HomeMy WebLinkAboutJMRPWG agenda 102898 ' T
OR
ANGE COUNTY
HMILSBOROUGH
NORTH CAROLIN A
/Y >7d
MEMORANDUM
TO : Joint Master Recreation and Parks Plan Work Group
FROM : Albert Kittrell
DATE : October 20 , 1998
SUBJECT : Meeting Notification
The next Joint Master Recreation and Parks Plan Work Group meeting will be held on
Aloof
A.
Wednesday , October 28 , 1998 at 6 : 00 p . m . ; he new Southern Human Services
Center, 2505 Homestead Road, Chapel Hill . . 1 eshment will be r4 * d .
.sue ...
�;e _ ; mar,:': a•'a^s:i ' . _
r
.. . vI •'
love
tq JY': .:�yr i.I'. ' .ttyY.�.: •. .:\":�::....: v ,•\ ..a .: '•"� ix"� .•��•iits>,,.
yr .. . .� :.
IA
Y:t, elI
+.. ::Y.:.•
% � a
l ...: All
p. . .'.:.".':
t'i,l
:y.Y � . .
All
Al
:t : '.:C
,.14
i ".i� r!•7,e•. .St :" . , -.r ... . ' ] €;?•;'[• Y;-:.`tl..,,w..."..k.',
`tit vili
t �•*+i+': '::: " ... •i'
a,T�. 3-„Et.! . <t Y'.'�:':::.;..:%� .• . Mva• .' .Z, vrv�A
:....f w? .. _
i
7. iye�� "se _ '�
ri. ..,e . .�..Y Q,x,.:• .. x . ...s1..F. :.f. �w^Y. _
IV
IlitS � v. :K .<j
J^a'�t.
.w`+x: .�a :YJ',, .ai ' ;<.r :'ai: s�'a'C:..r:• .xv. • "�t�: +' . All : ;�.:.
IVA
'i.\'<h;,z• •t'a, Y+':,?^ x:ii.ta? ':! � .,>,`2 .ei. 't >.:✓i:':�;{y .. .'i. • '.�. ,
yt •' .�+teY»:i _ram . ^;:Y.:. . ., U. .
Ale
.%i,•ti^ice -
� .. ><'_,� . :�:<'•: '2'^: s�;.-:::X. .:F
It
:.:
' ..
.t:.:.3n ..�,?•.7. - ..x>• x , .. ::... ...^ :.... «.,,. .. , .,,xJ"•>;-.. .. .
,.. .., +•y fn r , ,. Ili .n .•,• . . . _ .. . ... ..v . _ >. rf :. r:NrJ . . - :_^^..i_' C ' .n >
IlImb
AREA CODE (919) 732 - 8181 • 9684'001 • 688 - 7331 • 227 - 2031 • FAX (919 ) 644 -3004
cYt 9 , 00
i i l
Joint Master Recreation and Parks Plan
Work Group
Southern Human Services Center
October , 28 , 1998
6 : 00 p . m .
AGENDA
I . Landscape with Wildlife/Update to Natural Areas
Livy Ludington, Triangle Land Conservancy
II . Land Dedicated to the County for Recreation Purpose — David Stancil
Land holdings of Triangle Land Conservancy
New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan
III. Recreation and Parks Needs (Attached)
— Town of Carrboro — Richard Kinney
Town of Chapel Hill — Kathryn Spatz
_ Town of Orange County — Bob Jones
- Town of Hillsborough — Ken Chavious -- - _
IV . O WASA Presentation
- Attachments rri -
dor Open Space-Master Plan
New Hope Co
- Town of Carrboro =1SIi emorandum to Board of Aldermen
Identif ed Town of Chapel Hill Parks and Recreation Needs
nty Recreation and Parks Capital Needs
Orange Cou _
Town of Hillsborough Growth and Recreational Activities
t
• L f t I
Town
of
ills gh
Slme 1754
MEMORANDUM
To : Albert Kittrell, Assistant County Manager
b
From : Ken Chavious , Hillsborough Town Board member
Date : October 14 , 1998
RE : Hillsboroughgrowth and recreational activities
Recent residential growth .
The following new residential lots have been approved within the Town ' s jurisdiction since 1993 :
1993 42 lots , Magnolia. Place '
6 lots , Elin Court
1995 106 lots , Governor ' s Downs
1996 89 lots , Phase 5 , 6 , 7 Cornwallis Hills
5 lots , River Bend
1997 7 lots , Southwood -
31 lots , Hart ' s Mill `
1998 36 lots , English Hills -
218 lots , Beckett ' s Ridge _
There are also two sizable subdivisions in the discussion stages adjacent to Hillsborough, but in the
County' s jurisdiction; the Scothwood development and the possible subdivision adjacent to the new
elementary school site between NC 86 and NC 57 north of town. Both of these developments are
discussed to be in significant excess of 300 homes each and these residents will seek recreational
opportunities in the immediate Hillsborough area.
At this time more and more subdivisions are being developed . This means the demand for parks and-
recreation facilities are also increasing . As the county becomes more urbanized and our population
continues to grow, and land becomes more scarce and expensive , demands for recreational facilities
and services become more difficult to meet . However the demand is there for .us to create and
expand our active park facilities . We have tried to meet this need by developing small town lots into
passive community parks . This is not enough , nor the answer to our problem . Our contribution to
this point is as follows .
The Town is also involved in the following efforts to provide recreational opportunities to its
citizens :
Occoneechee Mountain .Park - state grant to construct parkin] area, trail and overlook to officially
open the park. Agreement pending with the state park system to assume patrol and maintenance of
this facility .
101 East Orarzae Street P . O . Box 429 + Hillsborough , North Carolina 27278
Murray Street Park - $ 9 , 000 allocated in this year' s budget to construct trail, play area, and make the
site available for mostly passive use .
Gold Park - received gift of 24 acres , specific plans for the site unclear, was the site of former
ballfields
i .
River Park - The Town of Hillsborough in cooperation with Orange County has worked to construct
a public park behind the Courthouse . The Town pledged $ 50 , 000 to this effort , of which at least
$ 25 , 000 has been spent , the remainder is available for expenditure when the County is ready to
proceed .
Active Sports Complex - If the County and Eurosport propose making the necessary funds available
for this park effort , with a sin\cere commitment, the Town of Hillsborough is also ready to allocate
25 acres to this park project , plus additional funds toward a feasibility ' study to initiate and confirm
this public/private partnership with the County and Eurosport for the development of this multi-
' P ty P P sport
complex. Town officials and staff traveled with their county counter parts to Charlotte to observe
other recreational facilities constructed on former landfills . The Town stands ready to proceed with
thi endeavor whenever the County agrees or makes a fnal commitment or decision to go forward
with this project which could have significant. county- wide benefits . Eurosport has expressed a
sincere interest in the development of such a park and is willing to become a participant in this
public/private development along with Orange County and the Tbwn of Hillsborough . _ --
Citizen group Q
g p - neighborhood has approached the town about preparing a small part on town owned
land at the intersection of King and Occoneechee Street . This protect is under consideration and
design.
Land acquisition along the Eno River the Town received a grant from the Clean Water
j Management Trust fund to acquire buffers along the Eno Riven for water quality preservation. The
buffet is punned to connect Occoneechee Mountain Park with the Eno Rivet- State Park in Durham.
OLYMPVS
) 1 t 1 l e t
' r '
• .
OBJECTIVE :
THE OLYM PVS GROUP , INC . and STEWART ENGINEERING , INC . (the "TEAttil " ) of
Chapel Hill , - NC propose to offer specialized sports facility consulting - services to the ORANGE
COtWff COND aSSIONERS , THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH , and SPORTS
ENDEAVORS , LNC . - ( the " CUENT" ) . The Team will consist of a professional group of planners
and engineers with the objective of producing a FEASIBILITY STUDY which researches the -
conditions for a " megaplex ' sports and recreation center at FAIRVIEW PARK. The Team ' s
services are designed to provide- Technical & Programming Assessment assistance to insure a process is established to properly develop a complex which will meet the present and future requirements of
--- Hillsborough , Orange Couiaty , the Triangle and regional sports and recreation programs . The Study
will also Locus on the prospects of this site meeting the requirements of the . nationally acclaimed
Carolina United Soccer Program , a division of Sports Endeavors , Inc . of Hillsborough .
ASSUI1�iPTZONS :
The Team has met with members of the Client group over a period of several months during a series
of informal and unofficial investigate sessions , represenring Sports Endeavors , as professional sports
SPORTS FACILITY COvSUET1NG PROPOSAL Pam L
FairviewIt 7
Park roe has been identified , toured and subsequently , the
facility consultants . The property rry
Team has developed and submitted a series of il Site Plans to sketch out various initial options for
nitia
review and comment . The initial review process has met with positive responses to date and the
prospect for success has made the next step the proposed Feasibility Study .
This proposal is submitted with the assumption that the complex will be the new home for the
Carolina United Soccer Program and Summer Camps and will host local , regional and even national
caliber competitions .
The work to date has established an initial model which now needs to be studied in detail in order to
r the development of a national class outdoor sports and recreation
determine the probable cost for
a
center .
The following Assumptions are included as the initial Model to- be studied for Fairview Park : _
❑ 2 Championship Soccer Fields _ -
P P -
❑ 4 Competition Level Soccer Fields - -
❑ 3 Youth Soccer Fields
❑ 4 Softball/ Baseball Fields
-O 4 Basketball Courts
❑ Bleachers / Grandstand
❑ Staff Offices _
❑ Restrooms — - --
❑ Parking
❑ Picnic Shelters
❑ Concession Areas -
.❑ Fitness Trails — -
❑ Sports Field Lighting -
❑ Information./ Security Pavilions
❑ Disc Golf Course
❑ Playground
❑ Scoreboards
SPORTS FACILITY CONSULTING PROPOSAL
❑ Maintenance / Equipment Storage Facility
❑ Security / Fencing/ Gates
❑ Roads / Gated Entrances
❑ Landscaping
❑ Waste Management System
❑ Sports and Maintenance Equipment
❑ Garden/ Amphitheater
❑ Staffing Solutions
C3 Proper Irrigation/ Drainage Systems
The Fairview Park property is estimated to cover 40 acres with an additional 220 acres of possible
useable space adjacent to the Park . The Feasibility Study will incorporate the entire 60 acres into the
b
model .
The Study will question the premise of developing a "megaplex " of sports and recreation
_ opportunities for a greater consumer mass in Hillsborough and specifically at Fairview Park. Z'he
complex will incorporate the current trend in America to replace scattered community parks and _
playing fields with a secure, well maintained, competition oriented complex-which also has revenue
generating potential for the communuy .
SPECIAL,L= SCOPE OF WORK:
The Team is prepared and experienced to develop this project thf ugh- final desip and construction .
However , the initial work by the Team is understood to be the development of a Feasibility Study to
assist in determining the anticipated programs , uses , user groups , tenants , concessionaires . and ocher
functional areas intended to be served by this complex .
The goal of the Feasibility Study is to outline the process For development of a complex of this nature ,
citing and recommending the strategies, methodology and cost options for a successful project .
SPORTS FACILITY CONSULTING PROPOSAL Page
The Feasibility Study will develop a detailed statement of probable cost associated with the programs
and designs which are confirmed by the Client as reasonable and desirable for the project .
The Feasibility Study will also make Initial and simplified calculations of potential revenue
generatibn for the community from the completed facility by measuring the likely annual usage of the
complex , expected to be near 100 , 000 per ar um .
i
The Feasibility Study will also map out the anticipated annual cost for operations and maintenance
budget of the complex .
The Feasibility Study will also make recommendations with respect to building in Phases and also
i
master planning future expansion or land use .
The Feasibility Study will also provide assessment models of other similar facilities , including but
not limited to popular soccer- oriented parks in - :Fayetteville , Greensboro and Raleigh . The report will
touch on the history of economic impact which has been realized in other North Carolina communities _
from the development of tournament quality soccer and softball facilities . __ J
The Feasibility Study will spend a significant amount of time assessing the environmental impacts
and engineering requirements of the project on the property , specifically focusing on the history of -
the property as a former landfill .
The Scope of Work shall include the following Services :
l . Develop an initial Environmental Analysis and Engi
ueermg Survey based on civil and
structural engineering principles , studying the propertyy to determine the available structural
and civil .. design options and boundaries , as well as to locate all existing components ,
impediments and utilities , wetland issues , storm/ sewer issues , structural foundation .
requirements and any other applicable issues requiring analysis .
Study e�istin To o �raphical Survey of the facility to determine the existing elevations of
the property to most feasibly position all functional areas .
SPORTS FACILITY CONSULTING PROPOSAL Page �4
i E i
3 . Commission and analyze new Soil Core Testing report of existing property to determine
whether or not the existing base will permit construction of competition oriented Melds and
building structures .
4 . In. temew all key personnel who are immediately involved in the project and / or will control
usage of the facility ( as determined by the Client) and develop a P rofframminc- document
outlining, the specific program criteria by the anticipated user groups .
6 Coordinate schematic d 'eszn session with Client during which desip options and
developmental schematic plans are prepared on CAD through a workshop format .
7 . Develop and submit a pz=o , planning , and cost model report based on :
Property Boundaries and Limitations
Schematic Design
Program Checklist -
Test and Survey Results
Engineering Principles
Analysis of Similar Parks and Trends in the Region
Revenue Generation Prospects -
Professional Recommendations
- _ - After the report is reviewed; the Team will provide uR--to two follow- up sessions and briefs to
respond to any questions , comments and/ or concerns as a part of the Feasibility Study . The
Team will also make a presentation of its findings as requested . Any further assignments will
- be considered a part of Phase ? , and not covered by this proposal .
i
9 . The Feasibility Study shall be completed within 90 days of Notice to Proceed.
SPORTS FACILITY CONSULTING PROPOSAL Paae 3.
( 4
it
The fee for the FEASIBILITY STUDY is developed as follows :
❑ The Assumption of the program for Fairview Park , based on our experience could cost in the
range of3 - � million dollars . This estimate is based on researching similar facilities throughout
the United States . While the complex can be limited to reduce the budget significantly , the cost
for the Study must take into consideration all the parameters required for analysis and evaluation .
The standard fee for such a project and the deliverables as outlined above is a percentage of the
perceived project cost .
0 The Team is prepared to provide the proposed services for the percentage of I . I , % of the median
assumed project cost ( $4 , 000 , 000 ) .
i
❑ The fee for the Feasibility Study shall be 1 . 15 % of $4, 000, 000 = $46, 000 (FORTY SrX
THOUSAND DOLLARS) .
Q A breakdown of the fee by component is provided as follows :
Env ironmental/ En� xneerintr Analysis . S 91000
Interview Survey : - - S 3 , 000
Assessment of Similar Facilities S J , 000
Revenue Generation Assessment S 5 , 000
Development of Program Checklist S 4 , 000
Development of Schematic Site Plans 37 , 000
development of Cost Model -- 5 3 , 000 _
Development of Final Report - — S- I0 , GOO --
Feasibility Study Fee : - $46 , 000
The Team invoices on a monthly schedule for the percentage of the work completed . All pre -
approved travel and associated project expenses shall be billed at invoice price for an additional cost .
The Client will be responsible for the cost of all report copies , publications and design plan
documents . The expected cost for theses expenses shall nor exceed 10 percent of the project .
SPORTS FACILITY CONSULTING PROPOSAL
l "Y •�' nn % . � ' k-0►`I mFv U 1 ILA C AlCLP`
X .� � (Z} SENIOR SUCCER �
( ) SDI rai 1L L FlaOS
e y
_ o
P"IC Si a7 R/
COMFOW STATION
Fib { WTrr4
2ND LEVEL
CCNCESSCNS)
ooa� A � � �
it .,F'
PARl+ M LCT
t co SPACES
PtAYDROUND.MT LAT ac
PtC4tC AREA .
3 COURTS
— { (54` X 507
IC AREA
JUNICIR MELD SiIIIIE.TER
Pojacm LOT
80
r
_ _ - s�T '� •1 ACES
y TORAit
...mAN
pom
JON
wmw
OWASA ORANGE WATER & SEWER AUTHORITY
Quality Service Since 1977
HAND DELIVERED
MEMORANDUM
i
TO : John Link, Jr . , Orange County Manager
FROM : Ed Kerwin
DATE : October 23 , 1998
SUBJECT : Potential Recreational Uses of OWASA Property
The Board of Directors received the attached packet of materials at their meeting last
night and indicated that this should represent their interim position on possible
recreational use of OWASA property . The Board wishes to remain flexible in
I�
approaching these matters and noted that a number of uncertainties should be resolved _
when OWASA ' s Comprehensive Water and Sewer Master Plan is completed in early
2000 .
