Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda - 10-07-2008- 7b
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM .ABSTRACT Meeting Date: October 7, 2008 Agenda ,,,1_ Item No. _~_ SUBJECT: Com rehensive Plan U date Phase II DEPARTMENT: Planning & Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) ~~ ATTACHMENT(S): See Guide to Attachments (ALL ATTACHMENTS PROVIDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER) (Draft Comprehensive Plan received with May 79, 2008 Pubic Hearing Materials) INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor, 245-2579 PURPOSE: To receive the Planning Board's recommendation on the draft Comprehensive Plan, determine if the Board wants to schedule a work session for further review of the draft plan, and direct staff to place the Plan on the November 6t" BOCC meeting agenda for adoption. BACKGROUND: Process roved a rocess for On October 3, 2006, the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) app p updating the County's Comprehensive Plan in two phases as follows: Phase I, to include the development of Comprehensive Plan goals and County Profile Element; and Phase II, to include the remaining seven (7) Elements of the updated Comprehensive Plan. Phase I was completed by the County in September 2007 and Phase II was initiated immediately thereafter. From October 2007 to April 2008, a Planning Consultant, County staff and the following County advisory boards worked together to develop the draft Comprehensive Plan: Affordable Housing Advisory Board, Agricultural Preservation Board, Commission for the Environment, Economic Development Commission, Historic Preservation Commission, Orange Unified Transportation Board, Planning Board, and Recreation and Parks Advisory Council. Input was provided by additional County advisory boards as well as the public. Several public input opportunities were provided during Phase I of the process. Public hearings were held on May 19, 2008 and August 25, 2008 to.receive formal public comments on the draft Comprehensive Plan. Phase II of the update process also included public input meetings on January 28t", April 3`d, April 9t" and April 23`d. 2 The August 25t" public hearing was held open to provide additional time for the municipalities of Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Durham,.. Hillsborough, and Mebane to submit courtesy review comments. Comments have been received from Chapel Hill and Durham, which are attached. Staff does not expect any additional courtesy .review comments at this stage but anticipates significantly more during subsequent Plan implementation phases. General Contents of Comprehensive Plan The Draft Comprehensive Plan includes the following Elements: ® County Profile (Data) ® Economic Development ® Housing ® Land Use ® Natural and Cultural Systems ® Parks and Recreation ® Services (Utilities) and Community Facilities ® Transportation Recommendations are. also provided in the draft Comprehensive Flan that addresses the administration, implementation, and monitoring of the Plan that will need to take place following its adoption. There are no major changes to existing/current policy directions incorporated into the draft Plan. Furthermore, the draft plan does.. not include specific implementation recommendations. Work on those will start once this. Plan, (with its framework of goals, objectives, and linkages) is ,..adopted... This Plan update. effort is designed. to establish a common data source, to pull together existing ideas and information that.. heretofore :have been scattered among a series of topic-specific plans and documents, and to set the stage for subsequent community discussions about implementation strategies. Public Access to Materials All key documents that have been produced during the planning process have been posted on the County's website. Following is the address to the .Comprehensive Plan ,Update Webpage: . www.co.orange. nc. us!planning/compre_cpupdate.asp. PLANNING BOAa2D: Planning Board's .Statement for the Public Record -Review of Public Hearing Comments on the Draft Comprehensive Plan Plannin Board members made the followin statement at the Se g 9 ptember 10t" Special Planning Board Meeting. "At the August 25, 2008 Public Hearing on .the draft Comprehensive Plan, the ..Planning Board learned that there was some confusion in the community that the Planning Board may not ,have .received and reviewed all of the- public ..comments submitted on the draft Comprehensive Plan.. For the purpose of the. public record,: let it be made clear that `the Planning Board has received. all .public. comments that .have been submitted on the draft Plan and all comments have received thorough and equal consideration by the Board during its review process. The Planning Board attended public hearings in May and August to hear ..public. comments, reviewed all written public comments submitted, and held meetings on July 9t", August. 6t", September 3~tl, and September 10t" to discuss comments and develop .proposed revisions for further consideration by the Board of County Commissioners." Planning Board's Recommendation At its October 1, 2008 regular meeting, the Planning Board unanimously recommended adoption of the draft Comprehensive Plan to include the revisions reflected in the Planning Board's Table of Proposed Revisions. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no direct fiscal impact associated with this item. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Administration recommends that the Board: 1) Receive the Planning Board's recommendation on the draft Plan; 2) Determine if the Board wants to schedule a work session for further review of the draft plan; and 3) Direct staff to place the Plan on the November 6~' BO`CC meeting agenda for adoption. 4 5 GUIDE TO ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1, Planning Board's Table of Proposed Revisions, pp. 7-76 -This Table includes the Planning Board's recommended revisions to the draft Comprehensive Plan based on its own review of the document and the comments received from the public, BOCC, and other advisory boards. Upon BOCC adoption of the Plan and any specific revisions required to the Table of Proposed Revisions, the adopted table will be forwarded to the County's Planning Consultant for final editing. Attachment 2, Staff Recommendations on Courtesy Review Comments, pp. 77-78 - Due to the Planning Board the timing of receipt Staff to develop any proposed1eev s ons that may be required for authorized Planning consideration by the BOCC. ______________ --------------------- --------------------------- The following attachments are provided for BOCC reference purposes: Attachment 3, Courtesy Review Comments, pp. 79-82 -Comments have been received by the City of Durham and the Town of Chapel Hill. Attachment 4, Public Input Meeting Summary Reports, p~. 83-98 -Staff notes from public meetings conducted January 28t", April 9t", and April 23~ . Attachment 5, May 19t" & August 25t" Public Hearing comments, pp. 99-254 --Although the BOCC has previously received all comments that have been submitted via Public Hearing and Planning Board agenda packets, all comments have been provided herein for convenience. Attachment 6, Orange Unified Transportation (OUT) Board's comments on Goals & Objectives, pp. 255-264 -The Planning Board did not include the OUT Board's proposed rewrite of Transportation Element goals and objectives in its recommendations to the BOCC. The OUT Board's proposed goals and objectives have been provided herein as . well as Commissioner Cordon's suggestions on the OUT Board's proposal. Attachments 7 and 8, Minutes of May 19t" and August 25{" Quarterly Public Hearings on the draft Comprehensive Plan, pp. 265-294. Attachment 9, Minutes of September 10t" Special Planning Board Meeting, pp. 295-304 - Among other items, includes the Planning Board's discussion and consideration of the OUT Board's comments. The Planning Board specifically asked that the minutes of its discussion of the OUT Board's comments be verbatim and provided to the BOCC. Attachment 10, Box of Ideas, pp. 305-306 -During the Comprehensive Plan update process, Planning Staff made general notes of ideas that were communicated at public meetings and hearings. This Attachment provides a list of additional ideas that; per the Planning Board's recommendation, are oofuture referencet The Plann ng Boardlasked may be helpful for the County to retain f staff to provide this Attachment to the BOCC. 6 7 a~ v U O Q. C ~ ~ W a~ ~ > ~ ~' o C , ~ •N ~~ O $ U y ~ o ~ Q ~- O (~ L ~a ~ O O ~ t0 -Q A ~ tCf ~ ~ N "a tts O m C ._ 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 oc~ 0 o0 0 00 0 0o 0 co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 fiu!