HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 12-14-2004-9dORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: December 14, 20Q4
Action Agenda
Item No. ~-d
SUBJECT: Selection of a Professional Planning Consultant for the Development of a
Countywide. Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENTS:
BOCC TDR Goal Statement
TDR - RFO Document
Listing of RFO Respondents
August 3, 2004 Memorandum Regarding
TDR Tour
Louis Berger / UNC -Charlotte Proposed
Scope of Services
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Craig N. Benedict, ext 2592
Glenn Bowles, ext 2577
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough 732-8181
Chapel Hill 968-4501
Durham 688-7331
Mebane 336-227-2031
PURPOSE: To select a consultant to assess the feasibility of a Transfer of Development
Rights (TDR) program for Orange County,
BACKGROUND: Establishing a Transfer of Development Rights program has been along-term
goal of the Board of County Commissioners. To that end, over the last year, a County staff
work group developed a comprehensive Request for Qualifications (RFQ) that would allow the
County to find a consulting firm to provide professional planning services to develop an Orange
County Transfer of Development Rights (TUR) concept and ordinance, which may include a
legal framework, market evaluation, administrative procedures, and public information concept.
The work group includes representatives from:
• Purchasing,
• Planning,
• ERCD,
• Engineering and
• EDC, as well as
• The County Manager and
• The County Attorney
The RFQ was advertised and forwarded to the national and state chapter of the American
Planning Association (APA). Apre-proposal meeting and tour was held and attended by six
firms (Please refer to the attached list of RFQ respondents). Five firms subsequently submitted
proposals. Each firm was independently rated on the following criteria by the evaluation team:
1. Project interest and understanding,
2. The firm's history and experience with similar projects,
3. The firm's ability and expertise,
4, The abilities of key personnel assigned to the project,
5, Knowledge of local planning constraints and real estate economics, and
6, Technical and analytic abilities.
Gast figures were not a part of the evaluation process. Results were tabulated and the top
three firms were invited for interviews. Those firms were Clarion and Associates, the Freilich,
t.eitner and Carlisle group, and the Louis Berger/UNC-Charlotte Urban Institute group.
References were also contacted for all three firms, After the interview process, two firms --the
Freilich, Leitner & Carlisle group and the Louis Berger/UNC-Charlotte Urban Institute group --
were identified as being capable of meeting the County's needs. Each firm was asked to
provide costs associated with the three phases. The work group then voted to recommend the
team of UNCC and The Berger Group to conduct phases one and two.
Dtaring its review, the work group invited written proposals from the three semi-finalist firms.
After opting to further negotiate with the two finalists, specific questions were posed to each, A
copy of the Louis Berger /University of North Catalina -Charlotte Urban Institute group's work
plan (scope of services) is attached,
A timeline of key events during this evaluation process include the following dates for the events
previously described:
• June 23 - BOCC authorizes staff to issue the RFO to professional planning consultants
for the development of a countywide TDR program,
• July 6 -Orange County TDR FRQ posted on APA and North Carolina Chapter of APA
websites,
• July 19 -Deadline for respondent questions.
• August 2 -Orange County field tour far interested firms,
• August 13 -Deadline for RFQ responses. Five were received, including:
o Robert J. Goldstein
o Freilich, Leitner, & Carlisle/James Nicholas/.lordan, Jones & Golding
o Louis Berger/University of North Carolina at Charlotte -Urban Institute
o Clarion & Associates
o The American Farmland Trust
• Atagust --Work group met to evaluate responses, Three (Freilich, Louis Berger, and
Clarion) are invited to interviews.
• September 8 to 13 -- Interviews at the Governmental Service Center.
• October 13 -Finalists (Freilich, Leitner & Carlisle group and Louis Berger /University of
North Carolina -Charlotte Urban Institute) are selected and additional questions are sent
to each,
• November 1 -All answers are evaluated,
In conclusion, the work group recommends to the BOCC that the County enter into negotiations
with the Louis Berger /University of North Carolina at Charlotte -Urban Institute group to
complete Phase 1 (Background Research and Data Gathering) and Phase 2 (Feasibility Study)
for a lump sum not to exceed $39,1Q0, This recommendation is due to the following:
1. The group's knowledge of North Carolina,
2, The approach to community outreach,
3. The familiarity with North Carolina communities and counties and specific TDR
applications, and
4, The hourly rates would allow for more public outreach and local consensus building.
3
5. The relative proximity and access to Orange County.
After Phases 1 and 2 are completed, the BOCC will decide whether it will be necessary to
proceed to Phase 3 (Preliminary TDR Plan Development). The attached proposed work plan
describes an outreach and education process, which should aid the BOCC in its decision-
making.
Freilich, Leitner & Carlisle/James Nicholas/Jordan, Jones, & Golding are also qualified and have
a strong legal, economic analysis, and ordinance basis, but the group's charge rates are nearly
three times those of the Louis Berger/UNC-C Group and would result in costs nearly twice as
much far the same work. The hours the group proposed during which the project would
supposedly be completed were less than two-thirds that of the Louis Berger/UNC-C Group,
especially for the public input/consensus building tasks.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Should the Board determine that retaining the selected firm to complete
the scope of services is in the best interest of the public health, safety, and welfare, there will be
a financial obligation to compensate the firm for their services. Staff estimates the first two
phases to cast approximately $39,100. There are na funds earmarked in the current year
budget to pay for these services. Should the Board decide to proceed with the first two phases
of the feasibility study, staff recommends that Commissioners appropriate $39,100 from the
County's fund balance to cover the cost. Additional phases of the study would be considered in
the upcoming 2005-06 fiscal year budget.
RECOMMENDATION: The Manager recommends that the Board accept the recommendation
of the TDR consultant selection work group and select the Louis Berger/ UNC-Charlotte Urban
Institute group to complete Phases 1 and 2 for a lump sum not to exceed $39,100.
.~
0
0
0
N
.-,
w
{~i
W
O
C.)
w
O
P~
H
rU
V
O
O
b
QJ
N
~~
~~
~o
N .-.
~ fV
O
b b
O
5
N
Q
~i
a
A
H
W
a
0
A
~i
w
C/a
H
Z
U'
0
O
U
0
U
w
0
0
>,
as
0
O.
