Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutIPWG agenda 020101 Memorandums f. F To : Intergovernmental Parks Work Group From : Bob Jones , Orange County Recreation and Parks Director Richard Kinney , Carrboro Parks and Recreation Director Kathryn Spatz, Chapel Hill Parks and Recreation Director David Stancil , Environment and Resource Conservation Director Date : January 25 , 2001 Re : Next Meeting — February 1 Please find attached the agenda for our next meeting of the Intergovernmental Parks ( IP) Work Group . As discussed on . December 7 , the meeting will be held : Thursday, February 1, 2001 5 : 30 p . m . Southern Human Services Center 2505 Homestead Road , Chapel Hi11 Dinner will be provided . If you will be unable to attend , please contact Carol Melton (cmelton @co . orange . nc . us or 245 � 2597 ) by January 31 . ' We look forward to seeing you on the 1st . Copies : John Link, County Manager Cal Horton , Chapel Hill Town Manager Robert Morgan , Carrboro Town Manager Eric Peterson , Hillsborough Town Manager INTERGOVERNMENTAL PARKS WORK GROUP AGENDA F EBRUA RY 1 , 2001 5 : 30 P . M . Southern Human Services Center 2505 Homestead Road Chapel Hill , NC 5 : 30 1 . CALL TO ORDER 5 : 30 2 . MEETING SUMMARY 0 2I7I00) 5 : 35 ( Page 7) 3 . PRESENTATION *=mo LANDS LEGACY PROGRAM (Please see Attachment 1 ) 5 : 55 ( Page 17 ) 4 . PROPOSED NOVEMBER 2001 PARKS BOND (Please see Attachment 2) 6 : 20 ( Page 25 ) 5 . ALTERNATIVE FUNDING MECHANISMS FOR PARKS (Please see Attachment 3 ) 6 : 45 6 . UPDATES • Proposed Chapel Hill Aquatic Facility • Chapel Hill Master Parlcs Plan update • Smith Middle School Fields 6 : 55 7 . SCHEDULE ADJUSTMENTS I PLANS FOR MAY MEETING (Possible items include OWASA lands/recreational use , Triangle Greenprint, continued discussion of funding mechanisms , parks standards ) 7 : 00 8 . ADJOURNMENT 01 Inter- Governmental Parks Work Group DRAFT Summary of Meeting December. 7, 2000 Held at Orange County Southern Human Services Center, Chapel Hill , NC Members Present : Margaret Brown County Commissioner, Mark Dorosin - Carrboro Board Of Aldermen , Bill Strom - Chapel Hill Town Council , Keith Cook-Orange County Board of Education , Judson Edeburn - Duke University, Joe Herzenberg - Chapel Hill Greenways Commission , Greg Feller- Orange Water and Sewer Authority, Beth Huskamp - Chapel Hill Parks & Recreation Commission , Lee Rafalow- Orange County Commission for the Environment, Jeffrey Schmitt- Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Council , Gordon Warren - Eno River Association , Staff Present : David Stancil - Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation Director, Kathryn Spatz- Chapel Hill Parks and Recreation Director, Richard Kinney- Carrboro Parks and Recreation Director, Bob Jones- Orange County Recreation and Parks Director, Carol Melton - ERCD staff. 1 . Welcome and Introductions Commissioner Brown welcomed and thanked everyone for attending and asked each member to introduce themselves so that everyone might get acquainted . 2 . Mission and Charge / Joint Capital Funding for Parks Report Stancil reviewed the mission and charge of this work group . The group is to meet , three times a year (fall , winter and spring ) . The group will work for three years (July 2000-June 2003 ), providing yearly reports and a final report in June 2003 . If desired after three years , the participating parties may make it a permanent, standing group . The charge of the group is to build on the momentum of the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group process by accomplishing the following : • To gather, exchange and share information on parks planning and development in the municipalities and County . • To maintain and update the Inventory of Parks and Recreation Facilities developed as part of the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Report, including new properties acquired or dedicated . • To foster communication between the municipalities County and other partners on future opportunities and collaborative ventures . Stancil reported a joint capita/ funding meeting held October 30'h looked at a number of areas where collaborative efforts could be addressed. • To provide a coordinating mechanism for updates to parks and recreation plans in each jurisdiction . Stancil noted that Orange County is planning to update its master recreation and parks element plan next year, and Chapel Hill has work underway along the same lines. • To review and inform the municipalities and County concerning parks, needs and potential opportunities . Stancil referred to a report from October 30�h Assembly of Governments outlining a number of different needs that are in the capital improvement plans of each jurisdiction, • To develop parameters for parks standards ( leaving flexibility for the actual standards to vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction within these parameters ) . Stancil noted that it is understood Last updated O1 / 11 /01 1 L : 1Carol\IGPWG`IPWG 12 -7 - OOMinutesdraft . doc 02 that there may need to be individual standards for different jurisdictions but, there could be general principles that we all operate under while still providing flexibility for different jurisdictions. • To develop and coordinate public education and public outreach on parks issues ( coordinated brochures, etc) . Stancil reviewed the report ( included in agenda packets) that was presented to the Assembly of Governments on October 30th on Potential * Joint Funding for Parks . A synopsis of the report included background information — during the last five years other work groups have looked at potential coordination of capital funding of parks as well as facility development, culminating in 1999 with a report identifying a number of recommendations along those lines . The 1999 report asked the Managers to explore joint capital opportunities . These were generally identified as (for each jurisdiction ) : Carrboro - Northern Community Park, Hillsborough Road park, Swimming Pool , Gymnasium , Smith Middle School Chapel Hill — Homestead park/Aquatics Center, Southern Park, Open Space/ Greenways , Greenway Projects Hillsborough - Occoneechee Park, Murrary Street Park, Eno Riverwalk/ River Park, Fairview Park Orange County - Town Park Funding , Efland -Cheeks Park, Cedar Grove park, New Parkland Acquisitions — Lands Legacy program . As a result of this report, different sources of funding were explored , along with mechanisms for collaboration . Since the County has a Lands Legacy program , it will be best equipped to facilitate parkland acquisitions in the future . As a result of the Oct 30th meeting the elected boards indicated that we should continue to pursue collaborative efforts, that the idea of a memorandum of agreement to be developed outlining how capital funding would work between the different jurisdictions was sound , and the creation of this work group was seen as a very important component . Warren asked for background information on the previous work groups to inform this group how it was created . Stancil said that the report from 1996 looked at facilities in the county and also the possibility for coordination . The 1997 report from the managers of the different jurisdictions built on the 1996 report and explored the possibility of coordinating capital funding . It is becoming increasingly difficult for a number of jurisdictions to meet existing parks needs as well as future parks needs whether that be parkland or park facilities . The 1997 report indicated that there needed to be follow- up on potential for capital funding and that created the Joint Master . Recreation and Parks Work Group . Their report, issued in May of 1999, looked at park needs and park facilities . One result was the inventory of facilities which is an appendix to the report . In addition the group looked at funding mechanisms , payment- in - lieu provisions, impact fees , and outside funding . A number of recommendations were produced by the 1999 report including the creation of this work group to facilitate more communication between the jurisdictions in terms of parks planning and identifying opportunities . A primary theme of the report recommends that we should start land banking for the future . Another important finding is that we have learned that we have ( as a county) a deficit of parks . This is true whether for a small community park or larger regional park . The idea of beginning to land bank before sites are lost was identified as an important recommendation of this report . In addition , an open facilities policy was developed and adopted by each jurisdiction , that each of our park facilities should be open to all residents of the county . The possibility of a parks and open space bond was broached by this report also . 2 Schmitt asked if staff was investigating sources of funding to make these more effective methods for funding . Stancil noted that each of the jurisdictions have in their capital improvement plans park facilities plans . As we learned a lot of those plans are not yet funded . There are existing park bonds in Orange County, and Chapel Hill has open space bonds that are still available . Grants have been pursued for projects in different jurisdictions, for example : the Little River Regional park grant approved for Orange and Durham counties . There is a school Park Reserve Fund that Orange County .has set aside for several years with the possibility of funding acquisitions that can serve as school/ park co - locations . Land Development/ payments - in - Lieu and Impact Fees are items from the Assembly of Governments meeting that this group will be asked to look at . How we deal with these as alternate sources and might be on the next agenda of this work group . 3 . Soccer Symposium Task Force Report Bob Jones reviewed the report noting that the increased citizen interest and participation in the sport has intensified the use of the limited fields within the county . The County Commissioners appointed a task force to host a symposium where all interested parties could express concerns . The charge of the task force provided a broad framework for discussing the issues . The Task Force distributed basic information on soccer programs, available facilities in Orange County and collected input from citizens about their needs and concerns relating to soccer and are listed in the report . The report stated recommendations as follows : • Fields should be located in a disbursed fashion throughout the county in order to improve accessibility for all and to reduce travel time . • There should be multiple fields at each field site so that parents can drop off children of different ages . • Fields should be irrigated and lightened , and sited in an environmentally-sensitive manner . • A promising model for field development is one in which public entities provide basic fields and soccer organizations finish the facilities . • A public- private partnership should be established to explore development of a soccer complex in Orange County, with established soccer interests to take the lead in fundraising for construction . • All soccer organizations in the county should collaborate to provide coordinated soccer programming throughout the county . In this scenario, the county would supply facilities , and the private organizations would provide programming . • If county funding is involved , including providing land , scholarships will have to be available to county residents who cannot afford programming fees . • Consistent with the Master Recreation and Parks Work Group Report, the acquisition of land for soccer fields should be included in active recreational areas developed pursuant to future bond issues . Discussion followed on possible locations for soccer fields, possible future expansion of Cedar Grove and Northern Human Services locations, and pro and con issues surrounding co - location with schools, lighting of school fields, use of school property . Commissioner Brown noted that a working group is being planned for the two school boards and BOCC to work out some of these issues . Stancil reported that as a result of the co - location agreement, the new Smith Middle School in Chapel Hill - Carrboro has additional playing fields in its plans . 4 . Proposed Chapel Hill Aquatic Facility Last updated 01 / 11 /01 3 L : \Carol\IGPWG\IPWG12-7 -OOMinutesdraft . doc 04 Kathryn Spatz reported that in 1999 the Chapel Hill Town Council adopted a resolution that established an advisory committee to work . with staff and a consultant to develop a conceptual plan for the aquatic/community center to be located in Homestead park . The charge of ' the committee included studying different type of pools ( lap pools , wading pools , side by side tanks , handicap accommodations and other options ) ; looking at needs of a community center including a gymnasium , meeting space, arts and dance space, office and other space needs . These are listed on page 137 Wof the agenda packet . On page 222 the Core Building needs are described with cost estimates of both the pool and community building facility . Spatz reported that there are two groups of strong advocates for a 50 meter competitive pool : lap swimmers and parents of kids in east Chapel Hill/Carrboro school systems who are on swim teams . People with special needs are more in favor of a leisure facility with zero depth entry and warmer water . The committee met with the Chapel Hill Town Council in October and reported on their findings and asked for the next step to be designated . The council had many questions . The Advisory Committee is scheduled to present answers to the council in January . However, in the meantime, the council suggested thr IP Work Group look at the work done so far . Strom added that it was recommended that the inter-governmental uses for such a facility be explored . The council