}aa~ 8d ~.o a~e® ~ rn rn rn rn ~ rn ~ rn.. o ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ~ ti t U ~e~S `o!Ignd U U U U U U U U st/~S 8d ~~08 O O O O O O ~ ~ m O ~.o •daa :u!fi!ap m m m m m m ~ m m m ~ c cv ~ -a a~ • ~ -~ ~ v~ ~ > o c ~ Qj O O O O N -' ~ U O _ O '~ ~ p j ~ ~ .L ~ O O ~ ,~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ V o a ~ N - a~ •L. - a~ o o c • ~ U ~ ~ i - ~ -c ~' ~ ~ ~ (U a~ ~, ~ O ,,_, O m c a~ O U m ~ > ~ O ~ -Q O = - N cn ~ _ ~ j N • ~ ~ ~ o U ~ ~ v a ~~ ~ Q. ~ ~ U ~ Q ~ Q ~ ~ •C - ~ >, ~ ~ E- ~ [L ~ c ~ a> ~ c m c~ c °~ a~ c ;~ -c ~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ o s.., E C ~ i ~ ~ -tom •~ - V '~ O ' ~ N O W "~ CU 0. o ~ O ,,_, G1 ~ O S "O ~ ~ .C ~ V O ~ G. N ~ .~ ~ ~ - -~ tCS ? '''' C N N 'O D U C~ C C Q1 C ~. ''-' O O ~ ~ N ~ _ __ ~ p vN '~ N ~ C O ~ N O V ~ A~ ~ ~ O " ~ ~ -~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~ o ' ~ E • ~ i ` O a~ co ~_ a~ -~ U ~ ~ tIf °~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ D ~ ~ D C ~ O E U O ca ~ N N V O -~ O ' ° ~ U U U ~ W ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~algao!!dde a> ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ Q- _ ~- ~ Q ~ a c Q c ~- c aged ) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u ~! # U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ c ~ e ~ c ~ c c c c c 0 # wail r N m r i ct ~ o rn ,-. A 8 a~ U C c6 L V V O Q. ^~ LL > N •~ C ~ O ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ U N O ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ O G N t~ to -Q ~ ~ ti3 ~ ~ ~ .a O m tlT D. ~ O ~ O fiui}aa~ ad ~o a~e® O o O 0 t-' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~a~S `o~~gnd ~ U `8b~1~ `sd `~~09 ~ U ~o •daa :u~Bi.~o ~ m W C O_ O ~ ~~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ -a ~ CU O ~ ~ d ~ ? _. ' m ~ a ~ A. -~-' O C N C6 ~'' Y C ~ ~ U ' ~ i O C ~ '~ C (~ to ~ ~ ~, '` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~algao~~dda ~: °~' ~. °~' ~!) # afied ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~~ c # uaa~.s ~ N M M O N 0 0 0 N O ~ .N t6 .d Cl.. ~ a~ ~ > m ~~ ~ ~ o a~ ~ ~- a 0 0 U m O $ N ~ O c~ m ~~ a ' ° ° ° ° ° fiu~}aa~ paeog o o o o o fiuiuuald ~o a~eQ m rn rn ~ ti ~ ~.a~s `o~~gnd ~ .~ ~ ~ ~. `8d~3 `8d `~~08 °° ~ ~ ~ .. o ~ ~ •~ ' N ~ ctI ~ ~ ' L O L ~ O C 6 Q L O c6 '~ ~ ;~ X O :. (6 CL L tq ~ ~ C N ~ U O ~ C ~ N O O .,_; ~~ O N O 0 .~ O N Q N E - 00 U O N t6 L ~ O U ~ .. -~ ~ ~ i2 Q ;~ N U1 .- . ~ Q O O ~ ~ ~ t6 ~ ~ ?C ~ O C N ~ _' ~ N O ?' U .+ L ~ O ~ -p ttf ~+-' '~ "a ~ ~ C ~_ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ .OC tB 'C ~ O O ~ N .~ ~ ,,-' om w' ~o L~ Ec > ~ ~ o U ~-a~ ~~ .N ? . a ~ ~ o ;~ ~ ~ o c ~ o .~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~' ~ ~ `a N s ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ cA cL6 ' o ~-~ > '~xa~i ~° o `~ "c o o o.~ _~ ~ c~i ~ Q "' .~ ~ a~ ~ o ~ u°~i ~ c~ ~ ~. ~ Q cv c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ° c ~ ~ " ~ _ . ~ oo .~ +~ .II O ~ .~ ~ U O L fn ~ ~ Q tfi ~ ~ N O ~ -O L (Cf C O ~ ~ -~ U d._ ~ tTf . r U -~-~ .V '~ O ~ ,C O O '~ N .O O ~ W ~ L U ~ O O E °" N ° "o -O N ~ C .L ~- ~ E ~ o U ~M - '~' t^o, W N 'r" „' '~ W ~ '~ ~ ~ N O C ~ ~' . ~ ~ , (~ fCf Q ~ 0 ~ "6 O ~ Q1 ~ F- ~ i ~ -0 ~~ ~ QJ O O~ U C .~ ~ ~ .C O`C o n~ E ' "a ~ - ~ o _ ~ ~ `~ ' E O c c N D X O O wUU O .~-. Q.~ L O ..C ~ - ~ ~ > - ~ U C6 C6 .~.~ d. f1- a-' ~- d. # auil ~ -~ = ~ L -~ C ~ tCS T N C'7 N J C `~ O T N ~.(~ t ~. # a e~ ~ i r ~ ~ ~ # uaa~ ~ ~ N ; u~ 10 J ~_ _~ •~ N ~ N ~ O N L O ~. a 0 0 U m ~ ~ to O ~ N ~ O cti OLl ~ ~ d. dui}aa~ paeo8 0° ° ° O ° ° ° ~UIUUk?~d ~.O a~G~Q N o N o N o o N o N T ~a~S `oi~gnd ~ v v v `8b~~~ `sd `~~08 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ }o •daa :uofiia® m m ~ m m ~ ~ w : ~ ~ ~ -c3 -a c -a ~ ~ > ~ Q C RS s. . .i-' Q~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V O •~ ~ O -p N ~ O ~ O N O C E '~= O H O O ~ ~ ~ ~ O 'X ~ .Q V O (U (ll N ~ O ~ ~ C Q.~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i Q~ •~ ~ -N ~ ~ -~ '~ V ~ ~ O ~ t13 ~ ,;~ ,~ ~ O ~ N O p N ;,r C i N O O N tTf O ~ ~ ~ .C ? N ~ ~ _ C ~ ~ '~ V ?+ ~ 0 "C3 ~ Q ~ .Q ~ ~ U V ~ N - 'S ~ ~_'' ~ O ~ tCf O N ~ ~ ~ E - N ~ ~ E O ~ ~ .. U ~ ` cll U tC9 O ~ -C ~ N ._ d~ ~a~S~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v .~ ..c ~ ca =a = z3 ~ ~ ~ .O _~ ~ ~G ~ ~ ~ O ` ...0 O ~ to to O -~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ N O 0 ~ O O ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ 'Z3 ~ . O _U ~ ~ 4- ~ ~ t6 ~ t6 N ttf E O ~ -+-~ C O N N ~ O _ O C O N `U- O ~ "'' C C 4= ..O C ~ .U ~ O U -~ cOn~ O ~ c6 ai c~ 'C ~ ~ ~ c Q O"O ~"a C QJ ~ O ~ V tq O O C ~ ~.,• (U O () to O U ~~ ~•~ ~ c ~ ~ V ~ ~ O O cn ~ ~ - Y E ~ • ~ c~ r- ~ '~ ~ fn C (/1 ~ ~ C ~ ~ T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r1+ ~ ~ t6 ~ LY ~! +' + ~ ~ .~ fCS ~ ~1 ~ ~ # auil rn N .~ rn ~ o ~ n1 ~ r' CO r J # aFed r r ~ lf7 CO I~- M M C~ C'7 t~ C'7 # Wa}I ~ N C'7 d- i c9 M a 0 0 0 o0 0 ° ~ui~aa~ paeo8 ~ o 0 0 N o Guiuueld ~o a~a® ~ rn rn rn ~? rn ~ ti ti ti rn r- ~a~S `o~~gnd U U ~ `8~d1~ `8d `~~08 p p ~ ~ m ~ m tL c a ~ ~o •daa :uifi.~p m m ~- ~ O ''= ~ U ~ C i Rf ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ N ~ ~ of ~ O ~• O > O d" 'a0- Q O C ` cn ccs ~' t~6 ~ '~ 'C > ' -c p ~ U ~ ~ -j N ..C O ~ ~ ~ C "O O O ~ ~ ~ ~ .II L U ~ ~ - ~ .~ ~ ,~ U O ~ Q O ~ ~ O (~ ~ (L5 N ~ ~ ~ ~ O N ~ ~ ~ X ~ . N ~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' o O N •N p + N ~ ~ ~ - O ~ ~ ~. j •~ (U ~ a ~ ~ R$ ~ i ^~ O a ~ to N Q~ O N ~ -F~ ~ ~i-+ ~ ~ U -ice N N O L O O U1 N' ~ 0 0 ~ .O O ~ (15 C6 ~ L ~ N U O ' i ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ NI m ca ~.. ~ U `- ~ c U ~ -~ ~ . ~ o-a m ~ o-~~ ~ Q a? m ~~ Eo~~ ~ a= :~ ~ -c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ a, a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ N ~ .f2 0 U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O" O O ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ O N U ~ tCf C t6 + ~ p U O~ -'-' 'O O ~ ~ ,~ U O O ~ a. ~ ~ rn O - L ~ D ~ -a c~ ~ O N > .~ ~ , o ~ o O cn ~ ~ c~ ~ ~ o° ~ ~ ~ ~ . o ~ ~ U c o N s- ~ ,,., ~ ~ - ~ cn -~-~ c N ~ O ~ N cn ;,_.~ c6 ~"' ~ ~ ~ ~ 11.. 0 t1T ~ . ~ N - .~ ~ cn ~ ~ -~ ' ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ DJ~U ` I- ~ .~ ~ , ~ N -c ~0 # au~1 ~ `~' oo ~ ~ N i.~ 0 0 ~ m m m ~ aGed r- r ~ ~- c~ ~ i c~ c~ c'~ m # ~a~l ti oo rn ~.. ° .-. 11 m 0 v v c a a L U C t .~ 12 w ,n N _~ ~> Cl. ~ ~ N ~ O N ~ d o O U cv ~ ~ fA O "~ o ~ N ~ Cfl m ~ ~ C G tC fiui~aa~ paao8 °o ° ° ° fiUIUUE?Oc) ~~ a~~® ~ o ~ o o ti uo ~ © rn i ~a~S `oi~q~nd U ~ ~ `8d1~ `8d `~~OS p ~ ~o •daa :ui~~ap m ~ ~ a. O m O o ~- a~ -Q cs' *~ ~ ° ~ ~ . ,, a~ ~ C > ~ S2 N N fCS - ~ ~ L. O O ~ •v ~ ~ cn o a~ ~ ~ . ~ cB ~ c .-. N O , ~ ~ ~ n O ~ ~ ~ ~ ' (6 ~ O RS ~ ~ tLf Q ~ ~ N O •> x ~~ , U . O O ~ -C ~ ~ •~ ~ ~ ~ .