
LU
: 1 mentally sensitive design. That true today as they were 11
CL I.Q T means environmentally friendly - Years ago:
■ Societal costs of energy
building materials, passive gY
solar heating . and cooling, pho- - consumption — erosion of land,
p - tovoltaics, natural daylighting loss of agriculture, health
QQ� and solar domestic hot water impacts .
W and space-heating systems . o Resource availability
_ Since 1977, they have depletion of nonrenewables .
J ; designed 650 solar buildings, a Pollution of land, air, water
more than any other architec- — 'climate change.
tural firm in the world. They've a Balance of trade one-.
w_ renovated 34 schools using fifth of the world's financial
- a -
solar and energy improve- transactions are related to oil.
_ ments, saving 250 million kilo- ■ Population growth — the
U . I ,watt-hours of electricity, and Third World has cheap coal for
w ' their nine. new daylit school industrialization (and pollution
1=- designs saved 24 million kwhs . like the West).
These schools averaged 10 perw ■ Discrepancy of wealth -
cent below. budget, and saved starving people don't care about
$2 .5 million in energy bills each renewable . energy; 2 billion ,
year, plus a reduction in carbon have no electricity.
dioxide and oil imports . The U. S ., with 5 percent of
In addition, their design for the world's population, is
Smith Middle School in Chapel responsible for 25 percent of
Hill has eight hot water collet- global warming. Wouldn't it be
tors that provide a third of the wonderful for us to stop pollut-
school's hot water needs, . and an mg and become the first coun-
underground cistern to collect try to adopt a sustainable ener-
' roof rainwater for flushing toi- gy program?
lets and irrigating an adjacent You can reach Marty Mandell at 967
athletic field (with'A connection 9646 and Susan Luster at ncsea@mind-
to city water in case of drought, spring.com. Innovative Design is
like last year). - reachable at
The school's daylighting plan innovativedesign@mindspring.com.
Wetland 41
project
praised Wednesday, April 23 , 2003
Restoration near Carrboro Wetlands -
cited by interior secretary as continued from page Al
good example of �1 a jam, F
environmental stewardship. this land was like, " Kate Dixon,
executive director of the Trian �, - - • �
_.
By KATHLEEN HUNTER gle Land Conservancy, said as
Staff Writer she motioned toward the
restored ponds. r.. _ Ydd
; '
WHITE CROSS — Gale Nor- Norton presented Kuenzler
ton, the nation's Secretary of with the US. Fish and Wildlife ;
the Interior, toured a local wet Service Regional Director Con
land preserve Tuesday and servation Award.
called the restoration effort a Kuenzler described the - �; -_ •-� --''':i
perfect example of the type of painstaking work that went into
public- pri- restoring the wetlands and the
vate envi- � . satisfaction the process brought
ronm en tal P' , " "t her and her husband. Staff Photo by Shawn Rocco
collabora- $i "We developed it little by lit- Standing with federal and state wildlife service representatives,
tion that y tle, " she said. "It took a long Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton, right, inspects some aquatic
the Bush time because my husband was a life she seined from a wetland pond at the Kuenzler Wildlife
administra- i perfectionist. It had to be just so. Habitat Preserve — a private farm owned by Jutta Kuenzler.
tion is try- As you see, the ponds are fuller
ing to fos- now, and we see what we wanted rc
ter. , ' °�" to see. " We are dependent on private land
T h e rt ;', To restore the land, e owners to choose to care for the lands ,
event , NORTON zlers enlisted the helpoff the the
which was Triangle Land Conservancy, the Tbese partnersbips work for the land.
held to note Natural Resource Conservation
Earth Day, took place at the 154- Service, the Orange County Soil Owner, the wildlife and the public,
acre Kuenzler Wildlife Habitat and Water Conservation Dis-
Preserve southwest of Carr- trict and the U. S . Fish and — John Ann Seaker
boro. Jutta Kuenzler and her Wildlife Service. 6Representative of the U. S . Fish and Wildlife Service
late husband , Ed Kuenzler, pur- The Kuenzlers ' property also P
chased the property in& 1965 and has been placed into a conserva- John Ann Seaker, a re resen- this wonderful project is being
have lived there ever since. tion easement, which provides tative of the U. S . Fish and used in some ways to distract
Ed Kuenzler, a professor of that future owners will be able Wildlife Service, also stressed attention from all of the dam-
environmental sciences and to use the existing hayfields and the important role that individ- age that is being done to public
engineering at UNC, soon dis- pastures for agriculture but will uals play in preserving land. lands around this country, "
covered that an abandoned cot- not be able to subdivide the "We are dependent on private Fitzsimon said.
ton field on his property was property or build additional land owners t o choose to care Despite the greater policy
once wetland . Kuenzler homes.
dreamed of restoring the wet- for the lands, " Seaker said . implications , Dixon said she
land to its natural state. Before Norton said that type of pub "These partnerships work for was pleased to see the project
his death in 2001 , Kuenzler iden- lic-private collaboration, led by the land owner, the wildlife and recognized at the federal level.
tified more than 400 species of individual landowners, is the the public. " "It was just a great project
plants and animals on the farm . key to future land conservation Chris Fitzsimon, a 'represen- with different entities bringing
efforts. tative of the Campaign to Pro- things to the table that no one
Norton visited two pools that "It's right here on farms and tect America's Lands (a Wash- could have done alone, " she
have been created on the prop- private properties across Amer- ington, D.C.-based environmen- said.
including leopard frog tadpoles ty. She examined aquatic life, ica that the environmental chat- tal advocacy group), said that Norton said the efforts of
n
and dragonfly larva at one pool lenges of this century will be although he supported the . the Kuenzlers gave her opti-
and ceremoniously placed a met, " Norton said. "The key to Kuenzlers' work, he feared the mism that future generations
piece of woody debris that will cooperative conservation is the Bush administration is relying will be able to enjoy natural
serve as habitat for aquatic great love that Americans have too heavily on citizens to treasures.
organisms at another, for the land. It's terrific to see become land conservation stew- "On Earth Day 2003 , thanks to
The pools were constructed the progress that already has ards. Americans like Jutta Kuenzler
as part of the restoration effort. been made in a short time." As a consequence, he said, the and her family, I am convinced
They existed on the property Norton said it is especially federal government is shirking that the future is bright, " she
many years ago but were important to involve children in its responsibility to preserve said .
drained so that the land could the conservation and restora- lands and is simultaneously
be farmed. tion of natural areas, so they turning public lands over to pri- Kathleen Hunter can be reached
Norton also planted a willow will mature with an apprecia- vate corporations. at 932-8742 or at
oak, a hardwood native to the tion for natural resources. , The concern we have is that khunter@nando. com. ,
wetland. _
"This is . probably just what
See WETLANDS, Page AS
•
mpromise
be Kuenzler Wildlife Habitat Preserve Page 1 0 1
The Kuenzler Wildlife Habitat Preserve
A Stagy of Farmland Protection and Wetland Restoration
The Family Latnd Protection.
n.
Ed and Jutta Kuenzler bought a 154 acre property in Orange County The Kuenzlers negotiated with the Triangle Land Conservancy
in 1965 , shortly after they moved to Chapel Hill. The couple fell in (TLC), a local non-profit land trust, to put the whole farm into a
love with the property immediately and it has been their home ever conservation easement. The easement specifies that future
since. They built a house, raised their son and daughter on the land, owners will be able to use the existing hayfields and pastures for
and kept small herds of beef cattle. The mosaic of hayfields, pastures, agriculture, but will not be able to subdivide the property or
and forests also served as an outdoor classroom for Ed s students. Ed build additional homes. The agreement encapsulates the
was an environmental sciences and engineering professor at UNC= Kuenzler's vision for the property and legally ensures their farm
Chapel Hill and would often bring classes out to his homestead, will be protected after they are gone.
Like other farm families in North Carolina, the Kuenzlers value their The family donated the conservation easement to TLC . As a
rural lifestyle and love their land . As a biologist, Ed Kuenzler enjoyed result, they are eligible for federal and state tax credits. The land
studying his property s plants and animals . He identified more than also qualifies for lower property taxes.
400 species on the farm before his death in 2001 .
fy�� z'6.97, rty r _ r �f ill
to
e
tA
K
r
When the Kuenzler family began to consider the future of their land, ;-
they knew they wanted to preserve their farm for future generations to
enjoy and love. They did not want it to be subdivided and converted y
«
into residential lots. Instead, they wanted their home to remain as
farm and forest land .
The family also wanted to protect and enhance wildlife habitat on drr . r
their property. For years, they dreamed of restoring a small degraded
wetland near Collins Creek. The area had long ago been ditched and Upland Chorus Frogs (Pseudacris triseriata) breed in large
drained for agricultural use. The family envisioned a wetland wildlife numbers following restoration.
refuge for migratory birds, amphibians, reptiles, and local
A 3T To achieve their dream of a restored wetland the Kuenzlers
solicited the help of several government agencies : Natural
Resource Conservation Service (MRCS), Orange County Soil
< dE r and Water Conservation District, and U. S . Fish and Wildlife
- - s Service (iJSFWS) . These agencies work together to help
fi * fir— Mo. •.2 �
}ram,
f� S -`�� ...+aL!4AY. " 1-, le"F1'�{8_.FN ,ys1"Y `?'
�3F r � f s families across North Carolina protect and restore wildlife
` ,= 'L ti, ` . s�� ",' e , ° � ,' ✓ t k be�lnll
habitat .
a i its - 7
13 � ` r fY yY l !' J'T- f1Xi i .x-
The project began with a planning process, as the Kuenzlers, the
} r y .{ f r1y � s fk. � �'`i�T'F f1 -!
r K . fir' agencies and TLC considered different ways to bring water and
v ; l ' '} * 4 , ` ` wetland dejj�� endent life back to 14 acres of the property. There
2 . t •� 3 ' . were no records of how the land had looked before its
Ak --f�"i ' � r`s _'icy �r r K ° NY •� . �{
, conversion to farmland, so the team had to be creative . In
ik r14
• ,w- y , � a tt"�� .fir f � br .� c r. r<r r' ' , �.�..
fi �;. `� particular, the Kuenzlers wanted a maintenance free system that
,
would sustain wetland wildlife without the need for active
The Kuenzler 's dream is realized in 2002. This shallow pool is one management.
component of the restored wetland.
Neq.%#.-t Page»
Page 1 of 2
unzler Wildlife Habitat Preserve
The Kuenzler Wildlife Habltat Preserve
A Story of Farmland Protection and Wetland Restoration - Continued
The team decided to slow the water flowing from an existing ditch } ''
and redirect a portion of this water into a set of shallow pools and � � ,� T m -
: , c tLF r
c � it
wet areas. The concept was to create a diverse set of forested = s p . t ,
wetland types : semi-permanent pools, ephemeral pools, saturated -
soil and moist u lands. i Y � �
7
r R, t ta5-
r: � x'"emu`.���•�'tvx
-' Y `�-
- x_ �,..�. 3'�• ,.�-Tit-.�-.rc-�r.� 't -z'.
The project consisted of five components .
. plugging the existing ditch to close the drainage outlet ; - Arr
,�-F. I YY
sculpting crescent-shaped low areas along one field edge ; { ` -
excavating three shallow pools with very gentle slopes • OFF
creatmi a diversion to spread water over the floodplain
� jL
through the pools ;
c
. restoring native vegetation.
