HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-03-2000-9aORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 3, 2000
Action Agenda
Item No. Q -q
SUBJECT: Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Grou Re ort
DEPARTMENT: ERCD /Recreation and Parks PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S):
BOCC Open Space Task Force report
(includes one Resolution)
JMRP Work Group Report (previously
provided)
JMRP Executive Summary
Schedule of Review !Comments from
Other Boards
Resolution -Open Facilities Policy
Article from The Amicus Journal
INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Stancil, 245-2590
Bob Jones, 245-2661
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough 732-8181
Chapel Hill 968-4501
Durham 688-7331
Mebane 33fi-227-2031
PURPOSE: To consider comments received on the Joint Master Recreation and Parks
(JMRP) Work Group report, and a report from the BOCC Open Space Task Force, along with
two resolutions.
BACKGROUND: On May 26, 1999, the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group
completed its report. The Work Group was comprised of one elected ofFcial from each
jurisdiction and school board, along with representatives from Duke University, UNC, OWASA
and the town and County recreation advisory boards. This report served as a follow-up effort to
the 1996 and 1997 inter jurisdictional reports on recreation and parks issues in the County. The
Work Group's charge also included exploring ways to develop a joint long-range capital facilities
plan for orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro and (later) Hillsborough.
The JMRP report was received by the Board on June 21, 1999, and referred to the Town and
County advisory 'boards, followed by review and comment from the Town elected boards. A
schedule of review, along with a summary of board comments, is attached.
There are nine recommendations in the Work Group report:
A. Create an Inter-Jurisidictional "Parks Council"
B. Ask the new Parks Council to develop standards parameters for parks and recreation
services
C. Continue to make co-locating schools and park sites a priority
D. Pursue public-private partnerships to provide facilities and services (such as with OWASA,
UNC and Duke)
E. Coordinate land acquisition through County Lands Legacy program and synchronize
jurisdiction's capital improvement plans (CIP's)
F. Adopt an Open Facilities Policy
G. Keep existing payments-in-lieu of recreation programs but explore other options
H. Address, existing parkland deficit :(645 acres now, 1265 acres by 2025)
I. Begin proactive land banking, using the current $3 million parkland bond and plan for a new
parks/open space bond of $$ million, or mare.
With consideration of the Chapel Hill Town', Council completed on April 10, all of the advisory
and elected boards have considered the report. The Town of Carrboro has adopted the Open
Facilities Policy resolution (attached), and has proposed ways to address the resolution that
could create the Inter-Jurisdictional "Parks Council".,The Town of Hillsborough did not take any
action at their review, but is scheduled to consider both resolutions in the near future. The
Chapel Hill Town Council adopted the Open Facilities Policy and agreed to recommendations
C, D, E, F -and I above. The Council also indicated agreement with the concept of a Parks work
group, calling for further discussion of the concept and asking that equity issues raised in their
staff report be reviewed.
The BOCC Open Space Task Farce met on April 4 and April 11 to discuss the Parks Council
and other issues raised during the review of the Master Recreation and Parks Work Group
report, and has prepared a report to address these concerns. The report includes an alternate
resolution to reconfigure the Parks Council into an Intergovernmental Parks Work Group, and
revises the MRP report recommendations accordingly (please see attached)'. Please. note that.
the Executive Summary a~th_e JMRP resort included with this agenda has. not been revised in
this fashion.
Prior to consideration of the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group report, the Board
has taken several actions relevant to parks planning, including adoption of parkland criteria and
the Lands Legacy program. A Memorandum of Agreement has also been developed by the
Schools and Land Use Councils regarding co=location of facilities.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with the report or the two
resolutions. A proactive land-banking program through the Lands Legacy Program would
involve use of the existing park bond money and other funding sources to be identified (possibly
including the School/Park Reserve and the Recreation Payment-in-Lieu funds).
RECOMMENDATION(S~: The Manager recommends that the Board adopt the Open Facilities
Policy resolution and the report of the BOCC Open Space Task Force, including:
1. The resolution ~r fiorming an Intergovernmental Parks Work Group, and
2. The revised ' report recommendations consistent with this resolution.
Consistent with the Open Space Task Force report, the Manager would propose to convene a
meeting with the other managers to further facilitate the process of resolving issues raised by
the Towns on capital funding and other issues.
Finally, the Manager recommends that the Board consider placing unresolved issues on the
October 30, 2000 Assembly of Governments meeting. At this meeting, the Managers' would
report on the planning and funding issues, including coordinated capital funding through
synchronized CIP's and a proactive approach to future (FY 2001-2002 and beyond) parks land-
banking through the Lands Legacy program.
3
Memorandum
To: Board of Commissioners
John Link, County Manager
From: Open Space Task Force (Margaret Brown and Alice Gordon)
Date: April 13, X000
Re: Report on Joint Master Recreation and Parks Report Issues
On April 4 and April li, the Open Space Task Force met with ERCD Director
David Stancil, Planning Director Craig Benedict and Recreation and Parks Director
Bob ]ones.
The Task Force has developed two products for the Board's consideration. First,
an alternative resolution for a proposed Intergovernmental Parks Work Group to
address the proposed Parks Council and issues raised about the charge of that
group. Second, based on this concept, a revised set of recommendations from
the report (consistent with these changes) is provided for the Board's
consideration. The resolution and revised recommendations are attached. P/ease
note that the Executive Summary of the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work
Group report has not been updated in accordance with the revised
recommendations attached.
In reviewing the resolution and revised recommendations, we would note the
following:
The Board has taken several relevant actions related to the findings of this
report, including adoption and use of the parkland criteria (as amended) and
adoption of the Lands Legacy program -both of which provide a vehicle for
parkland acquisitions.
The Schools and Land Use Councils have also developed a Memorandum of
Agreement regarding the co-location of facilities.
It shouil noted that no attempt has been made to comb back through the
report ~p make the revised recommendations consistent with previous text.
To the extent that the report text differs from the revised recommendations,
the revised recommendations (attached) are intended to control.
Based on the discussion from the Town Boards, the BOCC Open Space Task
Farce recommends that, if the Board approves of this approach, the resolution
and revised recommendations be sent back to the Town boards for their
consideration, and that contact be made with the City of Mebane to ascertain
their interest in participating.
4
A Resolution Regarding the Establishment of an Intergovernmental
Parks Work Group (IP Work Group)
WHEREAS, the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group effort brought
together representatives of the Towns, County, school boards, OWASA, Duke
and the University of North Carolina to develop a report on the future of parks
planning in the County; and
WHEREAS, the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group completed its
task on schedule and fostered a spirit. of communication and collaboration that
the Board of Commissioners desires to maintain; and
WHEREAS, the future of parks planning and development in the County will be
facilitated by information exchange and coordination among the aforementioned
parties; and
WHEREAS, a group created in the the Spirit and nature of the Joint Master
Recreation and Parks Work Group could foster these goals:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED -that the Orange County Board of
Commissioners proposes that an Intergovernmental Parks Work Group be
created to address important issues arising from the Joint Master Recreation and
Parks Work Group report. This Intergovernmental Parks Work Group would serve
in lieu'of the proposed Parks Council, with the following charge:
To build on the momentum of the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group
process by accomplishing the following:
1. To gather, exchange and share information on parks p/arming and deve%pment in
the municipalities and County.
1. To maintain and update the Inventory of Parks and Recreation Facilities deve%ped
as part of the Joint Master Recreation and Parks report; including new properties
acquired or dedicated
3. To foster communication between die municipa/ibes and County on future
opportunities and collaborative ventures
4. To prov/de a coordinating mechanism far updates to parks and recreation plans in
each juriction
5 To rev>e ancf inform the municipalities and County concerning parks needs and
potentiaf~oppr~rtvnitres
6. To develop parameters far parks standards (leaving flexibility for the actual
standards to vary from jurisdicrion to jurisdiction within these parameters)
7. To deve%p and coordinate public education and public outreach on parks issues
(coordinated brochures, etc)
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the administrative, tenure and membership
components of the Work Group be addressed as provided in Attachment A,
"Proposed Intergovernmental Parks Work Group," and that this resolution be
forwarded to the Carrboro Board of Aldermen, Chapel Hill Town Council,
Hillsborough Board of Commissioners and Mebane City Council, for their
consideration..
This, the 17ti' dey of April, 2000.
Moses Carey, Jr., Chair
Orange County Commissioners
ATTEST:
Beverly Blythe, CIerK to the Boarq .or commissioners
Mayor, Town of Carrboro
ATTEST:
Carrboro Town Clerk
Mayor, Town of Chapel Hill
ATTEST:
Chapel Hill Town Clerk
Mayor, Town. of Hillsborough
ATTEST:
--- Hillsborough Town Clerk
Mayor, City of Mebane
ATTEST:
Mebane City Clerk
5
Attachment A
Proposed Intergovernmental, Parks Work Group (IP Work Group)
Membershi
The proposed Work Group would consist of 17 members:
• One member -Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Council
• One member -Chapel Hill Parks and Recreation Commission or Greenways
Commission
• One member - Carrboro Parks and Recreation Board
• One member -Hillsborough Parks and Recreation Board
• One member - OWASA Board of Directors
• One member -University of North Carolina
• One member -Duke Forest Resource Manager
• One member -Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Board of Education (or designee of
Board)
• One member -Orange County Schools Board of Education (or designee of Board)
• One member -Orange County Board of Commissioners (or designee of Board)
• One member - Carrboro Board of Aldermen (or designee of Board)
• One member -Chapel Hill Town Council (or designee of Board)
One member -Hillsborough Board of Commissioners (or designee of Board)
• One member -Mebane City Council (or designee of Board)
• One member -Orange County Commission for the Environment
• One member -Triangle Land Conservancy
• One member -Eno River Association
* -Each Board listed above could also designate an alternate member, if desired.