is planning another public forum on this topic and inviting County Commissioners and Carrboro Aldermen in hopes that it will take the form of some type of inter- governmental facility to serve everyone around it. Discussion followed on available pool facilities in the County, including the Hillsborough Sportsplex„ what components make up a community center that unites a community, the need for co- locating community center with pool , the importance to serve the needs of the community, specific pool/ building designs to meet these needs, impacts , costs and potentials involved with different facilities . Commissioner Brown said that the IP Work Group 's charge is to look at joint planning , needs assessment. . Strom noted that Chapel Hill committed to a structure in Homestead Park and some type of public pool because of the 1996 bond . Dorosin said that this group is a two - part group , investigating costs , land availability ; share costs and benefits , then promoting intergovernmental cooperation becomes our responsibility to get each jurisdiction to see the benefits of sharing these issues to fulfill the goal of providing the best facilities of all the community . Brown asked if the 1996 bond instigates time restraints or could it be used for another location in the future with the intergovernmental potential . Strom answered that a particular time for ground breaking is not set as all the bonds are not sold . Open discussion continued in the areas of: considering school uses of pools, projected costs of construction , public pressure versus reality of the planning process, and opportunities for private investment, noted that the existing t$ 2wo million of bond money for a pool is insufficient and that a broader community-wide approach needs to be taken such as a Southern Orange Community Center drawing on a larger population base than Chapel Hill . . s . Plans for November 2001 Parks Bond Commissioner Brown reviewed the background information noting that the county usually puts forth school bonds . Three years ago the bond process expanded to include affordable housing and parks bonds . The previous $ 6 million dollar park bond is what has enabled us to start looking at the future, of being able to accomplish some things like establishing the Lands Legacy program . It is likely that the county will put out another bond , which is being driven by school needs . The commissioners will decide when to set up that bond . The timetable will probably begin in January with the committee working for three months . The usual model used for the bond committee is that : the membership of that committee is chosen by the commissioners with a wide range of representation ; then the committee will grapple with Last updated 01 / 11 /01 4 L : \Carol\IGPWG\IPWG12-7 -OOMinutesdraft. doc 05 all the capital funding issues in the county, understanding what the debt limit of the county is , understanding all the implications of all the different requests and needs, finally setting dollar amounts for designated uses . Discussion followed on the intent that joint funding efforts would be for large scale being most efficient to serve more people, whether natural resource/ non intensive areas would be located in the northern part of the county, the county could be the lead agency in acquiring land , and Feller noted that OWASA did an inventory of land holdings and is willing to consider in the cooperative efforts of using land that is used to meet water resource objectives for recreation such as an area around a water reservoir might be suitable area for active recreation . 6 . Adjournment ( Next Meeting — February 1 ) It was agreed for the next meeting to be 5 : 30 p . m . on February 1St and , following meetings the first Thursday in May and October . Possible agenda items noted for the next meetings were : bond update, Lands Legacy program update, Soccer and Aquatic Facility update, impact fees and how to pay for recreational facilities , OWASA's property inventory, County trail systems, Triangle J network plan of trails, Chapel Hill master plan and greenways update , and public relations component of intergovernmental cooperation for community wide facility . The group adjourned at 7 : 30 p . m . I I Last updated 01 / 11 /01 5 L : \Carol\IGPW G\IPW G 12-7 -00Minutesdraft . doe tf ( d) 611c.r'") � Lands Legacy Interim Action Plan Adopted 513100 Lands Legacy — Action Plan 2000 - 2001 For the period May 3, 2000 - June 30, 2001 Introduction The Lands Legacy program , adopted on April 4, 2000 , is activated through an Annual Action Plan process . In future years, this process will begin in August of each year with a staff- generated draft which will be reviewed initially by the Board of Commissioners and then sent to relevant advisory boards for further development of priorities for the coming fiscal year . The revised draft would be distributed to the Board of Commissioners at the December goal - setting retreat, and finalized during the budget/CIP process in the spring of each year . For the initial year of the program , the Board has authorized an Interim Action Plan to be created to guide Lands Legacy resource land purchases from the present through the fiscal year 2000 - 2001 (which begins on July 1 ) . The Interim Action Plan that follows is consistent with the template adopted as part of the Lands Legacy program ; and contains goals for the period May 2000 -June 2001 , more specific objectives and a priority table with timetable and purpose . The document closes with a performance report for the previous year (which is incomplete in this case, since the program was just adopted ) . Goals for May 2000 - June 2001 ( Note : the following goals implicitly include continuing to aggressively pursue grant funding for many of the County 's proposed projects . ) 1 . Purchase parklands ( regional , district and communi - level P ( 9 � ty ) strategically throughout the County, for both active and low - im act recreation to land - bank for future arks that can provide p P leisure opportunities for all citizens ( and potentially be co - located with future schools ) . 2 . Partner with the towns and other entities such as OWASA in acquiring future park sites , where possible . I Work with a willing seller ( and a partner entity, if possible ) to purchase a " pilot " farmland conservation easement in conjunction with the N . C . Farmland Preservation Trust Fund . 4 . Finalize park management and facility development/ use plans via an inter- local agreement with Durham County for the Little River Regional Park and Natural Area . 5 . Protect sensitive natural areas in the Seven - Mile Creek bottomlands and along New Hope Creek . 08 Lands Legacy Interim Action Plan Adopted 513100 6 . Accomplish preservation of riparian 4buffers , historic and archaeological sites, and identified natural areas and wildlife habitat/ prime forest through parkland acquisition , when possible 7 . Update the 1988 Inventory of Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitat . Specific Acquisition Objectives A . Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitat • Work to preserve (through acquisition and other means ) identified Natural Areas in the Seven - Mile Creek area • Work to preserve (through acquisition and other means ) properties along the Eno River adjacent to Duke Forest ( Hillsboro Division ) or Eno River State Park • Work with the UNC Botanical Garden and Triangle Land Conservancy and others to preserve an identified natural area surrounding the Mason Farm Preserve in Chapel Hill • Continue to monitor the efforts to preserve Pickard 's Mountain natural area , with standing offer to assist in preservation if needed • Work in conjunction with Triangle Land Conservancy to pursue opportunities for preservation of additional lands along the New Hope Creek Corridor ( as they might arise ) B . Farmland Preservation • Work (with the Soil and Water District and / or OWASA) to identify a willing seller of a conservation easement " pilot project, " preferably in Cane Creek watershed . Preservation of a farm in the watershed that also contains riparian buffers would optimize the purchase for all potential partners and could meet multiple goals . . • Apply for a grant from the Farmland Preservation Trust Fund by December 1 , 2000 , for assistance in purchasing the . conservation easement . • If practical , finalize arrangements with the Soil and Water District to hold the conservation easement, with specified monitoring and maintenance responsibilities worked out through a Memorandum of Understanding between the County and the District . C .. Parklands and Open Space • Using existing plans and the comprehensive resource database , pursue acquisition of park sites in the following areas . Lands Legacy Interim Action Plan Adopted 513100 09 • A district or regional park (with a combination of active and low - impact and natural area preservation ) — in Chapel Hill Township , between Chapel Hill/ Carrboro and Hillsborough . This park could serve both rural and Town populations . • Expansion of the " Cedar Grove Park" at Northern Human Services Center into a district park (with a combination of active and low - impact recreation ) • A community park (with active and low - impact recreation ) — in Bingham Township • A community park (with an active recreation focus ) — Eno Township or Schley area ( unless needs are met through other park possibilities in north or east Hillsborough ) • Develop a map and plan for a pilot project trail ( paved greenways in urban settings , rustic woodland trails in rural areas ) linking Chapel Hill and/or Carrboro Town parks , less -sensitive areas of Duke Forest, future County parks and Eno River State Park . • Acquire (through easement, donation or purchase ) the missing links for the pilot project trail , as practical . • In all park acquisitions , be cognizant of the potential for school site co location , • The County 's focus in parkland acquisition and collaboration should be on community, district and regional - scale parks . D . Riparian Buffers • With the focus on parklands , natural areas and a farmland easement pilot project, attempt to accomplish preservation of buffers in water supply watersheds through parkland acquisitions during this timeframe . • Develop possible priorities for riparian buffer acquisitions in 2001 - 2002 E . Cultural and Archaeological Sites • Given the focus on parklands , natural areas and a farmland easement pilot project, attempt to accomplish preservation of cultural and archaeological sites through parkland acquisitions during this timeframe . • Develop possible priorities for cultural and archaeological site acquisitions in FY 2001 - 2002 10 TERGOVERNMENTAL PARKS °WORK G ` IN> ROUP : Novetnb'6* 15,2000 _ NAME OF MEMBER APPOINTMENT BUSINESS TOWNSHIP of HOME ADDRESS/ TELEPHONE / E-MAIL RESIDENCE TELEPHONE Doris Murrell Carrboro Parks and (W) 966-8191 Chapel Hill Twp 110 Williams Street Recreation Commission Carrboro, NC 27510 Lee Rafalow Orange County 254-4455 Chapel Hill Twp 4512 Powder Mill Rd. Commission for the ]rafalow@mindspring.com Chapel Hill, NC 27514 Environment 382-2950 Jeffrey Schmitt OC Recreation & Parks 732-9852 Cedar Grove 2101 Schley Road Advisory Council Hurdle Mills, NC 27541 Patrick Sullivan OC Recreation & Parks 919-684-2800 Chapel Hill Twp 8108 Reynard Road Advisory Council psullivan@duke.edu Chapel Hill, NC 27516 942-0727 Alternate Fax 684-65144 Gordon Warren Eno River Association 732-3223 Eno Twp PO Box 1252 Egmarren@rnindspring.co Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dean Ray Mebane City Council 563-3629 106 Washington St. Mebane ,NC 27302 Maryanne Rosenman Chapel Hill-Carrboro 933-9092 100 Stoneridge Drive Schools Board of Mrosenman@aol.com Chapel Hill, NC 27514 Education Marty Pomerantz University of North Campus Recreation Carolina, Pomerant@email.unc.edu 203 Wollen Gym CB#8605 Director. of Campus Chapel Hill, NC 27599-8605 Recreation Wendy Olsen Triangle Land 732-7045 529 Lakeshore Drive Conservancy Hillsborough, NC 27278 Staff. David Stancil, Orange County ERC Director,Kathryn Spatz,Chapel Hill Parks and Recreation Director,Richard Kinney,Carrboro Parks and Recreation Director,Bob Jones,Orange County Recreation and Parks Director,Margaret Hauth,Hillsborough Planning Director INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAR January 24,2001' NAME OF MEMBER APPOINTMENT BUSINESS TOWNSHIP of HOME ADDRESS/ TELEPHONE / E-MAIL RESIDENCE TELEPHONE Margaret Brown Orange County 929-6460 Chapel Hill Twp 1509 Smith Level Road Commissioners mb@mindsprin .com Chapel Hill, NC 27516 Ken Chavious Hillsborough Board of (H) 732-3469 Hillsborough 401 N. Nash Street Commissioners / Hillsborough, NC 27278 Hillsborough Recreation Board Mark Dorosin Carrboro Board of 929-7799 Chapel Hill Twp 113 Creekview Circle Aldermen 942-3299 (fax) Carrboro, NC 27510 abmd minds rin .com Kevin Foy Chapel Hill (H) 932-1923 Chapel Hill Twp 19 Oakwood Drive Town Council kcfoy@aol.com Chapel Hill, NC 27514 Bill Strom Chapel Hill (H) 933-2711 Chapel Hill Twp 714 Greenwood Road' Town Council (Alternate) BillStrom@nc.rr.com Chapel Hill, NC 27516 Keith Cook Orange County Board of 919-644-1884 Hillsborough 419 Calvery Court Education kdc52@aol.com Hillsborough, NC 27278 Judson Edeburn Duke Forest Resource 613-8014 Duke University Manager judeburn@duke.edu Nicholas School of Environment PO Box 90328 Durham, NC 27708-0328 Joe Herzenberg Chapel Hill (H) 929-4053 Chapel Hill Twp 6 Cobb Terrace Greenways Commission Chapel Hill, NC 27514 Susie Holloway Orange Water & Sewer (H) 968-0832 711 W. Main Street Authority Bd. Of Directors (Fax) 968-0832 (start) Carrboro, NC 27510 Beth Huskamp Chapel Hill Parks & (H) 929-4053 Chapel Hill Twp 109 Chesley Court Recreation Commission bah@abpeds.org Chapel Hill NC 27514 Lands Legacy Interim Action Plan Adopted 5/3/00 Priority List for May 2000-June 