~ LL.I . ~ ~ _~ ~ ~ ~ N > O '~ ~ O i ~ ~ ~ X ~ ~ ~ "~ ~ ~ N O ~ • v O - - .,Q o0 L1J 4- O O O N ;~, . C tt7 O U N > C ~ L~ •O ~ ~ c N ~ (~ .C ~ (~ N _ o . "a ~ o o O ~ O c O o ~ ~ ~ ~- 'st O o ~ -r3 ~ c ~- ' ~ N ~ i N ~ _ N N N ~ O ~ ~ N ~. -O .C -,~,.~, O N ~ N >: -p . ~ ~ ~~ p N p ~ ~ ~ O + ' ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ , U Q1 Rf ' .~ ~ ..~ ~ O ' U ~ Q ~... tTf N ~ +r V ~ ~ ~ -O X O ~ ~ ~ O , L ~ p `~ ~ r' ~ ~ ~ tt3 -~ ~ ~ ~. ~ U c a ~ U ~ ~ t6 ~ ~ O ~ ~ O ~ ~ S', ~ p ~ ~y O o ~ O .o ` ~ o o ~ o ~ ,;~ ~ o~ O ~ ..~ ~ W o ai U ~ W ~ ~ ~ , ~ ; N .. O ~ O O E ~' O ~ O ~ N V t4 O ~ 'a rn c ~ .Q -p ~ ~ I Q U Z Q .,~ v O s... O ~ Q ~. N . O C O O ~~ # aui~ m M o cv c~ 6 ~ ~ rn o # a ad c~ ~, # wail ~ ~ i c~ ~ ~ 0 c~ 0 0 0 13 N (6 Cl.. ~ ~ N ~ O (U Q ~ ~ r~.. a. 0 0 U ~ o~ to O $ N ~ O cD m C C R 0.. 0 0 o fui}aa~ p.~eos o o ' o 0 Buiuue~d ~.o a}ea rn cN'o cN`o rn ~ rn co i o0 o i ~ i c ~a~S `ai~gnd U ~ ,~ U .~ U `8~/l~ `8d `308 m ~ ~ U ~ m ~ U m ~o •da~ :u~fi~ap a~ ~ cn ~ c~ .~ ~ ~' O c ~ O o c S 'Q `~ -~ '~ ..c ~ U N ~ N N O ~ ~ ~ ~ ._ ~ V, ~ O ~ j C ~ O ~ , ~ ~ L~ O C6 ~ ~ •~ ~ cn C6 ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ (~ to " O N ~ U O ~ ti.- • ~ ,C ~ ~ ttf U ~ a N p~ V 0 cA W : to ` . U ~ ~ U ~ C cn ~ ~ O .~-• . ~ N~ .~ N W ~ ~.~ v~~ O O N ~-O W CL . c ~ ~ o ~ O cn ~ O o ~ ~ -~ . ~ U ~ ~ ;~; c a~ O ~ Q .Q (a ~ ..~ L ~ .F.+ ~ 0 _ ~ O d. _ Q. 0. ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ m ~ ~ a~ m a~ ~ c ~'' ~ ~ ~.. ~ tll C C ~ O ~ Z3 c~ ~ C O 'C ~ ~ ts-6 L ;. .L~ ~ L1. O .~ ~ O c~ v ~ O` O U O ~ ~ -~-+ ~j ~ ~ C CTf ~ . ~ Q' V ~ f~ ~ C .~ N .V ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ _ ~ Z O i U ~ O tll Q (U .C2 ' f1) ~ C O ~ ~ ~ ;~, -~ O ~ O ~-~- N ~ Y .,..~ O U ~ ti ~ ~ O C ~ O ~ ~'? O ~ ~.c ''~ U N (~ ~ ~'a ~ . ~ O ` M- cn C ~ `'' Q' .C C N ~ p ' ' ~ ~ V O ~ O W ~ . U O, ~ - O ` ~ ' W ~ O ~ O ~ cA ~ ~ p ~ ~ ~ ;~ V p p ~ ~ ~ Q ~ " ~ ~ ? O U U ~ ' Q o -c # auil T ~ ~ ~ a # afiad rn w o - cYi ~ ~; d # u.la~ ~ r. r oo ~ ~ ~ 14 ~J _~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ o a~ Q. o a- a 0 0 U m ~~ O ~ N ~ O CO m ~ •C G ^~ l.f. fiu~}aa~ paaog 00 °o 0 0 0 0 Buiuue~d ~o a}eQ ~ o o ti ~- rn rn }}a~g `oi~gnd U v `8t/1~ `8d `~~0~ ~ }o •daa :u~~~ap m m -~ _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ •~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - _o c c m ~ ~~ • o~ y ~ `o y... ~? 7 ~ ~ ~ = ~ C ~ ~ o>. ~ _ ~/~ V J .,..r • -s-+ '~ Q~ ~ ~ '_Q ~ ~ ~ _~ O •~ ..C O O _ CQ ~ ~ N (U . C ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ C "L3 (n ~ Q C ~ ' ~ O O U ~ O ~ ~ i.. ~ ~ ~_ (U ~ ' N t6 .. ~ N a ~ Ca U ~ O U O -O O' ~ ~` tll ~ ~ p O ~ ~ _ ~ -~ ~ - O • ~ L O S ,O ~ ~ O -O R5 (6 .N v ° o O O ~ ~ N ~ °~ O m ~ r o .c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O p ~ ~ cu cn o ~ • C ~ v, o c O~ ~ ~ ~ o c E E ~~ ~ ~ o ~ p ~ a~ ~ ° ~ •~ c ~ o L o (n ° -~ .~ ~ c ~. ~ C6 O ~ Q ~ G ~ ~ - U ~ O C o ' U ~ ~ (6 d ~ o v ~ ~ C -p ~ ' N O 0 ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ Q `,~ ' i C t1) U LL , ~ - ~ ~ ~ ,~ O > ~ ~ O ~ X ~ cq ccs ~ ~ ~ <C ~ to ,,~ U> o ~ .~ O_ H ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ O ~ C O •~ ~ ~ ~ 'p O 4- ~ -~ U cn O U •O N r ~+- 0 cn ~ O E U G~ . U ~ O .O i ~ 0 -~ O. ~ N -O ~ , N- ~ ~ O O L ~ ~ O ~ •~ ~ O m ~ O ~ O v ~ ~ ~--~ ~ T •~ ~ •~ •~ O S] ~ ff5 ~ CO C a C6 O GO ~ N 'O U O O O U O ~ 0 O 0 ~ '~ O N~ cN ~ Q ~ N = ~ O .c cCS ~+ - m <(~ U ~.C ff} O # aui, ° o m M • # afied ~ ~ ~' , ~ - # wail ~, ; ~ 0 0 T Q r 15 W C N ~ •~ ~ N ~ O N Q. ~ Q. O O U o N O "a. N O c~ Cn C tC1 d ~ ° o 0o 0 ao 0 ~ 0 6UI~aa{~ paeog o 0 0 0 N 0 N Guiuua~d ~o a}eQ N a, N c~ ti o o ~a~S `~l~gnd ~ .~ ~`-' ~`-' `8~d1~ `'~d `308 . n ~ ~o •daa :u~fiiap ~ ~ o I ~ ~ c .~ CU c ' ~ ~ C ~ C E ~ O ~ q 0 3 ~ -r-+ U ~ ~ ~ L L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ i-+ ~ ~~ ° O ~ ~ ~ LQ U ~ Q ; ~ -C cn ~ ~ +_, - ,,~, : C to ~ ~+- U ~ , Q N O ~ ~ ccs ~E°'~ o a.° ~ ~'c~-E N ~ ~ c6 ~ v ~ ~ ~ -z3 N ~ v ~ ~ ~ O O N L- ~ ~ ~ .~ 4- ~ O O N ~ ~ L T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O C to .~ i ~ ~ U C _ ~ t6 to C C ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ = cn 'C '~ •N V "CS O C~~ c6 C N V O O O. U O~ O .. d ' ~ N ~ ~ O O ~ S ~ ~ O O= p v 'in N n U ~ ~ 5.. C ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ U ~ Q Q' ~ ~_ L ~ (6 O ~ ~ ~ ~ - N D. ~ m O N N ~ •~ O ~ ~ O t6 ~ ~ ; U ~ ~ ~ -O •~ . ~ ~ „C .C ~ '~ ~ C 0 ,; ~ ~ ..~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ ~ , t~ C : p ~ O C6 CC C G (n L ~ -Q ('-p 'O '~ V C6 C6 ~ O ~ ~ O - ' ~ ~ O O N ~ .~ E ~ ~ .U ~ ~ : ~ ~ ' ~ ~ .~.., to ''`~ Q.. O L O ~ ~t-• C Z3 .II ~ O cn ct5 ~ ~ C ~ ~ C fn Q O C ~ ~ ~ 4- ~ _ N ~ O r . ~ ~ ~ _ fn N = V O ~ v- O Q . ~ N ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ -O N .~ O ~ ;~ , tl) ~ ~ ~ O ~ tL5 r' ~ ~ O .~ :tr L C ~ O ~ .C ~ ; :ir V Q U :U v O O ~ ~ d cOn :~ ~ ~ O ~ j ' d N O ~ ~ ~ ° v ° ~ ° O o~ c m E . O ~ c ~ U O. d~ ~ ~ # aU1"1 ~ ~ uj d' d- ~- N # afed ' d d - d' ' # ~ua~l n ~ r` ~ rn 16 ,~ _~ ~> ~ O ~ N ~ o a~ L 0 Q- a 0 0 U m ~ ~ ~n o ~ o ~ N MM~ CL~ W ~ ~ C C a Bui~aaVy paao~ ~ ° ~ ° ~ ° ~ ° ° ° ° 6uiuuald ~o a~L'® o N o N o N O o o o N o N 0 f o~~p '~. O .rte, O ~ ~ ~ ~a~S `o~lgnd ca U c, ._ `9b~1d `8d `~~OS ~ p p ~.o •da~ :uifi~ap ~ m ~ ~ m ~ m ~ O O m m +r _~ 'v. ~ ~ ~ . ~I ~ ui O O `~ ~ c ~ ~ a~ ~ o O V O ~ U .C ~ ~ f/) p N ~ V I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ (~ N ~ O cn ?~ .C V N -. i~ ~ - . ~ c~i~ Z~ i~ ~ -~ O = ~ ~ O ~ cOn ~- c c ~ ~ ~ ,,,._ N R1 ~ ~ t 6 p ~ E O C U ~~ ° = ~~~ o _ a ~" ~ o o m o a~ ' m o .,~ c~ ~, ~ ~ f ~ a~ ~~ ~ ~ 'j ~ o " ~x ;~ o ~ ~o > ~ ~ ~ u1 L' "' a~ ~ 'O ~ O O VJ • ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q :_- n. ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ .c ccc c o ~ a ~ ~ Q = ~ c~ a " o c ~ : '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~i O ~ ~ a~ o ~ ~ a~ cu o ~ .~ •~ ,~ o, ca ~' ~ L U C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .c C ~ .~ ~ ~ ~. '.~'.: ~ ~ O 0 fCf ~ O .o ` '~ ~ Q. ,C U ~ .C ~ ~ .~ - ~ ~ N C ~ W ~ o .~ U U X -p W ~ f- ..I O ~ ~ U N ~ to . tty .-. - C 6 r "' O ~ .~ Q r ~ ~.. U tq _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - O ~ O O N ~ ~ ~ w .~ ~ _ ~ ~ ; , _ ~ ~ ~ ~ t~ ~ ~ O m z ~ ~ > ~ • > c c a~ ~ a, ~ ~ o °~ ~ ~ ~. m ~ ~I a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i U a ~ ~ o ~ m ~ ~ a~ N v = .n -~ g -~ ~ ~v O ~ Od. O °-~ O~ D D ~ Q° ~; # au~~ ° ~n M ~ ; o oo C r- d- ~ t.f) ~ d' z M N # a~~d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~r cfl ~ ~ ' ~. ~n ~ ~ ~ # uaa~l o ~ N M --~ -~ --~ .--. ~ r ~ r r- N t7 d- M C+') 0 0 U 0 a 3 .~ c ~L '~ t~ 0 m c .~ c m a~ a c U a~ c .~ a~ U t1 a~ ~_ E 0 c N E E 0 U 0 0 0 ~~ ~.. 0 N ~.. N >' •~ ~ O N ~ Q- a 4- O O U cu ~ ~ N O O ~ N ~ (D L10 ~ •~_ C c~ a ° ° ° ° ~uo~aa~ paeog O o o o o ~UIUUE~d ~.O a~eQ ~ j j ~ ~ N M ~ ~ .~ ~ O ~a~S `o!Ignd ~ U U U U `ab~1~ `8cl `JJ08 ~ O O O O ~.o •claa :ui~~.~p ~ m m m m a~ a~ E = v - ~ ~ o ~ cn ~- O- Q o O ~ (l5 m ~ s- C •~ -~ -p ~ . N tCf .,_, U ~ > O .C ~- ~- ~ C6 U ~ C -Q ~ -° fU to '~ c O ~ "O N N ~ ~ .C ~ o ~ ?~. O `, ?, (A G o ~ ~ ~ ~ •(n to C O Q O ~ ` U ~ ~ ~ L ~ ~ ~ ^^ o LL O m _ ~ Ctn off ~ O ~ o • jai •~ ~ .~ ~ E do C O ~ ~ ~ ~ , C U • ~ N ~ '~ ~ -Q ~ Q N I` ~ ~ ~ O O N O ~ O U •- N ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ U pp ~ ~ ~ O ~ t6 ~ N O ~ N Cll 't3 ~C C ~ ° O ~ Q- -O ~ C - tL 6 m t s- ~ O O -~ U C ~ c. -~ o ~ N o 'O 0 ~, ~+- ttf N o v C a> ~ ~ ~ a> ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~- '`'' (0 N ~ U "O ~ ~ . 6 .~ ~ _ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V ~ ~ 0 ~ N .~-~ - ' •- -O O Q t N C O. N C3 (U ~ U ~ ~ > p C3 N ~ ~ N ~ O ~ t(3 .~ ~ ~ d: .~-~ ~ ~ ~ c6 N ~ O t6 ~ ~ ~ U ~~ ~ ~~ o.~~~ ~ ~o E~ ~~ c c = ~ ~ a~ p .c -~ cn cn o .