Existing C. annel - �` �=` Restoration in progress. Excavation formed cresent-shaped low
areas along the field in 2001 .
._ ,. , ; , Pools
The WRP easement became effective at the same time as the TLC
r r `'
� , �2s ,,. ;; conservation easement in December 2001 . The two conservation
IrI
er��R 1 ' i_. ` ' . . ` ; ,� • - easements overlap one another and provide comprehensive
;: . '�- _ protection for the habitat .
OFF
Existing Uk I Shallovi Roo! . .
� - r r � 1
OF,
Oj
OF
�-- Channel Plug tNw, , , >
..' - - - •
Engineering drawing of the completed wetland restoration project.
To restore a diverse set of native vegetation , the team partnered sir ,
with Niche Gardens, a local native plants nursery. The nursery
d-� y
,provided native shrub and tree seedlings. They also helped collect w. .f :3r
wildflower seeds from the site prior to the excavation work- These
seeds were later used to replant the area. In. addition , many native
plants re-colonized once the weather warmed.
In one year, native plants sucessfully colonized the low area shown
A variety of mechanisms funded the wetland restoration project, above.
First, USFWS Partner s for Fish and Wildlife program provided
$4 , 000 in seed money to begin the restoration work . Second, NRCS The restoration work was completed in the fall of 2001 . As of
enrolled the wetlands in a permanent Wetlands Reserve Program 2002 , the wetland is providing habitat for diverse native riparian
(WRP) easement. Since the Kuenzlers agreed to a permanent and aquatic plants, aquatic insects , clams, amphibians , and
wetland easement, NRCS provided the family a land payment and reptiles . In addition, deer, small mammals, migratory birds, and
covered the remaining restoration costs . The total cost of wading birds such as herons and egrets are already using the site.
restoration was approximately $20 , 000 . It is now a flourishing wetland
The Kuenzler Wildlife Habitat Preserve is a wonderful example of
how one North Carolina family is successfully using assistance of
prOF
ivate conservation organizations and public programs to make
sure their land will always stay the way they have come to know
and love it.
unzler Wildlife Habitat Preserve Pate Z of L
tt
ere
TT
- _
_F
4L : r rt
r,fir
� -
-
f -
r r:, FF
r. v
g z �!re
Ir
h
Fingernail clams found in a small pool with leafy debris. They
filter water and provide a food source for fish, birds, and
mammals,
< Previous Page
Is +rl' rk �`1 v4 Sir' t .� . °^�' : r '� lei Vr.,k�}t
Ism
1 xe
.3Fir � �•r"IFIF
xlS�ss`
{ .:� f'' t ✓ .. � 7C 1-.1 11 a r _ .e! ':r 1' 3� rr rIF4tj A.
It
f F
IL A
,pF
n ,K _'m` .wr+•tt :.rr �,"�? Ur �" . Ny ..> t `�"t ?`' h. .g'. >t �. .
IA �ItI
t:i IF
1L':1��
Ryr $F1174fM��r,
WIF •t''rl ,t'1`F
M4
r Yir{of + -rn,_,v:- u' ' .�+ c^ _ .a r x ••,.;: t r FIFAIII
^ IFIF
'"_do-
' ` s_r_'..r+ - ��,i rr e + r � i► r -a �ii° �1, I '
u
r lily- 5A .
' Sr � � ✓ ` t do
I LA FF.IF
,t•d , yb ae � _ '
FF
fit - w
. . ,u..11rt J• ,�,,, b. kr�
Ago
dd
ram) J r R i L J"t ' .. . r• •.,,. r .51 ' °'!: „'-s� tii r—'�'--•- g 1 1 4 ^"z
IF ? � �it'i
A .
It
y �1 - "t `}Tr ,y-_ a+','•4? e S'�- i ,,r r: �,,,fr " ct_ uy .w,... s. f 3
e pro. S'�,3s
! "'4 s���y xY ✓ r id s� 4 ., ?? r�T r� tl* i' ^Ysetye
.W r'4 L : r ra'• .rt"";Y - tes`.'C _t. '_ { : t "',ckny ,` 'S �". 1Y.
r. ; i-.rw,yp",'fv ' '+* ytiti, '.+
r • i rvr=c Y +.p '., r"thif
a� X ol
� � ! � -•iCe
AI
For
AI
e11241
iggiiiiiiYir f[ - 43. E
onto
.F.- . ra � z "d`' ��� .F '_` r v� ,+,.r•}�rfi� ._.'sir^ '+ F 'sF,,�'�• s�
L � rr .yq
. At
t ,
7 :yr
:-+If . . :n - c- • _ .
THE HERALD-SUN I PHOTOS BY BILL WILLCOX
Junked cars titter the residential lot of junkyard operator Hoyle King along U . S . 70 near Mebane on Saturday. Many
nearby residents are upset about the zoning violation and what they say is the county ' inactivity in dealing with it.
Oft Am M a
0 n s junk
F , . uf5z nsti ...tom Ati '€ 'l�.s_,t j} r;Lp ,FF— : . rMK ww�ac. ✓'r' t •. ? .
Residents fed upy ,M .t �, Ms � Y a�I;gFyJ y
with abandoned x� �o
cars but county �L A� F
9 `
MIF F
town plan action us AHEAD
- , �"
'fir';'' 116
t'ex;7 r "*
BY GEOFFREY GRAYBEAL 4MQF:
ggraybealC�he raids un.com; 918-1033 QES f DOLT I AL PR OD V ES• ' V' r, t ,
ILLSBOROUGH — A 3 `` t�1_dIfa Y�y{5 TommyScott
� P i r {�s }+�
� � � TO STORE JUNK4 r stands beside a
junked black car sits a +� - sign he put up
few feet away from a ! ( Cr k } '
" CARS COUNTY OV�W along U . S . 70
No Parking Any Time sign 4
�rY ;' east of Mebane
along U. S . 70, while about a a r t `lFF.As#, `;' to draw
dozen more vehicles like it line f CANT CON I KOL . 1� 1 i j
a � •a"rr)i - `' attention t0 the
the shoulders of the road. , s �
A t rz•r= z5'sr~s, r ' ..a r ajp'i � � 4.1 � �. C
Officials from the N. C . `�� x✓ x � 4 �sya Al
_� ° rff � � FF FAA
iiii� � presence of
Department of Trans ortation -£ ' � '� � to r )
b t� � x t F ": � �� � unked cars In
say the cars don't belong there. ; -� iN
y � :,. r y r �'t background ) in a
�+ � I. � Y residential area .
Many nearby residents feel a�� ! ;�, , y ,. {
the same way about the cars M N � � .: � ` =I IT F, Scott lives
ay '"� cr-r #.�. -��� P'� 'x ± 1'sk 'r ° ` 3az5a 'L. trn f{ '(F{ st' Ki fit' ?.
that have spilled over from ,Y r c � y rr� y� _ t x Fj �: nearby.
junkyard operator Hoyle
King's property onto residents, ting on their ass and won't do Something needs to be done." attention to not only the neigh-
tial land that is not intended nothing," Graybill said . Fed up, Scott placed large boyhood, because they already
for such use. Scott said the complaints plywood signs along east and know about it, but to the
Tommy Scott, Anna Graybil� aren't with the commercial westbound lanes of U.S. 70. Orange County Commission-
and Chris Sims say they are property allowed under previ- The signs read: "Just Ahead ers, so they can get this
upset over the zoning violation ous zoning. Residential Properties Being straightened out," Scott said.
and what they view as county "What it boils down to is his Used to Store Junk Cars Coun- Orange County has charged
inactivity to address the prob- using residential property to ty Government Can't Control. King with creating a public .
lem. store his junk cars on," Scott why?" nuisance and violating the zon-
! see JUNKYARD I PAGE 9
" Orange County is just sit- said. "I've gotten tired of this. "I hope it will bring the
'c c
Is IN I NOT
_ * . : .
ITIONNOt
-.` . - . . - - — - - - - . - - r '
w- ti
NO
yr �} t `'9
a
_ _:-_ _ _ b'1� o
OFF
_ - - -
. . . . ".�
y
. ' - 4? ±
.� S - y _-�N 'S _ - - r
_
F-F IN I 4 I I C� _
t
_ 15.
_ _ 'bt �FP:'' ug ,, 'Ss7•; m ice! • � ayi t
- h I I
r .t IN IF . Y- !t' _ '' r - -: -11 _ TO - - .rQ 'Zt.:fit • fig
I I
J!Fr Ire -=`�?:t: s'L' - sib.. - 4. - T
- c r •tr - _ -
iIN I 16
- - , i � •
a= ' ?5 '- r f. Tor FF a _ jai a v _ F .. 3 ; t �._ .
v� 'c`Fe�i ' . 's`f/� ' ` $Jort " ?Q s- c i f '. aze P .
1 .. � -'$ -r • .t: . N�.-'• r�..y hl •}.. fn »-xa• l' -I _ _ i - _ - --cJ �L.`�� '- + ^ . • e
„?ef. •5%-•s -• ;-9 aF. _v� _ - :u. E7' .� f _ _ _ .n�'i .
s
. w. . _ .. i+_ ;�-_'�.-7sc•7r... S.. s ',fS,-+.-'4G+.rs�: r. t<'%� _ _ - ' _ n- ,�,.T.� , r - - : -•r
-<- __._
l.
- a•1"' �F'�•- . X ,,,•- -- . ��s-tom.•:x , - _ - - T ' "„ _ - r' y. _
-_. _ a '. . y fir.
h .. r
' ':c=• - - ,fir - - - - - _ - _ . . ,.-as
+.
' :t _ y. :> 4�. ;y - _ - - - _ _ _ - - . .vim �; "�' '-'' • . _ - Y
-•.ate:;ON III
- - - _ > Y , ;
w NO
i.
IIFF
N I
]_ 3 ' 4 _ _ ter- 7. ' Vcr� b
Y. N. . rY� _ � ..- A Noz tri cry :
or
INT: ,� y�
N.J.r ugt .:�t`i- eY•S" ` - - —T. - - '_ - - _� a- e:lth - "' �-• ''T "4'r.: •• a9+ • . , ..
- .'!',-�. `�T• ' ::.k _.�; .n�' _ a A. _ - - - OF
�..� .- z - _a` +may • } :�yT'. :T>'
Or
_ _ _ � x
_ x• a,_
F - - _
? : c {
3's` — '� y . i9 1 . ' a. :
Y hFBI
V - sad
- INOF - OF% or
_ ' -� �i
WE
} - _ III ,
-
Fr}u '�
•s7tkkF � syNON zI- I - - - a :ter '- � s' cY - -
ram.
_I-II i _ _ _ _ - . -I 1— - 2 i � �`r. .�f-'t.` .,,s': `� ` so
'ems' T "
`�. - oaFrFAI
yo
TIN T
I IF
- 'O 3sZZ�% 6 _ - - _ - _ �" _'�•r'r ,.ON, z" :: /.k+c-.'a.»- -n` '�••� - :r ' . Y'r 'ILrG•4''
_ _ _ �
fi - - - - - - - - _ �, . �..�s -u•�'�', �t " 7-fie°• • a,. �jftw'g srq•`>- - •c.f• r�?3F
�NNly
oots.
1.
..n �jI L+y�--'�Y. .