200*1 The following priorities are culled from the list of objectives on the previous page. They have been developed by staff and the BOCC Open Space Task Force, using a variety of relevant source documents including the State of the Environment report, the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group report, and others. Priority Need ' poEstimated Cost*- Timetable Purchase land (100-200 acres) Combination of active recreation Between $0.93 and $1.77 Identify potential sites by June for a district/regional park (fields, picnic areas) and low impact million, depending on location 2000; negotiate purchase June- between Chapel Hill/Carrboro recreation, preserving any natural August, 2000; close by October and Hillsborough areas or prime forest. Serve-as 2000. central junction of future trail links between Towns and Eno River/County parks. Potential for school site co-location? Purchase additional 25-60 acres Active recreation (baseball, soccer $75,000 to $240,000, As soon as possible. at Northern Human Services and softball fields), low-impact depending on amount of Center, and convert from recreation (trails, picnic areas), acreage purchased. community park into "Cedar water-based recreation? Grove District Park". Purchase or otherwise acquire Preserve one of the County's largest $500,000 to $2.1 million, Meet with potential partner lands in the Seven-Mile Creek intact identified natural areas (which depending on the amount of entities to pursue collaboration, Natural Area, especially those already contains land preserved by land acquired and method of pursue potential acquisitions as that are part of the identified the County, and other entities). In acquisition (fee-simple, they are economically natural areas/wildlife habitat the long-term, work to create a conservation easement, etc) practical. This might be a adjacent to County lands. Partner "Seven-Mile Creek Nature multi-year initiative, with an with other groups where possible Preserve", containing the identified estimated timetable of 2000- (Eno River Association, Eno natural areas/wildlife habitat and 2004. River State Park, TLC) and adjoining lands. Some nature trails explore alternative acquisition in less-sensitive areas could be methods. pursued. Lands Legacy Interim Action Plan Adopted 513100 ~ N Map and acquire lands (missing A trail network that ties paved Town Easements or purchases of a As practical and economically- links)in pilot project trail linking greenways to Eno River State Park. few properties will be needed feasible Town parks,Duke Forest,future It would also link future County to tie together open space County park and Eno River. State parks and(perhaps)less-sensitive network. Rough estimate of Park portions of Duke Forest via largely- cost is$500,000 unimproved rustic woodland trails. Secure or acquire 25-74 acres in Balance of active recreation(soccer Negotiate for use of OWASA- Identify potential sites by June central or southern Bingham and baseball fields)and low-impact owned lands** 2000; work with OWASA to Township for a community park, recreation trails.Also seek to secure lands June-October, working with OWASA if preserve and protect any riparian 2000;close by December, possible to locate the park on buffers within context of park, 2000. OWASA-owned lands particularly if within the watershed. (preferably outside of the Cane Creek watershed critical area). If no other parks are otherwise Active recreation focus—many Between$100,000-$444,000, Identify potential sites by identified by December,acquire multi-purpose fields. Trails and low- depending on size and location November 2000;negotiate land in Eno Township or Schley impact recreation,to a lesser degree. purchase December 2000— area to serve as community park. Potential for school site co-location. February 2001;close by April 2001.These plans contingent on other potential park options in areas north and east of Hillsborough. Work with a willing seller and To keep active farmland in $100,000 already identified In conjunction with OWASA or the Soil and Water cultivation and protect water quality from ERC/Lands Legacy fund Agricultural Preservation District to acquire a pilot project by preserving riparian buffers, and for easement.Apply for N.C. Board's New Consensus for farmland preservation provides a pilot project for future Farmland Preservation Trust Farmland work, identify conservation easement,targeting farmland easements. Fund grant for remainder. willing seller by October 31 for Cane Creek watershed December 1 grant submittal. Consider other objectives as N/A Unknown N/A opportunities arise *- Cost estimates are rough estimates based on expected per acreage land prices,and actual negotiations may produce different results.As acquisition opportunities are reviewed and evaluated,the cost estimates will be refined. **- If OWASA-owned lands are not available,the estimated cost of this parkland initiative could be$130-480,000,depending on acreage and location. Lands Legacy Interim Action Plan Adopted 513100 13 Other Notes and Special Inquiries • As acquisitions are explored , staff will consider parks and resource lands in the context of long -term trail linkages with parks as listed in Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group Report ( and include these in the update to County Master Recreation and Parks Plan ) . Staff will also consider acquisitions in context of potential school/ park co - location , and pursue accordingly . • Other acquisition inquiries received from landowners and ' potential partners during the year will be compiled and periodically presented for the Board 's review and direction on whether to pursue acquisition . At present, there are four additional inquiries that have been made that have not been broached with the Board . A summary of these inquiries will be forthcoming . Some may be in keeping with the goals and objectives , listed herein . • Staff will begin the outreach and educational efforts discussed in the Lands Legacy program , making available brochures on Lands Legacy, the advantages of land conservation , and other related issues . Staff will also solicit speaking engagements to spread the word about the program during the coming year . • Discuss conservation easements with Duke on less - sensitive portions of the forest for future trails . Performance Report for Previous Year This is the first year of the program . In future years this section will contain more detail about accomplishments during the previous year . A Performance Report will be prepared for the first Annual Action Plan ( FY 2001 - 02 ) in December 2000 . However, there were several opportunities that arose during FY 1999 - 2000 that occurred and can be listed ; • Received grant of $ 143 , 000 from Clean Water Management Trust Fund toward March 31 , 2000 purchase of Duke University property in Upper Eno watershed critical area , adjacent to public water supply . This property is