Advisory board and elected representatives from each jurisdiction would be
appointed by the elected board of that jurisdiction.
McEtings
The Work Group would meet three times per year (fall, winter and spring)
Tenure -
The Work p will work for three years (July 2000-June 2003), providing
yearly reports and a final report in June 2003. If desired afker three years, the
participating parties may make it a permanent, standing group.
Charge
To build on the momentum of the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group
process by accomplishing the following:
7
1. To gather, exchange and share information on parks planning and
development in the municipalities and County.
2. 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
3. To foster communication between the municipalities and County on future
opportunities and collaborative ventures
4. To provide a coordinating mechanism for updates to parks and recreation
plans in each jurisdiction
5. To review and inform the municipalities and County concerning parks needs
and potential opportunities
6. To develop parameters for parks standards (leaving flexibility for the actual
standards to vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction within these parameters)
7. To develop and coordinate public education and public outreach on parks
issues (coordinated brochures, etc)
Nature of Work Group and Staffing Arrangements
The Intergovernmental Parks Work Group would be truly inter jurisdictional,
providing information to all elected boards on the areas listed above. It would
not be a formal advisory board of any jurisdiction. Staffing for the Task Force
would be of a joint nature, including:
• the Parks and Recreation Directors from Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Mebane and
Orange County
• the Environment and Resource Conservation Director from Orange County.
The Environment and Resource Conservation Director will be responsible for
administration, agenda preparation and meeting coordination -working with the
Parks and Recreation Directors.
Proposed changes from BOCC Open Space Task Force shown in bold italic
From the ]oint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group Report
VII. REC~MMENDATIQNS
One of the important results of this report will be the laying of groundwork
for future matching funds and grant,programs -- many of which require a set
of goals, objectives and criteria. As Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro and
Hillsborough develop, the nature of future park and recreation provision will
likely include cooperative ventures among the local governments and
partnerships with organizations such as the school systems, OWASA, UNC
and Duke. Planning for this eventuality should begin now, to ensure that
valuable opportunities are not lost. These concepts were in fact, the reason
for this effort, as described in the Assembly of Governments and Manager's
reports from 1996/199.
In its deliberations, the Master Recreation and Parks Work Group (MRP Work
Group) has developed recommendations in nine key areas:
A. Create an Intergovernmental Parks Work Group,
(IP Work Group)
In developing plans for long-term recreation and parks planning,
there will be a need for a permanent joint
Intergovernmental Parks Work Group (IP Work Group).
For example, this IP Work Group might include one elected
official and one citizen from each jurisdiction's parks advisory
board, along with representatives from the school systems,
UNC, OWASA, Duke and others. The IP Work Group could
meet three times per year over the next three years, to
address follow-up concerns in the areas discussed in this report.
The opportunity in the MRP Work Group to bring all of the
different local governments to the table has been useful and
informative, and the MRP Work Group feels that this momentum
could be continued through along-term mechanism. While the
actual duties of the Intergovernmental Parks Work Group
would need to be determined, some areas of responsibility
might include:
l: To gainer, exchange and share information on parks planning and
deve%pment in the municipalities and County.
2 To maintain and update the Inventory of Parks and Recreation
Facilities deve%ped as part of the Joint Master Recreation and Parks
report including new properties acquired or dedicated
9
3. To foster communication between the municipalities and County on
future opportuniries and col/aborative ventures
4. To provide a coordinating mechanism far updates to parks and
recreation plans in each jurisdiction
5. To review and inform the municipa/ides and County cianaerning
parks needs and potential opportunities
6. To deve%p parameters for parks standards (leaving flexibility for the
actual standards to vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction within these
parameters)
7. To deve%p and coordinate public education and public outreach on
parks issues (coordinated brochures, etc)
The creation of this IP Work Group is a critical component of
future coordination. By its nature, the IP Work Group should
share information with the Schools/Land Use Councils on the
potential for for school/park co-location. This report contains
criteria and details that build on the ideas of the School/Land
Use Memorandum of Agreement. A resolution asking the local
governments to create the Intergovernmental Parks Work
Group in time for an initial meeting in fall of 2000 is attached
as Appendix L.
B. Inter-jurisdictional Efforts To Standardize Parks
and Recreation Requirements
Currently, the municipalities and County have a number of
different standards that are used to determine parks and
recreation needs. While recognizing the distinctions between
urban and rural needs and facilities, it does appear that
coordination of-the different approaches would provide a
number of advantages. In particular, if the local governments
pursue joint capital funding, land acquisition, and other
combined functions, the need for a consistent countywide set of
standards will be paramount.
Therefore, it is recommended that the Intergovernmental
Parks Work Group address, among their first duties, a
coordinated set of recommended parameters, within which
each jurisdiction would have standards for parks and
recreation.
C. ]oint Siting, Design, and Management of School and
Park Sites across ]urisdictions
The Schools and Land Use Councils have opened an important door in the
co-location of schools and parks. With an avenue for input into the design
and planning stages, the local governments and schools will be able to
10
provide for a number of parks and recreation needs. Concerns about
management of these facilities should be resolvable, with the Schools and
Land Use Councils providing an important role in consensus-building. As
mentioned above, sharing ofinformation between the
lntergovenmenta/ Parks Work Group and the Schools/Land Use
Councils will be paramount.
As further research is developed on the specifics of a program far
school/park acquisition, the MRP Work Group suggests that Orange
County, with its role in school site acquisition and program/staff
resources for land acquisition may best play a coordinating role in future
land acquisitions for both purposes.
D. Public/Private Partnerships
As mentioned above, one of the most exciting prospects far the future of
recreation and parks provision in Orange County is that of public/private
partnerships. Coordination with OWASA and UNC in locating future parks
and facilities seems feasible, and the Work Group recommends that the
local governments
work to identify properties for potential partnership and meet
to explore these possibilities. In particular, the identified need for a large
district park between Chapel Hill-Carrboro and Hillsborough might be a
venture that all parses would have a stake in.
Additionally, partnerships with other entities may take on different roles.
Coordination with Duke University is also recommended, although it is
recognized that Duke Forest is of a different nature. Duke Forest plays an
important role in the open space network of fhe~County, and future
discussion of that role as links in a corridor or trail system will be critical.
Fnally, the potential for coordination with Triangle Land Conservancy, the
State of North Carolina, the ono River Association and private firms
appears to exist and should be encouraged where practical.
E. ]oint Capital i=acilities Plan /Coordinated Land
Identification, Acquisition and Banking
~ the local grnrernments in Orange County are to be successful in
providing for the long-term needs of County and munieipa/residents, it
is clear that joint capital funding and land-banking efforts need to be
addressed, and should be addressed as quickly as possible. A meeting of
Manage should be called to develop a
plan far coordination.
It is clear that land prices will continue to escalate. Potential larger park.
areas inside the Chapel Hill-Carrboro area are quite limited, which will
require planning for future joint district parks in the County. This, plus the
11
inability to accumulate sufficient funds individually, leads to a strong
recommendation that Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro and
Hillsborough develop a plan to coordinate funding sources in future years.
It is recommended that the aforementioned meeting of Managers
from the jurisdictions occur as soon as possible.
Use of the different Capital Improvement Programs (CIF's) could be a
fundamental part of this mechanism. As previously-mentioned, Orange
County's Lands Legacy program for land aaquisidon might allow the
County to take a lead role in coordinating future acquisitions, most of
which will likely be located outside of Town corporate limits.
F. Open Facilities Policy
In the spirit of inter-governmental coordination, the MRP Work Group
believes that citizens of the munrcipa/ides and County should have the
opportunity to use facilities developed by all of the local governments and
OWASA. Attempting to limit use of facilities solely to residents on a single
jurisdiction is likely to be cumbersome administratively and not
constructive generally.
The MRP Work Group recommends that Orange County, Chapel Hill,
Carrboro, Hillsborough and OWASA adopt the "Open Facilities Policy"
resolution found in Appendix I. This policy will provide that all recreation
facilities owned and operated by the parties are open and accessible to all
County residents.
To a different degree, a policy regarding use of local government facilities
by UNC students and of UNC facilities by local citizens should be
investigated with the University. A particular possibility is the UNC
Outdoor Education Center, and cooperative ventures for this facility
should be pursued now.
Additionally, coordination with OWASA on recreational hours at the lake
facilities is another venue for partnership, and the MRP Work Group
recommends that OWASA review hours of operation as suggested by the
Carrboro Board.
The local governments within which Duke Forest falls should also
cooperate with Duke in the future to develop appropriate mutual
guidelines in this area.