ZPIPIFIT:sso
�r I OF -.
s
1
To
In i.1
_ - _ - _ n ME
t =--.'F v-s� :- b-v 'F^ P�. I RE OOP
� ,ram;--•" '�
IF —
I NO OF
21*
I III
- _ _ - _ - _ �Y- .1Lt- INN� Or
h k _-L - ro
l Or"FINIZ
I I—
IN
S Irr E IZRA istoo
lr
— f_ It
'
CLUB = — �IF
a
_ IIII
-. , - —
_ - rOUNDED : lfl92- - III —
r*-
- - N?
_ _ - - - -
- - -
Fr
- III : - -
-
Not olor.r
NO -
1k; "��rjvs.6, _ _ - - - - - - + —awe-t'_ ,,' s� - -
- - -
` U^@r3i- = _ _ _ —_ S _ � � — ice _ - . _�" ' - •� ' ' _ Tic 3
Y
_����_,...-. - 4 �-.sT� ^� y�''Ys _ r� — _ _ .:-r `7r-=�" w'S' _ =Yam'• _
' -,P� �-� � .'��' �-�-� �-- -ram--'FI � � '�--..-�'t-- '-��--�*-_ - _ - �` �^_'+ ��etij` _y- �"cs• %� - ,��'-�
_ '��_�=� _ '�""Y`—_Te'' `� . _�'�` '�v- r�_.r`_"� ,�`�,� � r.�. •ram•=�+ '�' a�i�� YF,dv��� - -�-. ��
-.o-_cr � ram- _ _ _ _ _ -- - �.�t�.s-X. X.�==_��z ��~ �)c '" �-•�,�r����^�`„-tea 'L+. ��� _^� i�"� '��{�
ter-
n"
y ''�- -. ,��� l - :��"ate — �"�.�°� � �'-"= x- � �--r i-'��".'�-��C—•-�-:�:�u�'�'�"F`E}-
s
- 'r '�'rst•'.".�'f �-y-1OR
11 IMP
Mao
. -fir. _ _ - _ `_ - �T - ;- "``_"Lc'— ""k - y'_•a. -+w�:
�'� �� — 'r.SYc - Z �rC f ..� � T�Z' �'�G�� vim• f
_
-emu
iY
- _ - - - j�.F' c."'`- '�3,?.i. �_]§- � �-�..�'tr�S`�"�.e^-'�',.-,'ram _ tom-?• �-� E'-'� j�$��yu, �-
Y__
..a =-e- — ._ �� "�' .'"" �-� ". " _"`j � - ��� ��^^�rm �-•- �? '�FY.S� .�h-ter :� :c tom.. � �.^4� .�.
�-� �� � _ -��HY'�-�,_�•�.%-'-�- . �i _ �� �� _ r �r,a.���',?t��i+..--rf�=:�} �`-._y, �.�'�''9��<Y�-��_r� - ' ' 4'�•��5''#"z?�����
�c � ' =� � �.s':�- C .. 4-. yam : -.��� •,1? �ss� -m�--� ,- ��-S � �4 �"t���=�Tf 'y, '� u�:�.,� �'-�Ta.3x.cs2_� =�:-� ���--cw t =c,�~ s�'� '`g • rE-.�, ' "�`a-'^'7_ M—. `_ ��
.�'r'i'�_~L- _ `-P.�. •m. _ =3�_ r''�+.T�s •2 .r; ._-'"•�^ fl_ �'�r-�� .fit
- �� -�r� s t� �� �,� ti-=--.`r�r 3 -�-'J;�-•� y� � _ �--:..sue � _��SE,. - `�-�z�'s3 -.�-}_�- �..-..-?'�.�`�'��'�'f.� - _ v �`�'s [r
- . �� •�-:� � �, y,�t.,•-� _ � '��`=��a,=-"s- - "a'�-- a.-''�]FF+ "ram'�.��. �-- -_ �� v ',�'°r- ��v,.�.vr - ��-�,..�
_ - � � --�:.a ��.�'yr �s �Y��z�� `i=�'�L�'"_ � -_ ��.� '��� x - •��r��--��__e '- �T 3���� `y���'�� � �
Kj
�,._;:��----__-.. �_• c��t �r- �+ _ -_a`:- '�`s��" y „��r�".���g:�c� ��4 �- -x:=yf.:..�`-��vq-�-�'� '• �� - -- - 4 ��4��. ..._. ��":-�'�ejxx� T�
_ . '�a"�.l�—L - — _ _ � —r ,�r � �, � �`��y�T _ _ ��`—�SSl�_��-T;'SSS'�'4.:-i-.`.a�i _Li'�� �'t_�4,r3 �=—i._.•1 nT`�. _ 1. �__ _ I _
-a. _ - _ - - _ - r_ '`s ,,,s8��'_ _ - �� - . s ,�Y'.^�-. ���;���1`�- �1..z- . .,4 E•=-.•�'r- - -�-Ti. ,_� r: . .#� - ,�-�... -•.� � �y .z�$�.� �iS- -� �'-r-�- � :- .1-� r , r '<v}
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
i rb- J
i00
LEAD WRITER & RESEARCHER
Trey Davis
PROJECT COORDINATOR S I
John Tallinadge A T ILA`T�
` �J>� 1L
LEAD ADVISORS & EDITORS
John Tallniadge , Ben Hitching' , Mary Kiesau , Molly I) iggins
EDITORIAL ASSISTANCE
Nancy Breeding , Brett Hulscy, Tancred Miller
This report would not have been possible without thje cc1operation a d c , r±tributiotns oY1F[ 1Lr1an1 '7
individuals and organizations , including:
The Attordable Housing Coalition of Aslieville & Buncombe Count• ; American Farmland Trust , I'x1i
Bell , NC Smart Growth Alliance ; I ) a�vn Blobauni , Town of Davidson , Nate BO\Vmall , Bowman
Development Group ; Tout Carr, Hickory by Choice ; Catawba Lands Conservancy ; Don Dubay,
Roleseville ; Town of Fletcher ; Forsyth County Conservation of Natural Resources ; Randy Hemaiui ,
Downtown Salisbury, Inc . ; Halford House , NC State Uimer city ; Sharon Jablonski , Morganton ; City of
Kinston ; Tommy Lee , Kinston ; buddy Milliken , Village ofWoodsong; Stuart Mullcii , Peter Nagle , Hot
Springs ; Town of Huntersvillc ; Piedmont Land Conservancy; Preservation North Carolina ; David
Stancil , Orange Countyjack Sinioneau , Currituck County ; Elizabeth Teague , Town of Selm ; Trust for
Public Land Voices and Choices of the Central Carolinas ; Jonathan Wells , Cliarlotte - Mecklenburg
Planning Commission ; Western North Carolina Alliance
Special thanks go to the Stanback Conseniation Internship Program and the Duke University
Nicholas School of the Er vironrreent and Earth Sciences .
" Successful Solutions to Spravvl : A North Carolina Approacl3 " is also available on the v>>eb ae
hap : / / sierrzclub -nc . erg /
This report has been funded by a grant from The Sierra Club Foundation .
14
\� n 1 ! .mod'' - ."•...a.�a.a..�,..n...�. �... ..+w«�d.1..aw...s..� vl J,I. fJw
ar.\.. Y�9 F� l � � aj•� s a ? � j; _ �{ r Jy 'e�Q� *�_
-:a :IvreeII
Ile
Ik
m It
It
` ? 9 f ) } T%.It
IN
ei
TIIIIII� .i"y..... ?
ow
tir
Ll
s ; trIF A
_
L. WIN
. y f y y { ri 1 yr
A It
Since September 11th , it has been difficult to focus on much elected leaders who also served on the>Conrnssion ,or who.
..,.,
beyond issues of national security or concern for the families of made presentations about the efforts in their communities; These
victims of the tragedy. Other issues that commanded our atten- are people who care deeply about their towns and cities , and
lion prior to that date seem to pale in comparison to the import about the environment on which we all depend,These_: are' also
of these events and the U. S . and global response . Yet our leaders who are committed to finding solutions that work �for
President has urged us to continue on with our lives , and we their communities .
must . This is a time for individuals , families , and organizations to We hope that this report will make it easier for your com-
look inward, to assess what is truly of value to us , and to be vigi- munities ' locally elected leaders to find Smart Growth solutions
lant in living those values , protecting that which is dear to us . that have worked in other places in North Carolina . The report
For the members of the North Carolina Chapter of the is organized into five key categories : Downtown Revitalization,
Sierra Club, this has meant checking in with each other, asking Land Use, Open Space Preservation , Traditional Neighborhoods
about family and friends . It also means reconfirming our mission and Transportation . Each category has a lead story about a strate-
of protecting our natural resources and environmental systems gy or project of particular note , followed by shorter descriptions
" for our families , for our future ." It has never been more appar- of other examples from across the state .
ent to me how much our U. S . resources - man-made, human, I trust that you will find these examples as inspirational as I
and natural - mean to the identity of our nation . The efforts of have . We know that most people in North Carolina value our
the state Chapter of the Sierra Club to protect our state 's natural natural resources , our historic resources , our agricultural tradI
resources were important before September 11th . They continue tion , and our quality of life . Poll after opinion poll has made this
to be so today, and as we move forward . clear. We are very fortunate , though, to have so many people
One of our Chapter's key campaigns has been working for who are committed to protecting these resources , these values .
" Solutions to Sprawl :" Our approach has been to educate the The North Carolina Chapter of the Sierra Club will continue to
citizens of North Carolina , including community leaders , about stand with them , and you , as we work together to find Solutions
the ills associated with sprawling land development, and the to Sprawl throughout our state .
promise held in new ways to build and improve our communi-
ties . In many respects , these " new ways ," called Smart Growth
strategies , are predicated on the town-building practices found in John Tallmadge
our historic small towns , city centers and neighborhoods , yet Chair, Solutions to Sprawl Steering Committee
updated to reflect our current transportation and lifestyle choic North Carolina Sierra Club
-
es . Increasingly, these Smart Growth strategies can be found in
use today in communities throughout North Carolina . This
report highlights a number of examples selected to demonstrate
the good work that our local leaders are doing on this issue . It
should also serve as inspiration to activists , local officials , and
other community leaders who are looking for ways to stop
sprawl and promote a better approach to development .
In 1999 , the North Carolina General Assembly created a
Smart Growth Commissi
on on to study Smart Growth strategies ,
and to recommend changes in legislation, state and local policies
to encourage practices that would better protect the natural
resources and the high quality of life that we enjoy in North
Carolina. I was fortunate to have had the opportunity to serve
on the Smart Growth Commission . Through that experience, I
gained an appreciation for the talent and ability of the locally
. . . . - - -
pp
A
_
"- T -� i _
. f
1 .a _y 1 :ir- C Far
ci fi F �'xyMIFF
AN
I AN
y 11ru WINItc f , 1
a'. fi �r LININ
rrr �? . f L
r <
d ;_. --3 '
1� I I A A A A A A
A A A
A }
Y1 AI
fir` `-�. _ 4
N 666666
s` �r
.. ; A ' _ �.�s.tnY '� -sue, '-�_�+^ 5- ''!r a,'�
r �"' c.l 11 . . - . . -. "`-`,Y' '�y —'.�' . ^z) �3--g - - ^
. _- - sue " -- - �~v
A-g
%AF
%
— -b ANIF
�Yx -
_ - - - _ _
`G1* Gl - - _ - _ -
u
-�- - A. _ _ -
_ - - _ - - - -
A j III III
_ A.