Iii
Oy
b
m
d
0
D\
b
U
ro
"~".+
ro
°~
~Fd
O
O
.~
ti
b
O
H
r
U
U
O
o.
0
d
a
O
•L
a
u
F4
0
w ~, ~
O N
~
W
~
.
.o p ~ b
~
ti
i
~
~ i
i
U
O c
U ~ 'b
~ cc2 p
'~ ~ . ,9
C
Y
N ,~ ~ U
~ ~ C
' .fl C1.
4
~
.ro ~ ~
b
O
U O
ff
. p
O O N
NN° °'
~~~
U `~ y
~
N b,,..
-~~3 ~
N
0 0
~ ~ 3
N ~ N
.ty b O Q)
U
~'
H O ~ ~
~ ¢''° L
.
ti
a Grob
a .~
~ ~
~ .
bN°'~
~ a
~ cd .
N p
~ ~ ~
~ ~ a~i b o
~ ~ o ~
~ ~u ~ ~
y
~ ~ .
~.
ro m Y i
~ ~.~ G 3
~' 3 Q q ~
by I~+ ,a a~
LQ H Y a~
IC
~
° ~ o a
~ ^ H
~
~ o
pp
N ~
Y ~ 3
~
a
~ ~
~ o
Y
p Y
~
o +J
~
.
a
o m ° ~
~ '> o Q o
~, ~ ~ ~ b
W
k7 N b
O
y
a~i ro o°n `~" '~~'
~ 3 b ~ ~
o ~ ~ ~ o^
N Y
`/
Q
~
~
b3
H ~ y a °3
~ b N
H Y ~ ~ ti
H
N
U
o 'b
a+ H
H_ ~
Q N
b~A O
aQ
H
0
°; ~,
w
w
N ~
b
N a
> f-.
O
a o
roU
~~
~~
G
x o
o ~
~b
°~ o
o
~U
O ~,
V .N.
w° m
m ~
~ '~
o ~
3 cn
bA ~
y .
N
4. ro
o p,
o
y
a~
o ~'
U rn
Draft
August 26, 2004
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING & INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT
Craig N. Benedict, AICP, Director
ounlP a! ~
Current Planning ,~`&; TT("-, 'e 306F Revere Road
(919) 245-2575 ~, " ^ x P O Box 8181
(919) 644-3002 (FAX) Hillsborough,
www.co.orange.nc.us '°~(n r.~~"°' North Carolina, 27278
Date:
July 6, 2004
SUBJECT: Orange County Request for Qualifications Development
of a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Concept and Ordinance
Your firm is invited to submit a Statement of Qualifications to become eligible for
possible interview and negotiations toward a contract for professional planning
services to develop an Orange County Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)
concept and ordinance, which may include a legal framework, market evaluation,
administrative procedures, and public information concept.
I. Introduction
services for the unincorporated portions of Orange County.
A. Description of Issuing Agency
The Orange County Planning and Inspection Department (Planning
Department) is the isstaing agency for the Request for Qualifications (RFQ),
The agency provides a full range of planning and development review
B. Selection of Qualified Firm
The TDR Review Team will review the responses to the RFQ and make
recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) to begin
negotiation with a firm to carry out the task of development of an Orange
County Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) concept and ordinance. The
BOCC has the sole authority to select or reject any or all responses to the
RFQ, A specific scope of services, budget and time line will be negotiated
with the selected firm, and a contract will ultimately be executed.
C. Questions
All questions regarding the RFQ must be in writing and be received by the
Planning Department no later than noon on Monday, July 19, 2004.
Questions must be addressed to Glenn Bowles c/o Planning Department,
306-F Revere Road, Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278; by telephone
GRB
TO: Professional Planning Consultants
Draft
August 2(, 2004
at 919 245 2577; fax, at 919 644 3002; or via email, at
c,Lb o w/es Ca)c o. orange. n c. us.
II. Background
The County is issuing this RFO to develop a Transfer of Development Rights
(TDR) program. Orange County is seeking a professional consultant to assist
staff in developing key concepts and a TDR ordinance. The final
recommendation for the professional consulting services to the County is with
the BOCC.
III. Scope of Services
A. Goals
1. Directing growth and development activities away from important natural
and cultural resources,
2. Shifting and converting rural to non-residential urban growth and
development activities toward areas supported by efficient public services
at urban densities.
3. Providing working farms with an alternative income potential.
4. Preserving the rural Orange County character and sense of place.
5. Protecting drinking water resources.
6. Overarching balance and preservation of both Waal and urban resources
to create a sustainable program of growth and identifying constraints and
potentials
B. TDR Review Team
The selected firm will work directly with the Planning Department, under
the direction of Craig Benedict, AICP, the County Manager, the
Environmental Resources and Conservation Department (ERCD), the
Purchasing Department, the Economic Development Department, and the
County Engineer. Periodic reports will be presented to the Review Team
for discussion, review, and recommendation. More specific work products
and development feasibility of the program may be presented to a work
group as determined by the BOCC.
C. Others Involved
The Planning Board Chair and Vice Chair have expressed interest in
assisting in the review of specific proposals.
D. Available and Relevant Studies, Surveys, and Plans
Available resource materials, which may be relevant to the project, include
the following and are available upon request: Proposed Concept for a
Transfer of Development Rights Program, Orange County background
data, Orange County Comprehensive Plan (Land Use Element), and
Orange County Rural Character Study
GRB
Draft
August 26, 2004 7
IV. Instructions to Proposers
A. General Information
1. Submittal of Qualifications
All responses must be received no later than 12:00 noon, EDT, on
Friday, August 13, 2004. The BOCC reserves the right to reject late
proposals; reserves the right to accept or reject any or all responses;
and reserves the right to issue a detailed scope of services and
request for proposal to preferred respondents at a later date.
2. Response Format
Responses shall be prepared two-sided on 8-1/2" x 11" recycled
content paper, Attachments can include general firm materials, One
bound, printed original and one electronic copy (CD ROM or IBM
compatible disk accepted) of the response are to be submitted.
Documents should be clear and understandable when reproduced in
black and white. The response shall include the Proposer's name and
address, and clearly marked "Response to RFQ for Professional
Consulting Services (TDR),"
3. Project Funding
The requested services will be funded through Planning Department
funds as augmented, where needed, by other county funds.