currently being referred to as the McGowan Creek Preserve ( pending official Board action ) . • Received grant of up to $ 377 , 000 ( Durham and Orange ) for the proposed Little River Regional Park and Natural Area from Clean Water 1 Lands Legacy Interim Action Plan Adopted 513100 Management Trust Fund . Submitted application to Parks and Recreation Trust Fund for project as well ( decision anticipated in early- May , 2000 ) . • Evaluated consultant work on Greene Tract, which led to eventual preservation of 60 acres of the property by the Board . • Brought six properties for potential acquisition to the Board for formal review and direction . Staff developed an evaluation of each site , based on relevant criteria . In addition to these activities , there are other projects that have furthered the goals of Lands Legacy — in particular the provision of parkland and parks facilities . The following report, " Report on the Parks Bond and Other Parks - Related Projects " addresses these activities . Conclusion Although the Lands Legacy program was not adopted until April , the draft program was used to evaluate and pursue two acquisitions of parkland and watershed riparian buffers . A total of $ 520 , 000 in grant money was awarded by the Clean Water Management Trust Fund toward these projects , with another application pending before the N . C . Parks and Recreation Trust Fund . The proposed action plan for the coming 14 months focuses on addressing the parkland deficit in the County, developing a pair of pilot projects for farmland preservation and a rustic woodland trail link, and preserving land in what could become a Natural Area Preserve in the Seven - Mile Creek area . The total cost of the proposed Priority List of projects for the upcoming fiscal year ranges from a low of $ 2 . 11 million to a high of $ 5 . 05 million — depending on the acreage acquired , the cost of the land , * location of the land , and the timing of acquisitions . This cost estimate is a rough estimate , and will be refined as more - detail is developed on potential sites . The cost estimate does not reflect grant funds that might be achieved to pursue the projects , nor does it include contributions from prospective partner entities . Staff will continue to aggressively pursue grants to fund these projects , and solicit the involvement of partner agencies , wherever possible and practical . Co - location of school # and park facilities will be evaluated in each case . While pursuing the current action plan as adopted by the Board , staff will also begin developing the first regular Annual Action Plan for 2001 - 2002 in the early-fall , with advisory boards helping draft priorities and initiatives during the fall — to be presented at the Board 's December goal - setting retreat . LAND MANAGEMENT Orange County will hold and manage most lands acquired through the Lands Legacy program. The County's Land Conservation Manager, within ♦� � I I I%%� ARAM the Environment and Resource Conservation Department, has a primary DS 11hirathGACY role in carrying out the duties necessary to implement the program. The first project under the new Lands Legacy program was the March 2000 � purchase of a 63-acre part of Duke Forest adjacent to the Eno River.and McGowan Creek. The McGowan Creek Preserve was acquired for watershed protection and will feature low-impact trails for the public to � � CADUtiiiirty enjoy in a beautiful woodland setting. Orange County is currently working with Durham County, the Triangle Land Conservancy and the Eno River Association to establish the Little River Regional Park and Natural Area, a_ 391-acre recreation and natural area preserve. The majority of funding for both projects came from state grants. ANNUAL ACTION PLAN An annual action plan will identify acquisition priorities for each upcoming year. The county commissioners in May 2000 approved an interim action plan for FY2000-01. Copies are available from ERCD and on our web site. - PROTECTING SPECIAL PLACES The population of Orange County increased by 67,000 people to 112,000 from 1960 to 1998. An additional 64,000 people are expected to reside in the County by 2030—an increase larger than the current population of `= Chapel Hill. More and more of the natural landscape will be converted to - accommodate these new residents. With its new Lands Legacy program in place, Orange County has an opportunity to protect many of its most Orange County has established the first comprehensive important natural and cultural resources using a variety of voluntary county land acquisition program in North Carolina. means, thereby providing a legacy for future residents to enjoy. Adopted on April 4, 2000, the Lands Legacy program You can read and download the "Lands Legacy" framework will provide lasting protection of the county's natural d landscape and enhance the quality of life of current and document on the Web. Visit www.co.orange.nc.us/ercd and future residents. follow the link! To achieve these goals, the Lands Legacy program will FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT: seek to acquire or otherwise protect the County's most critical natural and cultural resources before they are David Stancil Rich Shaw damaged or lost to incompatible development activities. Director Land Conservation Manager Land acquisition and protection by the County will be Orange County ERCD Orange County ERCD accomplished voluntarily—there will be no "taking" of P.O. Box 8181 P. O. Box 8181 property by eminent domain. The program is Hillsborough, NC 27278' Hillsborough, NC 27278 administered by the. Environment and Resource (919)245-2590 (919)245-2591 Conservation Department (ERCD). dstancil@co.orange.nc.us rshaw@co.orange.nc.us April 4, 2000 Orange County Environment fr Resource Conservation C�'t "There can be no greater issue than that of conservation in this country. " I'"'& WHY ACQUIRE LAND RESOURCES? Theodore Roosevelt 1912 v� Orange County recognizes that while some of its important resources have been protected through state parks and privately held research forests, many other natural and cultural resources have been lost. HOW WILL THE COUNTY PROTECT LAND? • Even with Eno River State Park, based on its population the County has a parkland Orange County will use the following voluntary techniques to acquire new deficitof 645 acres and is projected to have a 1,265-acre deficit in 2025. • An estimated 25% of the County's prime forestiand was lost in the last 20 years, parklands and/or preserve important natural and cultural resources: and many other forest areas have become fragmented and unable to accommodate transaction. oon.Acquisition—outright purchase of land via standard ;eal estate diverse species. transaction. • At least four (and perhaps more) of the County's 64 significant natural areas have Donations and Charitable Gifts— all or a portion of the land is donated; been lost or modified substantially since 1988. the landowner