~ o •~ ~' a~ a> v c ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ • n '~ N ~, ~ ~ ~ Q~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ •~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ L ~ cv c a~ L U T Z ~ ~ O / \ ~ U t~ O D -~ //~~ / ~ LL U Q~ # aui~ ~ o m d• m r `~ ~ N d• T' # afied ~n ~ ~ t- N_ c, ~ # wail i ~ ti ~ ~ 18 0 •~ ~ N ~ O Q~ L 0 a O ~ U cv c~~a L~ r O ~ o ~ N ~ CU m C~6 ~ ~ ~C C {~ a Bui~.aa~ p.~c:os °o °o °o fiu~uua~d ~o a}e® m ~ A 1 ` A 1 _ ~a~S `o~~gn~p U U U `8b'~~ `8d `~~0~ 0 ~ ~ ~o •da~ :u~fii~p m m m p cu c -~ c S -c ° -v ~ ~ L •-~ ~ 'O ~ O ~ R3 _ O N ~ O '~ ~_ ~ -~ - -+ (~ O O ~ ~ o ~ ~ ..~ o o - C cn ~ ° o u~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ o ;~• sn .N > ~~ o ~ U i ~~ ~ E-- ~ c ~ •~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •C ..C L .~ O . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ ~c a ~ i .{y •L '` ((f Q ~ (n C ~ ..C C O (n ~ Q..-p ~ N -a ~ ~ -a p ~ .~ O (B ~ -Q ~ O L ~ "F' V (J1 ~ (~ ~ m Y a ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ (~ O N :~ ~ 'O -~ ~- .~? -c C a~ ~ -~ v ~ C ~ ~ ~ c ~ CL cis -O O ~ cc~ Q U ~ ~ O N ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..C^j~ ~ ~ L Q" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V "C3 " U 7' ~ • 'r~~, •~ 5 Z ~ ~ C O .,~ .,.., O ~ cn O c ~ ~ ~ c U ~° o~ ~ ~ , -~ c . U Q. ~ p O~ O ~ O :~ Q U O -~ ~ N "~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m .~-~ _ # aul, M M abed N r N t- c~ ~ # uaa}' o ~ c i r- r- r- M M 0 N T 0 0 0 19 C ~ N ~ ,~ (1. ~ > ~ ~ N ~ O O ~. ~ d O U a~ c~~a ~ o~ O •~ O ~ N ~ CO m c c ttf a. ,~ 0 Cui~ae~ p.~eog o 0 0 f u~uueld ~o a~e0 rn ti ~e~S `o~~gnd U ~ •U U `9`d~~ `8d `~~08 O i ~ m ~o •daa :uifioap m c s a~ ,~ W ~ '~ (~ ~ vi ~ > J U ~ ~ >, ~ '''' N ~ ~ ~ C ~ ~ O L ~- O ~ ~ t6 ~ -~ c vi C rn ~ ` ~ N ~ to p U •;~ E- C ~ N E C ~ O ~ ~ O O ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ - U ~ ~ ~ ~ U p ~ U ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p N -C to ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O C t6 + ~ to ~ ~ i N O N O ` ~ S U N (Cf ~ G O ~ ~ N~ C +~ U ~ ~ ~ '+- ~ U _ cn ' ~ ~ ~ c ,,~ ~ H W N - ~ ~ 'S O C to O N N ~ t6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O -~ t6 ~ ~ > •~ ~ ~ X ~ .O ~ ~- ~ O ~ ~ O .~ ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ N O t 6 ~ •a O ,~ ~- N V ~ ''+- N ~ O ~ r O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ Q. - ~ ~ L ~ ~ '~+- .o C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'N ~ `~ t a~ ~ o V ~ ~-' ~. o o~ <C ~ ~ o ~ ~ m ~ o o ~ ~ ~~ a~ ~ - ~ c . c~ o c~ F- • _ ~ o (ll .,~ O to ~ ~ L o ~ ~ ~ t~ ~ v ~? i ~ ~ ~ X ~ ~ ~ v i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O •~ . Q ~ t n L O V v r ~ O ~ O CC C ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ -f~ ~ v~° n -° v ° N ~ `~ E O ~~ ~ c _ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •o ~ ~ +, •~ c ,~ n ~ ~ ~ . E o ~ .~ ~ Cn ~ ~ O U c ~ o ~ c N ~ o N U N o ~ ~ ~ 0 ~.. ~ 0 ~ N ~ ct f cll v ~ .c 0 ;~ ' o o ~ .~ c~ . - U C f v '~ ' E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ R T ~ U ~ .C .C p t tCf O O N f~. ~ a U 1 '~ N ~ °~ ct3 ~ ~ N ~ ~ N N # ace d ~ ~ ~ ~ # wa}~ ~ d- ~ cfl ~: c r; c 20 N C ~ N ~ •d d ~ ~ N ~ O O Q. a O 0 U ~ ~ ~ °o $ N ~ O co 00 ~~ c c~ d. dui}aa~ p ~eog o° ~ °~ o 0 0 0 0 . ~uiuueid }.o a}ea O O ~ N p O m N N N a7 ~ O7 ~ (~ p~ - ~e}S `o~~gnd ` U U ~ •v v ~ v U 8t~1~ `9d `~~0~ U v ~ .n .n .~ ~ U }o •da~ :ui~iap m m ~ c ~ n ~ m ~ U O C ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ O ~ ~ ~' ~ to N ~ C6 > O : ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ U ~ ~ ? U C ' 0 '~ ~ ~ to ~+- O N ~ ~ ~ ~C ~ ~ .~ 'C ~ N } C C '~ ~ to ~ I ~ .+-~ ~ ~ ~ > ;~ cn O to (6 ~ ~ N L ~ ~ "a ~ C ~ O Q. U O O C ~ • ~ yr ~ C6 N N ~ ~ • ~ ~ C ~ ~ • ~ u) ~ > .N+-~ O ~~ O) ~ O ~ O (ll ~ O ~ ~ N O I LL ~~ ~ 'a > "c -C ~ 'C ~ O O ~ ~ (6' ~ ~ ~~ ~°'o ~ ~ U o ~ ~ cq n. ~ o ~ ~- o ~- m ca .Q .~. ' OD ~ ° u U ~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~-° ~ -O ~ -~ O ~ in > N (!1 W can v ~ ~, ~ z Q~ ~ O > ~L c ' N , ~ ~ ~ ~ = ~ vi .~ y-~ ~ U cn .E... ~ cu c o U ~ c I -+-~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ d cy ~ o -a • c = c ~ rn ~ '~ ~ ~ c ~ 'ca ~ o ~ ~ ~ °~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ` o ~ o ~ 'c ~ "- ~+ ~ O ~ - ~ c O c ~ N ~ ~ O to c ~ E O cn N O ~ ~ \ c _ N N O ~ N O N ~ 'C V ~ O ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ <( -~-~ O L . to N C N-~ m 'p V 't3 ~ Ri O ~ . O O (TS ~. Q ~ Q ~ d' # a u I'0 M cQ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1' ~ N # aged ~ ~ N N d' d' d' d' -.c) ~.n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M .. N T T. ~- N N N N M O d' 0 0 0 T 21 N •~ Q.- N ~ O N Q ~ d w- O 0 U m o ~.' to O o ~ N 0 c~i OD ~ ~ ~ •C C t!f d BUI}aa~ p.l~O~ N N ~ N N f u~uue~d ~.o a~.eQ o o o m ~ r ~ ~ d7 _ f~- ~ ~ ~ ~u~S `oi~gnd U U U v `8t/~~ `8d `~~09 U U ~ m ~o •daa :u~fiiap m m ~ m ~ ° c ~ c ~ ~ z~ ~,~ °.~~~ o~ ~ g ~ ~ ~' o ~ ~ ~ ` ~ ~ - ° ~- c~ x c z °~ o .-~ ~ cv ~ O L ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ vi ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ p- U ~ U ~` ~ ~ Q~ ~ ~ '~ 'C tD V (n ~. ~- R5 -~ ~ (6 Q L ~ ~ ~ ~ fn U U O > ~ (ll U U ~ , L G~ ~ ~ • ~ Cl5 ~ O O 'F'~ C 'O ~ O U1 '~ ~ ~ C U~ O CC G O~ . ~ y_ ~ L ~ N -F-+ ~~ . Q> Q. ~ O 4- i ~ Q O U) ~ -~-~ ~ S U O ~ (/1 N ,V O O ~ v N .~ ~ .~ ~ .C ~ .~-, ~' O cn ~ OC -U O O ~ ~ ~ O ~ NL :~' ~ O O > 'O cn O " ~ U S C L- U ~ O C N > C O O ~ U~~ N ca >~ U t6 vi ~ O o ~ ~ ~ ~ o ° ~ 'o ~ L ~ c`6 ~ a~ c~ U 4- ~ cn O N U O .~ ~ Q O ~- ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..c~ v ~ U cu ~ ~ >~ ~ c`t~ ics ~ ' ~~ -Q o~ ~ _ C ~'~" > ~ C ~. 0.. ~ . a~ • o ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~j O Q d' "~ ~ O. cn N N ~ ~ ~ O J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N J 'a - C . U O O O > ~ ~ '~ E ~ ~ ~ tCf ~ L ~ _ U +U O ~ N ~ O ~+_~ N ~ ~ d U _ ~ ~ N ~ to t 6 E- p. a~ D O ~. ` O ° -~ S~. U O . N M # aGad ~ M ~ M ti C7 ~ t'7 ~ if) tf) 1.t7 lf~ Ln # ula~ ~ ~ N ~ N r~ N o i N rn N 22 N C O _~ ~ •:J'' d ~ ~ N ~ O N Qa 0 0 U m D ~ t4 O ~ N ~ O csa 00 ~ ~ ~ •C C tCf d ui}aa~ p.a~og O ~ O ~ © 0p C1 ~ p ~UIUU~'~d }O a}~Q N 'N'^^ TN N N O N A~A ` 1' W A` / _ ' ^ M` W ~~ ~ ' ~M W V ! ~a}S `o~ignc! U v v ~ U `8~d~~ `8d `~~0~ . U -~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o •daa :uiB~.ap m cL m n a ~ O O ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o o ~ -r~ ' ~ "~ O a~ o ~ ~ ~ Z3 0 ~ 0 ~ c ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;v ,~ ~ ~ ai c = ~ ~ ~ c .-° o ~ ~ . c ~ ~ O ~ ~' cn ~, ~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ N '~ -p U O ~ O ~ tL3 ~ O ~ ~ ~ O ~ V ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ '. L _~ ~ •~ RS ~ N ~ O W -p ~ ~ '~, '~ 0 0 p c ~ • ~ ~ cn ~ O N ~ ~ v .~ ~ ~ Q ~ Cn O ~ =f ~ ~ ~ T . ~ ~ ~ C ~ •~ ~ ,~ O ~ '~' ~ a~i ~ ~ ~ c = ~ ~ U .~ ~ E ~ Q C ~ O ~ Q ~ 'a ~ cn O- N J ~ a , ~ , N ~ N ~ ~ c6 > • C ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ N ~ ~ N O- (U p ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ S -~ ~ a~ cs ~ o : ~' c O ~ c~ a~ ~ - c N N s- t6 V O) O N ~ -O ~- ~-' C ~ 6 ( 'L3 "a O ..r C +-' ~ C O C o•, C ,}, o ccs ca ~ ° ~ >' Y Q1 ~ ~..~ o i , O C C , a~ co -~ ~ o m ~ m ~ _ ~ ~ C O ~ ~ ~ O N O t6 ~ 0 ~ .O .~ ~ O ~ +, N (6 - 'O Q. ~ L E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -- C .~ j ~ ~ ' ~'. ~ ~ p O fCf ~ O ~ Q • :,~ O V C6 ~ ~ ~ to ~ ~ O "~ U O f ~ O ~ N N L.. ~ (~ ~ 'y N ? ~ ~ i ' ~ LLl ~ ~ . 'y '+ O U ~ c ~ ~ LlJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ J c' o ~ J J ~ ~ c .~ o ' = O " c ~ ~ cn 'C3 N ~ > -~-~ ~ ~ (U ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ U ~ ' V C ~ ~ ~ ~ 'C3 ~ C G1 N -'~ ; O V ~ •Q O ~ p ~ .Q .a O ~ ~ ~? O .O ~ -~ ~ S "C7 E C2 ~ O ~ . ~ C t1) , Q_'0 . _ ,; ~ ~ ] ~ O O CA ._ O ~ t2 # aual ~ N ° ~ r # abed ~ M 0 d- ~ ` n ~ # uae}' ° N ~ c c c i c~i M O T U 0 a .~ .~ ca 0 m C C G co tll ~_ a a~ 0 U a~ 3 c .