4. Schedule
The RFQ will be conducted according to the following schedule:
a) Issue request for qualifications: July 6, 2004.
b) Questions due: Monday, July 19, 2004 by 12:00 noon EDT,
c) Responses to Proposer questions available on or before Friday,
July 27, 2004.
d) Proposer meeting and county tour, August 2, 2004
e) Interviews, if requested (The TDR Subcommittee may, at its discretion, issue
a detailed request for proposal or request interviews following receipt of Statements
of Qualification),
f) BOCC may begin contractual negotiations with preferred
professional consultant after September 15, 2004
5. Addenda/Clarifications
Any Planning Department changes to this RFO will be made by written
addendum, No verbal modifications will be binding.
6. Pre-contractual Expenses:
Pre-contractual expenses are defined as expenses incurred by the
Contractor in: 1) preparing its response to this RFQ; 2) submitting that
response to the County; 3) negotiating with the County regarding any
matter related to this RFQ; ar 4) any other expenses incurred prior to
the date of execution of the proposed agreement, The County shall
not, in any event, be liable far any pre-contractual expenses incurred in
the preparation of their response to the RFQ, Respondents shall not
include any such expenses as part of their proposals,
7. Exceptions and Deviations
Any exceptions to the requirements in this RFQ must be included in
the response submitted by the Respondent. Segregate such
GRB
Draft
August 26, 2004 8
exceptions as a separate element of the response under the heading
"Exceptions and Deviations."
8. Contract Award
Issuance of this RFQ and receipt of responses do not commit the
BOCC to award a contract. The BOCC reserves the right to postpone
opening for its own convenience, to accept ar reject any or all
responses received in response to this RFQ, to negotiate with other
than the selected firm should negotiations with the selected firm be
terminated, to negotiate with more than one firm simultaneously, or to
cancel all or part of this RFQ.
9. Conflicts
All responding parties shall identify any conflicts due to their
representation of others in actions adverse to County in this RFQ.
Conflicts resulting from representing other clients shall also be
identified.
10. BOCC Rights
The BOCC may investigate the qualifications of any Respondent under
consideration, require confirmation of information the Respondent
furnished, and require additional evidence of qualifications to perform
the work described in this RFQ. The BOCC reserves the right to: a.
Reject any or all responses if such action is in the public interest; b,
Cannel the entire RFQ; c, Issue a subsequent RFQ; d. Remedy
technical errors in the RFQ process; e. Appoint evaluation committees
to review responses; f. Establish a short list of firms eligible for
interview after evaluation of written responses; and g. Negotiate with
any, all, or none of the RFQ respondents.
B. Contractor's Proposal
1. Letter of Response
A qualified respondent should review the attached specifications and
submit its proposal by 12:00 noon, EDT, on or before Friday, August 13,
2004, to:
Orange County Planning and Inspection Department
Attention: Mr. Glenn Bowles, AICP
306-F Revere Road
Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278.
Below are information and materials that you should include with your
Statement of Qualifications. The required information includes the
fallowing items:
a) Firm name, address, and telephone number of each firm, including
the name, title, address and telephone and fax numbers, and a-mail
address of each contact person during period of response
evaluation.
b) A one-page statement of interest and qualifications for this project.
GRB
Draft August 26, 2004 9
c) A brief (maximum two-page) project understanding description,
Include any concerns regarding scheduling, concept, expectations,
and the like.
d) Discussion of your firm's specific abilities and expertise to provide
the required professional services and qualifications related to
project requirements, including project management skills and
methodology to monitor project budgets,
e) Key personnel proposed as project team members, including
detailed resumes. Clearly identify sub consultants, if proposed, with
similar information.
f) Examples of specific, knowledge, expertise and project
management experience related to this type of project.
g) Descriptions of recent and related projects completed by the firm,
h) References of at least three clients for which your firm has provided
similar professional services,
i) Acknowledgment of receipt of RFQ addenda, if any,
2. Hourly Rates and Personnel
Provide titles or classifications of personnel who may perform work and
their 20Q4 hourly rates, Proposers should note any other expenses
that will be billed (e,g.. copying postage, mileage, etc,) and whether
these items are billed at cost, or if there is a markup. The Proposer
should indicate the percent markup, if any,
3. Qualifications and Experience
Provide written information and examples of work experience of the
"project manager' identified that will lead the work on behalf of the firm,
which include a description of the approach used to develop a county-
wide TDR program, experience working with county government, and
knowledge of the TDR concept and planning in North Carolina,
4. References
Reference information must include: Name of Reference, b) Project
name, c) Brief description of firm's involvement, d) Contact person,
with address and telephone number, and g) Firm's key personnel
assigned to the referenced project, Please provide the name, address
and telephone number of three individuals familiar with the Proposer's
work.
V. Evaluation of Responses
Each response will be assessed as to haw well it meets the requirements of
the RFQ the qualifications and experiences listed in Section IV, above.
VI. Contract Terms and Conditions
Orange County will prepare a contract with the selected Respondent, The
County will use its standard contract terms and conditions. Although the
contract will be with Orange County, the client representation will include the
Planning and Inspection Department, the Review Team, and a possible work
group of the BOCG.
GI2B
Draft August 26, 2004 10
Proposed Concept for a Transfer of
Development Rights (TDR) Program, 2004
Conls. The goals of the program could include the following:
1, Directing growth and development activities away from important natural and cultural
resources.
2. Shifting and converting rural to non-residential urban growth and development activities
toward areas supported by efficient public services at urban densities,
3. Providing working farms with an alternative income potential..
4. Preserving the rural Orange County character and sense of place.
5. Protecting drinking water resources..
6. Overarching balance and preservation of both rural and urban resources to create a
sustainable program of growth and identifying consfraints and potentials.
Objectives. To accomplish these goals the following objectives could be posed:
1. Direct growth and development activities away from important natural and cultural
resources..
2. Shift growth and development activities to areas more able to support municipal services
and urban densities.
3. Provide working farms with an altemative income potential.
4. Link zoning densities to comprehensive plan goals and objectives,.
Legal Framework
Proposed Policy. Within the, fiameworlr of the North Cm~olina State Constitution, Orange County
supports acrd encourages the preservation of working farmlands and the protection of public
drinking water quality through nrnovative zoning techniques with a sensitivity to private property
rights, through a voluntary program of G•ansferring private development rights or densities
(TDR). Srrch a TDR progr°anr will continue to prrotect and safeguard the public health, safety, arrd
welfare of the citizerrs• of Ormrge County, its natural mrd cultural heritage and the needs of a free
real estate mmket place in Orange County..