G. Payment-in-Lieu Changes
The payment in lieu system is used by Orange County and Carrboro as a
source of funds for recreation lands and facilities. However, because of its
limitations (both geographic and financial), payment-in-lieu programs are
unlikely to produce sufficient funds to meet long-term recreation needs. A
12
i
process is needed to use existing funds, modify the current program to
make it more practical, and develop new sources of revenue for
recreation land and facilities.
The MRP Work Group recommends that Orange County and Carrboro
develop plans to match payment-in-lieu dollars to date with parks bands
and other funding sources. With a method of pooling payment-in-lieu
across jurisdictions currently unworkable, it is recommended that the
current system of payments-in-lieu be kept. In Orange County's case; the
County should explore modifications to the system to provide for amore-
appropriate calculation of payment based on the developed property
valuation.
Finally, the future Intergovernmental Parks Work Group should
explore the establishment of a recreation impact fee or impact tax, along
the lines of existing legislation. If found prudent, a recommended impact
fee/ tax program for recreation should be developed and forwarded to
the local governments in Orange County for action.
H. Address Existing Needs
Po ulation in 2025 fors uuu
Total Parkland bleeds 3 100 acres
Parkland ~ 1 835. acres
Parkland rplus _ -1 265 acres
The combined projected population for all of Orange County in the year
2025 is 168,000. This total county population was used to assess the
level of adequacy for future years. Based on this, in the year 2000,
Orange County will need a total of 2030 acres of park/recreation land in
order to meet naiaonal adequacy standards. With current park facilities
(including projected acquisitions in the next year), a deficit of 645 acres
will exist in 2000. In 2025, the County will need 3100 acres with a current
projected deficit of 1265 acres. Details on how these projections were
Currently, countywide parkland needs are assessed in terms of types of
parks (e.g. regional, community, neighborhood, etc). While additional
work is needed in developing standards, it is possible to envision an
overview of park needs based on population standards.
13
generated may be found in Appendix 1. Based on the projected future
need for i,265new acres of parkland, the MRP Work Group has
determined that the current critical need is to begin long-term land
acquisition ("land banking'. This concept is similar to any kind of bank -
it essentially establishes a "savings account" of land. Once the savings
account has been fully funded, land can be withdrawn and developed for
specific parks and recreation needs.
Based on the most commonly accepted standards, the
county/munitipa/itieswill need the following new parks just to meet
current deficits:
The estimated cost of purchasing this acreage countywide, in 1999
dollars, is $10.12 mi//ion. Over time, the cost of purchasing land
for parks will undoubtedly rise dramatically.
Y. Recommendations for Use of Current Funds and
Future Funding Needs
Simultaneous with the population increase, land in Orange County
is rapidly increasing in value. Large tracts are being subdivided,
and options for geographic locations of parkland in every township
are diminishing. A priority for use of future funds clearly must be
land acquisition for long-term park needs, rather than simply
developing recreational facilities (which can be developed over time
as the population increases).
A program for land acquisition for long-term park needs should be
developed that identifies sites that could meet needs (including
potential for siting active and low-impact recreation), based on
projected size and location of parkland throughout the county. The
availability of matching funds from the benefiting jurisdictions .
should be an important component in future acquisition and park
development. The program should also identify an acreage
* -The tata/acreage in community parks cun~ntly exceeds acreage needs, but
the existing community parks (three in Chapel Hill, one in Carrboro and one at
Etland-Cheeks) may not meet ttre geographic needs of the County. Canmunity
park needs appear to exist in Hillsborough, northern Orange County and
southwestern Orange.
14
threshold for co-located school/park land acquisition-~ne~
~£e
To address the estimated $10.12 million in future park needs, the
following actions should 'be taken to use existing bond funds and
address long-term needs. .
1, The remaining $2.89 million in land acquisition funds from the 1997 parks
bond should be used for acquisition of lands identified as sites for long-term
parks use as soon as possible.
Z. The balance of funding should be an estimated $8 million parks bond
Developing a program for identifying and acquiring long-term park
sites at this time will greatly reduce the cost of meeting long-term
park needs.
15
Executive Summary
Report of the Joint Master Recreation and Parks
Work Group
June 15, 1999
Introduction
0n November 19, 1997, the Board of Commissioners created a Joint Master
Recreation and Parks Work Group. The Work Group was developed to follow up
on two reports: a 1996 Assembly of Governments report "Recreation and Parks
Issues in Orange County, NC", and a May 1997 report entitled "Coordination of
Parks and Recreation Services for Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Orange County",
developed by the area Managers.
The charge to the Work Group was to:
"update and modify the Master Recreation and Parks Plan to be a joint long-
range capital facilities plan for Orange County, Carrboro and Chapel Hill... "
Although not listed in the charge, Town of Hillsborough and OWASA
representatives participated in the work group effort. In accomplishing this task
the Work Group was asked to address the following topics:
- An update of recreational facilities countywide
- An update of local recreation and parks needs
- Develop standards far park facilities and design
- Joint siting, design and management of school and park sites
- Tangible and realistic parkland acquisition foals
- Reassess payment-in-lieu of dedication programs (and service area
boundaries far programs)
- Dedication provisions for greenways in the Joint Planning Area
The Work Group began on December 17, 1997. The group met monthly over the
next 17 nir~ths (induding six months of additional subcommittee work) to
produce a r~xrt. While the Work Group reviewing a great deal of research and
discussed a wide variety of topics, a summary of the report may best be
considered in the following six topical categories:
1. Where Are We Now?
In evaluating the status of recreation and parks in the County, the Work Group
created two committees. The Resource Inventory Committee worked during the
spring and summer of 1998 to develop a template for tracking all existing
recreational facilities, and discuss a map or brochure to convey these facilities to
16
the public. The inventory of facilities (including quasi-public and private "fee-
based" locations) is included as Appendix C to the report. The inventory would
be maintained for future use,. and contains information on the type of activities
available at each location.
The Needs Assessment Committee met during the spring and summer of 1998 to
update recreation and parks needs from each jurisdiction, These needs are found
on pages 4-7 of the report, and run the gamut from active recreation facilities to
community parks, greenways and "low-impact" recreation. In summary, ,the
nrimarv needs identified for each iurisdiction were:
Carrboro Acquire/develop Northern Community Park,
communi mnasium
Chapel Hill Complete Northern Community Park, Southern
Communi Park
Hillsborou h River Walk Fairview Park Occoneechee Park
Orange County Complete Efland-Cheeks Park, Northam Human
Services Center Park, acquire parkland in
Bin ham/Little River Tw s
An evaluation of previous bonds and projects constructed with those monies is
also provided on pages 7-10 of the document. A summary of needs appears on
page 19.
The Work Group discussed the concept of a Countywide set of standards for
facilities and park design. The development of a common set of standards was
recognized as important, but because of time considerations was deferred by the
Work Group. Recommendation B on page 35 addresses this topic.
Z. Wh re Do We Fr m Here
With knowledge of needs and facilities, the Work Group then turned its attention
to future concerns. One such area was a set of goals and criteria for future land
acquisition and facility sitings. In general, the goals and criteria (pages 12-14)
encourage joint siting of schcmis and parks, preservation of resources in
conjunction. with parks development; awareness of environmentally-serisitive
lands, the Bence of matching funds, considering the intensity of use, and
locations fog Ilnear parks.
The work of the Schools and Land Use Councils was recognized as an important
piece of the recreation picture, and the idea of joint management of school and
park sites (as well as possible joint acquisition) is a theme throughout the report.
,one topic Ghat the report notes regards impediments to locating new active
recreation facilities. These impediments exist primarily in the context of lighting,
intensity, traffic and noise. In defining both active and low-impact recreation, it is
2
17
important to be consistent with surrounding land uses. Ideas on ways to mitigate
the impacts of larger active facilities include co-location of schools and parks,
combining active and low-impact recreation in larger, park settings to buffer
residential areas, and the need for a proactive land acquisition program to
purchase lands for long-term use as parks (and/or schools).
The potential for coordinating parks planning exists beyond the scope of the local
governments involved in this effort. In particular, the report notes the significant
potential for coordination with UNC, OWASA and Duke University in meeting
long-term needs of mutual interest. While UNC provides many facilities used by
students (and local residents), there is also an undefined impact on local
recreation facilities from faculty and staff of the University. Programs such as the
Carolina Outdoor Recreation Center offer a means for sharing resources, and the
potential exists for collaboration on Future recreational facilities with UNC.
Likewise, OWASA currently provides recreation facilities at bath University Lake
and Cane Creek Reservoir. OWASA holds over 3,000 acres of land in the County,
some of which appears to offer the opportunity for coordinated recreational use.
A memo from the OWASA Board (Appendix F) indicates a willingness. to discuss
certain parcels for future public use. And finally, Duke Forest also provides a
recreational resource to County citizens. While concerns about protecting the
integrity of the forest resources will be paramount, opportunities exist to work
with Duke in the future, particularly in terms of carefully-located trails that fit
with the University`s plans.
3. Adequate Provision of Parkland and Natural Corridors
One of the most prominent needs identified is to preserve green corridors,
whether in an urban or rural setting. This section of the report addresses the
potential for linking some existing and proposed greenway networks in Chapel
Hill, Carrboro and Hillsborough to future parks and regional open space such as
Eno River State Park and Duke Forest.