may be eligible for federal and state tax credits. • Farmland in Orange County decreased from 187,000 acres in 1957 to 671000 acres Conservation Easements — voluntary legal agreement between a in 1997. landowner and a land management agency that limits some of the • Many important archaeological sites may be lost annually due to lack of information owner's uses of the property in order to achieve conservation purposes. and relevant data on their location. aLife-Lease Agreements— land is purchased, but the landowner retains the right to remain on the land for a specified duration agreeable to both While not all resources can or should be protected by the public sector, a program parties. focused on identifying the most critical of these areas will allow the County to protect 0Timber Rights— purchase the rights to cut timber on the property at a environmental and cultural assets vital to the long-term public interest. The County will cost considerably less than buying the land or development rights. protect some properties on its own, and will work with local land trusts, adjoining jurisdictions and other partners to protect lands in a cooperative manner. In addition, some recreation and open space lands will be preserved through the Development Process, where conservation lands are set aside from development Despite over two centuries of existence as a local .government, Orange County owns as a part of the County's approval of a new development proposal. The very little land. An inventory of lands conducted in the summer of 1999 showed that the development process is administered the Planning and Inspection Department. County owned a total of 632 acres (0.24%, or less than a quarter of one percent of the County's 256,000 acres). None of those landholdings includes significant wildlife habitat WHAT FUNDS WILL BE USED TO SUPPORT THE PROGRAM? or prime farmland. County lands at Seven-Mile Creek contain very small portions of two identified natural areas. Of the land currently held for parks, none is actively used for A combination of County funds, grants and cooperative ventures will be used to recreation —although 144 acres are planned for future parks. fund acquisitions on both a short-term and long-term basis. The Lands Legacy Fund, derived primarily from sales tax revenues, was created to support the program. In addition, county park bond funds and funds generated by new development will be utilitized for parkland acquisition. Orange County will HOW WILL ORANGE COUNTY IDENTIFY LANDS FOR POSSIBLE aggressively pursue state and federal grant funds available to local governments ACQUISITION OR PROTECTION? for meeting a variety of land conservation objectives, and has been successful with $770,000 of grant moneys approved to date. First, important resource lands will be identified using various recent inventories of county natural areas, wildlife habitat, prime farmland, and The primary costs involved with land acquisition include the purchase cost of the cultural and historic sites. New information on resources is also being properly or easement, real estate appraisals, property surveys, environmental generated. site assessment, attorneys fees and title insurance. In addition, land manage- ment and stewardship are long-term costs of property acquisition. Second, the locations of those resources will be mapped using a geographic information system (GIS). Using GIS, a Comprehensive Resource Database The types of land and "open space" that Orange County intends to protect will be used along with established acquisition criteria to evaluate potential through the Lands Legacy program include the following: sites, prioritize those sites and target high-priority sites for possible acquisition. The County will add new data as it becomes available and will parkland update the existing data regularly. natural.areas and wildlife habitat • riparian buffers • prime farmland • historic and cultural sites 0) el)t 2 17 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS . ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting date : January 18 , 2001 Action Age da Item No . bomb SUBJECT : Creation of Proposed Capital Needs Advisory Task Force and Approval of _ Task Force Charge DEPARTMENT : County Manager PUBLIC HEARING : (Y/ N ) No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT : Proposed Task Force Charge John Link , ext 2300 General Task Force Schedule One Sample Scenario for Facility Improve- TELEPHONE NUMBERS : meats with November 2001 Bond Issue Hillsborough 732 -8181 Current Recruitment Notice for Potential Chapel Hill 9884501 Task Force Appointees Durham 5884331 Mebane 336 -2274031 PURPOSE : To approve the creation of, structure , and charge to a proposed Capital Needs Advisory Task Force , BACKGROUND : The Board of Commissioners has discussed its intention to create and appoint a Capital Needs Advisory Task Force to review school and County capital needs and provide advice to the Board concerning . the composition of . a proposed November 2001 Orange County bond referendum . Items recommended to the County for inclusion in this possible bond issue will be referred to the Task Force for review and prioritization along with other proposed recommendations . In conjunction with the Chair, staff drafted 1 ) a proposed charge to the proposed Capital Needs Advisory Task Force and 2 ) a possible plan for the size and membership of the Task Force . As parr of the Task Force' s activities , the Board would direct that the Task Force focus on specific ! criteria and utilize current policies and documents to guide its work. These parameters for Task Force work are detailed in the , proposed charge , which is attached . The Board may wish to add to , or otherwise modify the suggested elements of the charge . Upon approval of the � charge and appointment of the Task Force members , the charge will be delivered to the members so that they can begin reviewing the necessary information , .applying the criteria , and formulating proposed recommendations to the Board of Commissioners , The Task Force will consider all recommendations and submit a prioritized list to the Board of Commissioners for consideration for bond issue . In its deliberations , the Board of Commissioners will consider the County BudgetoOffice ' s Initial estimate of the potential tax rate impacts from the debt service, of approximately $ 70 million for the total bond package . Because of the tight timeframe , the Board of Commissioners may want to move forward with approval of the charge and structure . for the Capital Needs Advisory Task Force during the January 18 , 2001 meeting . If this occurs , the Board could likely appoint Task Force members at its January 29 , 2001 work session ( recruitment for potential members has already been initiated ) . This would permit the Task Force to hold its initial meeting in February and provide adequate time for the meetings that may be necessary for the Task