Reconeneendations,froue OWASA study.
Seek consideration by Canboro, Chapel Hill, and Orange County for Transfer of Development
Rights (TDR) opportunities for Cane Creek property owners. With appropriate enabling
legislation, these jurisdictions could establish higher density "receiving areas" in which
developers could exercise development rights (density bonuses) purchased directly from property
owners in the watershed. OWASA and its customers would benefit fiom decreased density in the
watershed; Cane Creek property owners would benefit from TDR payments in return for'
additional (voluntary) development restrictions; and in-town developers would benefit through
density bonuses in designated areas. All fransactions would remain in the private sector.
Potential Active Statements.
• Work with the Orange County state representatives and senators to sponsor legislation to
enable local North Carolina governments to establish a voluntary TDR program.
• After review and reconunendation from the TDR Task Foroe and the Planning Board, the
Board of County Commissioners will adopt the Orange County TDR program.
Concepts. The following concepts should be defined:
• Possible receiving zone(s), Affordable housing,
GRB
Draft August 26, 2004 11
• Density, Down zoning,
• Bonus incentives Conservation easement,
• Development rights, and Sending zone,
Discussion. Issues that should be talked through might include the following:
• Multi jurisdictional program possibly involving Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and/or
Hillsborough.
• Is the public purchase of a conservation easement equivalent to the public purchase of a
property's development rights?
• Multiple owners in a single sending zone?
Other Issues. Other issues for discussion could include:
• Density means the number of development rights originating from an individual parceh
• When a development right is used, how shall it be extinguished?
• Development rights certificates cannot be transferred into another area defined as a
sending zone.
• The nature of the easement placed on the sending zone parcel after transfer should allow
staff to resolve any zoning ordinance violation (i.e, derelict structures, junk and debris,
multiple residential structures, and the like) before recording the easement.
• Equity of price of densities purchased weighted against the value of the densities
transferred.
Administrative Process
Proposed Policy. The Orange County TDR program shall be made as simple as practical, for the
general public, elected and appointed officials, and property owner°s to understmrd, access,
monitor, and evah{ate, for the benefit of dte public health, safety, mrd welfare.
Possible Sending Zorre Characteristics. To be eligible as a sending zone, a parcel of land shall
have a threshold of characteristics, which may include the following:
Mature forestland, Working farmland, Steep forested slopes, More than ten acres in size,
Adjoining public parkland or another conservation easement, Significant geologic,
archaeological resource, or designated wild life corridor, Historic or Architectural resource,
Critical watershed for a drinking water source, or Protected watershed for a drinking water
source,
Use of Sending Zwre land offer trnrsfer of development rights. Any change or use or activities
in a sending zone after transfer shall require the Orange County Planning Director to determine if
the proposed change of use or activity is compliant with the conservation easement.
Conversion ofDevelopnreut Rights. When evaluating a tract of land as a potential sending zone,
the development rights may be converted into a transfer certificate at the given rate.
Bonus Incentives. Addition bonus incentives may be given if the resulting development provides
the following: affordable housing, Leadership in Environmental Design (LEED) compliance,
redevelopment of a brownfield or other priority site, and possibly other bonus incentives?
Receiving Zorre, General design guidelines for the receiving zone should be established
GRB
Draft August 26, 2004 12
Proposed Process. To select a sending zone site, County Planning Department staff will apply
zoning criteria to the parcel or parcels. The resulting number represents the number of
development rights, which potentially could be hansferred to a receiving site before any
conversion into a transfer certificate.
Application.
Sending Zone, Before a payment to the owner of a sending zoning tract can be authorized only
after the owner provides a legal description of the property to be encumbered and the Planning
Department staff makes a formal determination of the number of development rights assignable
to the property.
Receiving Zone. A property owner wishing to develop a property shall make application to the
Planning Department.
Discussion. Issues that should be resolved might include the following:
• Establishment of a planning management procedure to transfer and to develop property
rights.
• TDR certificates,
• Is down zoning needed, and if so, where?
• Will rezoning be required or can this be accomplished administratively?
• Will the sending and receiving zones need to be down zoned or can it be accomplished
with the present situation?
Market Evaluation
Proposed Policy. To create and maintain a sustainable TDR program that can accurately mrd
reliably monitor and evaluate actual market ecaronric petrormance over time for the benefit of
the public healtk, safety, and welfare..
Potential Action Statements.
• Continue to run county and small area growth scenarios using alternative densities and
growth patterns.
• Initiate constructive criticism from local developers, financial institutions, and real estate
representatives.
• Monitor trends in purchase prices of development rights and their marketability,.
• Monitor bends in local demand for transferred development rights.
Issues. The following questions may be issues for further discussion.
• Is there an economic market with sufficient vitality to sustain a Transfer Program?
• How do we compare the Orange County real estate marketplace to other communities
with successful programs?
• What incentives must Orange County provide to initiate a TDR program?
• Are all TDR densities (development rights) equal in value?
• Conversion of'residential development rights to commercial development rights at a rate
of one unit to gross square feet of commercial or square feet of office gross
floor area.
GRB
Draft August 26, 2004 13
Public Information
Proposed Policy. To create documents fw~public dissenrinatiorr, identification, and utilization of
outreach progrannnirrg through the County Cooperative Extension, reahor, conhactor, builder,
and other professional planning and architectural associations
Potential Action Statements.
Continue to monitor and assess community outreach programs and the effectiveness of
the public efforts,
Provide timely and periodic public progress assessments.
Create an interactive, visualization process, with the possible use of 3-D computer policy
simulations and scenario builders.
Issues. The following questions may be issues for further discussion.
• TDR information clearinghouse -who has them and who wants them, linking the two
interests..
• Where will the land bank reside or where is the rights pool?
• FIow should the public, real estate and development interests be made aware of the TDR
program?