_ -
IF III, Al
=� - -
-i _ - :_ A AA _
= _ - I N.A _ N Al
AI
- _ _J
.. 1 _. - . _
AAF
AA
:. : - - -
- _ . . IF
e sA I A A A A I I A A A A I A . i
-
�� - - -
- r .' ;
SU M ! Y North Carolina , the sixth-fastest growing state in the nation, has experi-
enced a population and economic boom in recent years . While for the
past half- century, growth and progress have been witnessed in terms of
new suburban development, bigger roads , office parks and strip malls
among the asphalt , it has become apparent that this type of growth is ulti-
mately damaging not only to the environment, but also to the economy
and the quality of life of all North Carolinians .
Sprawl has affected the state in many ways over the last decade . These
include increased commute times and air pollution , the loss of open space
and the deterioration of our special sense of place .
The costs are quantifiable . Governments have long operated under the
assumption that increased development will expand the tax base enough
to support the additional services required . However, it costs on average
$ 1 . 15 to $ 1 . 50 for every dollar spent by local governments to provide
needed services such as schools and roads to new subdivisions (September
27 , 1999 memo from Raymond Boutwell of Wake County's Budget and
Management Services) . North Carolina simply cannot afford the steep
and unnecessary costs of such haphazard growth .
T I 1-11 GOOD 11J E ITIT E There are many communities that are working to create more beneficial
and convenient development across the state . They are directing new
growth to long- empty downtown cores where infrastructure is already in
place to support it and costs are lower. Others are working to provide
alternative modes of travel that will ease congestion on the highways .
New smart growth neighborhoods are springing up and older ones are
being restored as the demand grows for a better way to live . Farms are
being preserved and farmers are able to make a profit without selling
their land.
None of these communities have taken an anti- growth stance . They are
working to promote healthy, profitable growth that provides citizens with
more choices in how they work and live . This is how growth in almost all
communities has occurred for hundreds of years , up to World War II and
the spread of the automobile .
Today, North Carolina communities are working to reverse the effects of
a failed experiment that began almost 50 years ago . Success - in halting P pd
sprawl .is not dependent upon the size or wealth of a community ; some of
the most successful projects were dreamed up and carried out by every-
day people with a minimum of investment . The key is a simple dedication
to following through , and a respect for the wishes of the citizens . The
examples herein demonstrate some of the best of our efforts .
- _t _ — _ _ i
l }I
+ IF � IF
.
t�N
.IF + _3
; 3
y Y
- . 41
� x � -
I AL
zI-
F -
t. , T t '
IF I : c
_
W
IF
ANSI �LII Fr I
ir
r, - b T
- � � �r4 _ Y .may, Y, Lr� _ ` } _ � F�
r
7.
R_r . , �--e,Sf v' �
v t_`•z�7bs " S" "Iz 4 _ "lr ._ r' {_ �S',,i r 'd4-.P' ��r
]3 -, ASS • .l 3. }! v- j
�_ \
I
At t
Fir
IF
FAA
IviP% " l ` .i ; O E �,1 � ,�, C � A SUS IAINA6LE C� PTIOf�3
Facing the growth pressures of the bustling Research Triangle , Orange County has imple-
mented plans to conserve open space . The county covers 254 , 720 acres , 187 , 000 of which
were active farmland four decades ago . Today that number has dropped by more than 65 %
to about 44 , 500 acres . Other open spaces , including forests , have also been developed at a
rapid rate . Orange County has taken several steps in order to protect its natural , cultural and
historical resources by preserving open space .
Open space preservation has ranked among residents as one of the most important issues
facing the county and has been an important local issue for many years . In 1987 , the
Orange County- Chapel Hill- Carrboro Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan was implement-
ed , putting in place the first urban growth boundary in North Carolina, Essentially, it linuts
the density of development on land surrounding the two towns .
In 1998 , after three years of research on Orange County 's role in the preservation of
these resources , the Board of Commissioners created the Environment and Resource
'
Conservation Department " The department serves to coordinate the Counrys preservation
projects and the acquisition of land for such projects .
luFiITIF `( INU-1 ,c; f'ti! D AC0UIF; ING CRITIC -� L LIPAAA. W V! C
In April of 2000 , the county adopted the " Lands Legacy Progrartl for Orange County,"
which outlines the acquisition process . It began by listing an inventory of existing land uses
and ownership in the county, culled from previous reports and studies . At the time of the
report , Orange County owned only 632 acres , less than a quarter of one percent of the land
within its borders .
s
53
1.
FOR SALE
APRRO7L 100 ACRES
919�490w6430
Pefirsd goal of are i � te en t
an e er is to save all the pieces . "
Aldo Leopold , The Land Ethic
In the first half of 1999 , department officials asked each Using money from a local-option sales tax and a
advisory board with a role in preservation in the county statewide farmland preservation fund, the county
to help develop a set of criteria for selecting the land recently purchased its first farmland easement of 71
- - _ acres on Back Creek . Because of its location in a critic
most critical for acquisition . These were divided among
t' critical wildlife habitat areas , prime farmland , historic watershed and the owner's strong history of responsible
` . and cultural sites , parkland, and riparian buffers in conservation practices , the land was considered a high
- ` .
a1� watersheds . General criteria incluvv
ded variables such as a priority for preservation .
4-.-� . checklist of what was present on the site , whether the
-� KEEPING FARMS AS A VIABLE PART OF THE ECONOMY
property was imminently threatened by development,
tw
how the surrounding land was being used and what the Orange County began working to keep farmland open
and vital even before the passage of the Lands Legacy
possible future use of the property might be ,
Pm ` -
Program . In 1987 , the Board of Commissioners forme
The Lands Legacy Program outlines various methods of the Agricultural Preservation Board (APB) , made up of
land acquisition available to the county. For lands where citizens . The APB drafted an ordinance to encourage
long-term maintenance is needed, such as critical farmers to register their land in voluntary agricultural
wildlife habitat, fee-simple purchase of the land is rec- districts . These non-binding, ten-year contracts currently
ommended. This involves the outright purchase of the protect about 1 , 400 acres in the county. Areas are
land itself and can be expensive , but it also ensures that marked on county maps and anyone wishing to develop
no conflicts over responsibility for the land will arise. within a half-mile of one of these districts is informed
Land might also be offered to the county as a donation ; that they will be close to a functioning agricultural area .
in return, landowners could receive tax breaks . This is intended to cut down on nuisance complaints
from anyone choosing to live near one of the districts .
A conservation easement is a third option that is often Other benefits include eligibility for farmland preserva-
applicable to farmland . Owners can sell or donate the tion funds and an exemption from water and sewer
development rights of their land to the county and still assessments . While they do not assure protection of the
retain ownership of the land. Specific details such as land should a farmer wish to sell, they do provide an
what types of uses will be permitted on the land in the area of focus for the possible acquisition of conservation
future can be worked out between the owner and the easements . Perhaps most important, participation in
county. Landowners receive income tax benefits as well these voluntary districts symbolizes a landowner's
as federal and state estate tax considerations that reduce commitment to keeping his or her farm in operation .
the financial burden of land ownership on heirs . When a farmer is considering selling his land for devel-
Easementsare often cheaper than a fee simple purchase opment, he may be encouraged to keep it as a farm
and allow the land to remain in agricultural production . when he sees his neighbors are committed to preserving
Thus far, the county has protected some 600 acres of their community.
open space — 526 through acquisition .
• Now as Not AIM a , • • •
two
lk
NJ
Y7 '�' -. i i7 _ 1� H � IN
.3+ F _1',rrtNo," } s y . fir ' } rs .y ` J.I )IN It
IINK ll-l � k aJ '.� 3Isomost � -.'} ci. , ' M� -r- 'IF •t -yN . ? i�i NJ*
.z '1
IN
IN
IN NIA
Not
:Ftr fit; . � h. ILA, "'E JP. r
IP
AN, IN
NI
- IF
_ -Fir `—" � ,
OF it
IN 0
IN
If
I IN
I NJ
tNA
ow e ,
r � � 1J 7 1 .Twl
_ T1 3
p 1 t log A
r, t 5' c IN,
T V.
I . IN " t ~T
t li ;rIF
,
- - - _ _ _ _ - _ - .I - - J - - - - -
}
AN AN
ON
ON
AN
N IN
No IN
A
• • • • . •
• • • • — . •
• • am a a a a • •
•
No
•
I . ® PEN SPACE PROTECTION 50
face the specter of neighborhood dogs bothering live- ment . Just as our gray infrastructure of roads links
stock or nuisance complaints from people unaccus- together to form a regional transportation system, so do
tomed to farm life . swaths of green space function together to support our
natural systems . If the links in this network of green
infrastructure are broken , the system begins to break
COUNTY down . The Triangle J Council of Governments is a
regional association of the local governments in seven
counties that is working in equal partnership with the
COUNTY BUYS DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS TO Triangle Land Conservancy and the N. C . Division of
MAINTAIN FARMS Parks and Recreation to develop a " GreenPrint" or
Forsyth County, home to Winston-Salem, has faced regional green space plan for the Triangle . The project is
many of the development pressures common around mapping green spaces that are currently protected, those
larger cities in North Carolina . Between 1969 and targeted for preservation , and other lands that are
1985 , 17 percent of land in the county was converted important to the ecological and recreational functions
to non-agricultural use . The pace of development only of the Triangle . The resulting GreenPrint will link
increased in the 1980s . County officials set a goal of together green space investments made at the local level
preserving 30 , 000 acres of farmland through the acqui- into a functioning regional green space network that
sition of development rights when they adopted the can help maintain the region's essential green infrastruc-
Agricultural Land Preservation Plan in 1986 . Money for ture for current and future generations . In an area that
the program comes primarily from the county's general lost almost 150 , 000 acres between 1987 and 1997 to
fund and has been set aside for the program since 1984 . development , this sort of planning is crucial to the
In recent years , federal and state grants have also helped future quality of life in the region. The counties in the
support the program . Charlotte region are involved in a similar effort through
the Voices and Choices initiative sponsored by Central
Since that time, the county has purchased development Carolinas Choices .
rights for 25 farms , leased the rights on two farms , and
received donations of rights for two more . This has
placed over 1 , 500 acres in protection , at a cost of just IPE
over $ 2 . 6 million for acquisition . Applications for over M UADUNTAIN ISLAND LAR
NINK
6 , 200 acres have been received.
While it has not hit the original target, the program has OPEN SPACE SAVES WATER SUPPLY, MONEY
taken important steps in preserving farmland in an area Preserving open space is often essential in maintaining a
where it could have easily succumbed to growth pres- high quality of life and keeping an economy vibrant . In
sures . Farmers have peace of mind knowing their land the case of Mountain Island Lake , the water source for
will remain safe and surrounding property owners have over a half-million people in and around Charlotte and
seen their land values rise. Gastonia, open space preservation is keeping drinking
water safe for residents . When Gaston County moved its
water intake to the lake, away from the more developed
South Fork of the Catawba River, it cut chemical treat-
� � � P , I � ment costs for drinking water by 50 percent because
the water was so much cleaner.