Barry Jacobs and Bill Strom have been attending meetings of the County ' s Joint Master
Recreation and Parks Plan Work Group and asked me to provide these materials to you
so that they might - be available for next Wednesday ' s Work Group meeting . -
Please let me know if I can provide any further information .
Ed Kerwin
Executive Director
attachment
cc . \,/Mr . Albert Kittrell , Assistant Orange County Manager
OWASA Board of Directors
400 Jones Ferry Road Equal Opportunity Employer Voice ( 919 ) 968 - 4421
PO Box 366 Printed on Recycled Paper FAX ( 919 ) 968 - 4464
Carrboro , NC 27S IM366 rc1rifrOWWsa . ory
t
OWASA ORANGE WATER & SEWER AUTHORITY
Quality Service Since 1977
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ed Kerwin
FROM : Ed Holland
DATE : October 15 , 1998
SUBJECT : Potential Recreational Uses of OWASA Property
Background
During the past year , Board members Barry Jacobs and Bill Strom have attended
meetings of Orange County ' s Joint Master Recreation and Parks Plan Work Group
charged with updating the County ' s Recreation and Parks Master Plan . One part of that
work is an inventory of all public and semi-public land and recreational assets in Orange
County . .
During the August 27 , 1998 Board of Directors meeting , Mr . Jacobs and Mr . Strom
submitted a list of questions about possible recreational uses of OWASA ' s land holdings .
This was referred to the Board ' s Natural Resources and Technical Systems (NRTS )
Committee, which reviewed information provided by staff and discussed the attendant
issues during three subsequent meetings . This memorandum and attachments attempt to
summarize the NRTS Committee consensus that emerged through those discussions .
The attached map shows the location of all OWASA- owned properties in Orange County ;
Table 1 provides additional details ; and Table 2 presents the NRTS Committee ' s
evaluation of the acceptability of different recreational uses of those properties . Uses _
-listed in Table 2 were compiled from documents of the Orange County Work Group . - - -
OWASA Interests
The NRTS Committee agreed that alternative uses should be considered in terms of
OWASA ' s central mission of providing " an adequate supply of high quality drinking
water and a complementary sewer service . " Activities or uses that might compromise
OWASA ' s utility function should be discouraged .
i
For example , certain uses , such as tennis , racquetball , or basketball courts , would be
incompatible with OWASA ' s operational activities within sewer easements or rights - of
way , while other uses , such as hiking trails , might be acceptable . Hiking trails would not ,
however, be desirable near the Cane Creek Reservoir where public access to the shoreline
represents a water quality risk contrary to OWASA ' s water supply mission .
400 Jones Ferry Road Equal Opportunit)t Employer Voice ( 919 ) 9684421
PO Box 366 I' Hnted on Recycled Paper FAX ( 919) 968 - 4464
Carrboro , NC 27S 10 - 0366
L C
Potential Recreational Use of OWASA Property
October 15 , 1998
Page 2
On other tracts , such as the biosolids land or the two sites reserved for future elevated
storage tanks , the NRTS Committee believed it to be in OWASA ' s best interest to defer
consideration of alternative uses until the future utility needs for those properties are
better defined through the Comprehensive Water and Sewer Master Plan or, in the case of
the tank sites , by local regulatory requirements for setbacks , buffering , and so forth .
These three mission- oriented considerations -- utility operations, water quality, and future
options — are abbreviated as (uo), (wq), and (f} in Table 2 , where they indicate the NRTS
Committee ' s rationale for recommending against certain uses or activities .
Major Categories of Property
The Committee first considered possible uses OWASA ' s largest categories of land ( see
Table 1 ) : Cane Creek property (inside and outside the 1/2-mile Critical Area) , biosolids
application property , Stone Quarry Reservoir, and the elevated storage tank sites .
Cane Creek Property — The NRTS Committee believed that property within the Y2-mile
Critical Area should be considered for virtually no recreational activities , due to water
quality concerns . Limited use of certain land in the Critical Area for research or —
educational purposes might be appropriate . Certain low-impact uses , such as a nature
center, hiking/jogging trails , and other educational/research activities might be acceptable
on OWASA property outside the Critical Area, but any uses requiring modification to the
land for clearing, grading, parking, or vehicular access would not be acceptable .
Similarly , the NRTS Committee recommended only limited activities be allowed on the
portion of the existing Cane Creek recreation site draining to the lake (inside the
watershed) , but that additional uses might be allowed on the back portion of that
property , which is located outside the watershed.
Biosolids Application Property — Although most of OWASA ' s biosolids are currently -
applied under strict State regulation -to private farmland , it has been OW-ASA ' s long -term
strategy to accumulate sufficient land for the future , when less private property will
remain available for land application. A systematic review of biosolids management
options — including the production of Class A material , possible co - composting with
municipal solid waste , further moisture reduction, and so forth is included in the
Water/Sewer Master Plan project . - Such -options could reduce the eventual need for land ,
but until this information is available , the NRTS Committee recommended that OWASA
maintain its maximum range of future options and not consider recreational uses of
biosolids property .
Stone Quarry Property — Similarly , the Committee recommended that no recreational
uses be considered at OWASA ' s Stone Quarry property until the future use of that site is
more clearly established .
Potential Recreational Use of OWASA Property
October 15 , 1998
Page 3
Elevated Tank Sites — The NRTS Committee suggested that alternative uses be
considered at existing tank sites as long as they don ' t interfere with OWASA ' s
operational needs for access and maintenance . The Committee recommended that no
alternatives be considered on the two properties reserved for future tank sites until
specific design and regulatory requirements are established .
i
Authority to Allow Alternative Uses
j Throughout its discussions , the Committee recognized that the authority to allow
recreational uses of OWASA property often lies outside of OWASA ' s control . For
example , OWASA might agree to certain low-impact activities on its sewer easements
and rights of way ; but legally, OWASA may not acquire utility easements for non-
utilitarian purposes such as recreation . Successful greenway partnerships with Chapel
Hill or Carrboro would likerequire' t e to act as lead a likely h Towns 1 agencies in acquiring
� Yg q g
i
multi -purpose easements and then granting utility rights to OWASA .
Similar situations are evident at OWASA ' s elevated tank sites and at the 500- acre Cane
Creek mitigation tract . Any alternative use of the 46 acres of OWASA land surrounding
the Nunn Mountain and Hilltop water tanks is strictly controlled by Special Use Permit —
conditions of the Town of Chapel Hill . The 500 - acre Cane Creek mitigation tract was
acquired in 1980 to comply with requirements of the U . S . Fish and Wildlife Service and
the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. Because these requirements- became
permit conditions for the Cane Creek Reservoir project, an alternative use of that tract
p P J � Y
would likely require approval by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission.
These examples illustrate that OWASA does not have unilateral authority to allow
alternative uses on all of its property . The NRTS Committee noted that the
implementation of some recreational proposals with community-wide benefits will -
require collaboration by other governmental entities , in addition to OWASA , working -
toward a common goal .
Staff Recommendations
I recommend that this memorandum and attachments be reviewed by the Board of -
Directors and, if appropriate, provided to Orange County ' s Joint Master Recreation and
Parks Plan Work Group .
Edward A . Holland , AICP
Director of Planning and Development
attachments
PROV1 M BOA,RO OF
APP Datei o � �
i
Mitigation Tract
A OWAQA Pr6perty
e
October, 1998
(See Table 1 for Descriptions)
O N
a] Thunder; Mountain
Tr a ct E
A s
N
1 0 1 mile,
�. 10 50 100
Acres Acres Acres
A
ubai(s Road
F
>n
i n d Q
aoneQuarry
K B L
G
Chapel I Till
Oro
V1bter Plant N
LAKE M c
A P
E
V1b st ewa ter
LEGEND p PI a n t
D
F--j Watershed Boundaries
1/2 Mile Critical Area
-
OWASA Property
®University Lake Leased Land i H
Table 1 . Summary of Land Owned or Leased
By OWASA -- ctober , 1998
OWASA OWNED LAND
Common` Name Purpose Acreage Map Symbol
Cane Creek Project Land purchased for original Cane 1 / 642 A
Creek Reservoir Project
Watershed Protection Land purchased since 1991 for 521 A
watershed protection under OWASA ' s
Critical Lands Program
Stone Quarry Reservoir Supplemental raw water storage 59 B
Jones Ferry Road Operations Water treatment plant site 15 C
Center & Water Treatment Plant
Morgan Creek WWTP Wastewater plant site 24 D
Hilltop Tank Site New elevated storage tank 17 E
Nunn Mountain Tank Site Finished water storage 29 F
Carrboro Tank Site Finished water storage 1 G
Southern District Tank Site for future elevated tank 4 . 5 H
Northern District Tank Site for future elevated tank 17 . 6
Right of Way (access ) Access to sewer ROW 2 J
Right of Way (access) Access to sewer ROW 1
Right of Way (access ) Access to sewer ROW _ 1 J
Wilson Creek Outfall Access to sewer ROW 241 J
Biosolids Application Sites Land for WWTP biosolids ( sludge ) 751 K
application
Calvander Pump Station Finished water booster station 009 L
Rangewood Pump Station _ Wastewater pump station - 0 . 4 M
Rogerson Drive Pump Station Wastewater pump station 2 .3 N
Jordan Lake Site for future water treatment facility 124 . 6 ( Chatham County)
TOTAL LAND OWNED BY OWASA 3 , 215 ac
LEASED FROM UNC
Common Name Purpose Acreage Map Symbol
University Lake Water Supply Reservoir and 577 O
Surrounding Buffer
Manning Drive Tank Site Elevated storage tank 0 . 3 P
TOTAL LAND LEASED FROM UNC 577 ac
Table 2 . Potential Recreational Uses of OWASA Property
Non-Cane Creek Watershed Land Existing CC Cane Creek Watershed Land
Recreation Site Outside Critical Area
Potential Recreational
Use/ActivityLand Inside
Sewer Tank Sites Tank Sites Biosolids Stone Below Inside Outside Critical Mitigation Thunder Meadowcrest
Easements (Existing) (Future) Land Quarry CC Dam Watershed Watershed Area Tract Mtn. Tract (Partial Lot)
Note#1 Note#2 Note#3 Note#4 Note#5 Note#5 Note#2 Note#6
Gymnasium No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Auditorium No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Stadium No (uo) No (uo;r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Swimming Pool No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Meeting Center, General Purpose Rooms No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) Yes Yes No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Nature Center No (uo) No (uo,r) Yes No (f1 No (f) No (uo) Yes .Yes No (wq) Yes Maybe No (wq)
Athletic Fields No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) Yes No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Tennis, Racquetball, Volleyball Courts No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) Yes No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Playground Maybe No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f1 No (uo) Maybe Yes No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Picnic Area, Shelters Maybe No (uo,r) Yes No (f) No (f) No (uo) Yes Yes No (wq) Maybe Maybe No (wq)
Track No (uo) Nd (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Golf Course No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No,(f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Driving Range No (uo) No, (uo,r) No (0 No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
RV Camping No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Car Camping (Tent) No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f). No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Primitive Camping No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) Maybe Maybe No (wq)
Nature, Hiking, Jogging Trail Yes No (uo,r) Yes No (f) No (f) Yes Yes Yes No (wq) Yes Yes No (wq)
Education and Research Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Maybe Yes Yes Maybe
Notes:
1. (Symbols in parenthesis) indicate the basis for assigning a "No"to a potential use or activity: (uo) indicates utility operational constraints, (r) indicates state or local
regulatory constraints on alternative uses; (f) indicates the need to maintain OWASA's future options at a site; and (wq) indicates water quality concerns.
2. Regulatory restrictions on alternative uses of this property are subject to change if initiated by other governmental entities.
3. Refers to OWASA's existing 59-acre Quarry Reservoir site located east of Bethel-Hickory Grove Church Road.
4. Much of the OWASA property downstream of the Cane Creek Dam is located in thg apron of the dam's emergency spillway. The remainder of this site is constrained by steep
topography and/or proximity to access roadways and the raw water pumping station.
5. Because a portion of the existing Cane Creek recreation area slopes toward the reservoir(inside the watershed) and the remainder slopes away (outside the watershed), the
potential water quality impacts of alternative uses/activities would depend on their specific location.
6. A narrow 3-acre strip of the Meadowcre,�t property is located within the watershed but outside the 1/2-mile Critical Area. There appears to belittle or no opportunity for
alternative use of this site.
1
, I
. = 1
Orange County Recreation & Parks
Capi-tal Needs Assessment
FY 1 997 - 2001
PRIORITY : Due to the overwhelming requests for Capital Needs of the Schools and County
wide Projects , the Recreation and Parks Department has identified Priority
` Projects for the next 4 years .
* The remaining projects will be identified in the Revision of the Recreation and
Parks Master Plan and addressed during future Bond proposals .
Efland - Cheeks Community School Park - $ 400 , 000
* Existing small comunity center adjacent to elementary school .
* Proposed park is on 16 plus acres and. includes new playground. equipment ,. picinic
shelter and outdoor classroom , nature interpretive trail and lecture station , multipurpose
field , walking / fitness trail , upgraded basketball courts and other amenities .
Fairview Community Park - $ 700 , 000
* Existing 42 ac_re tract ( formerly the old Hillsborough landfill ) .
* Presently on site is a playground and picnic area. -
* Town of Hillsborough_ and . other sources, interested in- developing this park with picnic - -
shelters , soccer fields , softball fields , and oth-er amenties . - -
* Adjacent land owned by Town . may be used for a major park entrance and. further
development . -
Northern Orange Hu -man Services Center - $ 500 , 000
* Existing facility ( formerly a school of 1950 ' s vintage-) .
* Softball field and playground area exist on the 8 acre tract.
* Building needs renovations that aLe addressed iri the County ' s Public Works CI. P some of
which lighting ,. painting , A . D . A . requirements , and heating / air improvements .
* The Master Plan dresses 2a acre expansion toodevelop a Community Park to increase
the active recreation - areas and add restrooms , picnic areas , parking and septic system _
Parkland Acquisition - $ 1 , 0001000 -
* Purchase 25 - 30 acres for future development of a Comm. unity Park in Little River
Township .
* Purchase 75 - 100 acres in Chapel Hill - Bingham Township for future development of a
District Park .
* Cost of land continues to increase and this would start a land bank for 2 future parks .
Total Projects ; $ 24. 6 million
Orange County Recreation & Parks
Capital Needs Assessment
FY 1997- 2007
The Orange County Master Recreation and Parks Plan
• Adopted in July 1988 and is currently being revised
Identified the need to :
Construct six Community Parks ( 25 + acres each ) and four District Parks ( 75 +
acres each ) . ( Land acquisition and development costs = $ 18 million . )
• This assessment based on parkland acreage requirements by using projected
population for 2005 . Based on these projections the total parkland needs are
958 acres .
Note : For the purpose of this assessment and the fulure revision of the Master Plan the
follolving is the focils : -
• Need for athletic facilities and active recreation areas
• Parks that have not been completed
• What is attainable ?
. r
Efland - Cheeks Community School Park - . $ 4-407000
iExisting sinzll community center adjacent to elementary school
• Proposed pack is on - 1G - plus acres and includes new playground equipment , picnic shelter and
Outdoor classroom , Mature interpretive trail and lecture station ; multi - purpose field , -
waiking / fitness trail , upgraded basketball courts and other amenities .
i .
Fairview Community Park - $ 700 , 000
• Existing 42 acre tract ( formerly the old Hillsborough landfill )
• Presently on site is a playground and picnic area .
• Town of I* Iillsborough and other sources interested in developing this park with picnic
shelters , soccer fields , softball fields , and other amenities .
• Adjacent land owned by Town may-- be used for a major park entrance and further
development . - --
g
Northern_ Orange Human Services Center-4500 000 - - -
,
• Existing facility ( formerly a school of 1950 ' s vintage ) .
Softball yg
Feld and playground area exist on the 8 acre tract . -
_ P
• Building needs renovations . that are addressed in the County ' s Public Works CIR-- some of
which include lighting , painting , A . D . A . requirements , and heating / air improvements .