• The acquisition of additional computer software to aid in the public discussion of the
TDR application in Orange County,
GRB
Draft August 26, 2004 14
Orange County Plann-ng Activities
Related to a TDR Program 1979 to 2004
1979 to 1981. The Agricultural Task Force Report
1986. North Carolina General Assembly Passage of Agricultural Advisory Boards L•nabling
Legislation
1987. BOCC Appoints an Agricultural Districts Advisory Board
1987 to 1990. Joint Planning Activities with the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill
1989. Rural Area Study Committee Report
1990. First Agricultural Districts Advisory Committee
1991. Triangle J Council of Governments Land Use Advisory Committee's Open Space
Sfrategies Subcommittee Report
1992. First voluntary agricultural dishict designated
199.3. Rural Character Study Committee report
1994. Public Hearings regarding the creation of a County Purchase of Development Rights
Program
1994. Farmland Preservation Bond defeated
1995. Robbins master's thesis, "A Transfer of Development Rights Program for Farmland
Preservation in Orange County, North Carolina"
1998. Rodiger master's thesis "A Development Management Program for Implementing a
Transit Oriented Development (TOD) in Orange County, North Carolina."
1998. Environmental and Resource Conservation Department established
2004. County Comprehensive Plan Development
Sponsoring Recommendations
Item
Or anization
Alleviate increasin tax burdens on aglands.
Minimize occurrence of complaints and
A
ic
ltu
al Task Fo
e nuisance suits
gr
u
r
rc _ _ ___ _
Report BOCC Minimize negative impacts of proposed
ublic rojects on farming o erations
Minimize relocation of farnrs due to non-
fazm develo ment ressures
Agricultural Advisory Organize and appoint advisory boards to
Boaz'ds Enabling North Carolina make recommendations concerning creating
L
i
l
ti General Assembly districts and bold public bearings on public
eg
s
a
on o,.,~ ~ „«,. .,,.~,,., a, m
GRB
Draft
August 26, 2004 I S
ro'ects like] to have an im act on farmin
Adopt policies for PDR in agriculturat
districts at the re nest of Che farrier
Agricultural Districts Provision for donation of and lease of
BOCC develo ment ri hts
Advisory Board
Funds of PDR Pro ram
Use USDA's LESA system to prioritize
urchases
Rural Character Study Defining rural character preservation
Committee BOCC strategies, density bonuses, PDR program
recommended
Rural Area Study Voluntary TDR program could protect lands
Committee Report Planning Board within the RB, prioritization program on
sendin areas, down zone RB
Revise PDR ranking system to include
Agricultural Districts BOt,t , visibility from ma'or roads
Advisory Committee Ex and advisor board
Present PDR to townshi advisor councils
Critical mass of economically viable
farmland is needed
Tr7angle 7 Council of Need significant growth pressure and
Open Space Strategies Governments Land receivin areas with infrastmcture in place
Subcommittee Report Use Advisory Link to com . rowth management Ian
Committee Economic inte city of ro ram
TDR ro ram nmsf be sim le in understand
Public information and outreach is essential
GRB
Draft
Reference checked for
August 26, 2004 16
Reference Check Form
ro essiona onsu an
Owner
Address
Project reference
Phone person contacted
What was your project?
When was it completed?
What did the firm do for your community?
Who was the staff person assigned to the project?
Rate the following: Rating 1 to 5
~s ;s me m9ne5e)
Comments
Qualit of ke ersonnel
Timeliness
Bud et control
Communication
Creativit
Total
GRB
Draft August 26, 2004 17
Qualifications Evaluation Criteria
Orange County Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program
Qualifications Evaluation Form
Criteria Best Possible
Ratin Rating
Project interest and understanding 15
Firm's history 15
Firm's ability and expertise ~ 5
Assigned personnel 15
Related project experience 15
Reference check (Reference Check Form) 25
Total 100
GRB
18
A
H
0
CH7
Q+
G~
W
H
N
N~
I~
0
~
O
~
~ u
b v
U
~
"'°
.~ C U
y
~ .ro
E t
.~ m
Q
O
y N
~
~
E
!~
C
~
!°
O
w o c d o
"
• u E
~
o
y E , o
~ ~ ~ ~ L L
U ~ ~L ~ u O J
~ "'"~ '
00 r1 O M O O~
~o M N M V ~ O O~
t~ l~ d' [~ W .-i o0
~ 7 ~ M ~n U N ~n
H °~ o N o °~ m °'
v
i
rn r N ~ rn M rn
M
N M
~
M
N '-' N Z N U ~ ~ ~
z z ~
+-~ N ~, H N
U
~ °~ ~ r '~
U WN U UN C7 ~a
...
.
~
~ ~'' ° ~
ti y C
.1 cbv ~ ~ p `~
b ~ .
T ~ P. ?'"'
~ ~ ~
v ~~ 3 ~ ~ N
~
~
~ ~ c
v
td b
~ b
~ Y
N
'~
~
~ ~ ~ W
O D O ~ N O U M
~--~ N N
O~ (~ O
~
U P-l V~ .-~
~ ~ V O
N N
P-i
b
q
~'
~ ~
v ~
~
o ~ ~ ~ H w
G ~ ~
p ~ ~ ti ~ o
~ N
~ ~ a' Y ~ ~
~ o ~
o ~ ~ a C7 ~ a o .,
U o U °' ~
° ~' ~
~ ~ ~
~ G
o ~
q °'
on
a
~ ~
U
>
.n °
.d
~
°' ~
~ >
H ~
r W
~ o' Q ° U ~ H C7
.-I w ~
19
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING & INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT
Craig N. Benedict, AICP, Director
oun,P or a.
Current Planning ~;`e~;;j~ . ~. 306E Revere Road
(919) 245-2575 ~t m P O Box 8181
(919) 644-3002 (FAx) ~,° Hillsborough,
www.co.orange.nc.us °<<b ~,~~~'°° North Carolina, 27278
From: Craig Benedict, Planning Director
DATE: August 3, 2004
SUBJECT: Orange County Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Respondent
Meeting and County Tour.
On Monday, August 2 the County Planning Staff hosted a briefing and tour of Orange
County for organizations interested in the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)
request for qualifications (RFO) solicitation, which was posted on the national American
Planning Association's (APA) website and the North Carolina APA Chapter's website.