REGIONAL COOPERATION TO PRESERVE GREEN
INFRASTRUCTURE The Initiative for Mountain Island Lake began 10 years
Open space protection issues often extend beyond the ago with what is now the Catawba Lands Conservancy.
jurisdiction of just one municipality or county govern- Many groups such as the governments of Gaston ,
IUCCESSEUL SOLUTIONS To SPRAWL : A NORTH CAROLINA APPROACH
Lincoln , and Mecklenburg Counties , the city of Treating the water onsite made the reuse of the trea-
Gastonia, and other foundations and agencies worked to sured community school feasible by eliminating the
obtain land along the lake shore or place it under con- need to pipe sewage to a treatment plant, decreasing the
servation easements through purchase or donation . To chances * of an environmentally-threatening sewage sys-
date, over half of the shoreline, about 5 , 000 acres , has tem failure, and cutting down on the cost of water and
been protected from development that might otherwise fertilizer used to maintain the landscaping . As a result,
have increased runoff into the lake and raised pollution what was once an eyesore and a safety hazard has
levels . Many members of the Initiative are now expand- become the home of several businesses with a minimal
ing their focus to protect land around critical tributaries impact on the surrounding environment ,
that empty into the lake .
R '�- 9 C H OL
913
GREEN BUILDING SAVES A CbMMUNITY LAND -
MAR I< , CUTS COSTS
Built over 50 years ago in a remote part of Chatham
County, Bell 's School sits on the shore of Lake Jordan . It
had served as a public school for children of the sur-
rounding rural community and later as a parochial
school . For two decades , the building sat vacant and
tiatended until purchased and renovated by software
distributor EMJ America in the mid4990s .
Because of its remote location and proximity to a nutri-
ent-sensitive water supply, both conventional sewer and
septic systems were infeasible and would not meet cur-
rent environmental standards . Hal House, a soil scientist
and wetlands ecologist, designed a wastewater recycling
system for the property that makes use of artificial " hill
marshes " to filter and treat 1 , 200 gallons of water each
day in a way that mimics natural methods . In addition
to recycling the water onsite for reuse, the system pro-
vides an aesthetically-pleasing landscape feature for
employees and visitors .
fI
SAM
- - - _ - - �t4 _ .
1 .
ME
' _ - - -� cam` - - - - - '.r-: - Tom' '= 50,
�- c? CT ram_ - 'Ylr - > • �= y s^' .— - _� '.
�. r
YC, _
- FF
- - - - - _
_ - -'FRI
-
i 'I/! � ?
L. _ = � 3 � r
,zFF
IF
FF
-
- _ - 4FF
FF
- _ - - - _ - - _ - - ✓= _ v
I IF
FFFF
- \
_ -FF
if
- _ - _ = _ +
Off
FF
= fIF IF
_ - - J =v
IF I
' - - _ - - .
s
>= = f
- - - - i ate•-• - _ =
Fa IIII'l-
Im
FF
OFF
_ �• `
FF
_FIFf
r
ME
FF FICA
FF-
b 35 _ -� •ram-- _ - _ _ v .�. 5 -�-• •7�. _ -- - - ,.�-
�. _ :Sys _ - _
-_,..� =,�' .r. 3. �+'•
_ -
FFrKLjrA
If
..PFC. -Aw +
FF—
_ J '"'-iY _ - 'z._-r °$ •. c ti-� : ^ - f -F - r`� _.as-..sue t.. - _ --5. "'"� E -= �^c•. � - _
y - � - ter' ss-=. f` r'• � _ -
_ r- a,p^ti ��- _ -.t �•L ✓�r-1� �--�.- _ :� '�'�v-�_ mac - L%i� _
E M - ,�.�= _ �.i ,a _ a-qF -
. aq
_? • �_`
_,., v An
fF
- � ... �s� s_ _ { . ._..sue- =•-.. - _ s ¢ss - - " . � — _ -:•- " _
777
Sf- X IE
F!F •` yip . 1• _ _ =
- '_'- -:_sue s "• . ?-� IF-
r_= _ _ - `i;F �s.� "� -P "�-� . ' = s �•.�
IN
For
• • • i • ' • • - - i • • • - • i
• • - • • i • • • " • • i • •
Fit
ITT, IFFFF
! OFF l
a
addd OFF,
�. I-
Fz , FIT
` f
FITyW� t .•s. F _ Y 1 ..
Yy - nab ?a., 1 '- -�
w OFF
OF OFF,
OFF
I OFF"
TOO IF
OF FFI
OF I
: - OF A. FIFIFFOOFFIF— OFF",
i f -
OF
ITT OF
OF
Or
IL IF FIT
IF I
TO
g , OFF Or
_ OFF-
ITIFF
y Ir-
tOFF
s e 3�
I- ' ` t
I Or
OFFTOOFOr - =OF IFi - ' • • • • • • • •
OF
Or J. L
OF FIT* 41
IF OF 0 alp
TO IF
Fri AA 4
Or
IF
•
OF
F OF
Or � , OFF 7
FI PIP
TO I 11,FFOOTIFFF F.F .
0 OF
OFF
Ora In
OFF
In
rT
• _ • • . •
�r
yy IhOF Or —
- - - -
KL _ -' - _ _ F- FF
OFIFI !FIF
- - - - F F F - - - - - — - -
OFF 4
Or
41,
ILL • • • • - • • 1
• , • • . • •
• • IF • • • • • - • • 1 • • • 1
AT
Allb
IF, ILL
• • - • , • - FIT
-
• • • • IT -
59
II . TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 11
cul-de-sacs and encourage the preservation of open project progresses , the mill building itself will be con-
space . In what Bowman says is an essential part of verted into living and working units by its new private
smart growth, Huntersville officials have continued owner. This will incorporate an even greater diversity of
to update and revise their zoning ordinances to keep people into the village, which currently has six houses
pace with the changing face of smart growth . rented at below market value to residents who previ-
ously rented from the mill owners .
T ILL ILL .
CTIJIC
RE - USING A TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD
Edenton Mill Village, located in the coastal plain of AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND OPEN SPACE SHARE FUNDS
North Carolina , is an example of the way small-town Asheville and the surrounding land of Buncombe coun-
mill neighborhoods used to be . Designed and con- ty have been subject to some of the strongest growth
structed in the first quarter of the 20th century, the pressures in North Carolina. Land in farm production
small, closely spaced houses changed little over the past has fallen by more than 140 , 000 acres since 1950 in the
one hundred years . They were owned and rented to county. At the same time, the availability of housing that
mill-workers by the mill owners . After textile produc- is affordable to a median income family has fallen in
tion ceased in the last decade, Unifi , Inc . donated the recent years to 56 . 3 percent - lower than even the
114 , 000 square foot mill and the surrounding 57 houses booming cities of Raleigh and Charlotte .
to Preservation North Carolina (PNC) in 1995 . The
44-acre property adjoins downtown Edenton and fronts Affordable housing is an important component of suc-
Queen Anne Creek . cessful smart growth . If it is not available throughout a
community, people will be forced to move further and
The neighborhood was created with 60-foot-wide further from the city center to find homes at prices
open spaces at the rear of lots and a larger tract along they can afford . This , in turn , leads to the loss of open
the waterfront . PNC donated the easement for the space and the clogging of roads with commuters who
waterfront property to Edenton for use as a community do not live close enough to their jobs to walk or take
park, complete with nature trails . PNC wanted to public transportation .
preserve these open areas , as well as the overall look
of the village . In the summer of 2000 , the Western North Carolina
Alliance and the Affordable Housing Coalition of
Homeowners followed guidelines that regulated the Asheville-Buncombe County, along with other local
types and sizes of additions that could be made to the groups , convinced county commissioners to create
houses . To make sure potential residents knew what to an affordable housing and a land conservation trust
expect, PNC interviewed every buyer and made it clear fund . The cooperation of the two constituencies is a
what would be expected in the neighborhood , which groundbreaking step in North Carolina , marking the
was added to the National Register of Historic Places first time such groups have approached government
in 1999 . The money from home sales has bolstered together to seek such funds . Funding came initially
PNC historic preservation efforts in the region , and tax from the sale of county-owned land earlier in the year.
revenues from the renovated properties exceed those The county also passed an ordinance allowing the gov-
from the mill prior to renovation. ernment to purchase conservation easements on critical
lands . Buncombe County is now eligible to receive state
The success of Edenton Mill Village is testament to the funds for farmland preservation . Both funds now have
desire of people to live in traditional neighborhoods seed money - $ 109 , 000 each - and will begin raising
with easy access to local community centers . As the more cash . Money from the affordable housing trust
SUCCESSFUL SOLUTIONS TO SPRAWL : A NORTH CAR OLINA APPROACH
fund can be used to promote infill development for environmentally and economically sensible because
lower-income families , while farmland preservation people enjoy them and are willing to pay more to live
funds will keep portions of Buncombe County's in such an area . Thus far, four single-family houses , one
remaining 87 , 000 acres of farms safe from development . duplex and two garage apartments have been complet-
ed; plans call for 164 dwelling units . New 18-foot-wide
streets , bordered on each side by 10400t planted areas ,
are a marked change from the standard street width in
existing code .
A NEW VILLAGE PRESERVES GREEN SPACE PROFITABLY Having a developer who wishes to create aTND
Located halfway between Wilmington and Myrtle in a town that does not have ordinances for it is an
Beach along US 17 , Shalotte is a small but growing increasingly common occurrence in North Carolina
coastal town . New development is inevitable in this as builders and loan officers realize that these develop-
ever-popular region, but the 22 + -acre village of ments are profitable . By working to create a conditional
Woodsong is an attempt to keep that growth compact code with the town , the developer was able to get his
and livable , project started, and in time, may demonstrate the advan-
tages of traditional. neighborhood design . This can lead
In 1994 , Shalotte had no planner and no ordinances to further changes in~ ordinances _ that would allow for
pertaining to traditional neighborhood development. more TNDs in the future .
TND developer Buddy Milliken worked with officials_, �"
to add a subsection to the existing ordinance that :, FAI
"
allowed him to begin the development of a pedestrian FF
oriented, mixed-use community next to the downtown
area that makes use of existing infrastructure, -.
The sensitive environmental areas common along the
IFF
coast are preserved in this neighborhood in the form
of protected wooded areas , while severalnore formal
and informal parks are spaced throughout the commu=
pity for a total of about 35 percent open space. Most r j
t_
residences will be within a one-minute walk of a park,
3
and within five minutes of the village center. k ' "'
Perhaps more notably, Woodsong has actually provided C. IF-
,
nT- .r
a net increase in wetlands area through a man-made IF
wetland for storm water treatment and has preserved - IF IF
an existing natural wetland as a community amenity. IT
l 1
Milliken points out that these features are socially, IF I
���0.i
W
14,
t TT �Ny}
t 3rfK.
-..• riS
- lb
IL few,
I .r f
FF
irs
_ } lt,
r W f 4
l: Sq
' _ P
I.
a -_s• - - ..L ca 4 J u, ter
i
tTeLl
, � , W.
rr
i
w.
ti � u
ga 4 �
..v=•'t }' i'c, �- ti3'JVwp t.yz . Ra. .r'7y. 5 -f( rnu 3' ,z .k, r -' �s -
Jew
w,r} -wt-I. . �
Iwwr
IV 1w
1 It w
_ �... '. _ may 4 . . �.-rc-�' -
?- MIt
t- � Sax a
14
r ' ' '- 3Sr JgII
� - Y- FV �
, yf n p
} S'r Faw
"° t?i' 1.�=v n% Y r,.. tiWt - �3E ' �U•`� j .