The importance of existing and future greenways in the Towns is noted, as well
as the existence of a schematic plan for greenways extending from the Chapel
Hill/Carrbot~ area into the Rural Buffer, developed in 1986 as part of the Joint
Planning A~ Land Use Plan. Wildlife corridors in the rural areas were introduced
into County planning efforts through the 1988 Inventory of Natural Areas and
Wildlife Habitat, and are important to the overall County and regional ecosystem
as part of the "green infrastructure." These corridors are undeveloped riparian
stream corridors or overland connectors that exist in a natural state. Any trails
would exist only as they have evolved over time by use of wildlife or humans.
However, as the County and Towns continue to grow, it will became important to
link Town parks to regional corridors such as Eno River State Park, nodes of
3
~;j
open space such as Duke Forest, and future County parks and open space.
Linking future rural parks and open space to Town parks via a few unpaved trails
could greatly expand low-impact recreational opportunities. The identification of
strategic corridors that might tie together these recreation facilities is suggested
as a practical long-term goal. lJsing criteria and a classification scheme, the
potential fora select few woodland trails as part of a Countywide (and
eventually) regional corridor scheme is noted. Three examples of such trail links
are offered (two within the Towns or Rural Buffer, one in the rural areas linking
Cane Creek and Eno River State Park) are offered.
4. Coordinate L nd Ac wisiti n f r Parks
The 199G and 1997 reports point to the need for coordinated capital funding,
and this is one of the goals of this project. In discussing parks needs and goals,
the Work Group placed a strong emphasis on the .need to begin land acquisition
for long-term park needs now.
Orange County has taken steps in 1999 to create a mechanism that could be
used in this fashion. The 'new Department of Environment and Resource
Conservation began operation on ,January 4, with a primary ,focus on
acquisition/easements of critical land resources. A Land Acquisition Program for
Orange County is currently being developed for discussion in the fall of 1999.
This program will develop and/or use inventories, criteria and a management
structure for the acquisition and stewardship of land resources deemed critical to
the public interest, working with other existing land trusts and entities. The
program will involve the preservation of natural areas and wildlife habitat,
farmland, riparian buffers, and the acquisition of lands for long-term parks use.
The ,County is hiring a Land Resources Conservation Manager, with expertise in
site evaluation and land acquisition this summer. This position will coordinate
land acquisition efforts, and would use the criteria developed in the Master
Recreation and Parks effort to evaluate land purchases for parks (please see the
Recommendations section for additional details). The outline of the Land
Resource Acquisition Program may be found in the report on page 26.
Funding for long-term parkland acquisition would likely involve local bonds and
allocations .and grants from ,programs such as the state Parks and Recreation
Trust Fund Information on this program is provided on pages 27-28.
P ment-in-li P r ms
All of the jurisdictions in the County have provisions in their development
ordinances addressing dedication or provision of recreation facilities. Carrboro
and Orange County also have payment-in-lieu of dedication programs, ,which
allows for the payment of a fee based on the number of lots in lieu of providing
recreation facilities. ,Orange County has special legislation that would allow for
4
19
the use of an impact fee for public uses including recreation, but this proviso has
not been utilized to date.
As of 1999, Carrboro has collected $453,On0 through its payment-in-lieu
program. Orange County currently has $488,000 available, allocated by four
districts in which the money must be spent. The County has also received land
dedications totaling 44 acres since 1986, although this land is in small pieces
exclusively in Bingham and Chapel Hill Townships.
The Work Group found that .difficulties exist with the existing payment-in-lieu
programs. The funds must be geographically earmarked and spent within the
area collected. They must also be supplemented with matching funds for use.
Considerable research was performed to explore programs in other jurisdictions,
and a special meeting with Richard Ducker from the Institute of Government was
held to review payment-in-lieu possibilities.
6. Recommendations
NDTE: T1fEr' BD4~ DPFIIf SPACE TASK fQRCE ~ , P14~'Q
y, .
~Q/KS! 7~ ; REC`~IMENDATIDNS, fiNFFH l~ll7R~
~NS~CF~IpNA ANA!'FAN®SQMEREVISIDNS IN SEfF~N~N~ . s ~:
TfflS EJ~'~^~~ SDN/~/AAII~l~' hFi4S NOT BEEN lfPDA'F~~ ~ TQ~ R~~.ECT
TffESE C~iIAIYGE~
Using the research and deliberations of 17 months, and with the charge and
goals of the project in mind, the Work Group developed nine recommendations,
summarized as follows (these recommendations also appear on pages 34-40).
A. Create a Parks and Resource Lands Council
As we move to coordinate long-term recreation and parks planning, the need for
a permanent joint council (to meet quarterly) was identified, building on the
useful nature of the Work Group itself. Possible duties might include:
- Develop and review standards
- Devek~ future parks bond proposals
- ProvidS coordinating mechanism for parks plan updates
- Make re~ommendadons on allocations of future bond moneys
- Coordinate acquisitions though the County Land Resource Acquisition
Program
A resolution asking the local boards to create the Parks and Resource Lands
Council is attached as Appendix L.
5
zo
B Interyurisdictional Standards
As previously noted, impediments exist to the creation of common standards that
could be used Countywide for recreation and parks facilities. If coordinated
funding were pursued, the need for some coordinated standard would be
important. The Parks and ,Resource Lands Council is recommended as a
mechanism to accomplish this goal.
C. Joint Siting, Design and Management of School and Park Sites
Coordinating efforts and responsibilities with the Schools and Land Use Councils
will be important, given the emphasis from both groups on the benefits of joint
school/park development. As discussed in the section on land acquisition, it is
recommended that Orange County, with dedicated staff resources, a program for
land acquisition, and a role in school;siting, should take the lead role.
D. Public/Private Partnerships
One of the mast exciting prospects is the potential for partnerships. Coordination
between the local governments on future parks, such as a large district park
between Hillsborough and Chapel Hill/Carrboro, will be paramount. Opportunities
also exist with OWASA, and it is recommended .that the Parks and Resource
Lands Council work to identify properties for partnership and meet to .explore
these possibilities. Coordination with UNC on future parks also appears practical
and should be pursued. While Duke Forest is a different type of recreational
entity, it plays an important role in the County's open space network and future
discussion of less-sensitive portions of the Forest as links in the open space
network should be pursued. Finally, opportunities for coordination with the state,
other land trusts and private firms offer many possibilities for future needs.
E. Joint Capita/ Facilities Planning /Coordinated Land Acquisition
A meeting of the Managers of each jurisdiction is recommended to develop a
plan for coordinating long-term land acquisition. With land prices continuing to
escalate and little land available for parks within the Town jurisdictions, action is
needed now to identify and acquire future park sites. Use of the individual
Capital Improvement Plans could be a fundamental part of .this funding
mechanism. 13y timing and matching fund availability, the Towns and County will
be able to vv~k together more effectively, with the County serving in a lead role
in site idenlcation and acquisition,.working with the Parks and Resource Lands
Council and the individual elected boards.
F. Open Facilities Policy
In the spirit of inter-governmental coordination, the Work Group feels that all
County citizens should have the opportunity to use facilities within the County,
regardless of their jurisdiction of residence. Attempts to restrict use will be
cumbersome administratively and not constructive in the collaborative future of
parks planning. A resolution to this end for consideration by the elected boards is
6
Z1
found as Appendix F. Pursuit of a similar policy with UNC and OWASA is
recommended, as is a review of hours of operation at Cane Creek/University
Lake.
G. Payment-in-Lieu Changes
After considerable discussion and review, the Work Group finds that the existing
payment-in-lieu programs are not likely to produce sufficient funds to meet long-
term needs. It is recommended that Orange County and Carrboro develop plans
to match other funding with the current payment-in-lieu funds to use these
resources. Even with its limitations, the existing payment-in-lieu program should
be kept and modified where possible. The potential for an impact fee or impact
tax should be explored, using existing legislation.
H. Address Existing Needs
While more thorough standards are needed, apopulation-based standard from
the 1996 Assembly of Governments report was used to determine needs for
parklands. Using this standard, the County as a whole has a current deficit of
645 acres of parkland. With expected population growth, this is County and
Towns combined with have a deFcit of 1,265 acres by the year 2025.
Based on average land sales (weighted for urban and rural lands) and existing
bond funds, the cost of purchasing lands to erase the long-term deficit is $10.12
million in 1999 dollars. Since this will unquestionably rise in the future, the Work
Group again recommends immediate action in terms of land acquisitions.
I. Use of Current Funds and Future Funding Needs
While it may be more practical to develop recreation facilities over time as the
population increases, amore-proactive approach to land acquisition is needed to
identify and purchase sites that offer both active and low-impact recreation
potential. Matching funds from the different jurisdictions (coordinated through
the aforementioned joint capital funding mechanism) should be an important
component, and an acreage threshold and additional standards for joint
school/park sites are also warranted.
To addre9s~ brrg-tens needs, the Work Group recommends that the following
actions ocEUr:
- The remaining $2.89 million for land acquisition from the County parks bond
should be used for acquisition of lands identified as sites for long-term
acquisition as soon as possible.
- The remainder of the $10 million in long-term land acquisition should be
addressed through an $S million parks bond placed before the voters in
November 2000. The Parks and Resource Lands Council should develop the
specifics of the bond proposal.