Organizations listed in the table below were in attendance, as well as Robert Davis and
Glenn Bowles from the Planning Department staff and Craufurd Goodwin of the
Planning Board. The meeting started a 1:00 p.m. and lasted about ninety minutes. A
one-hour tour of the County followed with a half hour follow up question and answer
period. The purpose of the meeting and tour was to acquaint the interested
organizations with local issues pertinent to a potential TDR program in Orange County
and to gain field perspective.
All potential vendors have been given copies of the TDR concept, a time line of planning
activities related to a TDR program, a Planning Board rural area study committee report
on preserving rural character, the Stoney Creek Basin Small Area Plan, the 2003
"Shaping Orange County's Future" document, and maps illustrating all conservation
easements, sewer service agreements, and properties in use value programs.
Responses to the RFO are due on August 13. As a reminder, there will be a RFO
selection team including the County Manager, the Purchasing Department, the
Engineering Department, ERCD, the Economic Development Department, and the
Planning and Inspections Department. The TDR work will possibly be atwo-phased
program; first an investigation of the feasibility of such a program, including various
parameters and a program "backbone" presentation to the BOCC, and second, if the
To: John Link, County Manager, BOCC members
20
BOCC wishes, to pursue formalization of a program with informal community outreach,
as a prerequisite to the formal public hearing regulation implementation process,
ORGANIZATIONS RESPONDING TO THE TDR RFQ
Consultant Address City, State Telephone FAX/email
ZIP
The Louis 1513 Walnut NC
Cary 919 467 cszwarckooCa louisberoer.com
Berger Group Street, Suite ,
27511 3885
250
UNC Charlotte 9201 Charlotte 704-687- vbbowmanCa~email.uncc.edu
,
Urban Institute, University NC 28223 2314
Land Use & City
Environmental Boulevard
Plannin
Robert J, 104 Surfview Emerald 252 354 robwillCa~earthlink.net
Goldstein & Road Isle, NC 3148
Associates 28594
.lordan, Jones, 9101 Charlotte, 704 527 IfraserColjjg.mm
& Goulding Southern Pine NC 28273 4106
Boulevard,
Suite 160
Clarion 1526 EBSt Chapel Hill 919 968 cmeadowsCo~darionassociates.com
,
Associates Franklin NC 27714 7935
Street, #102
American 24 Court Graham, 336 221 ocohnC~farmland.oro
Farmland Trust Square NW, NC 27253 0707
Suite 203
Triangle J P, O, Box Research 919 558 benhColticoo
Council of 12276 Triangle 9397
Governments Park, NC
27709
These consultants may be teamed with other legal and fiscal analysis consultants
before the final RFO submittal.
21
Attachment A
Revised Proposed SCOPE OF SERVICES
Orange County Transfer of Development Rights
Feasibility Study & Preliminary Plan
Project Overview
Orange County, North Carolina ("the Client") is located in the northern piedmont region of
North Cazolina, with its county seat in historic Hillsborough, NC, The unincorporated azea in the
County's jurisdiction is predominantly rural, although growth is accelerating in the southern
portion of the County around Chapel Hill and Carrboro, and to a lesser extent, Hillsborough..
The County wishes to plan for and manage its growth in ways that are fiscally responsible and
that provide for maintaining the rural and small town character of the County..
The Client wishes to conduct a feasibility study and develop a preliminary plan for a Transfer of
Development Rights ("TDR") program, incorporating these objectives:
• Sustainably balance rural and urban areas
Direct growth and development -
o Away from important natural and cultural resources; and
o Towards areas more able to support municipal services and urban densities,
• Provide working farms with an alternative income potential.
• Link zoning densities to comprehensive plan goals and objectives.
The Louis Berger Group ("LBG") is one of the largest consulting organizations in the United
States with more than 20 domestic offices. LBG offers an outstanding base of specialized
professionals with proven capabilities in: Regional Economics; Urban and Regional Plazming;
Demographics; Public and Project Finance; Transportation Planning and Traffic Engineering:
Urban Design and Architecture; Civi] and Environmental Engineering; Environmental Science;
Historic and Archaeological Resources; and, Public Involvement.
The UNC Chazlotte Urban Institute ("the Institute") was created in 1969 as anon-profit, non-
partisan, applied reseazch and consulting services outreach unit of the University of North
Catalina at Charlotte, The Institute provides a wide range of services, including technical
assistance and training, public opinion surveys, land-use and natural resources consulting,
economic development research, and community planning to meet the needs of the region and its
citizens.
LBG and the Institute (together, the "Project Team") will assist the Client in achieving its TDR
planning objectives, by providing land use planning consulting and applied research services to
the Client as described in the project services description that follows, including production and
delivery of the tangible deliverables listed below, according to the schedule set forth in the
timetable below, for the fees and other cost reimbursement as described below.
LBG and UNC Charlotte Revised Proposal I i .04.04
za
Client Role
The Client will:
o Administer the contractual agreement between the Client and the Project Team, ensuring
timely payment as provided in the contract, and seeking Client approval of modifications
to this Scope of Services as needed and agreed upon by the Project Team and the
Planning Department staff.
o Appoint members of a Taslc Force to establish overall goals for the TDR planning
process, review the Project Team's work product, establish a network of stakeholder
connections, and generate citizen participation in the TDR planning process.
o Designate (a) Planning Department staff member(s) to:
o Provide oversight and guidance to the Project Team in the management of the
project process, providing necessazy background information to the Project Team,
and providing feedback about the project's progress and the Project Team's
management of the project throughout each phase.
o Act as liaison between the Project Team and other Client entities (such as the
County Commissioners, County Manager's office, the Task Force, and other
County agencies whose participation in the project is desired.)
o Provide relevant County data and other information to the Project Team, such as:
^ Copies of prior studies or reports,
^ GIS files in the County's possession,
^ Statistical files in the County's possession,
^ Contact information for key individuals the Project Team may work with,
o Provide timely review and critiquing of the Project Team's work product prior to
public release or' public review and comment.
o Receive from the Project Team the deliverables identified in this Scope of
Services, distribute final work product to Taslc Force members and others as
needed or desired, and reproduce additional copies as needed at Client's expense.
o Reserve meeting space for Task Force and Planning Staff/Project Team meetings.
o Distribute meeting notices, agendas, minutes, and other project-related communications
to the Task Force, the Planning Board, and the County Commission, and inform them of
the dates, times, and locations of any project-related public meetings. (Note that the
agendas for Task Force and public meetings will be drafted by the Project Team for
review by the Client, and that the Project Teani will be responsible for public
conununications about the Public Forums..)
o Provide introductory remarks as desired at public meetings related to this project, and
rely on the Project Team to present the final Plan or interim results of the planning
process at such meetings.
o Publish legally required public notices of fornlal public hearings related to the project, if
any.