• The Master Plan addresses 20 acre - expansion to develop a Community Park to increase the
active recreation areas and add restrooms , picnic areas , parking and septic system .
University Station Community Park ( $ 2 , 000 , 000 )
• Proposed 30 acre park site dedication with the completion of University Manor Subdivision . _
Park amenities include soccer fields , softball fields , play area , picnic shelter , meeting center ,
park office and interpretive center , nature trails , restrooms , access and parking , and design
fees .
Capital Needs Advisory Task Force
Fcbmary 19 , 1997
i
j
District Park ( Chapel iilllBingham Township ) $4 , 850 , 090
• 1 . .Irld acquisition ( 75 - 100 acres ) .S110001000 Four field athletic complex 5I , 200 , COO
• Play area , trails , shelters 400 , p0Q Restroams , office & interpretive center ( SI , GCa , OGO
• Tennis courts S 100 , 000 Access/ parking/ landscaping S800 , XG
• Design fees ,cam 8 mo $ 3501OW .
Little River * ( Caldwell ) Cocnniunity Park - $ 2 , 4 � 0 , 000
• l . an ( l Acquisition : 30 acres S300 , 000 Community Center St , 200 , 000
• F� allficlds , shelters , play areas , restrooms parking , Design Fees 515010W
349W IOW
j -
Eno River Park ( not ict park plazi ) - $ 230 , 000
• Approxi tnatcly 5 acres passive park adjacent to Ecio Rivcr behind Courthouse ici
�I Ilillshorough .
• Walking trails and bridgcs , picnic areas , entertairunent pavilion and native American
palisade . .
= County purchased laced for S56 , 700 and cleared to its present state for $ 40 , 000 .
• Ilillsborough is funding $ 50 , 000 over two years . Other funding sources being reviewed .
Xrtiture School Sites and Facilities
• The Recreation and Parks Advisory CounciKsupports the concept of acquiring more acreage
than is required for schools and design park amenities for school and comrnuciity use .-The building designs should also. reflect the community use concept such as providing public
use of gymnasiums and auditoriums .
Important to emphasize through this assessment the. need to acquire park land . The value of
property continues to increase and the parcels available are limited .
Other . Jurisdictions
Chapel hill Parks aiid Recreation --
_. _ C: omtilunity facilities �Zeport adoptcd in June 1989 identified 2 cWilmunity p ?rks .
Northern Community Park - 40 acres with 2 softball fields , 2 soccer fields ; 4 tennis courts ,
_ skatchoard facility , and trails and. parking , outdoor acnentttcs $ 2 . 5 million ,
Community Center and pool - $ 3 . 5 million . -
• Southern Community Park - 80 acres . accurate plates arc not available at present .
Anitnities include softball/ soccer fields , tennis courts , amphitheater , play area , basketball
courts , restrooms , and community center . Estimates ( 7 years ago ) for Phase one $ 1 . 2 million .
C; arrboro Recreation and Parks
• 1994 Master Park Plan identif-ics needs to the year 2015 at a cost of S16 million .
Town of 11111shorough
• Parks and Recreation Board identif ied local park needs to year 2002 at $ 7I81000 .
Capital Needs Advisory Task Force
Fchrimry t�9 , 1997
�.�...�r
w
Summary
Recreacton and Parks
1998 - 08 Capital Investment Plan
County r tanager Recommended
2003 - 04
Through Through
Project Costs 1 997498 199 & 99 1999 -00 200041 2001402 2002 -03 2007 .08 Total
Efland Cheeks Fisk S39 , 250 56561920 SO SO SO
SO 0 S696 , 17C
Equipment and
j Vehicles
14 ,700 l 1 ,000 49 , 350 11 , 000 0 0 49 , 951 S146 , 001
Fairview Park 75 , 000 0 0 0 0 0 . 0
$ 7 S , 000
j New Hope Creek
Corridor 45 , 000 15 , 000 152000 15 , 000 0 0 0 S90 , 000
i
Other Park Projects
(Bonds) 0- 21000 , 000 2 ,000 , 000 11343 , 000 0 0 0 $ 5 , 343 , 000
Parkland be _
Recreation Facilities 55 , 000 50 , 000 50 , 000 _ 251004 2510CA 100 , 000 500 , 000 58051000
_ Trim e S orts lex 1 , 300 , 000 400 , 000 400 , 000 400 , 000 400 , 000 400 , 000 700 ,000 $ 41000 , 000
and Paria Project
Cons 51 , 5281950 53 , 142,920 $2; 514,350 51 ,-794 , 000 S425, 000 S500, 000 51 ,249, 951 11 , 15S, 171
i
- 200344
Through Through
FundingSources 1497 - 98 1998- 99 1999-00 200041 2001w02 200U3 2007 .08 Total
Sales Tax S 1 , 467, 950 S2, 4711000 $ 215 t4 ,350 S 1 ,794 , 000 $425 ,000 S500 , 000 S 11249 , 951 $ 10 ,422 , ? 51
j Bond fund - - _ SO - $ 656 , 920 SO SO SO SO SO $ 656 , 920
Private Placement SO SO So SO SO SO SO SO
Grant Funds So SO SO - SO SO $ O SO S0
Fces So - SO Sa So So SO So so
Other 561 , 000 $ 15 , 000 SO SO SO SO SO S7 6 , CC0
Total Recreation
and ParAu Funding
Sourcei 51 , 528t950 53 , 142, 920 52 , 514 ,350 51 , 794 , 000 5425, 000 SS40, Ooo 511249, 95 ! S11 , 155, 171
t
i
Identified Town of Chapel Hill Parks and Recreation Needs
I . The Town has recently begun updating its comprehensive plan
A . Parks and recreation section will be included
Be Council schedule calls for plan to be completed in fall of 1999
C . Town ' s comprehensive plan was last updated in p p p 1989
II . The Town Council adopted a Greenways Comprehensive Master Plan on May 26 ,
1998 (see attached)
III . At its August 24 , 1998 meeting the Chapel Hill Town Council adopted a
recommended timetable for use of $ 2 , 000 , 000 in funds from the 1997 Orange
County parks bonds . The adopted schedule is :
YEAR AMOUNT SCHEDULE OF TOWN NEED FOR FUNDS
1998 $ 145 , 000 Construction of concession/restroom building at Northern
Community Park
1999 $ 205 , 000 School soccer field at Southern Village ($ 105 , 000 ) and Southern
Community Park conceptual plan/construction drawings
($ 100 , 000)
2001 $ 795 , 000 Construction of Phase I of Southern Community Park
2002 $ 855 , 000 Construction at Northern Community Park
A . Future Development of Northern Community Park
1 . At its September 28 , 1998 Council adopted the following actions
a. $ 53 , 000 from FY98 - 99 budget appropriated for conceptual
plan process of aquatic facility/community center
b . $ 200 , 000 in Town park bonds allocated for development of
batting cage project
2 . Possible development proposals
a. Aquatic facility
b . Community Center
Be Future Development of Southern Community Park
1 . No Council decisions made at this point, except soccer field at
school
2 . No conceptual plan at this point
IV . Staff and Parks & Recreation Commission will soon recommend parks and
recreation master plan process
A . Identify community leisure needs , values
Be Clarify/revise Department mission
OWASA ORANGE WATER & SEWER AUTHORITY
Quality Service Since 1977
HAND DELIVERED
MEMORANDUM
i
j
TO : John Link, Jr . , Orange County Manager
FROM : Ed Kerwin
DATE : October 23 , 1998
�I
SUBJECT : Potential Recreational Uses of OWASA Property
The Board of Directors received the attached packet of materials at their meeting last
night and indicated that this should represent their interim position on possible
recreational use of OWASA property . The Board wishes to remain flexible in
approaching these matters and noted that a number of uncertainties should be resolved when OWASA_ ' s Comprehensive Water and Sewer Master Plan is completed in early
2000 .
Barry Jacobs and Bill Strom have been attending meetings of the County ' s Joint Master
Recreation and Parks Plan Work Group and asked me to provide these materials to you
so that they might be available for next Wednesdays Work Group meeting .
Please let me know if I can provide any further information .
Ed Kerwin -
Executive Director -
attachment -
cc : \Mr . Albert Kittrell , Assistant Orange County Manager
OWASA Board of Directors
400 Jones Ferry Road Equal Opportunity Employer Voice ( 919 ) 968 - 4421
PO Box 366 Printed on Recycled Paper FAX ( 919 ) 968 -4464
Carrboro , NC 27510 - 0366 cc - crtc : oWasa . oror
d
OWASA, ORANGE WATER. & SEWER AUTHORITY
Quality Service Since 1977
MEMORANDUM
TOso Ed Kerwin
FROM : Ed Holland
15
DATE . October , 1998
SUBJECT : Potential Recreational Uses of OWASA Property
Background
I
During the past year , Board members Barry Jacobs and Bill Strom have attended
meetings of Orange County ' s Joint Master Recreation and Parks Plan Work Group
charged with updating the County ' s Recreation and Parks Master Plan . One part of that
j work is an inventory of all public and semi-public land and recreational assets in Orange
County .
During the August 27 , 1998 Board of Directors meeting , Mr . Jacobs and Mr . Strom
submitted a list of questions about possible recreational uses of OWASA ' s land holdings .
This was referred to the Board ' s Natural Resources and Technical Systems (NRTS )
Committee , which reviewed information provided by staff and discussed the attendant
issues during three subsequent meetings . This memorandum and attachments attempt to
summarize the NRTS Committee consensus that emerged through those discussions .
The attached map shows the location of all OWASA- owned properties in Orange County ;
Table 1 provides additional details ; and Table 2 presents the NRTS Committee ' s
evaluation of the acceptability of different recreational uses of those properties . Uses _
- listed in Table 2 were compiled from documents of the Orange County Work Group .
OWASA Interests
= The NRTS Committee agreed that alternative uses should be considered in terms of
OWASA ' s central mission of providing " an adequate supply of high quality drinking
water and a complementary sewer service. " Activities or uses that might compromise
OWASA ' s utility function should be discouraged .
For example , certain uses , such as tennis , racquetball , or basketball courts , would be
incompatible with OWASA ' s operational activities within sewer easements or rights - of-
way , while other uses , such as hiking trails , might be acceptable . Hiking trails would not,
however , be desirable near the Cane Creek Reservoir where public access to the shoreline
represents a water quality risk contrary to OWASA ' s water supply mission .
400 Jones Ferry Road Equal Opportunity Employer Voicc ( 919 ) 968 - 4421
PO Box 366 Printed on Recycled Paper FAX ( 919 ) 968 - 4464
Carrboro , NC 27S 10 - 0366 W140, 11 : ort rtsa . orb
Potential Recreational Use of OWASA Property
October 15 , 1998
Page 2
On other tracts , such as the biosolids land or the two sites reserved for future elevated
storage tanks , the NRTS Committee believed it to be in OWASA ' s best interest to defer
consideration of alternative uses until the future utility needs for those properties are
better defined through the Comprehensive Water and Sewer Master Plan or, in the case of
the tank sites , by local regulatory requirements for setbacks , buffering, and so forth .
These three mission- oriented considerations — utility operations, water quality, and future
options — are abbreviated as (uo), (wq), and (f) in Table 2 , where they indicate the NRTS
Committee ' s rationale for recommending against certain uses or activities .
Major Categories of Property
The Committee first considered possible uses OWASA ' s largest categories of land ( see
Table 1 ) : Cane Creek property (inside and outside the 1/2 -mile Critical Area) , biosolids
application property , Stone Quarry Reservoir, and the elevated storage tank sites .
Cane Creek Property — The NRTS Committee believed that property within the I/2-mile
Critical Area should be considered for virtually no recreational activities , due to water
quality concerns . Limited use of certain land in the Critical Area for research or
educational purposes might be appropriate . Certain low-impact uses , such as a nature
center, hiking/jogging trails , and other educational/research activities might be acceptable
on OWASA property outside the Critical Area, but any uses requiring modification to the -
land for clearing, grading, parking, or vehicular access would not be acceptable .
Similarly, the NRTS Committee recommended only limited activities be allowed on the
portion of the existing Cane Creek recreation site draining to the lake (inside the
watershed) , but that additional uses might be allowed on the back portion of that
property, which is located outside the watershed .
Biosolids Application Property — Although most of OWASA ' s biosolids are currently
applied under strict State regulation to private farml-and , it has been OWASA ' s long-term_
strategy -to. accumulate sufficient land for the future , when less private property will
remain available for land application. A systematic review of biosolids management
options — including the production of Class A material , possible co - composting with
municipal solid waste , further moisture reduction, and so forth — is included in the _
Water/Sewer Master Plan project . Such options could reduce the eventual need for land ,
but until this information is available , the NRTS Committee recommended that OWASA
maintain its maximum range of future options and not consider recreational uses of
biosolids property .
Stone Quarry Property — Similarly , the Committee recommended that no recreational
uses be considered at OWASA ' s Stone Quarry property until the future use of that site is
more clearly established .
r
Potential Recreational Use of OWASA Property
October 15 , 1998
Page 3
Elevated Tank Sites — The NRTS Committee suggested that alternative uses be
considered at existin g tank sites as long as they don ' t interfere with OWASA' s
operational needs for access and maintenance . The Committee recommended that no
alternatives be considered on the two reserved for future tank sites until
properties
specific design and regulatory requirements are established .
Authority to Allow Alternative Uses
Throughout its discussions , the Committee recognized that the authority to allow
recreational uses of OWASA property often lies outside of OWASA ' s control . For
example , OWASA might agree to certain low- impact activities on its sewer easements
and rights of way ; but legally , OWASA may not acquire utility easements for non-
utilitarian purposes such as recreation . Successful reenwa partnerships with Chapel
g Y PAP P P P
Hill or Carrboro would likely require the Towns to act as lead agencies in acquiring
multi -purpose easements and then granting utility rights to OWASA .
Similar situations are evident at OWASA ' s elevated tank sites and at the 500 - acre Cane
Creek mitigation tract. Any alternative use of the 46 acres of OWASA land surrounding
the Nunn Mountain and Hilltop water tanks is strictly controlled by Special Use Permit
conditions of the Town of Chapel Hill . The 500 - acre Cane Creek mitigation tract was
acquired in 1980 to comply with requirements of the U . S . Fish and Wildlife Service and
the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission . Because these requirements became
permit conditions for the Cane Creek Reservoir project, any alternative use of that tract
would likely require approval by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission. _
These examples illustrate that OWASA does not have unilateral authority to allow
alternative uses on all of its property . The NRTS Committee noted that the
implementation of some recreational proposals with community-wide benefits will
require collaboration by other governmental entities , in addition to OWASA, working --
toward a common goal . -- - - _
Staff Recommendations
I recommend that this memorandum and attachments be reviewed by the Board of _
Directors and, if appropriate , provided to Orange County ' s Joint Master Recreation and
Parks Plan Work Group .
4
Edward A . Holland, AICP
Director of Planning and Development
attachments
PROM TO BOARD OF
Approved Date
I
Mi ti,gati on Tract
OWAQ A Poperty
October, 1998
(See Table 1 for Descriptions)
O N
Thunder Mountain
Tract E
A s
1 0 1 Wes
10 so 100
Acres Acres Acres
A
I
ubarks Road
I
F
I
fn
i n d Q
Stone Quarry
K B L a
G J
� � J
Chapel f ER
Oro
d
Water Plant N
M J C
A P
E
J V1b st ewa ter
LEGEND p Plant
I .