~ N U a Q c c~ m L_ O 0 Q 0 0 0 23 m ~ ~- 00 °O ~ 00 °O 0O ° ° N fiui~aa~ paeos °o N o °o ° ° ° N o -~„ ~UIUUG'~C~ ~~ a~~Q ~ N N O m ° "' ~ 07 0`0 0~`O (A ~ O O v ~a~S `ol~~9ncD U U •`-' m ~ a `8113 `sc! `JJ08 p p ~ ~ ~ ~- I. j ~ c ~o •tla~ :ui~~ap m m ~ a ~ ', ~ a ~ v ~. ~ c~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ z ~ ~ O i _ ~ N ~. N i ~ ~ ~ O C6 ° ~ ~ ~ O..C .~ - .~. -O N -~ j [CS ~ ' ~ O C~ -~ ~ ~ : N ~ to N ~ ~ ~ U (0 ' cn ~ O ~ v-- 1 =O ~ ~ O O GD ~ ~ W W ~ Q ~ ~ ,. 'i ~ .N ~ j Q. M O (6 ~ to ~ h• ~ W C6 ? O O O ~ ~ ~ ; to to ~ ; c[i ~ tq til t O ~ to 'S N J~~ J J ~, J O ~ ,~ O O > T3 N '~ ~ ~ to (U ~ O Cll N O Q. ~~ N ~O ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ N ~ (t3 ~ ~ U d O C ~ ~ ~ ~ L ? U > _~ ? ~ ~ N Rf l!1 0 C ~ 0~~~ N O N C O cB ~ (Cf ~ N cA C ~ _ O ~ ~ .Q O ~ O ,~ O O ~ ~ , ~, s. tll ~ ~ ~- O C ~ .: ~ O ~ ~ ~ Q C6 ~ C6 C ('~ ~ tSf f- QS . ~ ~ U ~ O v- ~ ~ , c6 O O cll ~ ~ N ~ -~ O :~ Q 'z3 O ca Q ~ ~ N . Q cn Q c~ ;U Q . cti ;~ W cn # auk, ~ ~ m o ° ° d- O O O ~ r' `- N # a~e~ to ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t j Cfl Imo- ~ 07 O ~ # wadi m m ~ C'7 M d- 24 0 `~ .~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ O N O Q O ~ U cv D ~ t~ O $ N ~ O CU m ~ ~ .C C C tC a ~ui~aa~ p.aeog 00 ~UIUUG'~C~ ~~ a~~a N ~ N O ~ N N p N "~` ~ N O N O N r ~- ~ ~.. O r- O r- r- ~ ~ ~ ~a~S `os~gn~ `gb~1g `gd `~~Og ~ Q ¢ c~a ~ ¢ c~a Q ~ ¢ ~ ~ ¢ d ~ ~O'C~a~:Ul~i.lo _ W~ W~ _ ~ W~ _ W~ W~ c a W~ _ W~ >, (U ~ ~ ~ C N ~ ..C ~ ~ ~-~ Cn ~ "~ t6 ~ ~ t0 ' cct ~ ~ C O ~ ~ ~ ~, Q ~ ~ .} (~ RS O ~ ~ N d E ~-. R3 .~ ~ ~, ~ 'o U ~ ~ ~ .c v Q~ ~ .~ ~ o N E L j ~ ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ c m . U ~ cu ~ _ o ~ ~ ~ Q ~ o ~ U O .~ ~ ~ -C . v a~ .~ -+~ c ~ a~ ~ a~ ..~ ~ ~ ~ O z o c :,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ to ,.., Q ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~'=~ • O . N d ~~ S~ > ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ Q. ~ / O t ~ ~ O ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ Q ~ g x~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U O O ~ ~ ~ m Y ~ ~ p ~ O ~ tq Q ~ ~ `- d ~ ~ W ~- ~ ~ ~~ ~ U O ~ N Q. X U N ~ N Q- ~ ~ O ~ 4= ~ ~ ~ "a tff co ~ c v~ ~ ~ ~ O- ~ O s ~ N , . Q. ~ ~ O tD ,+-. s.. 0 N to c O .C ~-• f .~ ~ C •L .Q .~ ~ .C n . U o ~ ~~'' cU ~ O ~ ~ W U v ~ ~ ~ U "~ ~ o n. 'ooin ~ ~° ~c~a ~~~ ~~, ~.~ 'c~ ~ ~ v '~ ~ N ~ t~ O ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ cn ~ vOi ~ ~ ~ C c . N ~ .C (~ /~~ I'- Q ~N/ CL ~ L ~ O .L' ~ -~ N •V Y BLS ..C (n ~ V y ~ Q ~ ~ p C N # aU1'~ ~ ~ ~ M N d- r, r- d' N # afied d- ~ co ~; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c o m ~ o N M d. I j CO I` O ~ ch 0 0 r O O r 25 N O .N ^c~ ~ LL N '~ > ~ ~ N ~ O N ~ Q- R].. O O U a~ c~a ~ ~ ~ N O .a o ~ N O Cif m c O t6 o 0 °0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ DUI}aa~ ~JE:Og ~ ~ N N 0 N 0 N fiuiuue~d ~o a~eQ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 y. rn rn 6, rn rn ~a~S`o!ignd m~ m~ m~ m~ m~ m~ ¢ `s~d1~ `~d `~~08 ¢c~ W ~ ¢~ W ~ ¢c~ W ~ Qc~ W ~ ¢c~ W ~ c~ W ~ ~o •daa :u~fi~ap ~ L O ~ ~ '- 'O O ~ .;~ V ..~ ' ~ ~ C6 U ~ ' ~ C N ~ ~ ' ~ s. ~ '' C L1J ` .+~ O p T3 (~ = ~ . ~ ~ CL5 = U -O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ to ~ ~ C _ (6 ~ N to ~ Q ~ ~ ~ C ~}' w-+ ..C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~G' LL ~ ~ O C E a~ N a~ `~ -' ~ ~ ~ .~ .~ V °n .y ~ ~ U Q ~ v- ° ~ ~ ~ *~ ~ C6 -O ~ "C5 c cn O > - ~ ~ c ~ L O ~ c Q (~ ~ j ~ t.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . U ~ ~ O O O ~ ~ O ~ .cn vOi ~ ~ U ~ C N '~ ~ n ~ d ~ f6 -~ 'C C O cll -p N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U1 N O ~ -p ~ ~ Rf ~ O -~ ~ C O ~ ~ ~ •- - C N Q- ~ 'p O '~ ~~ `~ ~~ ~ v ~ O ~ ~ o~V ~ ~ ~ tCf Q ~ d' ..Q 'C3 11.1 '~ ~ to Q. ~ U (A $~ ~ CO ~ .U .r j (U O C ..Q ~ u ~ '~ U cts cn O N c ~ ~ cri O N ~ Q O ~ ~ ~ O (~ ~ r ~ O ~ i N O„ ~ (Lf ~ N U .~ E ~ ~ ~ O . a~ ~ C; w cu c U ~~ -+-J O ~~ ~ ~ ~ _` C N O IL ~ c,= ~ O ~ ,.C C :~ O .,~ V ~ U ~ ~ t6 ~ O V i U ~ ~ ~~~ N C O = ~ U p ~ o~ °W UE 'a Q-~ ~- E ' ~ N ta x C ~ W vii ~ ~ c Q_ ~ ~ cQ I-U~ i a r m # au~~ m ~ ~ r r d" ~ ~ # a~~d ~ o cfl ~, c o c.~ co ~ ~ uaa~~ o ~ c i r ~ ~ ~ r ~ r m. 0 rn 26 O ~_ ~ •~ ~~~// {.L ~~ C y N ~ L Q. O ~ U ~ N ~ O cO m ca ~ C C Ri a dui}aa~ pa~o8 °o ~ °o ~ °o ~ °o ~ o ~ a° GUIUUG'~d ~~ 3}~a _ N O. _ N O N O N ~G' O N N O r ~ r ~ r ~ _r ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~~~S `~isgnd ` ` ` ~ ¢ ~ Q ~ Q ¢ U ~ Sb~1~ 8d 308 c a c a c a ~ ¢ ca ~O 'C~3~J :U1~1.1~ W ~ W ~ W ~ W ~ m ~W to ~ U p U ~ ~ ~ a-+ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -p ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •~ O C t~o• W -O ~ L • "O y.+ ~~ •V ~ O ~ ~ Q L (~ ~ 'CS ~ ~ ' p ~ N O O ! ~ ~ O ~ ~ O v ~ ~~ ~ C O ~ :~ O .~ L ~ O~ O ~ ~ ~' L ~ ;`n ~ L N ~ C ~ ~ V ~ fn (6 O ~ O CB ~ N Q. ~ N ~ N ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ '~ N ~ _ O z'= O O ~ ~ ~ Q a ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ N ~ U . " ~ ~ C N O C _ ~ ~ N~ (Lf O '''' E -O ~ d N ~~ O .,,_, O ~,, ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ cA a-.• C~ ~~ O C .~ mo / O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v i Q N ~ ~~ ~ . - (~ c z3 L ~ a~ o z3 ~ cn o ~ ~ ~ n. ~ ~ a~ ~ ~t o Y ~ ~ ~t- -s-+ ~ O E ~ ~ N ~ ~ O O ~ _' > 0 ~ ~ O ~ C ~ m fLf Q. (CS ~ ~ s. C ~ N ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ = ~ _C ~ N O (U ~ C ~ O C~ O ~ .~ N N N ~ ~ ~ a-+ (B fn ~ L N ~ ~ -~ C6 ~ fn ~ ~ C6 ( ~ 'p .O ~ U ~ ~ ~ O -~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ U N C ~ ~ ''-' ~ C ~ ~ ?~ O . - .C N . ~ ~ QO a°~ ~ ; °o~ ~~ ~~ a~io~ . 0 ;~ ;o~-' moo . ~v° z3 ~~ ~~~ :~ ;~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~,~ +.~ (~ ~ ti r ' O N C7 +~ c~ N # aui, ,~ ~ N N N ~ # abed N N N co ct~ tt> ~ ~ ~ # wa~0 ~ r r~ r o r rn r o N N M 0 0 N 0 0 0 Y- 27 N c ~ '> ~ °~ U ~ > '~ 'N d ~" N ~ O Q. O 0 U ~ ~ N O $ N ~ O cfl 00 C ~ ~ p p O O O fiui}aaw paeos 0 N 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 0 ~uiuue~d }o a}ea o a. o 0 "" ~ ~ p~ ~ Cn 07 ~.e}g`o~~gnd m~ m.~ m~ m~ ¢ m~ Q m~ ¢ m~ c a ~8d1~~'Bd~J~pB Q ~ W~ ~ ~ ¢ c6 W~ ~ W~ ~ W~ ~ W~ ~ Q W(n }o •daa :u~6~ap W ~ U ~ ~ U L ~ N ~ U c'7 ~ ~ _,,~ p ~ ~ O` ~ ~ ~ -U c W U_ m v a~ w cn . ~, ~ c ~ ' ' .~ 'Q J .~ .~ ' ~ ~ ~ o~ ~_ ~ ~~~~n v °~ai n' o ~ ~ .c~>~ X ~ ca ~ ~, ~ o o ~ ~ ~U :s~ ~ °.~ U •~ o ~ ~ o ~ o -~ •~ ~ (t3 o ~ ~, ~. ~ ;,~ C tt5 O U ~ O ~ N cB ~ •C ~ ~ ~ ~~ o a~ O U O a~ a~ ~~ ~ o o ~" c~ o ~ Q v ' U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ C ~ ~ ~ ~ C • ~ O N ~ ~ Q) ~ (Cf ~ ~ ~ ~ i U U • • '~ O ~ ~~•, O Z o tZ. -o ~ ~ ~ ~ -c3 c =~ ~ (~ ~ ~ ~, CD c ~ o o -~ ~ c p ~ ~ 4- o ~ ~ o o C~ .n ~ W Q ~ ~ o , w o~ ~ m ~ ~ U ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ..Q O ~ tL5 J (B i Z t6 -p ~, +-~ ~ ~ ~ U o .U f-•. -~ ~ •~ U ~ C ~ U r _ ~ ~ W ~ to ~ ~ 4- (Cf fi5 ~ ,Q C ..C ~ ~, ~ N ~ ~ ~ L N C O U ~ (•> (n L.. ~ N ~ Q• . ~ i U ~ O "~ fn .S~ tV .~ C ~ C ~ O Q1 ~ .~.+ fn ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ V L •~ ~, p N ~ ~ CA ~ •N ~ -p p O ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ O '~ C o - ~ ~ o v) .C ~ ~ Q .~ Q U C6 ~ Q LL ~ ~ CfS S2 ..~ N V # au1~ r ~ d. N ('7 ~ d- Co °° c~ m ace ~ ~ m m # d ~ ~ ~ c ~ c fl u.la}~ N N N ,n N ~ N ti N ~ N 28 N C N ~ ,~ ~ ~ > Z3 '~ O C N O O Q.. O O U m o~ to O N ~ O co m ~ ~ a ~U~~aa~ paeo8 0° °o °o o° °o °o °o °o ~uiuu~~d ~o a~~~ N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 . N 0 N 0 r. ~ '~ ~ r _ ~ r ~ r ~ r ~ ~ _ ~ T ~ ~.~~g `o~fgnd `8t/13`8d`JJO~J Q~ ~~ Q~ 4~ m <C~ m Q~ m~ ~ J ~.O'CIa,ZJ:UO~IJo J W~ W~ .J "+-~ W~ J ~+-~ W~ J ~ W~ W~ Jca W~ ~ W~ "~ ~ "C O --- ~ C Q. ,~ O i ~ = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~_ cn " ~ 'D v`'--. t6 to O _ ~ ~ o . ~ ~ ~ ` ~ ~ Cn ~ N ~ ~ p ~ N fA ~ ~ O ~ _ = ~ ~ ~ C ~ y. ~ V ~ ?, ~ .~ ~ ~ O f Q N ~ ~ "a z O ° ~ ~ ~ N~ i O v ~- ~ ~-- N Q- U ~ ,+-, C~ ~ L ~ _ O O . p tII i N (B «f ~ ~ C ~ 4- ~ "p ~ " ~ N ~ ~~N ~ ~ ~ C ~~' ~ 'u, 0 '~, ~ ~ E~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v~<C .p ' -~~ 4 C U N ~~ O'; O ~- U 4-. v~ ~ .