7
22
Review and Comments on the
]Dint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group Report
4/12/DO
Town of arrbor
Planning Board 8/24/99 Support the nine recommendations, develop
aggressive schedule for land acquisition and
consider interconnecting greenways between
Oran a and nei hborin counties.
Recreation and Parks 8/24/99 Recommend approval of the recommendations,
Commission - but ask Managers to meet to develop mission
and charge of "Parks Council", note that a
countywide standard far recreatipn need not be
a standard for each jurisdiction, and
acknowledge other parks costs beyond land for
future bonds
Environmental Advisory Board 8/24/99 Recommend approval of program, and that
F~4B have early input into any design of park
that would change existing natural areas, and .
that guidelines for gmenways/paths be
develo ed with Public Works Parks and Rec.
Carrboro Board of Aldermen (2/22/00): Adopted open Facilities Policy,
expressed support for findings of the report, and asked that comments from the
Town advisory boards be incorporated into the report, to be returned after
consideration by all of the jurisdictions.
Hillsborough Board of Commissioners (3/13/00): F.~cpressed general
support for~pgram and in particular, cooperative ventures. Asked about County
process fotr allocation of bond moneys for parkland. Recommended that the topic
be placed on upcoming Assembly of Governments agenda.
Town of Hillsborough
23
Town of Chanel Hill
...
Greenways Commission 12/8/99 Voted unanimously that Town Council adopt
Work Grou Re ort
Recreation and Parks 12/15/99 and Recommend Town Council adopt report as
Commission 2/2/2000 general planning tool, expressed concerns
(2/2) about Town residents priority for
programs with the Open Facilities Policy,
unified standards for all jurisdictions, and
lighting of playing fields -along with County
fundin for Town recreation o ratin costs.
Chapel Hill Town Council (4/10/00): Adopted Open Facilities Policy and
several recommendations from the report (including coordinated land
acquisitions on a case-by-case basis), asked that a Working Committee be
formed to further discuss the proposed Intergovernmental Parks Work Group
(Parks Council), and asked that equity issues raised in staff report be considered.
Orange Countv
:~. ~ ~.
Commission for the 10/11 and Supportive of program and recommendations.
Environment 11/8 Would like representation on Parks Council and
role in preservation of natural areas within
arks.
Recreation and Parks 8/24/99 Expressed support for program, and asked
Commission about the role the RPAC would play with the
ro sed Parks Council.
Plannin Board 1 1 99 No comments.
Agricultural Districts Advisory 1/19/00 Expressed general support for program. No
Board comments.
Historic Preservation 1/26/00 Express support for program and
Commission recommendations, and encouraged try
opportunity to preserve some historic sites
(carefully) in park setting as done in other
laces.
Mar-22-00 06:13P Tawn of Carrboro 919 968 7737
24
TOWN OF CARRBORO
.-~•~.
- NORTH GAROLiNA
. .
The fogowing resolution was introduced by Alderman Tacquelyn Gist and duly seconded
by Alderman Diana McDuffee.
A RESOLUTION RECEIVING THE REPORT OF TAE
MASTER REGREATTON AND PARKS WORK GROiJI~
Resolution No. 109/1999-2000
1~VHEREAS, the Town of Carrboro Hoard of Aldermen recognize the importance of inter-
jurisdictional coordination and its importance to the prevision of recrcation and park
services and facilities within QrangE County, and
WHEREAS, Representatives €rom ali governmental jurisdictions in Orange County have
worked toward and developed a report an issues surrounding the provision of recreation
and park services within the County, and
VIiTI~RE,4S, This report provides recommendations far the Carrboro Board otAldcrmen
to consider in regards to future improvement of rec,Teation and park services to the ?own
of Carrboro.
NOW, THEREFORE, TH.E 130ARD OF ALDERMEN OF TIiS TOWN OF
CARRBORQ RESOLVES:
Section 1. The Board of Aldermen has reviewed comments on the report provided the
Carrboro Recreation and Parks Gammission, Planning Board and <rnvironmertal Advisory
Board.
Section 2, The Board of Aldermen asks chat Orange County, the lead agency, incorporate
the convnents of the Town's advisory boards into the report.
Section 3. And that the report be returned to the Board oFAldermen fvr its consideration
atl~ amendmems are mada which take into consideration all oFthe actions by the other
jurisdictions involved in the work group repon.
Section 4. This resolution shall became effective upon adoption.
The fvregaing resolution- having been submitted to a vote, received the following vote and
was duly adopted this 22nd day of February,, 200x;
gel WEST MAIN STREET. CARRBpRO. NC Z751C • 19191 x42.8541 • FAX (11191 969.7777 • TDP ~9~91 969 777
AN rcCUAI. GrPOgTWN17Y EM~LOY6R
Mar-~2-00 05:13P Town of Carrbaro 919 968 7737
25
Page 2
Town of Can-boro
RCSOIuliDll ND. 109/199J-2000
Ayes: JoaI Hall Braun, Mark DoroSin, Diana Mcl]uftee, 7acquelyn Gist, Mchael Nelson,
Allen Spalt, Alex 7,affron
Noes: Nave
Absent or Excused. None
1, Sarah C. Williamson, Town Clerk of the Town of Carrborp, do hereby certify that the
foregoing is a true and correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Carrbvro Board of
Aldermen on Febnaary 22, 2D0~.
~~n~xunnunr~ _
'•!9809
•.
~~-~pRP~~p'~~ ~ Town Clark
1911
Mar-22-o0 05:13P Town of Carrboro 919 968 7737
26
TOWN QF CARRBQRO
NORTH CAROLINA
The following resolution was introduced by Alderman Jacquelyn Gist and duly seconded
by Alderman Allen Spelt.
A RE50LUTION ADOPTING
AN OPEN FACILITIES POLICY FOR
RECREATION 1~'AClti.><T1 ES 1N ORANGE COUNTY
Resolution No. Y 1?/1999-2000
WHEREAS, the Towns of Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Hillsborough and Orange County have
developed parks and recreation facilities to provide service to Citizens in their
jurisdictions, and
WHEREAS, the location and type of many parks and facilities is such that residents of
adjacent jurisdictions are in close proximity to parks of a different jurisdiction or desirous
of use of the facilities, and
vVHEREAS, the spirit of inter jurisdictional coordination pn current and future
recreation programs and facilities has been furthered in recent years with cooperative
ventures between local governments, OWA9A and the school systems, and
WHEREAS, attempting to tie use ofrecrcation facilities to users only of the providing
jurisdictions would be complicated administratively and would hinder community-
building and inter-local efforts;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE 1T RESOLVED that the elected boards of all local
governments in Orange County be encouraged to adopC this resolution .for an Open
Facilities Policy, which would provide that all public recreation facilities constructed by
the member local governments of the County be open to use by all County citiiens.
BE YT llr'TIIER RESOLVED 7`~-T, upon adoption of this resolution by the elected
beards er!F-ail local governments in Orange County, the resolution be transmitted to the
Chapel' 'H'ill-Carrboro Board of Education, the Orange County F3oard of Education, and
the Board of Directors of the Orange Water and Sewer Authority, asking their
endorsement of the concept of an Open Cecil ities Policy;
AND FURTHER RF.SOLYED TART, the local governments agree to explore
opportunities, at a later appropriate date, to clarify and explore a modification of an open
facilities arrangement with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Duke
University.
301 WEST MAIN STR86T. CaRRBORO. NC ~T310 19191 94Z•eSa~ • Rwx 19191 O~R.77A7 Tnn m19~ l,AB•7717
' AN EQUAL OPPDRTU NI7Y EIMPLpYER
Mar-22-QO O5:14R Tawn of Carrborn 919 968 7737
27
Page 2
Torn of Caniwro
Rcsatulian 1Y0. 1 l7/ 19990001
The foregoing resolution having been submitted to a vote, received the following vote
and was d~iy adopted this 22nd day of February, 2000:
Ayes: Joal Hall Broun, Mark Dorosin, Diana McDuffee, Jacquelyn Gist, Michael
Nelsen, Allen 5palt, Alex Zaffron
Noes: None
Absent or Excused: None
I, Sarah C. Williamson, Town Clerk of the T'vwn of Carrboro, do hereby certify that the
foregoing is a true and correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Carrboro Board of
Aldermen en February 22, 2000.
Town Clerk
Feb-16-00 01:26P Town of Carrborv 919 968 7737
ATTA C'I[~1'tENT S
CAR_RB[~RO RECRE,A'I'IQN AND PARKS C4MMIS~I~
Excerpt from Regular Scheduled Meeting on November I, 1999
Recomrnendatinns for the Master Recreation-and Forks Work Group Report:
John Boone moved that the Commissions comments as fellows be forwarded to
the Board of Aldermen in consideration of the Report of the Joint Master
Recreation and Parks Work Group.
a) Remove the "NOW, TkIEREFURE, BE IT RESOLVED that the
agrees to create a Joint Parks and
Resource Lands Council along .the lines specified in the Joint Work Group
report." That wording be substituted to direct that the Managers of the
different jurisdictions consider the charge, mission and structure for this
Council as part of a resolution for the Board of Aldermen to consider prior to
or simultaneous with the actual establishment of this Council.
b) Recommend approval to set' acounty-wide standard for coordinated funding
pursuits, but not necessarily a standard for each jurisdiction.
c) Recommend Approval
d) Recommend Approval
e) Recommend Approval
f) Recommend Approval
h) Recommend Approval
i} Recommend Approval (With acknowtedgrment that other funding items, i.e.,
development costs, etc. may need to be considered beyond just land
acquisition for future recreation bond passage.)