D
F-j Watershed Boundaries
f 1/2 Mile Critical Area -
O OWASA Property
®University Lake Leased Land ' H
i
Table 1 . Summary of Land Owned or Leased
By OWASA -- October , 1998
OWASA OWNED LAND
Common` Name Purpose Acreage Map Symbol
Cane . Creek Project Land purchased for original Cane 1 / 642 A
Creek Reservoir Project
Watershed Protection Land purchased since 1991 for 521 A
watershed protection under OWASA ' s
Critical Lands Program
Stone Quarry Reservoir Supplemental raw water storage 59 B
Jones Ferry Road Operations Water treatment plant site 15 C
Center & Water Treatment Plant
j Morgan Creek WWTP Wastewater plant site 24 D
Hilltop Tank Site New elevated storage tank 17 E
Nunn Mountain Tank Site Finished water storage 29 F
Carrboro Tank Site Finished water storage 1 G
Southern District Tank Site for future elevated tank 4 . 5 H
Northern District Tank Site for future elevated tank 17 . 6 I
Right of Way access Access to sewer ROW 2
g Y ( ) J
Right of Way (access) Access to sewer ROW 1 J
Right of Way ( access ) Access to sewer ROW 1 J
Wilson Creek OutfalI Access to sewer ROW 2 . 1 - J
Biosolids Application Sites Land for WWTP biosolids (sludge ) 751 K
application
Calvander Pump Station Finished water booster station 0 . 9 L
Rangewood Pump Station Wastewater pump station _ 0 . 4 _ M
Rogerson Drive Pump Station -Wastewater pump station 2 . 3 N
Jordan Lake Site for future water treatment f aci ( i ty 124 . 6 ( Chatham County)
TOTAL LAND OWNED BY OWASA 3 , 215 ac _
LEASED FROM UNC
Common Name Purpose Acreage Map Symbol
University Lake Water Supply Reservoir and 577 O
Surrounding Buffer
Manning Drive Tank Site Elevated storage tank 0 . 3 P
TOTAL LAND LEASED FROM UNC 577 ac
Table 2 . Potential, Recreational Uses of OWASA Property
Non-Cane Creek Watershed LAnd Existing CC Cane Creek Watershed Land
Recreation Site Outside Critical Area
Potential Recreational
Use/ActivityLand Inside
Sewer Tank Sites Tank Sites Biosolids Stone Below Inside Outside Critical Mitigation Thunder Meadowcrest
Easements (Existing) (Future) Land Quarry CC Dam Watershed Watershed Area Tract Mtn. Tract (Partial Lot)
Note#1 Note#2 Note#3 Note#4 Note#5 Note#5 Note#2 Note#6
Gymnasium No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f} No (f) 'No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Auditorium No (uo) No (uo,r) No No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Stadium No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Swimming Pool No.(uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Meeting Center, General Purpose Rooms No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) Yes Yes No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Nature Center No (uo) No (uo,r) Yes No (f) No (f) No (uo) Yes Yes No (wq) Yes Maybe No (wq)
Athletic Fields ,No (uo) No (uq,r) No (f) i No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) Yes No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Tennis, Racquetball, Volleyball Courts No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) Yes No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Playground Maybe No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) Maybe Yes No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Picnic Area, Shelters Maybe No (uo,r) Yes No (f) No (f) No (uo) Yes Yes No (wq) Maybe Maybe No (wq)
Track No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Golf Course No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Driving Range No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
RV Camping No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Car Camping (Tent) No (uo) No (uo,r) No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) No (r,wq) No (wq) No (wq)
Primitive Camping No (uo) No (uo,r) 'No (f) No (f) No (f) No (uo) No (wq) No (uo) No (wq) Maybe Maybe No (wq)
Nature, Hiking, Jogging Trail Yes No (uo,r) Yes No (f) No (f) Yes Yes Yes No (wq) Yes Yes No (wq)
Education and Research Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Maybe Yes Yes Maybe
Notes:
1. (Symbols in parenthesis) indicate the basis for assigning a "No"to a potential use or activity: (uo) indicates utility operational constraints; (r) indicates state orlocal
regulatory constraints on alternative uses; (t) indicates the need to maintain OWASA's future options at a site; and (wq) indicates water quality concerns.
2. Regulatory restrictions on alternative uses of this property are subject to change if initiated by other governmental entities.
3. Refers to OWASA's existing 59-acre Quarry Reservoir site located east of Bethel-Hickory Grove Church Road.
4. Much of the OWASA property downstream of the Cane Creek Dam is located in the apron of the dam's emergency spillway. The remainder of this site is constrained by steep
topography and/or proximity to access roadways and the raw water pumping station.
5. Because a portion of the existing Cane Creek recreation area slopes toward the reservoir(inside the watershed) and the remainder slopes away (outside the watershed), the
potential water quality impacts of alternative uses/activities would depend on their specific location.
6. A narrow 3-acre strip of the Meadowcrest property is located within the watershed but outside the 1/2-mile Critical Area. There appears to belittle or no opportunity for
alternative use of this site.
Town of Carrb o ro
iVEMORAND UM
TO : Mayor and Board of Aldermen
FROM : Recreation and Parks Commission
S UBJECT : Capital Improvement Plan — Recreation and Parks Commission
i
DATE : March 3 , 1998
At its March 2, 1998 monthly meeting, the full Commission received a report from a
working subcommittee on the above subject For the past month, this subcommittee of
Commission members and department director have reviewed the "Recreation and Parks
Comprehensive Master Plan." and its applicability to the Town' s Capital Improvement
Plan ( CIP ) . . It was ' decided that we send to you and the Town Manager a memorandum
outlining our recommendation in the area of recreation and park facilities that we feel
should be included in the CIP, . Many important items are accohaplished in doing this :
l . The items in the Mzster Plan are reviewed and analyzed as to what wv , t
realistically accomplish from the recommendations outlined in the plan_
. 1 The Master Plan is therefore reviewed and becomes possible Projects for
i aclusioA in the Town Manager I s CIP .34 The Board of Aldermen reviews the CIP through the annual b u i --
Pracess,
thereby, diving thA Board an opportmity or, tiuc7w, tEn merits of ye&z it -
C = -J
context of current needs and events that are taking place in the over-all
community.It is our understanding that the Budget Committee will review the CIP . we hope that
_ P
this information will e d e prove the most updated ' and helpful fu1 in their work as well,
P t P
The Master Plan is an excellent reference document and the- attached two pages list all of
the perceived needs for a twenty:=year period. Based on population standards and other
- professional data, the list -represents .com_ prehenszveness without relativity to the most
- — current issues a.nd fL, cal ewAxonment Most plans become outdated. By using th. ev Master -
Plan as a reference guide and upd.afu g it with the recommendations included in this
memorandum, the Commission can insure that the Master Plan is current by presenting
an action plan f6r the CIPP -as it regards recreation and park facilities . _
With anawareness of the fiscal constraints on Town services and additional costs
associated with the purchase , renovation and up- fitting (both in equipment and personnel)
of the Town Center, the subcommittee reviewed the five -year time frarnes of the Master
Plan and established the following for the Board of Aldermen ' s consideration .
G• REENWAYS ANTS OPEN SPACE PLAIN
To proceed with the funding of outside consulting services to develop an inventory
of previous offers of dedicated easements along creek corridors and list the impacts
of acceptance with recommendation to the Board of Aldermen . To develop
commun. lt-Y consensus of what level of c' reenway�develop men t is to take place and
exactly where . Also , to provide a vision for what open space should be and where .
Provide a written and visual plan mapping out the greeaway system , taking into
account the values of transportation, wildlife protection , stream environmental
concerns , park and open space concerns _
Recommendation : Utilize funds from the payment in lieu fund as " borrowing
capital " in the same way that the faster Plan was accomplished. Pay back the
Payment in lieu fund since this is a planning project and not acquisition or
development. Continue an account in the Recreation and Parks General Fund
Budget to begin making payment to the Payment in Lieu Fund for the greenway
plan . This process would allow the planning work to be authorized to proceed in
Fiscal Year 1998 - 1. 999 . -
G YMNAS IUMWCENTER AND CONEqTTNITY PARK
In the CIP last year, two items were recommended_ That a park of approximately
ten acres be located is the vicinity of Homestead Road 'and land be acquired for a
community center. Most of ,the financing for these two projects was scheduled to
take place in .1999-2000 with approximately S.284Y143 coining from the payment in
lieu . fund and reserves for . the Master Pa ,:rR Plan allocated in T'Y 95--96 . The
Recreation and Parks Commission strongly recognizes the need fora g mnaslum
- - t�-pe of center and active recreatio7a facilities_ A. neighborhood park - viU1 not allow
j for both of these issues to be taken care oL Therefore the Commission,. reaching
into the time frame of 2001-2005,4 would recourimend that property be acquired
North Commun.i.ty k'ark, With the funds available in the payment in lieu fi►ind, we
could perhaps purchase an option to buy a certain property in the Northern -
Transition. Area to provide space for a gymnasium/center_ and active facilities . This —
would provide a project that could attract private, local, county and state money.
Recomm. endatien : Pursue options on the purchase of approximately sixty acres in
the Northern -Transition Area on which to locate a gymnasiuraJcenter and
commuaitry park. Planning, and specific facility location should be -coordinated with -
j _ Chapel' Hill ' s North Commim4ty Park and Orange County ' s District Park plans ,
With final location to have the most effective service radius of one mile.
Approval of use of payment in lieu funds for this purpose and authorization to -
ed by the Board of Aldermen . Financing in 1. 999 - - -
pursue specific properties is need
2000 depeadenf ou many factors that remain as unknowns at this time. Would need
to be worked out as part of the eventual submittal of the CIP for the budget process .
The Recreation and Parks Commission sincerely hopes that this type of process will work
well to convey our recommendations to you. We will be glad to have a work session to
discuss this matter at the appropriate time in your budget deliberations . Thank you .
xc : Robert W . Aorgan
Richard E . Kinney
Ei s l
Recreation and Parks Comprehensive Master Plan Proposals
The park and facility proposals have been prioritized into four separate time
ioritization was influenced by the evaluation of frames for implementation . The pr
existing facilities ; the community needs assessment and the financial ability of
li improvement the town to Implement the overall capital imp plan .
I
Years 1995 -2000
Provide genera ; on -going renovations to existing facilities at all community ,
neighborhood and mini-park sites .
Along with the Chapel Hill/ Carrboro School System , . provide expanded
recreation faci ('d4es at Carrboro Elementary School , and new facilities at
McDougle School Site .
i
- Begin acquiring property along Morgan Creek and Bolin . Creek Greenway
corridors and start developing facilities where passible . Accept all previous
offers of dedication and easements. . along Morgan and Bolin Creek for
greenway system . -- -
Fully develop the " Morgan Creek Neighborhood Park .
Acquire property for " Bolin Creek Neighborhood ' Park and fully develop .
Fully develop " 4dum Mini- Park" .
- Acquire additional property for " Pathway Drive Mini- Park and fully develop .
Build the Morgan Creek Community Center. --
Years 2001 - 2005 _
Continue to provide on -going renovations to existing facilities _ at all
community , neighborhood and mini - park sites , and greenway corridors .
Along with the Chapel Hill /Carrboro School System , provide additional
recreation facilities at Carrboro Elementary School .
Continue acquiring additional property along Morgan Creek and Bolin Creek
Greenway corridors and continue developing facilities where possible .
Acquire property for " North and Scuth Community Parks " .
Acquire property for " Homestead Road " and " Union Grove Church Road
Neighborhood " .
Page 2
Years 2006 - 2010
- Continue to provide on-going renovations to existing facilities at all
community , neighborhood and mini-park sites , and greenway corridors .
- Along with the Chapel HIII/ Carrboro School System provide additional
recreation facilities at Carrboro Elementary School .
Continue acquiring additional property along the Morgan Creek and Bolin
Creek greenway comdors and continue developing facilities where possible .
Fully develop " South Community Park„ .
Fully develop Homestead Road Neighborhood Park „ .
Years 2011 -2015
Continue to provide ongoing : renovations to existing racilities at • all
_ C ammunity , neighborhood and mini-park sites , and -greenway corridors . _
- . Along with the Chanel HiIVCarrboro Sohac) l Syl. pfeV* idP addfio ^ ar -
recreation fadlities at C,atrboro Elementay School . -
Continue acquiring - additional• property along the Morgan Creek and Bolin
Creek greenway corridors and continue developing facilities where possible . -
Full develop " North Community Park .
_ Y P �Y _
Fully develop " Union Grove Church Road Neighborhood Park
Build the Union Grove Road Neighborhood Center .
i
To : David Stancrl, Land Use and Environmental Planner
From : Erin Dissly , Planning Intern
Date : October 19 1998
rridor Open Space Master Plan
Re : New Hope Co
i
Attached is an overview of the New Hope Creek Corridor Study for the Master
Recreation and Parks Work Group , as requested . .
Background
Corn
Open Space Area runs 23 miles along New Hope Creek bounded
The New Hope
by regionally significant open spaces , the Eno River State Park to the north and Duke
Forest, Durham division, to the south . The Corridor also includes feeder streams Old
Field Creek, Dry Creek, Mud Creek and Sandy Creek . The Corridor provides habitat for
wildlife and will provide open space for residents and visitors . The effort to preserve this
wildlife and recreational corridor began in 1987 , when local officials met to discuss a
cooperative open space preservation project . The recreational aspect will be a system of
bicycle and hiking trails throughout the Durham County portion of the corridor, with
wildlife corridors on the Orange County side .
In the spring of 1989 , the governments of Orange County , the Town of Chapel Hill , the
City of Durham and Durham County adopted a resolution to provide for the preservation
of open space along the New Hope corridor . The governments amended their -
comprehensive and map plans by adopting the New Hope Corridor Open Space Master
Plan,- created in 1991 by the New-Hope Corridor Advisory Committee .
The Master Plan ' s main g oal is to " . . . preserve an open space corridor linking the Eno
River State Park P Corps the New Hope Creek Co s lands and the growing communities of
Durham, Chapel Hill and Carrboro for aesthetic , environmental, and recreational
purposes , and as a means of shaping the urban form of the area. " The Advisory
Committee ' s goals include : -
• To reserve and enhance environmental quality
P
• To provide opportunities for passive recreation _
• To preserve natural habitats for their aesthetic values _To provide for a pleasing urban form by creating a varied environment and corridor of
open space linking Chapel Hill and Durham
+ To PP
provide opportunities for environmental and cultural education
P
As previously mentioned, the study focused on wildlife corridors in the Orange County
jurisdiction, but noted the importance of establishing a link between Duke Forest near
New Hope Creek and the Eno River State Park to the north .
To address this issue , a follow-up study by a graduate class in 1993 evaluated the
possible linkages from Duke Forest to the Eno River State Park. The recommendations
for Orange County included sets of recreational trails and wildlife corridors . The
following lists a summary of the suggestions .
Recreation Trail
• The construction of a free standing pedestrian bridge - - or pedestrian lane in
conjunction with the proposed Eno Drive bridge -over I - 85
• The acquisition of a trail easement through purchase or, when possible ,
through use of the required setbacks of Orange County ' s Major Transportation
Corridor Overlay District .
• The construction and maintenance of a trail within highway rights of way and
the acquired easement . - -
Wildlife Corridor
• The construction of a wildlife underpass at the intersection of I - 85 and US 70 .
• The acquisition of land along the corridor, much of which is within
floodplains , through fee simple purchase or, when possible , by promoting
cluster development
P .
The report concluded that the Orange County Recreation and Parks Department should be
responsible for maintaining and managing the recreational trails , while the North Carolina
State Park Ranges should maintain and manage the wildlife corridors .
Action
The Master Plan outlines a chronological order for implementation . All land acquisition
was to be completed in the first 10 years . In the second ten years , trail construction and
completion is to occur . The following is a list of the actions taken since 1991 in
implementing the Master Plan . —
All governments adopted the New Hope Comdor Masten Plan to their compzehensive ,
map and joint planning agreement plans .
• The Durham division of the Duke Forest has remained protected land .
• The land south of U . S . 15 - 501 , owned by the Army Corps of Engineers has remained
protected . - -
313 acres of the Corridor have been purchased by the City of Durham, . Durham
County and the Triangle Land Conservancy ,
The Town of Chapel Hill has recently been awarded $ 200 , 000 by the directors of the
state ' s Clean Water Management Trust Fund to acquire land north of the town limits
_ within the New Hope Corridor . This funding was granted to the Chapel Hill Parks and
Recreation Department .
NO
41W : • :�• N - i:• • 0 %0*9 • ial a � --goal•ii. am•q, • • „ - � - •• _get - so • � . • o i W • ••ti'Jtia► .ft ♦ M••' a-+„�:; .-gloliong - . • _
. ri • , �s ssJ •' .:+ . igrast • •�! =� ' •top gorilb �! .�••� •r •. : .Name •. •• • ♦ • . .• • V '• , t.•i1t. ♦W40 .. . 61 all
�- AlC�log It a p IF • •M•.•� iti•S•. r • f••
•.•- •• •- imtg •. • ♦ • i • a . 0 OM Sop
-. • •- �ti e No ts
- �• • mat ♦ �1- :� • :`•fir - •' .-Q .Y_ .�7_ • •� • . .