-r � :5i 774 '1:1VXMz2tt'4 'F1 r �f*It
,ij
J.
MA
.i'M' a'�+.":✓,_4., ryr}�yP,�y;> W K . :Y'�C �.,. I-]i`i24'f P�. �1 ^.} -
'a1?a' '_�.. . aa�-W- 1 •»Y tea' 4,'esj -
{_ s _ • - tT ii --:off. ``u.q `.` ' _ `. e.
fKItN
14 It.
C°� ' '+e `i ' T�v a • .'Fn" �+ �•£3 J1g., sit t 5
n. I� tr e�
- 'F � T..�
Y _
iSZ
MMA
COMMIT TO GROWTH AND IT WILL COME
In 1996 , Selma resembled many small railroad towns around the state . Many of the buildings that
went up along the main streets during its heyday as a passenger and freight junction sat vacant -
victims of time and strip mall development. The sixty- and seventy-year- old structures , inany
unused for anything other than storage for over two decades , were becoming eyesores and breed-
ing places for crime. The Town could not afford the . expense of demolition and was losing money
because it could not collect taxes for the services such as water and sewer, even though the infra-
structure for these was already in place . People generally avoided the downtown area and new
businesses were reluctant to move in next to vacant buildings . Even cosmetic improvements made
by the Town were not enough to bring people back . The central business district wasn 't doing
much business at all .
A THEME TO BRING BUSINESSES AND CUSTOMEF `: , ;_) .,A , I . ,. CJ ' 'i I '•.
Former Town Manager Bruce Radford and others came up with a relatively simple way to
breathe life back into a historically significant downtown district by turning it into an antiques
and crafts mecca.
The Johnston County town is located next to the heavily-traveled Interstate 95 , and about 34 , O ( > O
cars per day pass over Anderson Street. In a 1997 business plan entitled " Two Percent Can Make
it Happen ," Radford and Ray Gibbs saw this , along with Selnia '.s proximity to the wealthier areas
of Wake County, as a strong customer base for a specialized downtown market . The plan took
Radford and Gibbs only about three hours to draft and the council approved it within sit weeks .
' IF
IF
IF
It
ht4 •-�c' IF� ,�•�'` ?r"- t :ri +r> at``1IF
�c1� �?, 1 `,may
I IF fFI-I III
IIto I a c- - _.� � '� -"",� $ �r"`at
r + - IF
i5 p IL y , _ AN- It '
_ / s
r r
IF-
IF rip
IF
rFIFF3
�-S - r
a ' ¢IF
�d� Iji,l ■
YFINIF IF ,
z le
n'
FF
b` iI
In
l.
a- -a—. 4� '>K'rieIF
,IF I IF pit
IMI
IF T
rr !_' _'', yam'+'C..h M�c� '#' �t:y"ntt L r �itkFt '1 K �i t mot.
•
• • •
IF
Or
Or
OF it
OP
Or
PL
It
- - • " • " • 1 111
•10
Ih • • • • • • -
Or
1 • . • DID - • - - ■ - • - -
■
• , • a • • • . •
• • • • - •
■
as • - - / - • • • • • • / 111 ■ •
• • • • i,
AIR
• • ■ - • • • •
6 �
III . DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION 15
cosmetically, through plantings and parks for example , areas , as well as the creation of "prototype " apartments
is now appreciated by visitors and residents alike . to is developers and buyers in creating more .
Redeveloping the 20 buildings included in the original
plan motivated similar efforts by nearby property own-
ers . Once renovations began, 16 owners of existing SALISIBURY
properties took steps to improve the appearances of
their buildings as well . The atmosphere of downtown MAKING A BUSINESS OUT OF REDEVELOPMENT
has changed so much that it is now referred to as In 1980 , Salisbury applied for and received technical
" Uptown Selma" to reflect its economic success . assistance from Main Street USA for the revitalization
of its downtown district . That same year, Downtown
Salisbury, Inc . (DSI) , a non-profit corporation devoted
to the redevelopment of the central business district,
was formed .
A DOWNTOWN TO SUIT CHANGING NEEDS DSI , with two full-time staff members , works to
Downtown Morganton in Burke County is centered promote downtown Salisbury and attract new business.
aroundan 1837 courthouse and green space . The city es . It maintains a listing of property available for devel-
is in an area where per- capita income is rising rapidly. opment and keeps downtown business owners informed
Rather than lose this potential customer base to oudy- of new companies and proposed projects for the area .
ing shopping areas , the city undertook the development Incentives such as tax breaks for historic preservation
of a master plan for downtown . The plan included and the 20 , 000-plus cars a day that travel on Innes
studying the region to determine what types of busi- Street play a large role in enticing developers to locate
nesses would do best in the central business district . in the central business district .
Among these were high-end apparel, restaurants , and
hobby shops . DSI helps business owners secure low-interest loans for
redevelopment and obtain grants for facade restoration
The plan calls for wider sidewalks and increased land- through the City of Salisbury 's Community Appearance
scaping in keeping with its green center. To improve Commission . Since its creation , DSI has overseen 234
the economic center, the city recruited and worked facade improvements , 242 building renovations , and a
with developers to bring in a full service restaurant, a net gain of over 1 , 000 jobs in the central business dis-
theatercomplex, new art galleries and residential units . trict . This has come at a cost of under $ 20 million in
A former mill one block from the courthouse is being public funds and over $35 million by private investors .
transformed into a new city hall with residences on
the upper floors , some of which have already been
completed and sold.
Morganton 's success thus far can be attributed to a
number of factors . In 1996 , they began an 18 -month
planning process involving over 350 citizens before a ,�;,
drafting the plan . In addition, the city has a Main Street 3 L
Program devoted to carrying out the plan . The work is
divided into phases on a timeline, the first section enti- Lt
tied "Demonstration and serves as an incremental
approach to implementation . It involves several small , - ' �
. ;... a rJ
but effective improvements to streetlights and walking d!_ ;
i iE � ; f z
_ :: . _
ieAob r IV
do
doll
7d; IV
m3', l � A 'Ll — r; dod; V= p mfdddl�
IdWs
do
'doodoolder _d. _ - - - ti ' ._ _ . - -
ob
dood
1VA
-+�
e —
glrd4a .
ti 3 Sn..J*a x,
Vold— Vol. looll-
-- -
11
old
I SS - _
to
is
k — voodoo
r c
h
—+ do did old do
i `A.
_
r
P.
do— doll a
- :
c zz
F _ * — � #
dd —
--°' 'fig '•M . ..�" -
k =dor _ �tv
- _ - - —
do
look —4
A IV
Al doll jld—
f
_ — _
"` -
aold
- —
s
•
do
old
r"
44444
do-
IA
_ - - =- - -
or
do-
- - _ -In
7 do-
- �
Z
I Vol,
ow
old
9— MEN
IF
_ _ - F _ - - � i
_- - - _- � - - - - _ - C _ _ _-x
old
VIL
loll
doloo
- -mommomIll - - - - - - - _ - ... - -L _ _ -- -
R
_ _
_ _
old
—zooll
_ dood -. F
J
to
ran
♦ • __� dod Vol
dolor f —
LLE
do IT I—
I It — ollor
Alk
1
1
i • • • • • pa
• • • 111 • •
• • • i _ - • • _ • • - i • • • • i • • •
ALL
ow
- • • - • i • • i . • • • ill •
• • - • • • . • _ i i • • • •
• - old • did — • — • r . i • • • -
IV . LAXI➢ mUSE PLANNING 17
ij
65
thii
It
I
u y
� .
,
1999 , hundreds of additional residents were displaced . critical watershed from runoff and pollutants that result
The city began working to relocate these people into from development .
homes closer to downtown and out of the floodplain,
and secured federal grants to allow more apartments to While Kinston may not be seeing the influx of eco -
be added to an existing complex . nomic development it was expecting from projects such
as Global TransPark, it has nevertheless managed to plan
Kinston also worked with other developers and wisely for growth when it does occur. By consolidating
Preservation North Carolina to turn a former high new development in areas out of the floodplain and
school into housing for the elderly. Using volunteer and already served by utilities , the city is making growth
prison labor, the city is building new homes on vacant much less expensive, both economically and environ-
lots near downtown . All of these new housing options mentally. It has also managed to take hold of vacant
make use of existing infrastructure such as sewer, water land that might have otherwise been a drain on the
and roads . Rather than spending massive amounts of community to turn it into a draw for tourists and resi-
money to extend these to new suburban developments , dents alike .
taxpayers in Kinston are making use of what has already
been paid for.
PLANNING FOR GREEN SPACES AND CUBANUCK Ulu
PROMOTING TOURISM :
Working with graduate students in the Department of PROVIDING FOR S U S TA I N A B L E GROWTH
City and Regional Planning at UNC- Chapel Hill , THROUGH PUBLIC FACILITIES
Kinston and Lenoir County developed a " Green Located south of the rapidly growing Norfolk, Virginia
Infrastructure Plan for the Neuse River Floodplain " in area , Currituck County faces intense growth pressure .
May of 2001 . The plan identifies areas in the floodplain In October of 1994 , in response to citizen concern , the
that would be best used for active or passive preserva- county added an adequate public facilities (APF) ordi-
tion , or as conservation areas . The entire area will serve nance . Typically, these types of special use ordinances do
as a greenway connecting downtown Kinston to other not cover all subdivisions . However, any development
parts of the community. As a part of its effort to over six lots is subject to the APF ordinance . This tool
increase its draw as an area for tourists , Kinston will does not put an end to growth , but works to insure that
provide education centers , such as the planetarium, and adequate infrastructure is in place to serve new devel-
restore forests along the river. The city has also been opments , " including but not limited to schools , fire and
sponsoring canoe and raft rentals , turning the river into rescue, law enforcement , and other county facilities ."
a draw. An added benefit of limiting development in the
greenways , aside from preventing the costly damages to In another effort to direct growth , Currituck County
property associated with floods , will be to protect the adopted an open space design regulation in 1996 . This
66
SUCCESSFUL SOLUTIONS TO SPRAWL * A NORTH CAROLINA APPROACH
stipulates that a developer can build higher density to all citizens . In addition, developers can transfer densi-
housing if 50 percent of the site is placed in a perma- ty by purchasing the rights to land off-site for preserva-
nent conservation easement. Since that time , seven tra- tion. The town has set aside $ 10 million to purchase
ditiorial subdivisions totaling 143 lots over 374 acres open space and Mecklenburg County offered another
have been approved . Twelve acres of those were pre- $ 5 million . Ultimately some of this money will be used
served as open space . By comparison, three subdivisions to connect the open spaces for a recreation area and
If 170 lots on 216 acres have also been approved. One alternative transportation link.
hundred and fourteen acres — 53 percent — are now
preserved Rural landowners worried that this would decrease the
p rved as open space under the regulation at no cost value of their land and encourage developers to look
to the -county. elsewhere . In a compromise, the town appropriated
Unlike zoning, land-use ordinances apply to all areas of funds to buy land from any owner who felt he could
the county and permit a review of all new develop- not sell it at the previous market price. Thus far, no
ment . While Currituck cannot refuse to permit all sub - owners have taken advantage of this offer, but develop -
divisions its decisions are made based on the presenta- ers seem eager to work with the open space mandate .
tion of evidence and can be more readily upheld . As of August 2001 , four developers have applied to
develop over 500 acres in a manner consistent with the
new regulations .