Second: Alice Tropman Vote: Unanimous Approval
~~'hs c., ~' ' )'~ l2 L 5
Doris J. ell, Chair- Date
26
Feb-16-00 01:27P Town of Carrboro 919 968 7737 Z9
O ~ ~ ~ ~
O
.IAI"l11~
FAB review of the Parks and Recreation Comprehensive plan
The Eab apptaved the plan with the following stipulations. jOWN O~tOpS~
t , That the F,4B have early input into any design of a park or recreatio~aal area that would
change existing natural areas.
2. That p~vposed Green ways and associated moths do not have adequate existing
guidelines for design and are in particularly environmentally sensitive areas.
Therefore the FAB stron~y recommends that these guide lines be developed in conjunction
with Public Works and rks and Rec. prior to the outset of any design process for these
Green ways.
Giles Blunders Chair
Fib-16-00.01:27P Town of Carrb~rp glg ggg 7737 P ~
. TOWN OF CARI~BOaO 3
~„~,
• ~ PLANNING BARD
307 'West Main Street C$rrboro, Narth Cer~llna 27Si0
. RECOMMENDATION
(~ctuher 21,1999
REPORT OF _„THE ~,JUINT MASTER RECREATION ,AND
PARKS WQRK GRO~1P
MOTION VAS MADE BY SUSAN POULTON AND SECONDED BY
JOfTN MARSHALL THAT THE PLANNING BOARD SUPPORTS THE
NINE RECOMMENDATIONS PROPOSED IN THE "EXECV'1'tYE
SUMMARY; REPORT OF -'l'I-lE J()1NT MASTER RECREATION AND
PARKS V4lORK CrRQUP". THE PLANNING HOARD FURTHER
IZECOMMENDS TFIAT THE BOARD OF A1,17ERMEhT DEVELOP AN
1~GRESSIVE SCHEDULE f OR LAND ACQUISITION AND CONSIDER
A.N ADDITIONAL GOAL OF INTERCONNECTIVITY. OF
GREENWAYS BETWEEN ORANGE COUNTY AND NEIGHBORING
COUNTIES. VOTE: AYES 9 (Snider, Haven-O'Donnell, Poulton, Cohen,
Cheek, Bateson, Babiss, Marshall, Preslar); NOES p; ABSENT/EXCUSED
1 (Searing).
/ ~ .~ ~
,~ndrew B. Co~ien, cnQ~r (dQec)
31
AGENDA #7b
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Joint Master Recreation and Parks Plan Work Group Report
DATE: March 27, 2000
This memorandum addresses recommendations in the Joint Master Recreation and Parks
Plan Work Group Report.
Resolution A would adopt the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Plan Work Group
Report as a general planning document, indicate the Council's desire to immediately
pursue certain recornrnendations of the report, and recommend that a Working Committee
be established to draft recommendations related to the charge of the proposed Pazks and
Resource Lands Council and equity issues, including distribution of land purchases and
facilities to contributions and County funding to the Town's Parks and Recreation
Department operating budget compared to County use of Town programs and facilities.
Resolution B would adopt a statement supporting an Open Facilities Policy.
Resolution C would adopt the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Plan Work Group Report
as written.
Resolution D would establish Chapel Hill as a partner in a joint Parks and Resource Lands
Council.
We recommend that the Council adopt resolutions A and B.
BACKGROU1vD
In the spring of 1998 representatives from Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough, and
Orange County began meeting to discuss County-wide recreation and park issues. The
group's mission was to update and modify Orange County's Master Recreation and Park
Plan to be a joint long-range capital facilities plan for Orange County, Carrbaro, and
Chapel Hill.
The work group included elected officials, advisory commission members, public at lazge,
and staff. Council Members Kevin Foy and Lee Pavao, Parks and Recreation Commission
members Martin Feinstein and Dianne Lemasters, and Pazks and Recreation Department
32
staff Kathryn Spatz and Bill Webster represented the Town at the Joint Master Recreation
and Parks Work Group meetings.
On May 26, I999, the work group completed work on the Joint Master Recreation and
Parks Plan Work Group Report. 'The report is intended to serve as a possible blueprint for
the direction of future joint parks and recreation efforts in the County. The report includes
an inventory of existing parks and recreation facilities anal lands and offers
recommendations to continue joint planning for the area's leisure needs.
On September 11, 1999, the Council accepted and referred the report to the Greenways and
Parks and Recreation Commissions and the Manager for comment.
DISCUSSION
We believe convening the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group and the
completion of the accompanying report are positive steps in County-wide cooperation on
leisure issues. We agree with the report's central message that the best hope for a strong
parks and recreation program lies in partnerships, be it inter jurisdictional or otherwise. In
addition, the completed inventory of existing facilities and parklands is an important
component of the document, which can be updated annually.
Key Areas and Opportunities for Cooperation: The report identifies 9 key areas for possible
future cooperative efforts:
1. Permanent joint land use planning
2. Inter jurisdictional efforts to standardize parks and recreation requirements
3. Joint siting, design, and management of school and park sites across
jurisdictions
4. Public/Private partnerships
5. Coordinated land identification, acquisition, and banking
6. Open facilities policy
7. Payment-in.-lieu changes
8. Address existing needs
9. Recommendations for use of current funds and future funding needs
For each of~'i sues identified, the report includes recommendations for addressing
concerns...... ... _ _... .
1. Permanent Joint Land Use Planning
The Work Group identified a need for a permanent joint Parks and Resource Lands
Council. The report contains a resolution asking the local governments to create the
Parks and Resource Lands Council. The report lists possible areas of responsibility
for the proposed Lands Council, including the development of unified parks and
recreation standards; working closely with the Schools and Land Use Council to
jointly site, design, and, manage schools and parks; exploring the possibility of
33
impact fees; and_ exploring a potential future bond referendum for parks and
recreation.
Manager's Comment: We believe the general concept of a joint Parks and Resource
Lands Council is a positive approach to continuing the efforts of the Work Group.
We believe that the Council should support the establishment of a Parks and
Resource Lands Council after its chazge has been clearly articulated and consensus
has been reached. We believe that the needs of Chapel Hill must be fairly
represented by any such body.
2. Standards
The towns and County currently utilize different standards to determine parks and
recreation needs. The report recommends that unified pazks and recreation
standards be developed for the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill and Orange
County.
Manager's Comment: The 1989 Chapel Hill Community Facilities Report included
what were then national standazds established by the National Park and Recreation
Association. Chapel Hill's draft 2000 Comprehensive Plan does. not include
recreation and park standards. We do not believe that the leisure values and needs
of a specific community should be benchmazked or based on values of other
jurisdictions.
The Pazks and Recreation Department has chosen a consultant to develop a Pazks
and Recreation Master Plan. We anticipate that a key result of the plan will be to
identify recreation and park needs specific to Chapel Hill and to develop target
goals to fully address those needs. This can be done while allowing flexibility for
trends and innovations.
We believe that Town residents expect a higher standard relative to recreation
programming and facilities when compared to other areas.
3. School/Park Planning
Joint siting, design, and management of school and park sites across jurisdictions
aze important issues identified in the report.
Manager's Comment: We agree with the report's recommendation that any new
Parks and Resource Lands Council work closely with the existing Schools and
Land Use Council to address this idea. The role and relationship of a Lands Council
to the existing Schools and Land Use Council should be more fully explored.
4. Pablic/Private Partnerships
The report highlights the need to pursue partnerships in order to expand parks and
recreation opportunities in the area.
34
The report also recommends that the local governments (through the Parks and
Resource Lands Council) work to identify properties for potential partnership and
meet to explore these possibilities.
Manager's Comment: We agree that the pursuit of partnerships is important in the
expansion of parks and recreation opportunities in the area. Coordination with
groups such as OWASA and UNC in locating future parks and facilities appears
feasible.
We believe that identifying properties for potential partnership would be an
appropriate charge for a newly created Parks and Resource Lands Council.
5. Coordinated Capital Funding and Land Acquisition
The report findings indicate that if local governments in Orange County are to be
successful in providing for the long-term needs of County/Town residents, joint
capital funding and land-banking efforts need to be addressed.
The report recommends that the County take the lead role in coordinating future
land acquisitions, most .of which will likely be located outside of the various Towns
corporate limits.
Manager's Comment: We agree that potential parks areas are disappearing rapidly
and that whatever efforts local governments take to preserve open space or
purchase space for park development should be activated immediately.
While pooling funding. resources appears to offer the best opportunity for funding
future land acquisition, we are mindful that historically Chapel Hill has devoted
significantly more resources than the County or other towns within the County to
meeting the community's leisure needs. We believe that before the coordinated
efforts are actualized, we must ensure that the program's benefits are distributed
equitably, and with regard to contributions.