•s`;- y\.•. - •sy•. • . ,. Or We
` Al
46 wallalle
• ' .., -•�_ w.: y - .Wo • `- ..5=••: �Y •
I eve
Nil
lk
t� tr ~- .�atn — • o •!� r• • agip••• m • �:+ law ft
�♦��•�. �• s • •� ♦ am •
&tir&*04 l
Walla
l IN Aft
Nee
*I see
we
f •- \ 7/ �a 1 ' i ♦ 1 �• �••• st• � • • .'R• % • �Iy �� i .�/• 1 s' d •;,•�'-
Nowam
•• •?. • ` •`I_� oalI
ns
.t'� ,.• • • • � . •n!; = e. . �- : ••i !�i- .• tip► ± •a •. ,� •-!' ?•• -� f �+i w • 1.•• o •••�• • ?, •.•. aa� •a► 1• �••• •i . jai• a
• �< •r. f • � r- sty: :n �• i , - i • fI 1 •� fs
/L 1 . ,.
i~� • • r , tom` .•,• * ,�y1 Sf , .' . • m!w me
• • •� ♦���.• -ice! �!J_'+• .�i�1 .�►.•.
'i
maritalb Ica
a am
Vale Raw
all
al Nil a go Ow
me gas
am
LY
dp-
+s v . • • •�R •1�J a1 ♦ �'b0 UP
III, A • ♦ spew
► !fir`Q •�� 'v� � � • '.•M,/`7C !1rti •1rJ - +► r l�is�j•Z�
- ? � ♦ toy • a a•: .+•^ �' a.� h1� w _ •.. _ � ' •
all i
6MLINIP mail
vAu s0 Woo 0 WIN
kv
Sii�w • a* . ..-�� ••!•: �•'` 1�-G -•- �����A•C�if •• • . y'.a:1•
:�• w { _ _ awmampal fie•� 4 '• �1 ':Y1►•'�� •:q. y •
la
dollop m
la Na NO NOW
04
a all IN NO
loll OF 1'N• •S4a .r.•.
age` •. �••'•1 ` • .. - - .. . . \. " i�• •� '. .• • '• . Nam . •. r i• • - • 1 _ ' • S av�Irl �•' �r• •• • Y -
••-•.T n7 • TI A :► �• •i. - .Ne� ;• ' �y.cr _ df' • • -{!. ice• i
•►V �•�f1[�r..`Yf. iM <•: 1 - ii •: • • . :• �•:�r••: a • �`•. c.• M �. a ••� i f"'-'�IV •Mi .. Y•� .•a _ •• • -'f
`� •w.. ' •Ii -. • • ••• *ease% w f • - •-♦ �. � Fie - ♦ -` it
NiA•i`Iv `� � • � � Well
a•yy�t Wei
. +'•� w • N.�ew� : ♦N l.:•1••�0 't• :s'Ii.. ` • .r�.�i �i+ - .r •. ��.w •eal _ J: l•: �`iM
•
•
•
L► KAgl J t • PAA1AltIt40
Be not: moson,o,f,
V
l
a .�
�•�
to & I
VIEW .. ' .
': 6 ' • ' ' ; :�
r d,
to toa It� . :•;: : . �p .;'
0 / `'� OUtC EOAESI \
' �►a pp0'' 0 of
� ,
44
61� \ L. r . (/ 01 a OUKB UNIT ,
i'. 'y O \ � r . . lit, • d r ' r
OVIE\oC e� t� 'IV 0
a
IV
'off' VMS
0 IVV
If
onto
r ;
0 ko
. . ,
- - IV _ v ` f - -
-�� Ptekett Rd. DURHAM
Whltfletd-. Rd, � • OA
i r
COP t
:.� ,
eTw _
CHAPEL HILL . p o
, wo
fowl•
t6AtR V'fl' ' Y. •
, ;, • o
LEGEND. — y -r - �.Q•`% _
Ito Awl
It
-too YI AR nOCOAINVot " OPOi1D OPttl XPAC1 \ w VoltVoltPL 0
JAI
p tl
Wti-OUPI PROT1CT10111 AR1iA \` Ve `0
ti
9- 2 MU Motor" A.t•sa At ow 1 'Nag 41,V —
s- s M*N Crook Ae,e•ene Atm. ( \ � � COMPS Of z roOR iNt:t;lis
ORi
4-004 brry Ct«ka. •A • : Atsr it t-•40 A i wfa Rt. �� ^ • 'i wtLDt.tft: C
, • , I
1—d 4aw•dmy Crook Pitt A.. .ss 44 ::;y4,
i-s 410 !term A• otte" At"
C40tw"WONS — 1r+rfw tl.i rt Ar•• / QO +w f}••• Q
U
C1 a II C3 0 0 O PROPGSJM X1XX AIID P4093TRtA* TRAIL w ( U _
As
PROP042W NATURI TRAIL Wtoo•,oifoll3
Z x i
a:j * 1 �-
stcPrts Yn �>< P1tOT1CT[ti
-�� r
JOROAN RtrS >rAYOIR
NEW HOPE CORRIDOR OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAP
CITY OF DURHAM , N , C. '
CITY OF CHAPXL HILL, N , C.
DURHAM COUNTY
ORANOI COUNTY
COULTER ASSOCIATES - Landscape Architects - Land Planners Durham , N . C .
New Hope Corridor Open Space Maser Pian
I
i
Executive S
In 1989 , in passing a common resolution , the governing boards of Chapel Hill , Durham ,
Durham County , and Orange County recognized the value of the New Hope corridor and took
steps to preserve this open space as a natural asset . The 1987 Inventory of Natural. Areas and
Raze Species of Durham County recognized as significant the New Hope Corridor itself and
fic natural areas within the corridor . The New Hope corridor received Federal
three Speci
recognition when , in August 19901 the US Fish and Wildlife Service designated New Hope
Creek as an " Important Regional Wetland . " _ This designation - may offer the possibility of
receiving Federal. funding . Since October 1989 , an Advisory Committee representing each - of -
the jurisdictions has worked with members of the planning staffs and a Consultant , Coulter
Associates , Landscape Architects & Land Planners , to prepare a Master Plan for the preservation
of the corridor . .
The Consultant and the Advisory Committee were charged with : . .
" . . . . creating an open space corridor linking the Eno River State Park , the New Hope
Creek , Corps Lands , and the l growing communities of Durham and Chapel Hill for
aesthetic , environmental , educational , and recreational-- purposes , and as a means of
- — shaping the urban form of the area . "
The New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan identifies the critical environmental areas to
be protected to achieve those goals and recommends that the following land areas be acquired
through purchase , acquisition of development rights , or donation : - -
• The stream course ;
• Adjacent floodplains ,
• Steep slopes (defined as 20 percent or greater) adjacent to floodplains ;
• Larger tracts of particular historic , educational , or recreational value (open space
anchors) ; and
• The NC 751 Scenic Road (designation and some acquisition) .
I
i
New Hope Corridor open Space Master Pf =
These areas would provide locations for such features as wildlife habitats , trails , and access
areas .
The Advisory Committee recommends that the participating governing boards move to protect
the following areas :
• New Hope Creek from NC 54 north and west to Erwin Road in Orange County ;
• Dry Creek from New Hope Creek on the north side of the Chapel Hill-Durham
Boulevard west to Erwin Road and the future Chapel Hill gzeenway ;
• Mud Creek from New Hope Creek north to NC 751 ;
• Connections between Mud Creek-NC 751 and the Eno River State Park along NC 751
and Orange County roads ( to the west) ; and
• Sandy Creek from New Hope Creek on the south side of Chapel Hill-Durham
Boulevard northeast across the Boulevard to NC 751 .
After adoption of the Master Plan by the four jurisdictions , a permanent Advisory Committee
should be established to monitor and advise in carrying out the recommendations of the plan and
to nurture and foster citizens ' involvement in preservation and acquisition . The membership of
the Committee - would be drawn from the planning and open space agencies of the four
jurisdictions with additional representation of interested citizens and property owners .
The Committee should be official and permanent and should be charged with the responsibility
of overseeing the corridor ' s future , including reviewing and making recommendations
concerning development proposals , annual budgets , etc . , that affect the corridor . The
Committee should not be responsible for operations related to the corridor . The Committee
should require only minimal staff support in carrying out its duties .
-- The Implementation Recommendations (Section III . ) consist of three phases , which would take
- glace over a maximum of 20 years .
Phase 1 . Priority Corridor Acquisition (Years t-
- _ Objective : Through acquisition , to utilize land presently under control of the City of
Durham , Duke University , and the Corps of Engineers , as well as that
acquired through purchase of opportunity in the Wildlife Protection Area
and other acquisition opportunities that are presented through rezoning ,
negotiation , or donation .
ii
ty
New Hope Corridor Open Space Masur Pf=
Phase 2 . Completion of Corridor Acquisition (Years 5- 10)
Objectives : To complete the acquisition of land needed for the Wildlife Protection Area
4
and for slope protection .
� �P Pe
To acquire land needed for stream protection and for anchors and access
areas .
To construct trails as needed to connect schools , parks , and other locations .
i
Phase 3 . Completion of Trails and Access Areas (Years 10-20)
j Objective : To prepare plans , obtain needed financing for construction , and construct
trails and access areas .
rridor and establishing open space anchors will require the
Protecting the New Hope co
acquisition of approximately 1100 acres of floodplain , 45 acres of steep slopes , and 554 acres
-of uplands , and the purchase of development Aghts to an additional 103 acres . To achieve the
passive recreation potential of the corridor , approximately 20 miles of trails should be
developed .
The estimated cost of land acquisition ranges between $ 12 . 5 million and $22 . 5 million . The cost
of developing the recreational potential and trails is estimated to be between $ 1 . 8 million and
$ 2 . 7 million . The total project cost is estimated to be between $ 14 . 3 million and $25 . 3 million
dollars .
The partnership between citizens and government that has led to the preservation of the Eno
River basin has brought increasing national recognition to our community . Employing a similar
private-public partnership to establish the- New Hope corridor will ensure that the western side
of the Triangle will continue to be a desirable glace in which to work and live . Th�benefi.ts
from maintaining open space , maintaining and improving environmental quality , and providing
potential for passive recreation are immediate and real . They augment and complement the -
benefits of preserving for the benefit of all our citizens , a significant buffer of green trees and
free4lowing water .
i
i
i l21
, h
a0l;
CoT I
OlPQ va
L S V
Pill
KI
Lim
Liam Lb LIL ti ; <
LILL
leol
IIIF
ti s ti
LIP 4
r �h Z .�,..
4
� .
- �
\,
a .
IkL
IIIIIL
W14 01;
ovos
OT
aged �� � • 4a�
ci
a , e o- e .
� e�Q of and e a
��an",
Executive Summar
y
This study continues the work begun in the 1991 New Hope Corridor Open Space Master Plan by further
defining corridor links in east central Orange County . The objective of the study is to link the Durham
Division of Duke Forest with Eno River State Park with recreation trails and wildlife corridors .
Analysis for the stud followed these e
Y y es steps .
• Identification of the links based on physical criteria ;
• Assessment of each tink ' s relative merits and obstacles ;
• Synthesis of the links into separate recreation trails and wildlife Y p e corridors ;
• Analysis of trail / corridor feasibility based on potential implementation strategies ; and
• Selection of final recreation trail and wildlife corridor .
Recreation Trail
I
- The recommended recreation trail is a loop connecting Duke Forest and Eno River State Park . The trail
I is proposed for low - impact , passive recreation uses . The loop runs along the Duke Power easement to
its intersection with NC 10 , turns toward I- 85 , crossing US 70 , then travels parallel to 1- 85 and bend
back to the intersection of NC 751 and NC 10 . The trail then follows the NC 751 right-of--way back into
I
Duke Forest . The recommended implementation strategy includes the following actions ;- _
• Purchase recreation easements ; _
• Site trails in setbacks required by the Major Transportation Corridor Overlay District ;
I • Use NC -751 and proposed Eno Drive rights -of- way for trails ;
• Locate trails along Duke Power easement ; and _
• Provide a pedestrian bridge across I- 85 or pedestrian lane along proposed Eno ' Drive ,
Wildlife Corridor
The study recommends a separate 2004eet wide corridor for wildlife . The proposed corridor leaves Eno
River State Park along Rhodes Creek , crosses under Interstate 85 at the US Highway 70 interchange , and
runs parallel to the Southe - _
p rn Railroad right-of way into Duke Forest . The study recommends the
following implementation strategies :
Purchase corridor areas ;
I_ • Provide a wildlife underpass at 1- 85/US 70 interchange •
Y
• Encourage development clustering for undeveloped or underdeveloped parcels ; and
- • _ Acquire wildlife and floodplain easements where possible . - -
Wildlife experts stress that a wildlife underpass at the 1- 85 /US 70 interchange is critical for wildlife ' s safe _
�- passage between Duke Forest and Eno River State Park . These experts recommend that the corridor not
be implemented if safe passage is not assured . NC Department of Transportation does not currently plan
to construct culverts of the dimensions recommended by wildlife corridor experts for wildlife
underpasses .
The chance to secure these corridors represents a unique and timely opportunity for Orange County .
These trails and corridors will fulfill the goals of the New Hope Corridor Plan , and more importantly ,
will provide necessary space for public recreation and wildlife habitats in the area . Although
implementation of this study ' s recommendations may be a challenging task, development pressures will
only increase these difficulties as time passes . The planned improvement of I- 85 presents perhaps the only
chance to provide for adequate passage of wildlife under this heavily traveled thoroughfare . It is hoped
that Orange County will consider these recommendations to create a lasting , natural legacy for the
County .
Tectmical
Preservation as a Function of Local Goverinnent
is / ,� ; ' Y 'r . r • "r . . ►,, ./.
? F
s.
Oak
Aa
IL
ka
add MOP
ad
• _
• a�* T , F• j ' � : t•
_ • r
AM
� r
•
Prepared for the Orange County Board of Commissioners
by the Orange County Planning & Inspections Department
I
April 1997
The material in Section Four of this publication is adapted from Starting A Land Trust: A to
Forming A Land Conservation Organization, published in 1990 by and available from
the Land Trust Alliance .
-.e y
CONTENTS
Executive Summary
1 Introduction 1 . 1
Pur Dose -00
1 .
Organization 1 _2
2 Advisory Boards & Commissions 24
Desiination 2_ 1
Membership 24
Terms of Appointment 2 -2
Special Qualifications 2_2
Residency Reauirements 21mo3
Powers & Duties 2-3
Planning Board 2_3
Board of Adjustment 2 _3
Historic Preservation Commission 24
Community Appearance Commission 21oo5
Agricultural Advisory Board 2-6
Conclusions 2_`7
N11aUng the Cause for Coiisolidation 2- 7
The Case for the Status Quo 2-8
3 Staffing Needs 34
Time Spent on Preservation Issues 3 - 1
Relationship to Existing Divisions 3 -3
Division Duties & Responsibilities 3 - 5
Equipment Needs 3 -8
S Nd i
paceees - $
4 Land Trusts 44
What is a Land Trust? 4A
Should a Land Trust Be Formed? 44
Conservation Lands 4-2
Organizational Options 44
Settiniz Un a Land Trust 443
- Forming the Board of Directors 443
Draftinst Articles of Incormoration 446
Drafting Bylaws 448
Obtaininiz Tax-Exemvt Status 449
Saving Land 4-22
Land Conservation Criteria 41mi22
uatav i t vi,%rvLivit i�i% . ivu3 {-� ,J
r
CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
4 Land Trusts (Continued)
Saving Land (Continued)
Acquisition Methods 4-25
Tax Benefits of Land Conservation 4-26
Financing Land Protection 4-29
Stewardship - Taking Care of the Land 4-32
Running a Land Trust 4-32
Volunteers & Staff 4-32
Financial Management 4-34
Membership & Fundraising 4-3 8
A Straw Organization 443
Appendices ` '
Appendix A - Board of Commissioners FY 199&97 Preservation Related Goals
Appendix B - Conservation Lands, Orange County, N. C .