~ ~ v ~ p ~ O ..C ' ~ f/,1 ~ tq tC3 ~ x fLf O L m Y ~ fn ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ •~ Q ~ - . f6 u ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V ~ ~ V ~ fn ~ " ~ ~, ~_ -i~+ -~ ~ V N "' ~ ~~ ~ ~ -~ C .~~ C .~° (A U ~~ C p o~ ~ N fA a~iE° (3 C ~~ . Z ~ ~ . CC t~ z J ~ cA a. ~ a. Q = Q cn ~ i- O ~ m ~ # a U 1'0 N ~ N M t.f) C'7 Cfl ~- ~ ~ d ~ - a~~d ~ d- CO Cfl tD CQ to ~ i ~ ~ N M C7 M' M C~ ~ M 0 N N U 0 a 3 a~ . .~ t~ c .~ ~. as O OD c .c C tCf a. N ~_ .~ c U y~ c .~ U Q E 0 -~ c a~ E E 0 U Q 0 0 0 29 N C C N ~ •~ W ~ > ~ ~ N O O tl~ ~- a 0 0 U m D ~ N O ~ N ~ O co m _~'~ c a ° ° ° ° o ° fiui as .008 .~ !N p o ~ o O~ o o ~ oV o fiuiuue~d ~o a}e0 0 0 0 0 ' o 0 0 - 0 0 r ~_ O ~_ O ~_ O r O r_ O ~ O e O ~_ O O }~.e}S `o~~gnd ` ` ` Q~ Q~ d~ ~~ Q~ ¢~ Q~ Q~ Q~ ~~O9 8d 8b~~~ ~ ~ ~ W~ W~ W~ W~ W~ W~ ~.O'C~a~j:U1~IJ~ W W W ui M O N ~ d' ~ U ~ ~ C ~ ~ d ~ ~ O v ~ ~ O O ~ t6 ,~,,, ~ -~ C C6 -~ ~ Q d ~ O ~ N ~ ~ ~ 07 ~ ~ N ~ d W ~ O O •~ L > . N ~ i .;r .~ ~ ~ •a '~ ~ fl.. ~ ~ ~ :~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~' ~ ° O N o ~ •~ a ~ c~ ~ ~ • d ~ O c U •~ .~ -~ ~ c ~ o c ~• ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~' Z3 U (ll C O -O ~ c ~ i N ~ (t3 -~-~ Cll a' ~ ~ Q ~+ ~ p tU '- C6 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ O tL6 O p ~ •+-~ ~ ~ Q '~ ~O ~ Q. 'S ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ U a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ z x ~ ~ ~ ~- .c = ~ ~ ca -~ Q o W U a. ,..•, -a o a~ .~ ~ ~c n ~ o ~ ° ,°n s ~~ N ~ ~- i- ` i ~ ~ v 0 0 ~ ~ ~ p o ~ ~ w - a~ ~ O~ O o ~ C , Q OU H ~- ~ LL O ~ ~ IL-~ ~~ _I Z O # a U l'~ r r- O N cfl d' p d. # a~ud CQ d' I~- d' 00 d- 00 d• 00 d• 00 d• O ~.n O ~n r ~ ~ ~ cfl cfl co cc> co c~ co cQ co # we~~ .-. m .-. ~ .-. m ,-. ~°- - d- N d- M d- d• d• ~ d- 30 N N ~ •d e~/ ~' ~ ~ ~ O O Q ~.. a O O U m ~ ~ y O ~ N ~ O Cfl m .~ C C co a Gu~~aa~ paeog o o° °o °o °o fiu~uue~d }o a~ep o 0 0 0 0 r ~ r ~ r- ~ ~- ~ c- ~ ~a~S `oi0gnd ¢ ~ m ~ m ~ m `8t/1~ `8d `~~08 w .n ~ Q ~ ~.o •daa :uifi~ap w ~ ~ w ~ w n W ~ O L O ~ ~ ..C C O ~ ~ ' O O y, ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ Z U O V ty_ ~. . (~ ~ 4- ~ }' O V ~ y~ L ~ Q i~ ~ ~ O ' •~' ''~ cZf N V O - Q U cif ~ -~ ~ O (a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o CCf ~ v- cn ~ o a ~ a. Ca ~ 'a a~ o ~ N - ~ ~ 'O N .s= ~ 7 N N~ V P~ (t$ ~~ O .A ' ~ > cU c[f •~ U S a. `~ ..C ~ .+~ C~6 Q ''_ ~=+ to OU -C ~ cn m d? ~ 's.~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ a ~ n cn csf c6 ~ E ~ ~ ~ cis ~ -a ~ a ~ ~ c -a c ~ ~ . . .~ ~ ~ ~' J ~ 'S m m ~ C p~ U t6 to ~ O O S`' ~ O ~ O N .,~ ~ ~ ~ " o o ' Q v~ .c c ° a a~ hi " a ~ ~ ca ~ ~ O O p ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ , C ~ c O p O O_ O~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ V) ~ "~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ N ~ C C O U 1 CV ~ O iri ~ N ' ~" , C ~ ~ J '~ ~ O C ~' yam' ~ i ~ O ~' ~ ~ ~ Q N cLi _ _ ~ • C7 -~ ' +~ N ~ -~-~ ~ ~ f= ~ v a v ~ ~ ~. ~'_' ~ ca ~ ~ c~ : a ~ c ~ a~ O O ~ ~zF- a.. a~ ~ ~a~ d~ ~` ".Uw a~ O # au1~ M N T co ~ # aBad C'7 o cY"J o M ~ n c o c o ~ , # uaa~s ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ M M 0 ~t N 0 0 0 3~ C ~ ~ •~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ o a~ o Q- Q. ~ 0 U O ~ ~ U1 O O ~ N O Cfl CD ~ •~ ~r C a dui as p.lC:O~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N N N N ~ fiu~uu~~d o a}eQ o 0 0 `o 0 0 0 T 0 T 0 T 0 T T T T T_ T T }}a}g `oi~gnd ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~8d1~ ~8d x.7.708 ~6 Q C w~ Q ~ w~ Q ~ w~ Q ( +6 w~ ~6 C w~ Q w~ ~6 J t w~ Q w~ Q w~ w~ ~o•daa:u~fiiap ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q, U 4- ~ R5 ~ `o N c D ~ ~ O ~ C ..Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (B ~ ~ -~..O- 00 I`I ool ; ~ ~ x ~ d- ~ ~ ~ -c3 csp N- ~ ~ ~ C6 ~ O N ~ ctT N ~ ~ O ~ O .~ -> U :c r, (tf ~ C cn ~ ? ~ o to E N E ~ C . ~ ~, ~ > ~ 0 U ~ 0 ~ ~ C~ F; +~+ cn ~ c6 E ~ •~ o o a ~ ~ ~ ~ to cn ~ U :n (~ . C ~ ~ L -~-~ ~ O (u `~'j- O Tj ~ ,~ '~ V ~ (~ Q (U ~ C ~ ~ ~ tCf ~ CCf O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ V O D. N ~ ~ ~ = ++ tT~ ++ Rf tll L- -+-' .~ .U i- N O i ~ U ~ ,~ + ~ ~ O ~ N ~ ~ Z Z" -~ ~ ~ to -~ ~ U ~ "C3 U ~ ?, = ~ Q ~ ~ ~ Q. -U C ~ ~ ~ ~ -U 'p ~ ~- ~ ~ O O . (tf - ~ A ~ N N .~ Q U U N Ur -~ ~ _ O N ~ fq -Q -~ CLf (CS i C Q- ~~ V Q C E~ ~ ~ ~ cn ~ v , ~ ~ : ~ -~ ~ o 4~- 0 ~j ~ L ~ _ . ~ c~ ~ o fZ 'p ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ 'a N ~ -~ ~ ~ V -C s.. 'S ~ ~ C6 ~ LL E Q ~ ~ C~ ~ C~ - ' ~ ~ ~ U O # au1"~ ~ ~ O ~ c~ j N T ~ ~ o~ ~ry N aged ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ti ti # ~ Cp CO tD Cif Cfl t0 f.~ CO ~ # uaa} ~ r ~ N ~ M ,n d' u~ ~ ~n ~ ~n ice- ~n 00 ~n d7 ~n O co 32 C O C N ~ .~ ~ ~ 7 ~ ~ N ~ o a~ o Q O ~ U ~ o~ ~n o° -a N ~ O CO m a Bu~~aa~ paeos 0o o co °o 0o °a co o° 00 °o 0o °o ao °o 0o 0 ao 0 fuiuues~ ~.o a~~® o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r r r r r r r r_ r ~.e~g `oi~gn~ ` ` m ~ m ~ m ~ , m ~ ~.- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 9b~1~ ~d `J~O'~ Q c~ ¢ c~ Q c~ ¢ ca co ca Rs c~ c~ ~O 'C~3a :u1~1.10 W ~ W ~ W ~ W fn Cn CA Cn (n fn .~ ~' E N ~ (~ N L Q O L- O D "~ ~ N O) ~ _~ ~ V O Q ~ ~ V ~ tB ~ r , "~ ~, ~ ~ ~ N ~ Cn ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ .c cn c ~ ~ ~ ~: ~' a~ c ~~ U O_ ~ ~ cc- y ~ tTl U p 0 ~ C ~ ~, ~ fLS O i O u O N .~ ? ~ c ~ ~ -~ cA ~ °` .~ to cu V C ~ O , O O U ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ a ~' ~ ai ~ -v ~ ~ ~ L ~ Q. Q. • ~i-+ vJ I L ~ C ~ - O C ~- -c3 ~ °c ~ o C13 S (ll ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ m `1 ~ L O ~ -~ ~ C ~ '~ O ~ . n1 c, ~, ~ W ~ d cn ~ U F' m~ - o m m° ~~ > > ~ ~ as a c ~ c vi ~ ~ a i ~ '~ ~ U O o`~ = - O (Cl ~ U ~ ~ ®, U O ~ O-~ O O C U yOr) NO ~ c~ to ./~~ O O 1 ~~ O~ 0 r O, ~ 11 • LL m ~ Q ~ ~' ~ Q. ~ Q. ~ ' ~- U -~ L V CU N L .,~ L L ~ L, P ~ "~ ~- LL .Q Q~ ~ .Z ~ ~ U ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ C'7 # alll'~ N ~ ~ ~ Q Q Q d N Z Z Z Z # afiod a' ti o oro c~ u? r1~ co . t cfl m cfl m ~ ~`. r- r- ~ r~ # lUa}~ co ~ ~ ~ ~- N c~ d- n m 0 cn N U 0 Q. 3 a~ .~ c .~ cts 0 OD c .~ c m d cU a C U c .~ a~ U a 'C O c m E E 0 U 0 0 0 33 O ~ •~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ O ~ Q ~ O GL a O o U ~ ~ .~ c~a. c~ ~ ~ rn o~ N ~ O ~ ~ ~ •C C C tLf 0.. ° ° ° ° o Cui as paeog .~ ~I o o o c o~ o N ,, ~uiuua~d ~.o a~ep o a ' o 0 0 0 , 0 rn T rn rn rn rn w -~ rn ~a~S `ol~gnd `gt~1g `gd `~30g cn cn cn cn cn ~o •daa :ui~~~p cn cn c c~ ~ . V -~ ~ Rf Q -~ ~ C (Lf V ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ (T5 t6 ,~ ~ ,~ c6 N L1J ~ U ~ ;~ to '''' 7~, (Lf C ~ ~ , = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y , +.~ O ~U N ~ ~~ ~ O Z ~ f9:1 N ll ~ ~ ~U to cn ~ . ~ ~ o ~ U a~, ~ ~ ~ ~ "-' ~.~ N ;~ ~ '~ ~' ~ p yL ~ ~ -C ' ~ ~ °~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t3 N ~ o- :~ _ ~ ~ C~ -~ 'S ~ U (ll ~ ~ -a ~ to N o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ cu •~ ~ ~ ~ c6' N I O -a ~ .~ t4 of ~ -a C ~ ftf ~ ~ . U ~ ~ v' ~ o _ ~ ~ ~ • a> .~ v cn cv ~ ~ Cn L V ~ L N ~ cct ib ~ o ~ cu ~ c~a u' ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tll ~ ~ '.oo ~ f '~ ~ c ° ~ ~ (D z ~, ~j ~ "-+ .~ . C~6 ~ . V a~+ ~ ~ ~ C ~ C Q C ~ U ~ .` 0 U ~ U ~ ~ N ~. ~ '~ Q. ~ ~ ~ 'U t6 ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~, ~ U U ~ ~ ~ ~ t4 ~ `~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (if .~ ~ "~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ (~ ~~ (ll ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O Q ~ ~ ~~.~ •~ ~ ~ U C~ ~ tcs C ~ (ll D `` ~ ' ~ : ' N ~~~'` t!