Services
The P%ject Team will provide all services necessary to perform the work plan as described
below and to produce the deliverables as described below, except for those tasks specifically
reserved to Client as described in "Client Role" above.. The Project Team's role in the
development of a TDR feasibility study and preliminary plan includes Project Management,
LBG and UNC Charlotte Revised Proposal 11 04.04
2.3
Research and Analysis, Public Engagement Process Design and Facilitation, and Plan Document
Design and Production, which in general ternrs will involve:
a. Managing the timely and cost-effective carrying out of the research and planning process
to produce a study and preliminary plan that fulfills the Client's objectives;
b, Conducting the data gathering, research and analyses that form the foundation for an
effective plan;
a Designing and facilitating an effective public engagement process that builds on that
research-based foundation and generates community consensus on TDR options for the
Client;
d. Working with the TDR Task Force ("the Task Force") to establish overall goals for the
TDR planning process, review work product produced by the Project Team, establish a
network of stakeholder connections and generate citizen participation in the TDR
planning process;
e, Working with the Planning staff to coordinate project meetings and public forums,
review work product produced by the Project Team, modify as needed this Scope of
Services, and administer the contractual agreement between the Client and the Project
Team;
f. Securing meeting locations for all public meetings related to the project;
g. Providing ample notice to the Client of the date, time, and place of all such meetings.
The Project Team proposes to accomplish this through the following 3-phased program of work:
Phase I - Baclcaround Research and Data Gathering
A. Collect & review existing public documents and data files, such as GIS and other land
use data files, copies of prior studies & reports, etc. (LBG and Institute)
L.BG and UNC Charlotte Revised Proposal 11.04.04
B. Conduct key person interviews (LBG and Institute)
24
v. :Collect property valuation records (preferably in digital format - GIS or
MS Access database) and trends in sales ratio data from County assessor's
department. Review assessor current assrunptions and practices regazding
the cost of various building types and differentials in the County by
vi. Interview Department personnel responsible for the Lands Legacy
Program; Agricultural Use Value Program and. Forest Use Value Prograzn
to revievr recent trends, patterns and the use value of preserved parcels.
~estigate the current and'future supply of residential, commercial and industrial
ielopment in the County with particular attention to the spatial patterns of
>plyin the unincorporated aeeas.
i. ,Supply characteristics and trends, opportunities and tlueats to the County
real estate market will be examined in a series of select interviews with
realtors (i:e, commercial, industrial, residential) and economic
ii. Investigate local build-out analyses, zoning ordinances and vacant land
inventories for a determination of future supply
iii, To estimate the annual absorption levels of the future supply of residential
and nonresidential'development, the team .will use several data sources
including recent population trends, building permits, labor mazket and
employment trends, and tax assessor records.
iv ;Summazize preliminary issues and opportunities (LBG and Institute)
D. Develop a Public Participation Plan (LBG)
E. Research & analyze relevant NC case law (Institute)
F. Research & analyze relevant TDR case studies (Institute and LBG)
G. Meet with Planning Staff (Institute and LBG):
1. Project Start - Meet with Planning Deprtment Staff to:
i. Establish working procedures and initial detailed schedules/deadlines;
ii. Identify public documents, data files, and key persons for Project Team to
review/work with;
iii. Identify existing programs for evaluation of TDR implications
iv. Review draft agenda for first Task Force meeting
2. Phase 1 Completion - to review results of background research & data gathering,
including swmnary of preliminary issues & opportunities
H. Task Force Meeting # 1 -review planning process, Task Force role, and basic TDR
concepts (LBG and Institute)
Phase II -Generate & Review TDR O~ons (Feasibility Studyl
A. Assess Sending Areas potential with Task Force
1, Identify eligible areas (hrstitute)
LBG and i1NC Charlotte Revised Proposal I 104.04
25
i. Eligibility criteria;
ii. Down-zoning of Sending Areas ("mandatory" TDR) vs. existing zoning
densities for Sending Areas ("voluntary");
iii. Criteria for awarding TDR credits uniform vs. variable scales, & ratio of
TDR credits to existing development rights);
2.` Develop TDR Feasibility Assessment Model Sending Module (LBG)
i. A spreadsheet model in EXCEL will be prepared drat will facilitate the
exploration of key: variables and enable a series. of "what if' scenarios to
be investigated. The model will support a systematic exploration of the
range of outcomes for market feasibility by substituting values of key
variables. Scenarios will account for important elements in the TDR
program that would be subject to change or variation including the
administrative framework (ie., free market approach, laid banking
system), existing development density, as-of-.right zoning density, quantity
of vacant'developable land,'land value, sales or mazket prices, etc.
ii. The model would utilize the build-out estimates from the residential and
nonresidential supply analysis in Phase I to determine the available. credits
iii. The appropriate property appraisal technique,(e.g„ sales, net income
replacement cost) will be applied to estimate the value of the transferred
development credit, adjusting as needed for the costs of land and
improvements by location in the County.
B. Assess Receiving Areas potential with Task Force
1. Identify eligible areas (Institute)
i. Eligibility criteria;
ii. Criteria for using TDR credits maximum TDR limits & ratio to TDR
credits to dwelling unit or floor area densities)
~elop TDR Feasibility Assessment Model -Receiving Module (LBG)
i. 'For the receiving areas, the spreadsheet model would again be designed to
facilitate different "what if' scenazios reflecting different values for key
vaziables l(i.e, "as-of-right" densities, higher proposed densities;
absorption rates, construction costs, capitalization rates, infrastructure
spare the as-of-rightdensity of the receiving areas to
'residential demand (both from Phase I) to
iemand for transferred development credits.
rty appraisal technique will be applied to estimate
;reed development credit.