Appendix C - List of Regional & Local Land Trusts
Appendix D - Memorandum of Agreement between N. C . Department of Transportation & the
Greene & Wayne Soil. & Water Conservation Districts
Appendix E - Articles of Incorporation & Bylaws - Triangle Land Conservancy
Appendix F - Ordinance & Bylaws - Annapolis, Mar) Land Conservancy Board
Appendix G - Ordinance & Bylaws - Narragansett, Rhode Island Land Trust
Appendix H - North Carolina Nonprofit Corporation Guidelines
Appendix I - IRS Publication 557 - Tax-Exempt Status for Your Organization
Appendix J - IRS Package 1023 - Application for Recognition of Exemption _
Appendix K - N. C . Historic Preservation & Conservation Agreements Act
Appendix L - Model Conservation Easement & Historic Preservation Easement, 1996 - Land
Trust Alliance
Appendix M - Conservation Easement between the Nutter Family & the Triangle Land
Conservancy
Appendix N - N. C . Income Tax Credit for Donations of Real Property for Land Conservation
Appendix O - Newsletter of the Triangle Land Conservancy
Appendix P - N. C . General Statute 55A - Nonprofit Corporation Act
" _J
Executive Summary
1
Introduction
This report is about possibilities . It has been prepared to address the objectives adopted by
the Board of Commissioners as part of natural resource and farmland preservation goals .
Specifically, it seeks to accomplish the following :
• To review the statutory requirements and limitations concerning the designation,
membership qualifications , terms of appointment, residency requirements, and powers and
duties of various advisory boards and commissions .
• ility of creating a separate division in the Planning Department to
To evaluate the possib
give "Resource Conservation" a higher profile .
• To evaluate the feasibility of establishing a land trust for Orange County.
1 his Technical Report has been divided into three sections with each section addressing
one of the three objectives outlined above . Following completion of the draft report, it was
circulated among planning-related advisory boards, preservation-related organizations, County
departments, and municipal planning directors . Upon receipt of all comments, the report was
revised and distributed to the County Manager and Board of Commissioners for recommendation
and decision, respectively .
2
Advisory Boards & Commissions
The ability of local governments to create planning-related advisory boards and
commisions is granted though the North Carolina General Statutes . In Orange County, the
following planning-related advisory boards and commissions have been created by the Board of
Commissioners : the Planning Board ; the Board of Adjustment; the Historic Preservation
Commission ; and the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board .
Making the Case for Consolidation
If one of the options under consideration by the Board of Commissioners is advisory
board consolidation, it is possible under the present statutory provisions . For example, the
Planning Board may be designated as the Board of Adjustment and the Historic Preservation
Commission . Likewise, it appears that the Planning Board may be designated as the Agricultural
Advisory Board .
For such an arrangement to be implemented, changes must be made to the composition
and membership of the Planning Board . If designated as the Historic Preservation Commission, at
1
least three additional members must be appointed to the Planning Board or three existing
members replaced with new members who have demonstrated special interest, experience, or
education in history, architecture or related fields
Though not part of any statutory requirements, the issue of title and advisory board
longevity were raised at the Board of Commissioners ' December 9 , 1995 Goals and Objectives
Retreat . The following categories of advisory boards were suggested : board ; commission;
committee ; task force ; and council . If an expanded or re- organized Planning Board were created
to handle the functions of the Board of Adjustment, Historic Preservation Commission, and the
Agricultural Districts Advisory Board, the name of the Planning Board would be changed to the
"Planning Commission" .
The Case for the Status Quo
The case for maintaining the status quo is a case against consolidation . One of the
strongest arguments for the status quo is that it does provide greater opportunities for citizen
participation in county government . Another advantage to maintaining the status quo is spreading
a multitude of duties and responsibilities across a greater number of advisory boards . A related
argument involves staff assignments . Specifically, it is easier to assign staff to assist multiple
advisory boards than a single, consolidated one . Finally, with respect to categorization and
naming of advisory boards, almost all of the advisory board titles currently in use were derived
from terminology used in the General Statutes .
3
Staffing Needs
In May, 1995 , the Planning Director asked the Current and Comprehensive Planning staff
as well as the Geographic Information System (GIS) Project Coordinators to identify what
preservation issues and topics they worked on, and what percentage of their time they spent on
each topic or issue identified . In terms of time spent on preservation issues, four of 10 staff,
members spent two-thirds or more of their time on such issues . Of the Planner Hs., two emerge as
potential candidate ' s for anew division - Don Belk and Emily Cameron. A third person eligible
for consideration is Miriam Coleman, a GIS Project Coordinator.
Division Duties & Organization
One means of testing whether personnel can be moved is to create a "straw" division, then
determine what changes in duties and responsibilities must be made for the new organizational
ing the "straw" division would be Emily Cameron and Don Belk .
arrangement to work . Form
Miriam Coleman would not be included because of the increasing demands for her services .
Overall , the new division could assume responsibility for the duties listed below .
• Administrative, technical , and professional support to the Board of Commissioners ,
Planning Board, Historic Preservation Commission, Agricultural Districts Advisory Board ,
and any study committees established pursuant thereto .
• The preparation of written staff reports and recommendations concerning the
r- ? implementation and administration of preservation- related ordinances .
• Staff activities would include, but not be limited to, applications for approval of major
subdivision concept plans and proposed amendments related to the preservation of natural
and cultural features , and rural community character; e . g. , the Flexible Decelopment
standards .
• The inspection of landscaping installed to satisfy design standards contained in the Zoning
Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations .
• Liaison with departmental divisions, County departments, local government units, state
and federal agencies, acid local and regional land trusts .
To support the new Preservation Division as well as others, and to account for the
increased demand for GIS services , the re- institution of the Information Services Division is
proposed . It would be comprised of a GIS Applications Developer who would also supervise the
division, the two GIS Project Coordinators , Miriam Coleman and Elizabeth McFarland , and a
pact-time GIS Mapper I to digitize maps and create new coverages . Of the two members
. . remaining in the Administration Division, they would continue under the supervision of the
Planning Director in providing support to other staff T'hPse mcm.bers include the Administrative
Assistants, Joanna Bradshaw and Kay Evans .
Equipment Needs
- a To carry out the duties and responsibilities assigned to the new division, the staff must
..
have access to equipment with which to assemble and manage data, and prepare reports and
i recommendations . During FY 1995 -96, nearly all of the personal computers in the Planning
Department were upgraded . In addition, all computers were networked using Novell software and
provided with a common ,operating system, Microsoft Windows 3 . 1 . Each staff member being
considered for the new division participated in the upgrading process .
The GIS needs of the Planning Department are served by a SUN SPARC-2 work station.
t�
To store the natural and cultural resource coverages that have been created to date, update and
expand them, and develop new coverages for land use, zoning, and infrastructure, another GIS
r VA work station is needed . In lieu of purchasing a similar work station, staff has contacted a
;_ ., representative of SUN Microsystems to explore an alternative approach.
• Purchase two ULTRA- 1 work stations and two Calcomp back- lit digitizing tables , one
each for Miriam Coleman and Elizabeth McFarland .
• Retain the SPARC-2 work station and connect the two ULTRA- 1 stations to it to provide
-a work space for the Water Resources Committee project and store coverages .
3
• Retain the X- terminals so that citizens can query the coverages to find out information
about their property .
The above alternative can be implemented at a lower cost than the CIP plan, including the
additional digitizer and operating software . A question exists, however, as to whether the
department should rely exclusively on a geographic information system which is work station
based or PC based or some combination of the two systems .
The answer to this question lies in installing ArcView GIS on selected department
computers . ArcView is a complete system for accessing, displaying, querying, analyzing, and
publishing the department ' s coverages . ArcView links traditional data analysis tools, such as
spreadsheets and business graphics, with maps for a completely integrated system . While the
ArcView software can be run using either a computer or work station-based format, its utility lies
in the fact that coverages created using the ARCINFO (GIS ) operating system can easily accessed
by a property owner to display maps of the natural and cultural features located on his/her
property.
While ArcView provides tremendous advantages to the department and the new divisions,
there are some obstacles to overcome . One major obstacle is the need to network systems so that
maps can be prepared and stored using the work stations, and viewed or printed using computers .
VA ile networking computer and work station-based systems can be accomplished, new funding
will be necessary. As an example, it 11 be necessary to ipgra(le all of the department ' s
computers again.
Space Needs
Aside from the issue of equipment needs, a question exists as to whether there is space in
Department for a new division . A more basic question is so even if space is available,
the Planning
should an effort be made to bring the new division ' s staff members closer together, particularly
the planners ? Furthermore, if staff relocation is necessary, should efforts be made to consolidate
staff as close to a division basis as possible? Finally, are there any foreseeable changes which
would warrant an increase in stall?
The answer to these questions exists in the current office space arrangement . To
accommodate these various needs, the following office arrangement is proposed .
• Move the drink and snack machines from the Break Room to the Front Lobby .
• Move the copier to the former Break Room, including the cabinet and table used to store
paper.
• Convert the former Copy Room to offices and move two of the three new division
members, Emily Cameron and Don Belk, to that area .
• Set up Lora Galineau ' s office in the space where Don Belk ' s office was .
• Move Mary Willis ' office to the location of Emily Cameron ' s old office . This move will
better consolidate Current Planning Staff in one location and will place the supervisor in a
more central position relative to the remaining staff.
• Convert Mary Willis ' old office location to a Map Room and secondary Intern Work
Area .
The only exception is the GIS work station area which would be retained in its current
location, including the offices of Miriam Coleman and Elizabeth McFarland .
4
Land Trusts
The purpose of this section is to evaluate the feasibility of establishing a land trust for
Orange County, including the applicability of such an approach to the goals of agricultural
` preservation, natural resource protection, historic preservation, and rural character protection .
What is a Land Trust ?
A land trust is a local, regional or state nonprofit organization involved in protecting land
for its natural, recreational, scenic, historical or productive value . Because most land trusts are
private, nonprofit organizations, they depend on volunteer leadership and support even if they
have a professional staff. They can be organized to protect a single piece of property or to carry
out a larger preservation agenda. They may focus on a community, on a region, on a particular
type of resource such as a bottomland hardwood forest; or a protection project such as a river
corridor .
Should a Land Trust Be Formed ?
Before determining whether the formation of a land trust is feasible, it is advisable to
determine first if a local land trust is the best approach to use . For example, setting up a land trust
r may not be warranted if only small areas with limited resource value are to be preserved or the
trust simply duplicates the efforts of an existing regional, state or national organization.
Conservation Lands
Lands which could be conserved in Orange County cover a variety of natural , historic,
productive, recreational, and scenic resources . In some instances , the land area may be small or
not have special resource value, and finding an existing land trust to conserve the land would be
preferable to setting up a new one . However, if these resources are combined into a coherent
conservation network, establishing a new land trust becomes more feasible . As an example, the
Land Use Element uses a technique referred to as overlay mapping to display and group resources
together into two categories - "Primary Conservation Areas" and "Secondary Conservation
Areas" .
Primary Conservation Areas . Sensitive environmental resources, historically significant sites ,
and features considered unbuildable because of their limitations or inherent unsuitability for
development are considered Primary Conservation Areas. When these resources are combined, they
forma conservation network of 63 , 357 acres or 25 percent of the county ' s total land area.
Secondary Conservation Areas. Within the second category of conservation areas, resources
vary more widely in importance, vulnerability or fragility. Within each type of resource, there are
examples of greater or lesser significance, whether one is looking at mature hardwood forests or stands
Of young pines, prime farland soils or those of local importance,mportance, or portions of the county with a
greater potential for archeological sites than others . These resources form a network of Secondary
Conservation Areas of 124, 829 acres or 49 percent of the county' s total land area. While there is
some overlap between Primary and Secondary Conservation Areas, the shear size of the land area
occupied by these resources suggests that there is a role for a land trust in carrying out the goals
of agricultural preservation, natural resource protection, historic preservation, and rural character
protection in Orange County.
Organizational Options
The second point to consider in deciding whether to set up a local land trust is to
determine if there is already a trust or other conservation organization in existence capable of
acquiring and/or managing these resources . Three existing organizations are currently authorized
by state and/or federal law to carry out these functions, including the Triang,L Land Conservancy,
the Orange County Soil and Water Conservation District, and Orange County government . Each
of these organizations is examined below to determine if they could fulfill this role .
Triangle Land Conservancy. Operating in the Research Triangle region is the Triangle
Land Conservancy, a nonprofit corporation working in six counties, including Orange County.
From the purposes and criteria adopted by the organuzation, it appears that the Triangle Land
Conservancy is a candidate for acquiring and/or managing Orange County ' s conservation
resources . Justification is also evident in the Conservancy' s. record of acquisition and
management . As of 1995 , 820 acres were protected in the six-county region, 406 of which were
owned and 414 of whicli were managed under easement . Currently, in Orange County, the
Conservancy owns 141 acres and manages another 171 acres under easement
Even though the purposes and acquisition criteria of the Triangle Land Conservancy
appear to be consistent with Orange County ' s preservation goals, the Conservancy ' s role may be
a limited one . With a six- county region to serve, the Conservancy must be careful in its choice of
sites to acquire and/or manage . Likewise, the Conservancy' s priorities are to add acreage to
existing preserves and acquire land and easements along four major stream corridors, including
one in Orange County . Given this focus, the Conservancy will probably play only a supporting
role in the county .
Soil & Water Conservation District. An alternative to a private nonprofit is a public
agency such as the Orange County Soil and Water Conservation District ( SWCD) . With the
enactment of the Soil Conservation Districts Law in 1937, the North Carolina General Assembly
6
established districts as political subdivisions of state government . Under the provisions of the law,
districts have been organized through the efforts of landowners to plan and carry out conservation
programs that are locally designed and operated . Districts also coordinate the efforts of federal
and state agencies in such programs, including the Natural Resource Conservation Service
(formerly Soil Conservation Service) of the U. S . Department of Agriculture, and the Division of
Soil and Water Conservation of the . N. C . Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources .
Under the Soil Conservation Districts Law, districts may exercise a variety of powers with
respect to soil conservation, erosion control, erosion prevention, flood prevention, or the
conservation, utilization, and disposal of water, and the development of water resources . One
example of the work of a Soil and Water Conservation District ( SWCD) involves soil
conservation, and erosion control and prevention. The Orange SWCD and the Natural Resource
Conservation Service have provided conservation planning assistance to local farmers . In
addition, the N . C . Agricultural Cost Share Program provides incentive payments and cost- sharing
funds to farmers who install Best Management Practices (BUT s) .
Another example involves a cooperative agreement between the N. C . Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) and the Greene (County) and Wayne (County) SWCD ' s . As part of the
Nahunta Swamp Watershed Plan, the Greene and Wayne SWCD ' s developed wetland restoration
plans for individual properties . The SWCD ' s then acted as agents between landowners and
NCDOT, purchasing and holding (in perpetuity) conservation easements . Funding for all costs
associated VVIth the purchase of the conservation easements and implementation of wetland
restoration measures was provided by NCDOT .
In the case of the Nahunta. Swamp Watershed Plan, a greater conservation role is
suggested for the Orange SWCD . For instance, the Orange SWCD could hold conservation
easements donated to it and/or Orange County. Monitoring to assure compliance with the terms
of the easements could also be accomplished, since the staff of the Orange SWCD must monitor
farms to assure that conservation plans are being implemented .
In contrast , funding resources and easement acquisition may deter the Orange SWCD
from a greater conservation role. Furthermore, the SWCD may not wish to play an active role in
purchasing conservation easements . Finally, if the SWCD wishes to limit the extent of its
involvement to agricultural and forest lands, other resources such as natural areas and wildlife
corridors , historic and archeological sites; recreation areas ; and scenic views must be dealt with by
other organizations . Given such limitations , the Orange SWCD , like the Triangle Land
Conservancy, will probably play only a supporting role in the county .
Orange County . If the Triangle Land Conservancy and the Soil and Water Conservation
District could be expected to play supporting roles at best, then Orange County could assume a
primary role in conserving resources . Counties and cities are authorized to acquire by purchase,
gift, grant, bequest, devise, lease or otherwise, the fee or any l interest, development ri
ght,
easement, covenant or other contractual right of or to real property in order to preserve, through
limitation of their future use , open spaces and areas for public use and enjoyment .
7
Given this legislative authority, Orange County could carry out essentially the same
activities that a land trust can . There are, however, real or perceived difficulties with the County
assuming such a role . First, there is the perception that lands owned and/or managed by the
County would be subject to changes in the make-up of the governing board . The same skepticism
could cause potential donors to be less willing to donate their property, or conservation easements
on their property, to the County than to an independent nonprofit land trusi .