6. Open Facilities Policy
The Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group's report contains a resolution
that vwauId provide for all recreation facilities owned and operated by Orange
Couy, Caaboro, Hillsborough, Chapel Hill, and OWASA to be open and
accessible to all County residents.
Manager's Comment: This idea is consistent with the current policy. We
recommend adoption of the Open Facilities resolution.
The Town of Chapel Hill currently receives approximately $70,000 annually from
the County in recognition of County, non-Town resident use of Town facilities and
programs. The County's financial contribution is about 4% of the operating costs
for the Town's parks and recreation programs.
35
Parks and Recreation Department records indicate approximately 20% of registered
activity. participants reside in non-Chapel Hill areas of Orange County (including
Carrboro). The percentage of County, non-Town participants receiving fee waivers
is significantly higher. Thirty-nine percent of fee waiver participants in the Town's
popular summer day camp program last year were County, non-Town residents. Fee
waivers to County, non-Town residents far this program alone amounted to over
$20,000.
We are concerned with the issues of equity raised by the fact that the County's
contribution does not appear to be commensurate with County, non-Town resident
use. In addition, the Town of Chapel Hill currently operates significantly more
indoor recreation facilities than the other jurisdictions.
7. Payment-in-lieu Changes
The report findings indicate that the current payment-in-lieu programs in- Carrboro
and Orange County have not been effective as the funds derived have not been
sufficient to fund projects. In addition, the rules related to use of payment in lieu
funds have prevented those jurisdictions from using some of the funds. they have
received over the past years.
The Work Group's report also recommends exploration of the establishment of a
recreation impact fee or impact tax.
Mana er's Comment: To date, Chapel Hill has not experienced similar problems.
The report recommends currently maintaining separate payment-in-lieu systems,
recognizing that Orange County and/or Carrboro may wish to change their own
processes.
We believe the establishment of a recreation impact fee or impact tax is worth
exartLning. We believe this would be part of an appropriate charge for a newly
created Parks and Resource Lands Council.
8. Address Current Needs
The report recommends that one critical need is to immediately begin land banking
in to meet current and future land needs of the community. The report
sug~ that the County would need 6~5 additional acres of parkland just to meet
curre~ needs. The estimated .cost to meet current needs would be 10 to 12 million
dollars.
Manager's Comment: We agree that land should be purchased as soon as possible
even if funds for development are not currently available.
b
9. Use of Current Funds and Future Funding Needs
s
Resolution C vuould adopt the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Plan Work Group Report
as written.
Resolution D would establish Chapel Hill as a partner in a joint Parks and Land Use
Council.
ATTACHMENTS
38
36 }
1. Report of the Master Recreation and Parks Work Group (begin new page 1).
2. Greenways Commission recommendation.
3. Parks and Recreation Commission recommendation.
a
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING TFIE JOINT MASTER RECREATION AND PARES PLAN
WOR% GRDUP REPORT AS A GENERAL PLANNING DOCUMENT
(2000-0410/R 14a))
WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill Council recognizes the importance of inter jurisdictional
coordination and its importance to the provision of recreation and pazk services and facilities
within Orange County; and
WHEREAS, representatives from all governmental jurisdictions in Orange County have worked
toward and developed a report on issues surrounding the provision of recreation and park
services within the County; and
WHEREAS, this report provides recommendations far the Chapel Hill Town Council to cgnsider
in regard to future improvement of recreation and park services for the Town; and
WHEREAS, the Greenways and Parks and Recreation Commissions have reviewed the report
and provided comment to the Council;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the
Council hereby adopts the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Plan Work Group Report as a
general planning document.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill hereby adopts the
following recommendations of the report:
• Adoption of an Open Facilities Policy
• Expenditure of the remaining $2.89 million in Orange County Farks land acquisition
bonds for the purchase of park lands as soon as possible in order to maximize value of
existing funds and options for selection of sites
• Inter jurisdictional work on joint siting, design, and management of school and park
sites across jurisdictions
• Pursuit of partnerships with groups such as OWASA and UNC in order to expand
parks and recreation opportunities in the area
• Pursuit of opportunities for coordinated expenditures for land acquisition on a case-
by-case basis until such time as the idea for more formalized coordination of land
acquisition funds can be explored
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council recommends to the County that a Working
Committee be established to draft recommendations concerning the following issues:
Consideration of a proposed Inter-Governmental Task Force.
Re-examination of the issue of adopting County-wide standards
Examination of how to assure equitable distribution of land purchases and facilities
commensurate to contributions
39
4p
• Examination of the level of County funding to the Town's Pazks and Recreation
Department operating budget cgmpazed to County's use of Town programs and
facilities
This the 10th day of April, 2000.
Amended April 11, 2000
.1-,..
el "
11
RESOLUTION B
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A STATEMENT SUPPORTING AN OPEN
FACILITIES POLICY (2000-03-27/R-17b)
WHEREAS, the Towns of Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Hillsborough and Orange County have
developed parks and recreation facilities to provide services to citizens in their
jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the location and type of many parks and facilities is such that residents of
adjacent jurisdictions are in close proximity to parks of a different jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the spirit of inter jurisdictional coordination and future recreation programs
and facilities has been furthered in recent years with cooperative ventures between Iocal
governments, OWASA and the school systems; and
WHEREAS, attempting to tie use of recreation facilities to users only of the providing
jurisdictions would hinder community building and inter-local efforts;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the elected boards of all local governrnents
in Orange County be encouraged to adopt this resolution for an Open Facilities Policy,
which would provide that all public recreation facilities constructed by the triember local
governments of the County be open to use by all County and Town citizens,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon adoption of this resolution by the elected boards
of goverc~ments in Orange County, the resolution be transmitted to the Chapel Hill-
Carrboro Board of Education and the Board of Directors of the Orange Water and Sewer
Authority, asking their endorsement of the concept of an Open Facilities Policy,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the local governments agree to explore opportunities,
at a later appropriate date, to clarify and explore modification of an open facilities
arrangement with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Duke University.
4I
This the 27th day of March, 2000.
12
RESOLUTION C
A RESOLUTION ADOPTIlYG THE JOINT MASTER RECREATION AND PARKS
PLAN WORK GROUP REPORT AS WRITTEN (2000-03-Z7/R-17c)
WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill Council recognizes the importance of inter-
jurisdictional coordination and its importance to the provision of recreation and park
services and facilities within Orange County; and
WHEREAS, representatives from all governmental jurisdictions in Orange County have
worked towazd and developed a report on issues surrounding the provision of recreation
and park services within the County; and,
WHEREAS, this report provides recommendations for the Chapel Hill Town Council to
consider in regard to future improvement of recreation and park services for the Town; and
WHEREAS, the Greenways and Parks and Recreation Commissions have reviewed the
report and provided comment to the Council; and
WHEREAS, the Council agrees with all, recommendations as written contained in the
report;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that
the Council hereby adopts the Joznt Master Recreation and Parks Plan Work Group Report
as written.
42
This the 27th day of March, 2000.
13
RESOLUTION D
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CHAPEL BILL AS A PARTNER IN A JOINT
PARKS AND LANDS USE COUNCIL (2000-03-27/R-17d)
WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill Council recognizes the importance of inter-
jurisdictional coordination and its importance to the provision of recreation and pazk
services and facilities within Orange County; and
WHEREAS, the Council agrees with all recommendations aswritten contained in the
report; and
WHEREAS, the formation of a Parks and Lands Use Council was called for in the Joznt
Master Recreation and Parks Plan Work Group Report;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that
the Council hereby establishes Chapel Hill as a partner in a joint Parks and Lands Use
Council.
43
This the 27th day of Mazch, 2000.
44
ATTACHMENT 2
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: Greenways Commission
Mark Broadwell, Chair
SUBJECT: Recommendation on Report of the Orange County Joint Master Recreation
and Parks Master Plan Work Group
DATE: February 9, 2000
The Greenways Commission rnet on December S, 1999 and voted unanimously (6-0) to
recommend that the Council adopt the Report of the Orange County Joint Master
Recreation and Parks Master Plan Work Group.
CHAPEL HILL PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSIQN
200 PLANT ROAD, CHAPEL HILL, NpRTH CAROLINA 27514
VoICE/TTD~(919) 968-2784 FAX: (919) 932-2923
ATTACHMENT 3
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Waldorf and Council
FROM: Dianne Lemasters, Chair, Parks and Recreation Commission
RE: Recommendation Regarding the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group Report
DATE: February 3, 2000
At its December 8, 1999 and February 2, 2000 meetings, the Commission discussed the Report of the
joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group. On February 2, 2000 the Commission voted
unanimously (&0) to recommend that the Council adopt the Report of the Grange County Master
Recreation and Pazks Plan Work Group as a general planning tool. However, the Commission expressed
concern over several ideas in the Report including the reciprocal relationship between jurisdictions for
participation in programs, the development of unified recreation standards, and lighting of playing fields.
The Commission applauds the Work Group's efforts in collecting an inventory of all recreation and park
resources in Orange County and believes that the Work Group has laid a strong framework for Carrboro,
Orange County, and Chapel Hill working cooperatively. The notions of joint siting and management of
sites and coordinated opportunities with OWASA, UNC, and Duke University are very positive.