C. Assess Issues, Constraints, Opportunities
1. Legal & Administrative (Institute)
2. Financial (LBG)
D. Develop Feasibility Decision Flowchart (LBG)
E, Explore Implications of TDR For existing programs (Institute)
L,BG and UNC Charlotte Revised Proposal 11.04.04
26
F. Identify Mechanisms for Creating TDR Program (LBG and Institute)
G, Prepare summary feasibility report (LBG and hrstitute)
H. Meet with Planning Staff (LBG and Institute):
o Prior to each Task Force and public meeting, to review agenda and materials
prepared, plus 2 interim results review meetings
I. Task Force Meetings (LBG and Institute):
o .3 meetings, to review interim and final feasibility study results, and prepare for
public meetings
J. Public Meeting -introducing planning process and TDR concepts (LBG and Institute)
Phase III -Develop Preliminary TDR Plan (Preferred TDR Options)
A. Identify Preferred Approach, via (LBG and Institute):
1. Task Force recommendations;
2. Public Meeting(s) input;
B. Develop Legal & Administrative procedures recommendations (Institute):
1. Integrating TDR into existing County ordinances vs, a TDR ordinance;
2. Administrative and legal procedures for transferring and receiving TDRs;
3. Private vs. public roles in effecting TDR transactions (free market, free market
with aCounty-operated TDR Bank, County-controlled mazket);
4. Public involvement in Plan refinement prior to adoption;
5. Organizing to provide support for an ongoing TDR program public awareness,
TDR information center, funding for County TDR purchases, coordination with
municipalities, utilities, NCDOT,
C. Develop implementation cost estimates (LBG)
D, Prepare summary report /preliminary plan document (LBG and Institute)
E. Prepaee Master CDs with electronic form of project deliverables (LBG and Institute)
F. Meet with Planning Staff (LBG and Institute):
o Prior to each Task Force and public meeting, to review agenda and materials
prepared
G. Task Force Meetings (LBG and Institute):
0 2 meetings, to select preferred TDR option, review preliminary plan, and prepare
for public meetings
H. Public Meetings (LBG and Institute):
0 2 meetings, to review feasibility study results, and to review preliminary plan
Note: this work plan and Scope of Services do not include the following steps that may follow
should Client decide to proceed beyond a preliminary TDR plan to developing and implementing
a more comprehensive TDR plan:
LBG and LING Charlotte Revised Proposal 11.04.04
27
• Refine the Preliminary Plan:
o Implement a thorough public involvement process to validate or modify the
preliminary plan's key components and implementation recommendations.
o Identify and map specific eligible Sending and Receiving areas.
o Draft specific ordinance language .
• Explore formal participation by municipalities in Orange County.
^ If required, obtain enabling legislation from the NC General Assembly.
^ Conduct a formal TDR Program adoption process, including public hearing and County
Commission vote on adoption of TDR ordinance language and TDR Plan.
Assumptions
The timetable and fees proposed in this scope of services are based on the following
assumptions:
0 9 meetings with Planning Staff, approximately 2 hours duration each, of which 6
may be conducted via conference call for Institute team members
0 6 Task Force meetings, approximately 1.5 hours duration each, of which 5 will be
attended by Institute team members
o .3 Public Meetings, approximately 1.5 hours duration each, all of which will be
attended by Institute team members
o Approximately 20 documents or' statistical files, and .30 GIS layers to be reviewed
o Approximately 14 key person interviews, of which 10-11 can be accomplished in
two full-day sessions in Hillsborough, and the remainder of which can be
conducted via telephone
o Approximately 12 GIS layers will be created by the Prgject Team for final
delivery to the Client
o Written deliverables meet the production specifications as described in the
Deliverables section of this Scope of Services
Aeliverables
Public Participation Plan:
o Written plan document covering recommendations for public participation,
implementation steps and cost estimates: stapled hardcopy version of the .3-6 page
approved Public Participation Plan, 1 copy, all pages black and white including cover.
Feasibility Study:
o Written report documenting background research, TDR options explored (including
potential sending and receiving areas), assessments of legal, financial, and administrative
issues, constraints, and opportunities (including implications for existing programs),
decision flowchart, and mechanisms for creating TDR program: GBC or spiral bound
hardcopy version of the 50-75 page approved Feasibility Study Report, 1 copy, 10 pages
color plus color covers, remainder black and white.
Preliminary Plan:
o Written plan document covering preferred TDR option, recommendations for legal and
administrative procedures, and cost estimates: GBC or spiral bound hardcopy version of
LIIG and UNC Charlotte Revised Proposal 11.04,04
28
the 30-50 page approved Preliminary TDR Plan, 1 copy, 10 pages color plus color
covers, remainder black and white.
Master CD containing electronic file versions of:
o Public Pazticipation Plan
o Feasibility Study, including decision flowchart
o Preliminary Plan
o GIS layers created by the Project Team relevant to the preferred TDR option
LBG and UNC Charlotte Revised Proposal 11.04.04
29
Timetable
The contract shall be fora 14-month time period, effective as of the approval of the Orange
County Commissioners. The duration of the project is anticipated to be 12 months, with each
phase of the project as follows:
Phase I 3 months
Phase II 6 months
Phase III 3 months
A contract contingency of 2 additional months will allow time for project delays beyond the
control of either the Project Team or the Client, and end of project administrative work..
The timeline chazt attached as "Attachment B" details the anticipated schedule for the main steps
outlined in the Services work plan.
Fees
Fees payable by the Client will be as follows:
Total Planning consulting/applied research services fees: $ 52,204
o Project Management, Research & Analysis, Meetings Facilitation, Report Writing
Optional additional services fees:
o Website design (if included in final approved Public Participation Plan): tbd
These lump sum fees include Project Team expenses for labor and materials
required to fulfill the program of work given the assumptions listed above, and
create and produce the deliverables listed above, except for fees for these
expenses:
o GIS or other data or reports that must be obtained from third parties
o Public Participation Plan communications expenses, to be estimated separately
All fees will be payable to the Louis Berger Group. The Louis Berger Group and the Institute
will prorate the fee amounts between them as they may independently agree.
Fee schedule is as follows
o Total fees will be prorated by estimated monthly percent of project completion based on
Attachment B, Project Timeline, and will be invoiced and payable monthly..
o Optional service fees:
If' approved, prorated and invoiced and payable monthly.
Amendments
This Scope of Services maybe amended by mutual written agreement between the Project Team
and the Client.
End Scope of Services as of November 4, 2004.
L BG and UNC Charlotte Revised Proposal 11,04.04