A Local Government Land Trust. If other organizations are to play limited roles or the
County' s role is a concern, an alternative to consider is a "local government land trust" or trust
created and/or funded by a local government . There are only a handful of such trusts in the nation,
including the Block Island Land Trust, the Davis Rural Land Trust, the Narragansett Land Trust,
the Annapolis Conservancy Board, and the Severn River Land Trust .
To address the concern of local government involvement, Orange County could play an
active role in the creation of a land trust . To create an independent organization which provides
for local government participation, the initial board of directors could be appointed by the Board
of Commissioners for staggered terms after solicitation of applications from the community. With
respect to financial resources and staffing, the County could provide interim assistance until the
board of directors was appointed and the land trust was fully operational . However, until the trust
had evolved to the point that it had an operating budget and fundraising efforts were established,
County financial assistance and staffing could be expected .
Setting Up a Land Trust
The first step in forming a land trust is to set it up as a legal entity; e. g. , as a nonprofit tax-
exempt charitable corporation. Forming such a corporation has four main components, including
forming the board of directors; drafting articles of incorporation; drafting bylaws; and obtaining
tax- exempt status .
Forming the Board of Directors
Forming the board of directors is the single most important factor because the board is the
land trust . Under the North Carolina Nonprofit Corporation, members of the board of directors
are those persons who are responsible for the management of the corporation. A nonprofit
corporation is required to have at least one director or it may have more. The articles of
incorporation or the bylaws may contain provisions for electing the directors . If a corporation has
members , and, if the articles of incorporation or bylaws permit, the directors may be elected by
the members . Otherwise, the directors are elected or appointed in the manner and for the terms as
provided in the articles of incorporation or bylaws .
How many board members should a land trust have? A common and generally effective
board size is about nine to 15 people? Smaller boards communicate and arrive at decisions more
effectively, but risk being overworked . Larger boards offer greater resources of time and talent,
but can find it difficult to get much done with so many people involved in decisions .
R
Once the board is established, it must elect officers . The day-to - day management of the
corporation is provided by its officers . The officers are elected or appointed as prescribed in the
- bylaws and their performance is overseen by the directors .
Drafting Articles of Incorporation
The most basic step in setting up a land trust as a legal entity is to establish it as a
nonprofit corporation . This is accomplished by preparing and filing articles of incorporation with
the appropriate state agency, usually the Secretary of State ' s corporations office .
The articles of incorporation are the most fundamental organizational documents of the
land trust, defining the basic purposes and structure of the organization. The main source of
information for land trusts ' organizational documents is the state law governing the incorporation
and governance of nonprofit corporations . North Carolina ' s Nonprofit Corporation Guidelines
should be consulted to determine what information to include and how to present it .
Drafting Bylaws
Bylaws are the governing documents of the land trust, since they define how the
organization will be run . The North Carolina Nonprofit Corporation Act requires that all
nonprofit corporations have an organizational structure and bylaws by which they are managed .
The organizational structure is comprised of directors and officers which handle the internal
: and perhaps also of members, which may have the right to elect
rAaaagement of the organization,
the board of directors of the corporation . The internal management of the corporation is regulated
by the corporate bylaws and the articles of incorporation. The bylaws may contain any provisions
not inconsistent with the law or the articles of incorporation .
Obtaining Tag Exempt Status
To operate effectively, a land trust must satisfy two Internal Revenue Service
determinations . One establishes the trust ' s own tax exempt status as a charitable organization,
while the other establishes the right of donors to the maximum allowable deduction for their
contributions to the trust .
Federal Tax Exemption . Land trusts claim exemption as charitable organizations under
Section 501 [ c] [3 ] of the Internal Revenue Code . Application for a determination is made by
means of IRS Form 1023 , and a trust seeking tax exemption should file that form within 15
months from the end of the month when the organization was established .
For an organization that has not yet begun operation, a proposed budget for two
accounting periods and a balance sheet are acceptable . However, many trusts are established with
a minimum of assets and do not accept contributions until tax - exempt status is determined . In that
case, the trust must note that information on the application and can eliminate filling out a balance
sheet .
9
Maximum Donor Deductions . Obtaining tax- exempt status does not automatically give
donors maximum income tax benefits . The extent of deductibility will depend on the category of
tax exemption under which the land trust qualifies and the nature of the property contributed to it .
There are three ways in which a land trust may qualify for maximum donor deductions : as a
" arity, " as a "private operating foundation, " or as a "supporting
publicly supported ch
organization . "
Maintaining Tax Exempt Status . The Internal Revenue Service requires exempt
organizations to file annual tax forms . Forms should be filed even if the application for exempt
status is still pending, and the land trust is required to make its annual returns for the past three
years available for public inspection. The reporting forms filed by the land trust must also continue
to demonstrate compliance with the requirements for a charitable organization and the specific
tests for public charity or private foundation .
Charitable organizations are not allowed to support or oppose candidates for public office
under the Internal Revenue Code, but they are allowed to engage in limited lobbying for or
against proposed legislation if they are qualified as public charities . Lobbying includes only
attempts to influence legslation. Actions by executive, Judicial, and administrative bodies are not
legislation . Thus, expenditures made to influence these bodies are not restricted or prohibited .
Saving Land
Saving land is the heart of a land trust ' s activities . However, most land trusts would like to
protect more land than their limited time and resources permit . It is for this reason that a land
trust needs to establish guidelines for selecting the land it will try to protect . Likewise, a trust
must utilize those land protection methods which he within its legal and financial capabilities .
Land Conservation Criteria
To establish guidelines for selecting land to protect, most trusts rely first on their mission
statement . The statement defines the overall scope of the land trust ' s activities and the type of
resources it intends to protect .
In addition to narrowing its focus . in a general way through the purpose and goals
statement a land trust needs to establish written criteria for determining whether it wi
, ll protect
specific parcels of land . Such criteria help insure that limited resources are used wisely, provide a
rational , defensible program of conservation, and avoid projects that could be a serious liability .
Criteria cover factors such as the type of significance of the resource in question, the
property ' s proximity to other protected areas, the degree of threat to the property, the likelihood
that the proposed project can actually protect the resource in perpetuity, the size of the property,
and the long-term costs for the land trust . Criteria should be designed to screen out properties
with excessive management difficulties . Criteria can also give the trust an objective basis on which
to refuse parcels that do not have sufficient public benefit .
10
Land Protection Methods
Land is protected by a land trust through one or a combination of two basic methods : fee
simple ownership or a conservation easement . Other methods may also be used, including
temporary protection measures , but these two methods are the mainstays of most trusts .
Fee Simple Ownership . Fee simple ownership means that a person owns all the rights to
a piece of land. Complete ownership provides the most certain ability to protect the conservation
resources on the property, determining who will be allowed on the property and under what
circumstances, how the resources will be managed, and what the future of the property will be .
Conservation Easements . A conservation easement is a legal agreement between a
property owner and a nonprofit organization or government agency in which the owner agrees to
restrict future uses of the property . In granting a conservation easement, the landowner retains
some rights and gives up others .
Conservation easements may be donated or sold like any other interest in land . Those that
are donated in perpetuity and meet Internal Revenue Service criteria qualify the donor for a
federal income tax deduction. A conservation easement may also qualify the landowner for a ' state
income tax deduction and reduce property taxes and estate taxes .
Temporary Agreements . Temporary or nonbinding agreements are used when permanent
protection does not suit the land trust ' s or landowner ' s needs and wishes . In such instances, the
trust believes that the property ' s conservation value is not great enough to put its resources into
permanent protection measures, or the landowner is only willing to enter into a temporary or
nonbinding agreement.
Methods That Buy Time . Options and rights of first refusal preserve a land trust ' s
opportunity to purchase land in the future if immediate acquisition is impossible or unnecessary .
An option is the exclusive right to purchase a property under certain terms and conditions - and at
a specified price - by a certain date . A right of first refusal is an agreement between a landowner
and the land trust that gives the trust the right to match any bona fide purchase offer made on the
�. property and acceptable to the landowner within a specified time period after the offer is made .
Acquisition Methods
The method of acquisition determines how much the land trust pays to acquire the
property rights and when those rights accrue to the land trust .
Amount of Payment . Purchasing land or interests in land at fair market value is the most
expensive acquisition method . For this reason, land trusts will usually try to negotiate a donation
or purchase at less than fair market value first . Landowners may donate almost any property right
r or interest in their land, including the entire parcel in fee, a conservation easement, or the other
property rights such as an option or lease .
�; 11
Timing of Acquisition . In most transactions, a land trust will take full ownership of the
property or conservation easements as soon as the terms are worked out and the appropriate
documents signed . However, some landowners may work out agreements where the trust takes
ownership at some future date . A remainder interest is where a landowner gives his or her
property to the land trust but reserves the right to live on or use the property for his or her
lifetime; e . g. , a "life estate " .
A landowner can also leave property - land, an easement or other assets - to the land trust
in his or her will . Donation by bequest can significantly reduce the estate tax for the donor ' s heirs
by removing the value of the donation from the taxable estate .
Tax Benefits of Land Conservation
Donations of land or interests in land such as conservation easements may qualify donors
for significant tax benefits . In such cases, the land trust ' s representatives need to be
knowledgeable about tax benefits so they can discuss them with potential donors . However, they
must be careful not to give specific legal or financial advice . It is the responsibilij3 of the
landowner with his/her attorney, accountant or other advisors to determine whether a particular
donation qualifies for a tax deduction and what the value of the deduction maybe .
Income Tax Benefits . A charitable gift of land is generally deductible in computing the
donor' s federal income tax . The general rule is that for gifts of apprecia`ed rI apz may , the dortoi
can deduct the fair market value of the donated property, up to 30 percent of the donor' s adjusted
gross income. Any remaining value can be carried forward and deducted, subject to the same 30
percent limitation, for up to five succeeding tax years . If the value of the contribution is reduced
to the property' s basis (e . g . , the price the landowner paid for it), the donor may deduct the value
of the gift up to 50 percent of adjusted gross income per year for five years .
In terms of state income taxes, individuals and corporations are eligible for an income tax
credit for a qualified donation of interest in real property located in North Carolina that is useful
for public beach access or use, public access to public waters or trails, fish and wildlife
conservation, or other similar land conservation purposes . Another condition of eligibility is the
interest in real property must be donated to and accepted by either the State, local government or
a body (such as a lams trust) that is organized to receive and administer lands for conservation
purposes and is qualified to receive charitable contributions . However, lands required to be
dedicated pursuant to local government regulations or ordinance, and dedications made to
increase building density levels permitted under such regulations or ordinance are not eligible .
The general rule is the donor will be allowed an income tax credit equal to 25 percent of
the fair market value of the donated property interesthe credi. T t allowed may not exceed
$25 , 000, and any unused portion can be carried forward and deducted for up to five succeeding
tax years .
Estate Tax Benefits . Estate taxes are paid on the value of an individual ' s assets after
death . Changes in tax laws have made it possible to reduce or eliminate the estate tax burden for
12
4
most people . A taxpayer may also make a lifetime transfer of $ 600 , 000 without being subject to
estate or gift tax. Also of significance is the fact that the total value of the landowner ' s estate, and
consequently the estate tax, may be reduced by making a charitable donation of a portion of land
or by restricting the entire parcel with a conservation easement . A donation made during a
landowner' s lifetime may also qualify for an income tax deduction .
Property Taxes . Restricting a property ' s use through a conservation easement may
reduce the owner' s property taxes . Some states, including North Carolina, have laws that allow a
property under certain circumstances to be assessed based on its current use value . For this
reason, a conservation easement that reduces the fair market value of the land may or may not
reduce the property taxes . As an example, where the land is assessed based on its use as farm or
forest, a conservation easement will probably not reduce the property taxes . In contrast, where
land is assessed based on its fair market value, a significam property tax reduction may result .
Appraisal & Valuation . A deduction for a charitable gift of property with a value in
excess of $ 57000 is possible but only if the donor obtains a qualified appraisal from a qualified
appraiser and files an appraisal summary (IRS Form 8283 ) with the tax return on which the
deduction is first claimed . IRS regulations govern what constitutes a qualified appraisal and a
qualified appraiser, and an attorney familiar with charitable donations of land should be consulted
to be sure these requirements are met .
Financing Land Protection
Land and easement purchases can be financed through three basic methods : fundraising
from the private sector, government funding, and using market forces . On average, land trusts
finance more than two-thirds of their acquisition costs by fundraising from the private sector . In
areas where government funding is available, such funding can be a vital element of a land trust ' s
acquisition program.
Fundraising . A project campaign is a focused drive to raise money solely for a certain
project rather than for a trust ' s operating expenses . Raising money for a specific project is easier
because giving to save a certain piece of land has more appeal than paying the trust ' s utility bill .
People are also more inclined to give when they know exactly what their money is going towards .
In North Carolina, charitable solicitations undertaken by a nonprofit corporation such as a
land trust to raise funds to finance its operations may be subject to regulation under state statute .
The primary purpose of N . C . General Statute 13 IF, the Charitable Solicitations Act, is to protect
the general public and public charity from unlawful solicitations and to provide for the
establishment of basic standards for the solicitation and use of charitable funds . Any corporation
or entity that solicits charitable contributions must apply for and obtain a license from the N . C .
Department of Human Resources on an annual basis .
Government Funds . Governments funds can come from the federal, state, and local level .
At the federal level, a recent source of acquisition funding is the Farmland Protection Program in
the 1996 farm bill . For a local entity to be eligible, it must have an active farmland preservation
1 ?
r `
program and have offers pending to purchase agricultural easements . If Orange County were to
establish an easement acquisition program and begin accepting offers for the purchase of
development rights, it would be eligible to receive matching funds from the Farmland Protection
Program .
To match the funds from the Farmland Protection Program, Orange County should
consider designating $ 200, 000 in the Capital Improvements Program for easement acquisition .
The rationale for such funding is that it represents the use of deferred use-value tax payments to
support an easement acquisition program. Information gathered from tax records shows that since
1991 , over 111000 acres have been released from use-value taxation, with deferred tax payments
exceeding $ 935 , 000 . Over the last three years, payments have exceeded $200 , 000 annually . If
these deferred tax payments are recognized as revenue from farmland conversion, funding
established in the Capital Improvements Program would save farmland .
A new State-level program is the Parks and Recreation Trust Fund The Fund comes froma
a percentage of a land transfer tax established by the General Assembly. It is expected to yield i =
$ 12413 million annually, with 60 percent going to the State park system, 35 percent to local park
systems, and five percent to the beach access program. Grants are in the form of a cash- only
match to local governments of up to $250, 000 for land acquisition, development or renovation. `
Another source of funding created by the N. C . General Assembly in 1996 is the Clean
Water Management Trust Fund . Reserved to the Fund is 6 . 5 percent of the unreserved credit
balance remaining in the General Fund at the end of each fiscal year. The Clean Water
Management Trust Fund may be used for a variety of related purposes aimed at upgrading surface
L - .-i
water by eliminating pollution and protecting unpolluted surface waters . State agencies, local
governments, and nonprofit corporations, whose purpose is to conserve, preserve, and restore
North Carolina ' s environmental and natural resources, are eligible to apply for assistance . 1 . s
Using Market Forces . Limited development refers to the development of the less
sensitive portion of a property in order to finance the protection of the more environmentally
sensitive areas . The undeveloped areas are usually placed under a conservation easement or held
in fee by the land trust, another conservation organization or a government agency.
Interim Financing . Land trusts frequently need to buy a property before they have raised
the money to acquire it . To do so, they must have access to quick financing which they are able to
obtain in a number of ways . A revolving fund is a fund that the land trust maintains at or above a
certain level so it always has acquisition money available . The money from the fund may be spent
frequently, but it is replaced through fundraising or income from transactions .
Stewardship - Taking Care of the Land
Acquisition is only the first step in land protection, A land trust must q Y p p glue serous
consideration to the future of all its land and easements and make its capacity for long-term
stewardship one of the major criteria in evaluating projects .
14 _ ;
Stewardship entails many costs . A land trust must maintain and manage the property that
it owns . It must comply with any deed restrictions on donated property . It must also actively
manage the property ' s resources to meet the conservation goals for the parcel . Finally, if the land
is open to the public, upkeep is especially important , both for the trust ' s image and to prevent
liability problems . These are perpetual responsibilities , requiring time and money .
A land trust needs to monitor the land and easements at least annually . For property it
owns, a land trust must make sure that management goals are met, safety hazards are identified ,
and any trespass or vandalism is detected and dealt with . For the conservation easements it holds,
e .
a land trust must insure that the owner is complying with the easement ' s terms .