VIThe ordinance also calls for mixed-use , pedestrian ori-
ented development, ten percent open space in all other
OPEN SPACE AND PUBLIC HOUSING AS districts , and the interconnection of neighborhood
VITAL INFRASTRUCTURE streets . It sets standards for architectural design that will
Effective July 1 , 2001 , Davidson's new Planning blend with the existing small-town atmosphere as well .
Ordinance requires the adequate public facilities of
Currituck , with the addition of affordable housing . All
new developments must provide 12 . 5 percent affordable
housing throughout . This is in keeping with the current
level of such housing in and around Davidson.
In many communities that take on land-use planning
and neighborhood revitalization , the result is the gentri-
fication of certain areas . Rising housing costs push
lower-income residents out of the market and force
them to look elsewhere for housing . This can con-
tribute to urban sprawl as they look for cheaper land. It
also can severely impact the ability of people without
cars to live ' close to their place of business . By marking
affordable housing as an important part of a town's
infrastructure , Davidson ensures its mixed-use commu-
nities will remain vibrant and viable .
The plan also requires 50 percent of any new develop -
meets in the 4 , 400-acre rural district to be preserved as
Open space in perpetuity. This may be reduced to 40
percent if all of the open spaces are publicly accessible
} r ^b $ r 7 s S
It rl�
to lZ
! + 41
al
41
J fir' Vr
,ElI
Id
I it
.+ 'or
f +
It In
It
it
t I
14 !to
.x 4 '' 1
It
y
Sn S
44
tool
Is
Jr-
-i
G 9 Tk � ! �s
r+ - a ti=�Ilt _ �- �`-6 - - . I as
iitt I
s :dam r ' �we
�''b .x .": i `if.�- l l ! .
It
still I
A lion
s
It t t
fill
i ..1
91
Its it
-
ow
r!,'
f
.it It
4
7.
L _19L2--s • .
may .
K
J � 3 d :P'
_ l y - :s�
ci
III
Y f f -^ hcf YI• _ � ,. '! 1 J 'font -
_,;i<.n ^Pr •' $�.`', -"mac •''3 ' . i• . a�„'rz ;i: :-tea:'
Y 2 nIT, Izlt
A " LO T
PLANNING NOW TO PREVENT A STANDSTILL LATER
The roadways of the Queen City of Charlotte have become so crowded with royal subjects that it
threatens to tarnish the crown . The city of over half a million is projected to grow by another
345 , 000 people by 2025 . As has happened in other cities where the automobile controls the land-
scape , Charlotte faces the specter of dangerous air pollution , stalled traffic , and the migration of
jobs to areas less congested . It is currently ranked 17th-worst in the nation by the American Lung
Association for ozone and nitrogen oxide pollution and could stand to lose federal highway funds ,
as Atlanta did, if things get much worse . To combat this , city and county planners have created an
integrated transit and land-use plan that will guide growth and provide alternate modes of trans -
portation to keep the city economically vital and better for citizens .
TAKING ACTION BEFORE THE ` WRONG DECISION ' CAN BE MADE
Charlotte 's combined planning process is taking place before many major land- use and traffic deci-
sions are made . As the city has seen from larger cities such as Atlanta that failed to integrate com-
bined planning processes early on , it is much more difficult to provide successful solutions after the
fact . Growth is inevitable and welcomed in the Charlotte area, but it must be guided in order to
be sustainable and healthy.
PUBLIC SHOWS SUPPORT IN REFERENDUM
Charlotte 's " Centers and Corridors " transportation study quantified growth pressures in the
Charlotte -Mecklenburg area , and emphasized the need to investigate the possibility of rapid transit
options along five select routes that would connect Charlotte 's Center City to outlying areas . As a
result of the Centers and Corridors visioning process , Charlotte began the " 2025 Plan " in 1998 to
evaluate the potential for these transit projects and to encourage land-use planning that would lead
to more compact , urban land development .
SUCCESSFUL SOLUTIONS TO SPRAWL : A NORTH CAROLINA APPROACH
The citizens of Charlotte have already shown that they issue , the Department of Transportation hired a full.
stronglysupport this type of regional transportation time bicycle coordinator to oversee the implementation
planning. In 1998 , they voted for a half-cent sales tax of these plans .
increase that will provide about $ 50 million per year to
support the Centers and Corridors transit inati
itives .
This money is set aside for completely new rapid transit 1111ICKORY
projects along the corridors and is separate from the
funds for the existing bus system .
BY CHOICE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PAVES THE WAY
Local officials , citizen groups , and corporate leadership FOR PROGRESS
have all worked to raise public awareness of and support After several heated disputes between city officials and
for these transit initiatives . citizens over zoning and transportation issues , the city
of Hickory decided to review their ordinances . A 25 -
PLANNING FOR FUTURE GROWTH member task force consisting of residents of the city
At this time , four of the five corridors are still being and surrounding communities was selected by city
studied while the fifth, the 10 . 5 -mile southern corridor council in 1998 to produce a citizen- derived growth
between uptown and Pineville, has been identified for plan called " Hickory by Choice ." Members ranged from
light rail service and has entered the preliminary engi- environmental activists to wealthy developers , but all
neering phase . The other studies are expected to be called Hickory home :
completed by the end of 2001 . Options range from
light rail or commuter rail to dedicated bus lanes . Each After familiarizing themselves with the region's current
one has different benefits . To the north , for example , methods of growth and development , the committee ,
light rail is not feasible due to the distance and cost of not city council , selected an outside consultant .
providing electrical power for those trains . A diesel
powered commuter train or a bus system would be In what was probably one of the key elements to
more cost- effective , the success of Hickory by Choice , public charettes
were held with the help of the consultant. Residents
As routes and modes of transit are identified, the city is were shown a series of examples of various types of
changing land-use ordinances in those areas to encourage street and neighborhood design . Through this process ,
compact, pedestrian oriented developments with easy called a visual preference study, residents were able to
access to proposed stations . Land-use planning along the point out exactly which elements they liked and dis-
routesis an important ingredient to their success . If liked in each picture and explain why. As it turned
development is of the typical, low-density suburban type out, most people from apartment developers to open
and is not convenient for pedestrians , it does not provide space activists tended to like the same things — tree-
much ridership for rapid transit. At the same time, cur- lined streets , sidewalks set back from the road, and
rent development patterns put more cars on already landscaped medians .
over-taxed highways . By combining denser development
with other investments in infrastructure, Charlotte is able The citizen-led committee spent the next year develop-
to offer residents more transportation choices . ing a list of over 100 very specific statements that sum-
marized the desires of residents on topics from street
Other modes of transportation are also being encour- design to neighborhood development . More pictures
aged to reduce the dependence on automobiles . In were drawn that combined these and they were once
2000 , the planning board adopted a Bikeway again shared with the public . Afterwards , the committee
Improvement Plan that calls for improvements on road- released its report and held a second round of commu-
ways throughout the area to make them more attractive pity-wide meetings . This time, participation was even
to bicyclists . In keeping with its commitment to this better as more people came to voice their support and
1
• V. TRANSPORATION PLANNING 21
concerns over different aspects of the report . instead. These options do not cost much more, and
according to town staff, DOT has been very receptive
The Hickory by Choice draft plan was left open for to helping the town meet its goals . Most recently,
public comment for almost three years . This long com- NCDOT has agreed to place Share the Road signs at
ment period gave citizens and committee members the north and south ends of Fletcher along the US 25
time to recognize and resolve conflicts before the plan Corridor to indicate the presence of bicycle traffic to
ever reached city council, and helped to ensure that the be accommodated by the wide outside lanes designed
plan was approved . into the widening project .
Hickory has already begun to implement some parts As with several communities across the state, Fletcher
of the plan , such as converting its downtown one-way does not have a strong downtown core. But just because
streets into two-way streets . Traffic flow in the central one doesn't exist, does not mean it cannot be created .
business district was never heavy enough to warrant On thirty acres of land owned by the town, plans are to
one-way streets , so this change has made it much easier build a pedestrian oriented downtown center of mixed-
to navigate downtown . Much of the implementation use development. Developers and residents have shown
remains to be done, but the public involvement in the great interest in the idea and Park Ridge Hospital is
Hickory by Choice project has bolstered its success already building in the new town center.
thus far.
1 SOPRINtGASS
L
CONNECTING THE RIVER TO THE TOWN
MAKING STREETS SAFER The town of Hot Springs has long been a quaint resort
In the mountains of North Carolina , Fletcher sits on and a favorite stop along the Appalachian Trail. People
US 25 . When word came that the state DOT was plan- come here for relaxation and mountain views . The
ning to widen what essentially serves as this 12 -year-old downtown area, while very popular, did not have many
town 's main street, citizens wanted to make sure the places for safe pedestrian traffic . To combat this problem
rural character of the town would not be covered in and preserve a historic 1910 trestle bridge , citizens
asphalt and concrete . The Town conducted a " Corridor organized a campaign to restore the Red Creek Bridge
Study " with planning funds from the Asheville Area and landscape the area surrounding it . The project will
MPO and began working with NCDOT to incorpo - open an empty tract of land adjacent to downtown ,
rate landscaped medians , crosswalks , and other aesthetic quadrupling the pedestrian area and giving pedestrians
features into the new road that would make it comfort- access to one of the town's nicest natural features ,
able for pedestrians and more in character with Spring Creek . f �
Fletcher's small town atmosphere. In the area north
of town, a landscaped median has been provided as a Without any money from the town, citizens managed
" Gateway Feature " that will signify the entrance into to apply for and obtain grants from the NCDOT and
Fletcher. Other features include sidewalks , landscaping, other state organizations . The remainder of the money
a town sign, and decorative crosswalks . South of town , for the project will be raised from local businesses and -
where the widening project is still underway, the US 25 citizens . Creating a greenway around the creek, with
bridge spanning Cane Creek is designed to allow for a the bridge as its anchor, was a relatively inexpensive and
pedestrian underpass as part of a planned greenway. environmentally sound way to increase the pedestrian
Rather than putting a blank concrete retaining wall up areas of downtown and make the area more attractive to
when it had to cut into the side of a hill , the town visitors who come to the mountains .
asked the DOT to put up a brick-patterned wall
UNION
Sol
` MM
'Y p — 9 •: =�- - y -rr. `' �
-'���s.a� 04- max +,-s.
T um
�'
-
�, Q. _ _ Q'.�•]--ky - -z - .3 - ,=r �`
ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES — APF ordinances require buildings can be converted to mixed- use buildings contain -
certain facilities , such as police and fire services and school ing both housing and commercial space . Infill makes use of
classrooms , to have the ability to meet the increased existing roads and services rather than requiring expenditure
demands of a new development before the development is on
approved . They are designed to keep growth at a pace that new infrastructures
the local government can manage and to prevent critical
shortages in public services . LIGHT RAIL — Light rail transit is generally used over relative-
ly shorter distances than commuter rail . An example is a rail
AFFORDABLE HOUSING — Commonly defined as affordable system that operates exclusively within a city 's geographical
for people making less than 80 percent of the median limits . Often light rail is powered by electricity.
income in a given area .