Force to complete its work by May 2001 . A suggested composition of the Task Force is : • Two members , nominated by ' the Orange County Board of Education , • Two members nominated by the Chapel Hill - Carrboro Board of Education ; • One member nominated by the Orange County Parks & Recreation Advisory Council , • One member nominated by the Commission for the Environment ; • One member nominated by the Advisory Board on Aging ; and • Six- Eight members appointed at4arge by the Board of Commissioners . In addition , the Board of Commissioners may consider 1 ) the appointment of one member each from the Affordable Housing Task Force and the Community College `task Farce , and 2 ) the appointment of one elected official each from the Town of Chapel Hill , the Town of Carrboro , the Town, of Hillsborough , and ( possibly) the City of Mebane . The Board of County Commissioners mayIso want to consider creating subwCommittees of the Task Force to review specific areas associated with a bond issue . The sub,Committees could be classified into the areas of: Schools , Public Buildings , and Parks and Open Space Facilities . The sub-Committees could be limited to twelve ( 12 ) each plus staff. As was the case in 1997 , the Board may also wish to consider retaining the services ,of an external facilitator to assist the Capital Needs Advisory Task Force . The Task Force received assistance from the Dispute Resolution Center, and that may be worthwhile again for the 2001 process . Three related documents are attached for informational purposes only . They are : 1 ) a general schedule for the Capital Needs Advisory Task Force ; 2 ) a copy of one sample scenario for * facility improvements supported by a November 2001 bond issue ; and 3 ) a Copy of the current recruitment notice for potential Capital Needs Advisory Task Force appointees . FINANCIAL IMPACT : There is no immediate financial impact related to . this item . Costs for administrative , logistical , and facilitator support for the Task Force would likely not exceed $ 10 , 000 and ' could be substantially less depending on the size * and structure of the Task Force and the number of meetings required . RECOMMENDATION ( S) : The Manager recommends that the Board approve the charge to , and composition of, the Capital Needs Advisory Committee ; and direct staff to arrange for the services of a qualified facilitator. 1 .. 19 ]DRAFT CHARGE TO THE CAPITAL NEEDS ADVISORY TASK FORCE The Grange County Board of Commissioners has created a Capital Needs Advisory Task Force to review school and County capital needs and provide advice to the Board concerning the composition of a proposed November 2001 Orange County bond referendum . Items recommended to the County for inclusion in this possible bond issue will be referred to the Task Force for review and prioritization along with other proposed recommendations . As part of the Task Force ' s appointment and its efforts , the Board directs that the Task Force focus on specific criteria and utilize current policies and documents to guide its work. These parameters for Task Force work are detailed in the charge below . Upon approval of the charge , it will be delivered to the Task Force . so that the members, can begin reviewing the necessary information , applying the criteria , and formulating proposed recommendations to the Board of Commissioners . The Task Force will consider all recommendations and submit a prioritized list to the Board . of Commissioners for consideration for bond issue . In its deliberations , the Board of Commissioners will consider the County Budget Office ' s initial estimate of the potential tax rate impacts from the debt service of approximately $ 70 million for the total bond package . The Capital Needs Advisory Task Force will be charged with the following : Review the immediate needs for new schools in the 10 ^ ear Capital Y p Improvement Plan ( CIP ) , as identified by the Orange County and Chapel Hiii - Carrboro City Schools * Review the capital needs identified by County departments in requests submitted for the 2001 -2011 CIP Familiarize itself with long range school capital funding policies as adopted by the Board . of Commissioners • Familiarize itself with recommendations developed by the School Construction Standards Task Force , the Space Needs Task Force , the Affordable Housing Task Force , the Community College Task Force , the Library Task Force , and the Master Aging Plan ( MAP ) j • Familiarize itself with the Lands Legacy Program and future recommendations and plans Confirm the need for , and timing of, new school construction projects , considering current and projected student populations 20 DRAFT + Provide ' recommendations on the possible elements of a November 2001 bond referendum with the items listed in order of importance from most important to less important • Provide recommended sizes and estimated costs for each bond referendum element - recommended by the Task Force as well as any portion of the costs shared by the proposing/recommending entities • Ensure that each recommended element complies with the appropriate adopted policies of #Orange County for Joint Capital Facilities Development , the Orange County Debt Management policy , and the# Orange County Capital Funding Policy as well as all other relevant adopted policies of the - County • Ensure that all elements are accessible to and serve residents throughout Orange County • Complete its work by May , 2001 21 DRAFT GRANGE COUNTY NOVEMBER 2001 BOND &REFERENDUM Schedule for Capital Needs ' p A,dvlsory Task Farce a) SOCC advertise for volunteers December 2000 and January 2001 b ) BOCC review apps & appoint volunteers to task force No later than mid - February 2001 c) Organizational meeting of task force Late February-First week of March 2001 d ) Task force & sub committee . meetings March , April , May 2001 e) Task force recommendations to BOCC First meeting in June 2001 f) BOCC discussion of recommendations First & second meetings in June 2001 ' I 22 SECOND . DRAFT ORANGE COUNTY NOVEMBER 2001 BOND REFERENDUM ONE SAMPLE SCENARIO FOR FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS SUPPORTED BY NOVEMBER 2001 , BOND ISSUE Chapel Hili -Carrboro City Schools Elementary School #9 ( Meadowmont) $ 13 Million Elementary School # 1 0 r $ 13 Million Orange County Schools Middle School $ 18 Million Senior Centers (Two at $ 3 Million Each ) $ 6 Million Public Buildings $ 5 Million Community College Justice Facilities Parks and Recreation $ 15 Million ( including Soccer Fields , Open Space , Conservation Easements , Watershed Protection , and Parks ) Affordable Housing $ 2 Million TOTAL : $ 72 Million ( Please note that the items and numbers above were compiled Eby Commissioner Halkiotis , Commissioner Jacobs , and staff just to present a " possible case scenario" of what the November 2001 bond might look like and just to get the discussion going amongst ourselves . )