Running a Land Trust
Being a land trust means being a business, and running a land trust is a lot of work. Most
boards include many busy, professional people who will lose interest if too many demands are
made that do not use their special skills . Land trusts thus need to supplement the work of the
board with the help of volunteers and, if necessary, hired staff. In addition, careful financial
management is essential so that the trust can carry out its mission and because the trust is
accountable to the public for its use of funds . Finally, community support is vital and involves
_ three activities : building public awareness, developing membership , and fundraising .
Volunteers & Staff
Most land trusts rely heavily on volunteer efforts . However, while some land trusts feel
they don ' t have the money to hire staff, many believe that paid professional staff makes the
difference between a trust that only reacts to opportunities and one that can set goals and meet
them.
Volunteers . To make effective use of volunteers, a land trust needs to operate a carefully
thought out program of recruitment, supervision, recognition, and trairsng . Before recruiting
volunteers, however, the land trust needs to know what it wants to do . Screening volunteers is
also essential . The land trust needs someone who is cooperative, is able to do the assigned job,
and reflects well on the trust . Prospective volunteers should be interviewed by a board or staff
member or a volunteer coordinator . Whatever the approach, the point is *o uemonstrate that the
trust realizes the volunteers are an essential part of its success and not taken for granted .
Staff. Some land trusts believe the cost of hiring staff is prohibitive . However, many land
trusts have learned that staff more than pays for itself. Full- rime staff can allow a land trust to do
I L more and more complex projects, raise the trust ' s visibility, step up its fundraising, build
membership, and make new contacts . All of this ultimately contributes to an increased financial
a
base for the organization .
�. The kind of staff that enables a land trust to elevate its effectiveness is professional staff,
usually an executive director . The salary for a full-time director depends on the experience of the
person hired, and the cost of living and salary ranges in the area. Another important point to
15
remember is that the director is responsible for a wide range of activities , from coordinating the
trust ' s fundraising, to public relations, to landowner contact and negotiations .
Financial Management
The financial management of the trust is one of the main responsibilities of the board of
directors . Setting up appropriate board committees such as finance and stewardship can help
insure that financial statements, annual audits, and risk management matters receive careful
oversight . In addition, the board should obtain expert assistance when necessary from an
accountant, insurance agent, and attorney .
Budgeting. An operating budget is a plan showing expected income and its sources and
anticipated expenses . It sets a target for how much the trust needs to raise and provides guidance
on how funds are to be spent . In addition, it hP.1ps the board refine and clarify its thinking about
the trust ' s goals, priorities, and use of resources . The land trust needs to review the budget
periodically and compare it with the trust ' s actual financial situation . A mid-year review is
advisable, but more frequent checks are advisable to insure that revenues are sufficient to meet
expenditures .
While each community and land trust is different, individuals are the most reliable and
consistent source of funding. Most of the money raised from individuals comes from large
donations . For instance, a fundraising rule of thumb is that 80 percent of the money comes from
20 perccut of0the donors .
Accounting . Accounting is the recording and periodic reporting of the trust ' s financial
transactions, assets, and liabilities . This includes bookkeeping, periodic financial reports, and
audits to check the accounts . It is the responsibility of the board to insure that the trust ' s records
are kept according to generally accepted accounting principles .
Regardless of the system selected, it is important that a land trust set up good financial
controls to make error and dishonesty difficult . Preparing and distributing regular financial
statements allows the board to track how the trust is doing in relation to its budget and will make
preparation of the annual audit and the next year' s budget easier. The financial statement should
be prepared monthly for members of the financial committee and at least quarterly for the entire
board .
Liability & Insurance . All nonprofit organizations are potentially liable in many ways .
The first defense against potential liability problems is to anticipate them and eliminate or reduce
them . This is known as "risk management" and starts when a land tmst considers purchasing or
accepting donation of land or a conservation easement, or taking on land management
responsibilities .
Public access on land trust property is one of the main sources of potential liability for land
trusts . The land trust ' s surest defense against liability is insurance . All land trusts should have
insurance, since even the best risk management plans will not guarantee that no problems will
16
arise . Insurance is necessa even if the land trust does not hold any land or easements, because
ry trust officials should understand that a prime reason for insurance is to protect them should they
- . be named in a suit along with the trust .
Membership & Fundraising
Community support is vital as the source for volunteers and board members as well as
funds and land donations . A public image that gains community support also attracts assistance
from businesses, foundations, and government agencies . Increasing public support involves three
interrelated activities : building public awareness, developing membership, and fundraising.
Public Awareness . One of the most important determinants of a land trust ' s success is the
extent to which it makes the public aware that it exists, is needed, and is effective . A primary tool
is media coverage, but a public awareness program can also include lectures and workshops,
nature walks, talks for other groups, newsletters and brochures, special events, and environmental
education programs for local schools .
!; In developing a public awareness program, a land trust will want to determine who they
want to reach and what they want their audience to hear or do . While the community at large is
the primary audience, a land trust will need to reach a number of audiences . Once the audience
has been chosen, the land trust should think about what each audience does and give it the
information that will make them want to do it . Likewise, the most effective method for conveying
, rness age c. xt be chosen .
Membership Development . Most land trusts have members who contribute annually .
These are sim 1 people who financially contribute to the trust on a regular basis, usually in
PYP P Y �
response to a mailing . A dues-paying membership gives a land trust a relatively steady and
predictable source of income . Having members also helps build good will in the community and
provides the basis for a pool of potential volunteers . Likewise, membership support can help
convince public agencies and the media of the trust ' s legitimacy, encourage corporate and
foundation funding, and meet the IRS public support tests .
.t 'N
Land trusts with members almost always designate categories of membership . One
category used to raise early seed money is to solicit "charter" members who contribute $ 1 , 000 or
more . Although many development professionals advise against it, another category is the "life"
member who makes a very large contribution and receives all membership benefits for life . Finally,
the mainstay of most trusts are its "regulaz" members who generally contribute $ 15 to $25 as a
minimum membership fee and help establish it as a community organization .
Fundraising . Fundraising is one of the top concerns of most new land trusts and of every
active land trust . On average, more than two -thirds of land trusts ' operating budgets comes from
individual donations and memberships . While each community and land trust is different,
individuals are the most reliable and consistent source of funding . Most of the money raised from
individuals comes from large donations . For example, a fundraising rule of thumb is that 80
percent of the money comes from 20 percent of the donors .
17
As soon as the land trust has outlined its program for the coming year and developed an
operating budget to carry it out, the trust needs to prepare a more detailed fundraising plan .
Specifically, the trust will need to determine how much money it will need to raise, identify
sources of funding, and set target amounts for each source .
A Straw Organization
As noted previously, Orange County could play an active role in the creation of a land
trust . Initially, the Board of Directors would be appointed by the Board of Commissioners for
staggered terms after solicitation of applications from the community . Board membership would
consist of one representative of the Board of Commissioners with the remainder from the general
public . However, a majority of the members must have special interest, experience or education in
history, historic preservation, archeology, architecture, landscape design, horticulture, agriculture,
ecology, and similar fields . With the exception of the Board of Commissioners ' representative,
successors to the Board of Directors would be elected at an annual meeting .
With respect to financial resources and staffing, the County could provide interim
assistance until the Trust is fully operational . For example, the Trust will eventually raise finds
through donations and membership drives to pay for acquisition as well as operating expenses .
Likewise, it will seek out grants (for acquisition) with which to match County funds . However,
until the Trust evolves to the point that it has an operating budget and fundraising efforts are
esiabiished, County financial assistance and staffing would probably be needed .
How long County assistance might be needed will depend on the amount of time required
for a newly organized land trust to gain independence and come to understand its budgetary
needs. How much County assistance might be needed, both in terms of money and staff, will
depend on how the trust chooses to organize initially.
18
t
it
Land Protection Methods
Land is protected by a land trust through one or a combination of two basic methods : fee
simple ownership or a conservation easement . Other methods may also be used, including temporary
protection measures but these two methods
s are the ai
Y
m nsta s of most trusts .
Fee Simple Ownership . Fee simple ownership means that a person owns all the rights to a
piece of land . Complete ownership provides the most certain ability to protect the conservation
resources on the property, determining who will be allowed on the property and under what
circumstances, how the resources will be managed, and what the future of the property will be .
Ownership is favored where the resources are highly sensitive, and the land trust cannot
guarantee their protection through other conservation measures . However, ownership places greater
long-term demands on the land trust . The trust may be liable for accidents or injuries on the property,
must monitor the property for trespass and the condition= of the conservation resources, and may
need to actively manage the land to insure the perpetuation of its conservation resources .
tl
As noted previously, 820 acres were protected by the Triangle Land Conservancy in the six-
county Research Triangle region in 1995 . A total of 406 acres (49 . 5 %) were owned by the
Conservancy, of which 141 acres (34 . 7%) were located in Orange County .
Conservation Easements . A conservation easement is a legal agreement between a property
owner and a nonprofit organization or government agency in which the owner agrees to restrict
future uses of the property. In granting a conservation easement, the landowner retains some rights
and gives up others . Typical restrictions are prohibitions on some or all industrial and commercial
activity, restrictions on the removal and disturbance of a property ' s vegetation and surface, and
limitations on the number and siting of houses and other structures . The exact terms of the easement
are negotiated between the land trust and the landowner, and depend on the nature of the property ' s
conservation resources and the landowner ' s needs .
Conservation easements may be - donated or sold like any other interest in land . Those that are
donated in perpetuity and meet Internal Revenue Service criteria qualify the donor for a federal
income tax deduction. A conservation easement may also qualify the landowner for a state income
tax deduction and reduce property taxes and estate taxes . The value of a donated conservation
easement, as determined by a qualified appraiser, is generally the difference between the fair market
value of the property before the grant of the easement and the value afterwards . For example, if the
property without the easement restrictions is valued at $ 50070007 and with restrictions is valued at
$25070001 the easement value is $ 250 , 000 ,
4- 23
For land trusts, holding a conservation easement is often less expensive than holding land . In
fact, it may be preferred where the trust is able to negotiate restrictions that protect the property ' s
conservation resources . As part of the acquisition process, the land trust will need to conduct a
baseline data inventory to establish - the condition of the property at the time the easement is granted .
The trust must also have access to the professional advice needed to acquire the easement and must
be sure it will have the personnel and financial resources to monitor and enforce the easement in the
future .
For the community, conservation easements may be popular because they keep the property
in private ownership and on the property tax roles . For the landowner, the terms of the easement can
be crafted to meet the landowner ' s needs . An easement can be granted on all or part of the property,
and public access need not be allowed . For example, conservation easements can be used in the case
of "limited development" projects, where a property is partially developed but its major conservation
values are protected . Where the landowner continues to own the larAo he or she can use it, sell it or
bequeath it, subject to the terms of the easement. Likewise, all subsequent owners are bound by the
restrictions in the easement .
There are two sources of information that should be consulted about conservation easements .
The first source is Article 4 of Chapter 121 of the N. C . General Statutes and * is known as the
"Historic Preservation and Conservation Agreements Act" (see Appendix K) . It contains the
provisions which authorize State government agencies, local governments, and nonprofit
corporations to enter into conservation agreements with private landowners for the purpose of
holding conservation and preservation easements or other interests in land .
The second source is The Conservation Easement Handbook: Managing Land Conservation
and Historic Preservation Easement Programs, written by Janet Diehl and Thomas S . Barrett for the
Land Trust Alliance and Trust for Public Land in 1988 . A companion text, Model Conservation
Easement and Historic Preservation Easement, 1996, by Thomas S . Barrett and Stefan Nagel,
contains revised easements and commentary from The Conservation Easement Handbook (see
Appendix L) . The conservation easement has served as a model for land trusts nationwide, including
easements held by the Triangle Land Conservancy .
In 1995 , 414 acres were managed under easement by the Triangle Land Conservancy in the
six-county Research Triangle region, of which 171 acres (41 . 3 %) were located in Orange County .
Appendix M contains the conservation easement for Maple View Farm, a 300 - acre farm in Bingham
Township owned by Bob and Chris Nutter, and farm manager, Russ Seibert . Held by the Triangle
Land Conservancy, the initial 107 -acre easement represents the first phase of a conservation plan that
combines limited subdivision of the property with protection of natural, agricultural, and scenic
lands . Combined with the conservation objectives is an economic development plan of pasteurizing,
bottling, and selling Maple View Milk. After the tax incentives from the first easement are used up ,
the remainder of the farm will be put under easement .
Temporary Agreements . Temporary or nonbinding agreements are used when permanent
protection does not suit the land trust ' s or landowner ' s needs and wishes . In such instances, the trust
believes that the property ' s conservation value is h its resources i not great enoug to put nto
4-24 0. 4
permanent protection measures, or the landowner is only willing to enter into a temporary or
nonbinding agreement .
An example of a temporary agreement is a lease which typically gives a land trust exclusive
access rights to properties for the term of the lease and is useful for protecting fragile on- site
t resources . A less used agreement is a management agreement or plan under which the property will
be managed by the landowner or by the trust . A final type of temporary measure is a registration
program . The registration usually is a nonbinding agreement stating that the landowner will not
develop the land or specified portions of it and will notify the trust of any threat or plans to sell .
Methods That Buy Time . . Options and rights of first refusal preserve a land trust ' s
opportunity to purchase land in the future if immediate acquisition is impossible or unnecessary . An
option is the exclusive right to purchase a property under certain terns and conditions - and at a
specified price - by a certain date . Acquiring an option gives a trust time to raise funds when a
property is put on the market and threatened with imminent developnwnt. If the land trust obtains the
necessary funds in time, it can exercise the option . If not, the option expires, and the trust forfeits any
t money it paid .
A right of first refusal is an agreement between a landowner and the land trust that gives the
trust the right to match any bona fide purchase offer made on the property and acceptable to the
landowner within a specified time period after the offer is made . Before matching an offer, however,
the land trust should be sure that it is a serious offer by a third party. In the case of both a lease and a
: right of first refusal, the land trust is under no obligation to purchase the land or make an offer on the
property .
Acquisition Methods
The method of acquisition determines how much the land trust pays to acquire the property
rights and when those rights accrue to the land trust .
Amount of Payment . Purchasing land or interests in land at fair market value is the most
expensive acquisition method . For this reason, land trusts will usually try to negotiate a donation or
purchase at less than fair market value first . Purchases can also be broken into installments, either by
paying for one transaction in installments or buying a piece of land in multiple, separate transactions .
Since a landowner selling property at fair market value is subject to tax on any gains on the sale of
the property, installment sales may also produce greater tax benefits for the landowner .
l
A bargain sale is a sale of land or interest in land below fair market value . The difference
between the fair market value and the actual price paid may qualify as atax- deductible charitable
donation to the trust . For this reason, bargain sales can be an attractive option for land owners who
want to preserve their land but also need income from the transaction . Although a landowner will
make more from the a sale at fair market value than from a bargain sale, the tax benefits of the gift
portion can reduce or eliminate the disparity .
A land trust ' s acquisition method of first choice is donation by the landowner . Landowners
may donate almost any property right or interest in their land , including the entire parcel in fee, a
4 -25
t -
i
t conservation easement, or the other property rights such as an option or lease . Donations of land or
certain interests in land may qualify a donor for certain tax benefits .
1
i
1
Timing of Acquisition . In most transactions, a land trust will take full ownership of the
property or conservation easements as soon as the terms are worked out and the appropriate
documents signed . However, some landowners may work out agreements where the trust takes
ownership at some future date .
A remainder interest is where a landowner gives his or her property to the land trust but
reserves the right to live on or use the property for his or her lifetime ; e . g . , a "life estate" . The donor
usually qualifies for an income tax deduction at the time of the donation, based on the value of the
property and the life expectancy of the donor.
A landowner can also leave property - land, an easement or other assets - to the land trust in
his or her will . Donation by bequest can significantly reduce the estate tax for the donor' s heirs by
MP
removing the value of the donation from the taxable estate. Howel6r, this approach will not result in
any income tax benefits .
1 An undivided interest is a portion of the landowner ' s entire Ainterest in a property. For tax
purposes, a landowner may wish to transfer the entire interest in a property to a land trust through
the donation of undivided interests over time. For example, a donor might donate a 20 percent
interest in the property to the trust in each of five years ,
f
i
= � z
i
{
r
d