OPEN SPACE — Open space may take the form of a public
CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT — The CBD is the core dis. park , a farm , forests , town courtyards , recreation areas or
trict of a town , and is often referred to as the downtown or any other use that limits development on the land . It may be
the uptown . used to protect a way of life , an ecosystem , or a cultural or
historic site . Open space is also beneficial in maintaining
CHARETTE — During a charette , planners , leaders and citizens scenic views and property values .
gather for a brainstorming session to talk about the design of
proposed projects . Participants often draw sketches and PARALLEL CODES — Rather than replacing existing or
make lists of what they do and do not want to see in the nances , parallel codes offer developers some alternatives .
new development . It provides public input that can be cru - Developers may opt to build under the new codes , and are
cial to the success of a program . often rewarded with incentives such as increased density
allowances in return for the preservation of open space .
COMMUTER RAIL — These are trains that travel over relatively Previous codes may eventually fall out of favor and remain
longer distances and may have fewer stops than a light rail unused .
service . The main purpose of commuter rail is to transport
residents in outlying areas to and from the city. SMART GROWTH This type of development focuses on
making efficient use of communities ' existing resources . It
CONSERVATION EASEMENTS — Land owners may sell or includes offering multiple modes of transportation , multiple
donate the development rights to their land to a local gov- types and costs of housing and mixed - use zoningo
ernment or non - profit entity for permanent protection , In Smart Growth saves local governments money by eliminating
return , they maintain ownership of their property and gain the need for costly new construction of roads and utility ser-
income , property and estate tax benefits . vices , the extension of police and fire protection over larger
areas , and the expensive construction of new schools while
FEE- SIMPLE PURCHASE — This is the outright purchase others remain under-used .
of property and all the rights that go with it . Fee-simple It allows residents to rely less on their automobiles , reduc -
purchase is the clearest and simplest way to protect land ing the hazards of driving on over-crowded roadways and
in perpetuity& helping our health by reducing automobile smog . It pre-
serves open space for all citizens to enjoy and prevents
GREENFiELD DEVELOPMENT Greenfield development is communities from losing their sense of place to strip malls
conversion of open space (farm or forest land in most cases) and subdivisions *
into a new business or housing complex .
INFILL — Infill is the redevelopment of property within an SPRAWL — This is growth that is largely unplanned , radiating
existing developed area . For example , vacant downtown further and further from urban centers , and heavily depen -
71
23
dent upon automobile transportation . Sprawl forces people ment around transit stops so as to encourage ridership and
to drive for even the most basic daily needs . decrease the dependence on automobiles .
Characteristics of sprawling development include sub-
divisions with streets that don 't connect , houses that VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS — These are
are widely spaced and segregated by price and type and arrangements under which farmers agree to become a part of
wide roads that suit traffic but inhibit pedestrian travel . an agricultural district . Farmers receive some benefits such
Farmland and forests are paved over and traffic jams as exemption from water and sewer assessments , and the
become commonplace . VADs indicate that the farmers intend to keep farming and
• to preserve their community.
Contrary to popular belief , sprawl is not the result of a free
market economy, but instead had its genesis under federal VISUAL PREFERENCE SURVEY — Participants from a commu -
rules and programs . With huge federal highway grants put in nity are shown a series of photographs or renderings repre-
place in 1954 to subsidize automobile travel , auto-centric senting alternatives for the scale and style of development
development became the norm . Regulations were put in and conservation projects . A visual preference survey is
place across the country that outlawed mixed - use neighbor- an effective way to find out what a community envisions
hoods and made homebuilders space homes further apart for itself .
and away from the streets . Many of these out-dated systems
remain in place and serve as obstacles to smart growth .
TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT (TND) —
TNDs reflect how the nation grew, up until the end of World
War II . Communities were centered around pedestrians ,
rather than automobiles . Narrow, interconnected streets and
wide sidewalks made it easier to move around . Houses were
placed closer to the street and each other, while neighbor-
hood shops provided for some of the basic needs of resi -
dents . Office space and central gathering places were also
features of the neighborhoods . TNDs included transit stops
that tied into the existing. community. Most residences ,
whether houses , condominiums or apartments , were located
within one-quarter mile of the center of the development .
Elementary schools were located close enough for children _
to walk to school .
Traditional neighborhood development , once thought unprof-
itable by builders , has been gaining favor. With about two
dozen TNDs under development in the Charlotte area alone
and new ordinances in place , there are now several projects
that show that this type of growth is both popular and prof-
itable . Since lending institutions base their loan decisions
upon the success of recent projects , it is becoming easier
for builders to get loans to build TNDs .
TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT — Transit oriented devel -
opment encourages compact , pedestrian oriented develop -
ARN MOR
For more information ,
visit us online at
sierraclub - nc . org
SIERRA
CLUB.
FOUNDED 1892
Sierra Club , North Carolina Chapter
112 S . Blount Street Raleigh , NC 27601
919 . 833 . 8467 info@sierraclub -nc . org
Printed on 100 % recycled paper
%
•`__ � _ }_ _sr-ata'�sF—"' ' _Td 'Lts{ F c.4'=._ _ l Y ., _ - - ! _ = ;
APAPPIAr ",ram+ c- - �} as roe Y Wiz_ -s � s
.. -- .--
IF FAA I IF
TV Imo� IF l rt�n'
IF
xA. t..� -
S —
r . . t d _ S r
),L
i ce+ l ,AFT 3_ �� � IIFF -
`ct � ; y _ wAFA ��Y.+1.�AVIV �';R to t 4IF I
V IV.
,
Ad
APPLI
..,vt -a-
_ A ¢/ t 7 -
J IIAr
,Y - ,�,s S �. - _ _ _
r y " .A ; FI
W: m
I.
Ad
t ._. -
roAl,d _
y a
� t '
' f s - � i s I
l ssy ` 4 c
2 IVIA'�_ 6 '� =a-= Fl "•.tee-�, 'ram'-r.;• - v _ -` - 't� ' , _ ' � ` , r .
x '+.
, • .' -i?' •*:fir+--• - .=: t` - r +-�i.->- �'-.: t _{` ;`'.,. , �+ y.�a _ t _
�'s `^ m •r _ � ^ / ` — y l: = xL �pep/v� ��ggvvqqyy e
53,1;�-1.!' u.-,a /r y�E'.i J i3, m _ _ itl. 1I" " � _ _� ,. � - y - '� � ' %W#, !r �i � . 8 . . .
A4S� wi �2Yu` c- .F }.Sys'_-�r� .� ,,".O�JSt��k-, •. • ,• .
II
I IIIw
III
'y, ram,. {..z, r'.= .i .ems # " '*_ - aR ^-�
. 4 P sx 'y-2 - • �`-L�,.rt•- .r"_:+ -- � . 'c'C' - .� -; may"` 1- Ir 1 -
t` s AFF x ` { i
a r ,. �S <
yr �"
`� .- - + - _ - - .mow ' yr-�„c •+. _ _ -
r =C�rr'+� L-�.-�- at JJ �- �.
_ i -
?r. + �' -`- - -�-- - - - .' Ad— . -�- . , So- ,,}}I - ti - - J. .
i It.{ ' 4
- _ ! "-�Y.1r'�.E-+,r A3 s t tt ,l 2 i' Ili- -1
x AV I' s t jr:rrA. IV IF
Z IF - AlR - Y r - ' t= .ram -i ce t "- ' i .� '
IF I 'xIF I '. wil.: ? Y Ad I _-�'� r- .emu. .. -=,�+. _ - ` ' � : - P -F IN AP -
t� f -
-", mar - ,�+ vst-r j IF �WI L AAT 1
. �� `' - ..
'_-n �. EIS --F:`• 7� it ^SF` `�.+- : µ• `me•' III
L.tt "•1, [ _ L li i. , t'_ lif, S ' 7 `r
sY'� J. •� C4- -" - -fiIF
x- _' ll 14- C� a
es
�17
IF
., ram -
•� -i a 'L�Fra i , r + IL. .`* ..>r-�c-�-• sItAlli IV E� � t t r }All s it. . ry e, . _
,cr �� W '.ate Almil ti r+, tVLV All r y t
- -ZN IF;AP - - n L `' ��-� alp r _ , 4,t �` - . r
fiT,-sue �" ^a", .}r,li t rL 4 i _ -'3 �y
II
�tr • . a' AT " - 9"- �"" T .s £ tti yam. �Y 3i."iki , ' + 5 +.>r 'yea ` _
^s`- . r'dt.z xtc rt, mod• . . - - o
_
R
.d-s . " -�.4 ^4u- j* tt t7.-t ri-sF -
-` dr• rsir s� by ,.. 7 --•�' �- 4 `.x; - nvrs ,� ^ ' } s --r' :t
� ,.•, ¢ ,? L'• 'vM1h 7 At -�-c yt rev n t
- ' `'a'c O �� IFI l � q - } 1 PA _,;.V .. _ '' I�m4'-T ? . - a. - -
Lz ? Ur' x- rY `i i Ill Li i { S L _
r- Lam _ �, 5 j rF' 7 r # - } II III
- II
III III II
+. y -o <+�yY � -. ��c.. �' ,:r r� !- 0_. �s'-s>i_-'-'v,' . .
V.
AII
` ' tlLi �.-.� �{e,i••a :V. &I'` ,Mrs '{ t ' - 7 •' '•'' -tea'-` .
5 yes F ? F ` j itEtr� �r qA & i R
_ 3g
� . _ } . � � jL �n t a�r tk Jx;•fi*lddl4 � & d'M7 �7j t r Z i'`_ 2. -i - -r
III
d- a I .. d t it -
III
3 t 1. i, 5{ { t { t t '„�,• II
.
_4 ;� . 'J ''. ! -. '� t23#4s.. `F + > ,3a ' "Si ? �c tz,•,7 . ft, sr l a L t y / y i fic'�.c?an
1 ` f r . . t +',tt' - ..
t' -.�.:+; add AV . .y r rk .
_ t � ` � ��
Otq A % IF ��' � � 7 �
r � wbES �c c i t S
-..rz ,_ t A _u_ K. t v 5 1 t't raS°o` i'�'+R' : - . -
r
y� �e n t
Awl A
IPP.I .'icS, o- s•a- 5- - ra4? 72+ r F . > fi_.rr . ; t .� L r t 1 ;{ c� + : - - - .
= _ _ _ -sy .A.. 4 :k'j�-..y„ ' �:? 3� 1v ; r . tt ` '�tf3t. V4�t1-}; r.-5 ' - _ . . -
_ rv^' ' .rlV'til'.F- (yiri1 hr`€: t;5.ir .r'.'},tiln .i' •!a'^�t + _ - -
lIW
` 5' _ C ' =, Y� h' t tit �,
4 .4 ' •'+'�r� __�`- 4 'fls±..SL�,:• Y'tns; la -'`r'• _ .. •z.�.xr`r V '4_
PICAW .� iny" a.�tti 5-.. xrl�• ��¢ ey •. -7'g.,g'�- �a� 4- • t i ' �
v _._ ^, :a L L -t3 fr "'. r' 3- Ati -' .� � '„= s�grd"S1 _ t < t r
rA
• � � ? �• _
�....-W ,_., .. �T- �' ��'.`; �v, .ta ' Cam' __.c� ` �.c m•. 5 - . . _ _ * AI . , ;�?_. .�._ . ,. : _ .4 .. .' -
f�
0
SIERRA
CLUB
FOUNDED 1892
Sierra Club, North Carolina Chapter
112 S . Blount Street Raleigh, NC 27601
919 . 833 . 8467 info@sierraclub-nc. org
U
z
a)
m
a
.m
A