The Work Group did not resolve some key issues, chiefly the concept of unified standazds. It maybe that
no one set of standards is applicable for all azeas of Orange County. While we believe the creation of a
"Parks and Resource Lands Council" is a good idea, we are not confident the Council's charge has been
fully articulated. We believe staff should work to develop a formal list of agreed upon responsibilities
before elected officials approve the concept.
The Open Facilities Policy proposed in the Joint Master Recreation and Pazks Work Group Report is
consistent with curt reciprocal agreements. We believe it should be noted that virtually all facilities
currently being operated in the County are in fact in Chapel Hill. While we do not propose restricting
participation, we believe Town of Chapel Hill residents should receive priority registration in Town
programs. This concept is not inconsistent with the proposed Open Facilities Policy.
We understand that the funding Orange County provides to the Town of Chapel Hill for parks and
recreation operation amounts to less than 5% of the department's operating costs. Yet almost 20% of
overall participants in organized department activities are County, non-Town residents. Staff records
indicate that for some programs almost 40% of fee waiver applicants are County, non-Yawn residents.
We believe the County's contribution should be equitable at least to County, non-Town resident usage.
45
And that is not even taking into account that virtually all Town of Chapel Hill residents also reside in
Qrange County.
The Commission believes the need for lighted athletic playing fields is great. We urge all jurisdictions to
include lighting in all future field development. VVe also believe existing fields should be retrofitted for
lighting.
46 t
~...
47'P
Orange County
Commission for the Environment
c/v Orczn~~~e County ERCD
P.O. Box 8181
Hill~boroacglt, NC 27278
Plzvne: (919) 245-2597
Fax: (919) 644-3002
Entail: ccrazvfvrdQco.nran~e.~zc.us
Mema~andum
T0: Orange County Board of Commissioners
Alice Gordon, Chair
From: Kris Price, Chair
Commission for the Environment
Date: November 9, 1999
Re: Comments on the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work
Group Report
On October 11 and November $, the Commission for the Environment
considered the report of the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work
Graup.
The Commission is supportive of the findings and recommendations of
the report, and commends the Work Group for its diligence and
thoughtful approach to future parks needs. The Commission concurs
with the Work Group's interest in beginning to land-bank for future
parks. With this in mind, we would share the following comments and
recommendations regarding our future role:
- The Commission for the Environment stands ready and willing to
make recommendations to the Board of Commissioners on the
preservation and acquisition of natural areas, wildlife habitat and
riparian buffers -consistent with the charge to the Commission to
advise the Board on matters concerning the environment.
- The Commission would like to have significant representation on the
proposed Parks Council, in regard to the expressed interest in
protecting natural areas and wildlife habitat in a more-
comprehensive parks concept.
F: \USERS\DSTANCIL\CFE\MRPCDMMT. DOC
48 '
- If the Parks Council is involved in recommending parks that include
preservation of natural or other environmentally-sensitive areas,
the Commission for the Environment would like to be consulted and
involved .in the decision process. In particular, the Commission
would like to be~ involved in the design of the park (i.e., access,
facilities, etc.) so that careful consideration is given to limiting
access to significant natural areas, as well as commenting on other
environmental considerations.
- The Commission for the Environment wishes to continue to reserve
the right to recommend and advise the Board of Commissioners on
preservation and acquisition of important natural areas, wildlife
habitat and riparian. buffers, whether within or outside of a park
concept.
Thank you fior the opportunity to review and comment on this excellent
report.
Copies: `: ]ohn Link, County Manager
David Stantil, ERC Director
F: \USERS\DSTANCIL\CFE\MRPCO M MT.OOC
49
Resolution -Open Facilities Polity
An Open Facilities Policy for Recreation Facilities in Orange County
WHEREAS, the Towns of Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Hillsborough and Orange County have
developed parks and recreation facilities to provide service to citizens in their
jurisdictions, and
WHEREAS, the location and type of many parks and facilities is such that residents of
adjacent jurisdictions are in close proximity to parks of a different jurisdiction or desirous
of use of the facilities, and
WHEREAS, the spirit of inter-jurisdictional coordination on current and future recreation
programs and facilities has been furthered in recent years with cooperative ventures
between local governments, OWASA and the school systems, and
WHEREAS, attempting to tie use of recreation facilities to users only of the providing
jurisdictions would be complicated administratively and would hinder community-
building and inter-local efforts;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the elected boards of all local
governments in Orange County be encouraged to adopt this resolution for an Open
Facilities Policy, which would provide that all public recreation facilities constructed by
the member local governments of the County be open to use by all County citizens.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT, upon adoption of this resolution by the elected
boards of all local governments in Orange County, the resolution be transmitted to the
Chapel Hill-Carrboro Board of Education, the Orange County Board of Education, and the
Board of Directors of the Orange Water and Sewer Authority, asking their endorsement
of the concept of an Open Facilities Policy;
AND FURTHER RESOLVED THAT, the local governments agree to explore
opportunities, at a later appropriate date, to clarify and explore a modification of an
open facilities arrangement with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Duke
University.
This, the giddy of , 2000
door
t
0Y oONALO MYRPNY
Too often in government,
benefits- s if there were n
E.F. Schumacher wrote; "In the current
are few words as final and conclusive as the word
uneconomic. If an activity has been branded as
economic, its right to existence is not merely
tinned but energetically denied:' In an' atte
recent years to overcome this bias, some hav
troduced the concepts of "cost-effecti . "5
"cost-benefit analysis; which are s
us to show how valuable, what w
ments, are intangibles such as
health. But it is a cure worse than-
cast-effectiveness has come to mean red
is priceless to some arbitrary price.
Consider one aspect of environ
provides value to everyone in this co
es of green and expanses of ecosyste
states and communities and the fed
as parks. California parks alone recei
million visitors annually who'spend mo an $1.6
billion and support fi2,000 jobs, but to talk of them
in these terms is to reduce them from priceless trea-
sures to commodities in the marketplace. To justify
outdoor recreation and conservation, the current
economic paradigm demands that we place them
within the framework of an economic system that
they transcend, We must resist this tendenry. It's time
for a different way of looking at parks---fora per-
spective that will focus on those values intrinsic to
human existence, values that are sufficient unto
themselves. Parks are not merely pretty places with
fences around them. Parks, as the embodiment of
outdoor recreation and conservation, represent
economy of a higher scale. _
This cosmic economy (or, if y`
masher, "meta-economy") resto_
30 • The Amiws Journal
50
ark ~ to the a ~ ~ I sight '.
sibl ' of photoch co
us to light. All our senses are 'ible because' -
nections; all things create a circle of life through their -
connections.
The connections between human beings and o
world are vital for us because they facilitate the tran - -
fer of information. Evolutionary biologists are ~
ploring the notion that we are created by _
information we absorb. Quantum physicists
proposing that information shapes wlio we aze '
level of the subatomic particle. This does no
merely that we are influenced by informati
fed via the media. It means information ' of
forms: the twinkle of a star, the feel of '
past one's face, t}~:- tin of being in
51
*:.,,
t::
?,. ~'
_~
`,~i
y re-
process
r; .
a
for the ~ of us wh .
mea at we are see '
or species,
of mere monet -
seeking to protect the disse
oration-through the often hidd _
humans make each time they walk in ~ -
ten to a stream, inhale the aroma deep within a red-
wood forest, or feel the snow upon their brow These
connections between ht~an beings and their world
generate energy that sustains the living universe.
When you understand this, it becomes ludicrous
to think of a park in the contem of the current eco-
nomic paradigm; it becomes ludicrous to assume
that parks can be priced and purchased in the mar-
ketplace. We must not subordinate the very creative
force o the u " _ to a system that is simply one
s _ uc f - ~e. To do so.th~eatens to
~'}°continued disco -
verY aid cre-
~p ti - a ~ mat only
Ott ex-
is ~. ~~.~~
,~ ~;,~~-
our parks, or that parks will be commercialized.
at people fear, and rightly so, is not simply that
s ,parking, or guidebooks will cost too
- they fear the loss of the human con-
' the creative force of life itself.
r a moment about how your own expe-
have shaped you. How have you grown and
lvec~ y~r7con ' ' mess? How have you become
o i`e• sw ~ is: through connections.
~..
_- ur parents, with your fam-
' a ' 'e.p int with the world around
trip, or a walk in the
- You. a first time. You felt
~.., r ...
- :felt n your face. You test-
- :...~_.
ip or an arduous hike.
"tat a by which an individual
erztiit not only the re-creation of the
'actually the creation of and move-
einsciousness. The boxer George
Fo apt waded for a life of crime in Houston
when, at eighteen, he joined the Job Carps. He was
transferred to Grants Pass in Oregon. Looking back
on the experience years later he said, "I'd never seen
streams and all the beautiful trees. It changed my
life, and for the first time I saw there was another
part of the world."
It maybe argued by some that everything has its
price, and that if something is of value it can be
bought; and further that many of our most valuable
lands have been bought for a price. I submit that
that is a perversion, and it ought not be. Just as we
do not place a monetary value on our children, our
spouses, or our freedom, we should not place a
monetary value on our natural and cultural re-
sources. Some things are just too precious. •
,D~ald.Murphy is the author of several hooks and the
,of ,~~~ediate past Direcror of California State Parks.
.-:.
~' '~ Summer 1998.31
1