~ ~ cal cal ~. ~ cn # au11 Z z ~' ~ ~ r r r` d- afie ti ti ti '< ~ ' ` ~ r- c~ o0 o # d o0 00 0o a ~ uaa} I n o r` r N m ~ 34 c 0 +_~ ^_^~ •/ 1.1. N •~ O ~ 0 Q •u. U cu ~~ N O ~ N ~ O cfl 00 ~. a dui}aa~ pJC'Og N a ° N ° O o0 fiuouueld ~o a~~® o o ~ ~ N o o O ~ O ~ N o ~ ti ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~a~S `oi~gnd U `8b-~~ `8d `~~08 ~~ a - ~c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ m -~ o . ~ c ~ -~ ~o ~ ~ ~ o n_-.~ ~ ~, _ .~ V) ~ R3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o L ~ ^^ LL Q Q~ .O vJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ V ~ N ~~ Q ~ ~ ~ L ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~ Q~ 6 (cc (ll ~ O ~ 0 N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ G (6 ~ ~ O C -~ ~ 'S ~ ~ ~ >, ~ N U O U c6 ~ ~ a ~ cu > ~ ca ~ m ~,; U ca ~~ oo ~ a~~= n~ ~ ~~ m m Y U c ~ _ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ .C ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Cn U ..Q ~ p ~ (U ~' .,_, ~ N ~ ~ C (ll ~ i- "a ~ Q) ~ ~ ~ C O ~ ~ U ~ q) N Q. O ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~/ tLf ~ U - U •~ ~ ~ ~ y ~ ~ -~ ~ •Q V ~ (~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~'° w ~ °O a ~ ~ •N ~ :sz Q m ~,~ m ~.-: o~ . ~-: # a U 1"~ N d' op c~ ~ ~ ;~ ~ N c # abed °' r- ~ r N N c i °p o0 0o co 00 00 00 # uaa~l i o ti o rn o r r- M m 0 N 0 O a 35 N O c~u ~> ~ ~ _> ~ ~ N 0 i ^O Q {,~. O ~ U as ~ N °° -a N ~ O c~ m C C ~a n. ~ ~ ~ ~ui~aa~ p.~eos ~ °o o ° c°u ~ c°y N Buiuueld ~o a~eo ,~ ° N co N ~ i ~,.. ° -~.. ° `.. ~? ° r rn ~, °° ~.,. rn rn rn . °' rn ~}a~S `oi~gnd ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `8bo1~ `~d `~~0~ ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.o •da~ :ui~~.~~ ~ o cn cn cn cn ' o ~ ~ 4- `}- o ' ~ ~ ~-- L ~ o .C O N ~ 4 O ~ "C3 O O C C . _ +~. ~ O t6 ~ U ~ C C ~ (~ ~ ~ O - ~ O ~ •~ N ~ ~ -O ~ O ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ .c c6 + ~ oo ~ •~ ~ Ci N ~ O ~ ~ O ~ ' ~i ~~ ~ ~ U 00 O- ~ ~ C t 6 + + O ~ O a> Q vim- ~ ; o " oN v I- N Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O 4~ -~ ~ ~ ~ te Q ~ ~'(On~ •a ~ ~ . ~ . '~ r , U ~ ~ •~ ~ V ~ " ~ ~ ~ -~ '~ v~ - Q~ -i ~ ~ ~ ~' .,~ ~ ~ cu c3 . ce -~ ,~ ~ Q. ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ 7, ~ ~_ ~ :ti, c O ~, .c ~ ~ o O ~ ~ ~ i~ E C c .c~ ~ d ~ ~-, ~ o ~ ~ ;~ -p -~ ~ ` cz U ~ o = ~ v ' ~ c ~ '~ ;~ ~C~ U ~ ~'= ~ ~ o .O ..O a~ O. = - i~+ - ~ cn p ~ .~ Q ~ C O ~~ ~= O ?, C ~ ~ ~ ~O O u~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N J U ;~ a ~ p . "c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ o ~~ y o O;~ U ~ :~~ U ~~ ~ +~ Q. v ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ N ~ (6 V O ~ ~ tt5 .Q Oar O~~ d° a i :U~ Oc`~ w d- ~ t' # aue~ (~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, r d- , ~ ~ ~. m N # afied r c~ N c~ N c~ C'7 c~. tf') ch CD c~ 00 0o ao co 00 00 # wa}s N m d- r ~ r c0 r r-. r r r 36 N ~ ~N ~ •~ d ~ ~ N ~ O N Q. d 0 0 U as ~ F- (n O ~ N ~ O CK~ m ~ ~ C C tC! Bui}aa~ p.aeog ~ °G ~ °o «~ °o 00 °o ~lllt,ll.le~d ~.O a~e~ ~ O O o ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~- ~ ~e~S `oi0gnd v °~e1~ `ad `~~®s o ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~o •daa :u~~oa® m w~ w m w~ L to ~ ,.C ~ ~ p U cn ~ tU i. ~ ~ N ~ ~ C ~ - C ~ ~ ~ f6 ~ O O . ~ ~ EC ~ N C~a O ~•C• -~ C6 ~ O O ~ ~ O O- !ll (A ~ ~ ~ .~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ to ~-+ ~ ~ .~ = ~ N ~ ~ ,~i N ~- ~ O ~ N U O O `"~ ~ V •~ "C O ~ U "C3 U +-, Rf N ~ ~ ~ c m c a~ cn • ~- O -a a~ ~ .C ~ .~ c N O N ~ ~ ~ ~ `'- O' ~ v ~ O ~ D. ~ ~ N (,~ ~ co ca "'=' u, cn is , r O m Y U P O N C~6 •'O ~~; cn O~ •~ U ~ ~ ~ cU 'C ~ (Q "''~ t~ ~L'i ~ O O_ "Q ~ •L of ~ O ~ cn _ ; >U~ ~ ~ O ~ s... ~ O N ~ O '.~ •~ ~ O U O .O C tll .Q p - _ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~- j ?~ ~ O N ~ ~ ~ ~ p O O _ _O ~ C .Q -C U ' ~ '.~ ~ O O vi ~ O ~ cB ~ O v ~ ~ ~ O N ~ C "O ..C p U `~ .C ~ O O O cn :~ U ~ U O. 'II -O ~ .~ '~ ~ O +• C6 ~ -p O O Q- ~ ~~, O ~ v Q co ~ S ~ W ~ O F- .c # a u l'~ ~. ~ ~ N N N ~ ~ ~ N # abed M L ~ ~ ~ ~ rn ~ cn # uaa~f o -°~ ' --, .-. ~- ~' N M M O 0 c~ 0 T O T 37 0 Cu~~aa~ paao8 N N N M fiuouuald ~o a}eQ o 0 0 r- r- <- rn ~ rn ~a~S `ol~gnd m ~ m ~ m ~ a ~.o •da~ :u~6iap a -~ O b ~ ~ in c O 4- ~ ~ ~ cis ,.~ ~ L O O O cis •+-~ ~ cLf C :.~~+ N ~"' -~-' to cis "C3 ~ 'i ~ •C E N O U Cn ~, ~ O i C ~ *~ cn ~ V ~ ~ to N 't3 ~ ~ of O '- O O '~ .~ ~ ~ ~ c .~-~ ~ o crs ~ ~ ~ ~ C cn 4= to } ti5 N ~ ~ tCf > ~~ ~ N C N O Q ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O } ~ O O ~ ~ O ''"' E v .~ ~ NO N C E O ~ 'c3 ~ N L Lf~ .~ ~ (if L ~ 0 ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ V ' p O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ 0.. cCS O } U~ O C ~ ~ ~ W Z -~-' ~ ~ .O ~ > ~ N to ~ `, H ~ ~ ~ O N •q ~ C .O C O ~ ~ ~ N N ~ 00 m `1 a E ~ ~• V cn r O ~ U O `+- O ~ N N '~ ~ ~ .~ (~ s- to ~ O a o) ~ cn cn ~ ° ~ O ~ N ~ cB O N ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ai ~ ~ U .+~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O c cis c ~ O ~ O ~- ~ c~t5 cn vOi ~ O U ~ ~ ~ °G' ° ~ ~ U O c1~ to cj) O cn C ~ U U '~ c(f ~ C '~ ~ ~ cTS CA ~ ' ~ ~ ~ , n x ~•~~ ~~ ni~ oZ ~U~cvri o # afied 0 N 0 N 0 N ~ ~ ~ # wai l r n ~ 38 0 ~ '> ~ ~ •"' v, O 0 ~. a 0 0 U cv ~ ~ N ~ O C4 OD ~ ~ .G' C ttf a fui}aa~ paeoe N N N 0 fiu~uue~d ~.o a~e® o 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ `^' }~.e~s `~isgnd ° ~ s~~~ ~sd `~~os g ~ g ~ .~ g ~ S ~o -daa :uoBeap w . w ~ w ~ w ~ c > O o ~ ~ - _ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ to ~ C U ~ O } .-. c ~ .~ p ,~ ~ c i~ H c = ~ ,o ~ ~ ° ~ ~ v ~:~ ~ cn ~ N ~ •~ ~ ~ U O N ~~~ ~ a~ c6~ ~ ~ _~ ~ ~ ,~ o ~ ~ ° ~ c ~ ~ ~ c ~ •ccs ~ cn o a~ ~ m ~ ~- ~ c ~ V o U ~ ° a1 E ~ H F4- > V ~ >•~ . O O ~ ~ •O ~ ~ ~-c > C ti3 fCi • ~ 0 O (6 .a o ~ o vi Q- •~ ~ ~ ~ p` ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ o c ~ `~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ vi N ~ ~ tCS •~ o L O - m .f,~ O " O O O U W 1 LL ~ ~? (U R3 ~ ~ C R3 O ~ O ~ t6 ~ .~ ~ • ~~' O ~ V ~ r i "~-' O ~ U ..C C 'C .Q ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ "~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ' O ~ O ~ -p ~ .~ '`'' O .~-~ Z ~ ~ O O ~ U ~ O vi ~ ~ ` ~ ~ z ~ ~ O "- N +-~ ~ N U O s ~ ~ U O _ + - U ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o ~• ~ -~ ~ ~ E a~ c ~ ~ ;~ c ~ ~ U N ~ "~ cn ~ a~ O N - -~ -~ ca o ~ ~ t-- •~.~ -~ tn~Nc+M ~, ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ a~ ~~ # a l! I'~ O ~ ~ m ~ 'd' ~ ~ ,~ ., gy N r- ~ # aged ~ ° ° N ~ ~ ~ ~ # wa31 ti ~ ~ o M C'7 0 N M 0 0 0 T 39 N O .~ ~ •d d ~ ~ N ~ O N Q- a 0 0 U ~ D o~ N ~ O cci m C RT a fiu~~.aa~ paaog O O O N N N ~UIUUGId ~.O a~.6Q M C`O M ~ O O r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~a~S `oi~gnd ` U U m ~ m ~ `8t~"13 `sd `~~08 < ' ~ ~ am.. O W ~ w ~ ~o •daa :uiCiap m m ` ~ a~ c ~ O ,C •~ ~ _ . ~ `~ > ~ ~ ~ c ~ p o ~- ~ c ~ 'a, a. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~a a. iii ~ ~ "- ~ 'C3 ~ V U O 'p -p > _ ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ d c cn o a> • ~ c~ ~ -~ ~ U a> 1 d ~ ~ N '~ ~ -Q C C ~ •_ V .~ V U O : N ~ O Rf Rf -a ° as ~ a~ "' ~' c ~ ~ v O m ~ Q ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ c ~ m o c ~ O . -~ -~ . ~ o ~ :~~a~; ~ ~ ~ ~ o, a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ai a~ ~ a~ p„ cII ~ ~ _ C - U v ~ ,,,.,~ .~ O .i~ ~ O .O ~ nm. ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ m ~t - c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .n -~' ~ Q ~ i x~ x~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O C O ~r- ~ O Q t6 U N E _ O ~ Z ~ L O N- N~ Q i Nct> Q ~ U ~ ~ O - 'O .~? ~ O Q ~ '~ ~ O ~ ~J ~W p~ ~ OU OU r ~ v N `~ ~ c = "= m .,~ ' ti- tLf ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C N Q -C ~ . ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ N ~ N '', (If p ~U ' == ~ A I-.n 'O Q4= Q= Q'om' # aui~ ~ m z m m z z # afed ~ N N d' Z z m m m m # wa} ~ ~ ~, c i t i o 40 Attachment 1.3 41 An emerging point of consensus in Orange County is that we need to move toward becoming a sustainable community. What that means is that we must seek to develop a community that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. Trends identified by scientists have demonstrated the need to focus on sustainability. Current global trends have demonstrated the need for planning healthy and sustainable communities. One trend is the increasing impact of greenhouse gases on the world's climate and another is the decreasing supply of resources that support life. Sustainability is defined as aligning our built environment and socioeconomic activities with the natural systems that support life. In the long run, Sustainability means adapting human activities to the constraints and opportluiities of nature. The syn~bel fl~ure below is a graphic representation of a sustainable community. Each ring represents one of the Three E's: the environment, the economy and social equity. Each of these rings is connected to, and dependent upon the others. INSERT Fi~.u~e 5-1 "The Three S ~heres of Sustainable Cnowth" from Page 5-2 of the draft Com»rehensive Plan The design of a sustainable community in Orange County means that this Comprehensive Plan will strive, in its implementation, to link the economy, the environment and social equity to improve the vitality of all three of these domains. The meaning of sustainability can be further understood by examining four basic principles regarding human needs, natural systems, and the relationships between them. mr, ""''°s ~e "w~ic, 1. For a given natural resource, if the depletion rate exceeds the replacement rate, the resource will be available for only a finite time. Thus, unchecked use of resources has implications for our future generations. 2. Human activity produces harmful substances, which must be mediated to maintain balance in the natural systems. Human-generated waste, such as plastics, sewage, and carbon monoxide, must be carefully managed to minimize and eliminate damage to the earth. 3. Earth's ecosystems, of which humans are a part along with other living beings, are interdependent and most stable when they include a diversity of species. Overuse and pollution of the natural environment has implications for maintaining the earth's biodiversity. 4. Human needs span physical, economic, environmental, cultural, social, and spiritual dimensions. Human needs can be met equitably, justly, and with dignity without compromising the physical environment. Achieving greater fairness is essential for social stability and the cooperation needed for making large-scale changes within the framework laid out by the first three principles. These global principles are locally relevant because our community is part of a region, part of a continent, and part of a world. Our individual and collective decisions and actions affect the quality of human life and the quality of our natural environment not only in the local community, but also in the world. By understanding these principles, and the consequences of continuing to violate them, we establish a common basis for working toward becoming a sustainable community. 42 43 d' w U O ~~-+ Q i r~ M% i ~' ~i ~. ~~ O:: d'': .~:~ i ~: ..~.;. Q~ ~: ~. _~ s '3 ~ ,.~~., ~ ~; 6 ~ ' L ' ~ ~~ , ~~~ I C' E m o ~ of ~~ °I ~i °I ~I ~nI ~r ooI d;I °I ° ~ N N O r- S O N I- ~'`~~ ~ N ~`- ~ O ~ O ) NI I I ) ~I I ~I ~) I I N O ~ O O O d' O o'~ d-I ~~ ~ u~I ~I of ~?I ~?I of NI N N CV N r- 'r M o) c ~l N o~ N Sri I I ~I L(~ ~I 1.(J ~) ~I N . N N N N N r N N ~ cD ao c~ ~ r- O~ ~Y °) N u71 0l ' ' ~ u~ I r- NI rn I ~ rn ' co OI NI ' ~ r- O r O ~I OI O d- OI OI ) NI OI I d'I ,{ N N o0 CV N ~ r- ~- O N O O ~ T~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ N °°I ~ ~I O~ '`I ~ I c~ '`I N `°I ~ ~ ° ~ ~- r- N O ~ ~ O ~ N 07 N N ~ ~ ti ~') NI OBI Imo- CV) NI OI tiI tiI OI ~I ~ ~ ~ C7 C7 ~ r I 1 'K i~c ~ t6 * ~ 'k is ~ I 'O * .*~ ~ U C6 ~ O '~ ¢ ~ ~ ~ ~ "L3 (ll ~ (ll ~ N C ~ ~ * to Q ~ o ~ O: , i a U Q '~ ~ ~ .~ Cn O j ~?, O ~ ~ J ~ = O ~ ~ > ! ~ ~i ; .j t6 tll ~' J O N i O i N J ~ ~ ~ tlJs 'n U 4- O N_ N_ N_ O ~ ~ S ~ _ ~- -~ ~ (ll Cn fn Cn N N N U a. ~ ' 'co ` ~~ o -~ ~ ~. o .,~ 0 .~. 0 'u~ 'v~ in ~, ~ ~ L- O O ~ J J _._I O O O O > ~RS L U Q cn to v1 tq to tq J _! J ,J 4 s ~ o 0 0 0 u ~ -- o p ~ o U' U U' Z Z Z ~k L ~ L ~ Q~ ~ ~ ~ Q~ .Q 2 ~. L L. L 1. L L. L S ~ ~ ~ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q O O .~ O " U p O -O C ~ - c0 C ~ ~N ~ irc ~ O i~ (~I ~I iC (iC I # .O O O r O O of .~ O C c~ G U ,^ar ~ ~ fU to C ~ ~ ~ o ~ c ~ o Q L C~ .O i t6 O O • r- • Z RS 44 ~r U R3 Q .,:~ a, o I ~ I r.. ) ~a I c~ I ) f-- ~ N ~ N ~ N M N d ~N ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N p` I ~ ~ _ I M OD t0 ) I ~ ' d ~'`~ N o° ) N ~ I ~ I o l NI N c I N ~I ~ c'O IN N O) MI ti ~ I M m N N N of ~) N d- ~ ~I r'I ~i ~ N ~ c N Q O ~ N '~1' t.f)I ~ NI d;I c~ N N N ~ c~ r- ~I o ~ N ~ y.+ :. r ~ r C~ I M r U c t~6 .~ ~ U 0 :, ~ f6 ~ J . y0. N ~ p J ~ ~ > ~ t4 ~ C S ~ D C ~N ~ ~ ~ * ~ -~ ;?~ N ~ ~ fn O ~t _ '~ ,O ~ . ~ -~ ,~ A ~~ .Ct ~~ . > ~' ° v3 ~ U o - o `° ~ ~ ~ ~ J Qf o C ~' ~ O ~ U N C c ~ ~ ~C ~ 4- ~ o ~ O J ~ L ~ ~ z ~' c~ Q~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ N ~' z ~'-' ~ '~ Q G ~~~ ~ w o .,-. s c~ (6 ~ f ~ U ~ Z3 ~ ~ i ~ ~ s a~'i ~ ~•~~ •~ W ~ i ~ ~ U 0 'G3 c ca 0 45 d- N U tt5 Q N ~ ~ CP ~ o ~ r ao ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ NI ~ I ~~ ~~ N- U ~ N O ~ N O) ~I t ~-I dO'I MI NI ~ O ', N O -Q O tB 0 ~ ~I OI N C l VI NI O ~ 0 N r r to O • ~ ~ ' ~ U tCj ~ Q~ tf) ~) NI d'~ NI N O O C'7 CO ~ C j O" ~ N~ C~D~ ~I r"I c '~i N L c N N "O i N ~ N a ~ ~i ~~ r N I ~I ~ I C CV r . { rl ~ O (Cj N ~ to ~ l °I ~ ~I N I -~ N I ~r r O • N r C cn 4- .O CO `a to O o Q ~ l ~~ m °~ O o ~ ~~ N I ~ V _ _ r ~ . ~ o O E T ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~I NI ft3 O 07 ~ "~ W ' d I O r ~_ N ~ ~ V T~ ` r ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ a c~ c ~ L ~ ~ cn o ° ! ~ o o 'w ~ - a c o ~ ~ •~ ~ a .~ • ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ v '> o • o ~ -o ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~- z ~ '~ C 'i W (n ~ -J i ~ cs3 •~ ~ p , ' ~ o J ~ o U N C 6 ~ ,;, , N ? U O p ~ N O N .~ O Z ~ fn v ~ 't3 ; o ~ 0 fI) ~ c ° ~ d x Q! ~i r N -° +~ ~0 O L ~ o W VJ' 4 - O E ~J ~ ~ ~ ~ N ++, .I N o v a ~ N z O G ~ rn ~ F X - W : ' O O Z1- { O> -Q > Q ~ "CS .o c r i N r ..fl V w L UJ O .~ O > C X O N a r o 46 Attachment 6.2 47 ~E.dd li~Ia~ cultural ~e~~~rces (unincorporated portions of Orange County) ~~ ,~ . .:~ - J r t, ~~ x~ ''` .' _.. r Jr •wTe • ~ .[~~ /~'~ Colonial Hen[age ilyrray (1 ~ ~cNq ~'/ • Nr ~~ `i 1 ar' \ Q a;-Y1~ i Rs}<Kanlon Natbnal Reglatcr ~'' 1 ~• \\ h.~ _ _ f d Ofstrk \ ~i Y,ry4'•%..... ..... tlylJat s o c t ~y^~ ~,VEC'r~ ~ \.. i5 1~51u HI iD 1 CedarGroueRutal'Crossroads~' ~V~,, / o \ 1 /.i~` i~ * \}; RCN - \\ ~+' ~ ~~ ~~'' SL Mary'sftwdNatbnat ReBfsfer it '~k~G4 t ~ `.Z" !,, Sfu~tlet H/atodc dlsfdct r Lr'.P iMTN Rry \_\_ ~ • ~ ~ \ (1 ro° !w ~ /r~ , rh" ~ ~.:~~ ~~ 7 ~, rNTLLS~ ~ ~' ~~~', `s: `-,tip-__~~.;.: -_;;_ tiJ`` r'}~ ~~° / \\ s~ors w i i, Hcrita{~ f X44'' -•i\`rr,._... y ff ff ••~ ~ Saint •iD ./ 4d~p ~Jf ? ~i i(( ~ l~.vo4lasrg.a.ch.,4:~ ry tt \~~i$4~t `~i! ~oj~ ~~ uj fit, ih~"Da~rs Nafbnat Reglsfersfudy fJst r \^,~~ J~ }, ~Hktork Dlsfrkt ~ I '~. -.-r~. e~:.~ ~~ ~ ~- rr S ~i Xita i ~E~~)L. i&S:;GfI"cEMBap2i14t(: ~ `.` .~ t'.. r ill; •;FP%'• v,, ~, ~ ,v.~ vii k., Football Road 1 ~. •r•~ GGG `~ 6L5 MaP Propamdby Lepend ~°a ommy EnNrmment & Rnwme -North Carolina SceNc ByHays L7 Local Landmark & National Register cm~rmem oroadmml .I~j Municipal E'fJs ~' National Register ;~~;;j Cdes ~ National Register Histodc Qistric[ _'` •~ Natlonai Register Study Ust Hda: Thismap apa: namduae artNleauairem:acr. in the -~ -Main roads mrnldpeAlke or Wilabam~gh. Chapel HIE, Cartbuo orMebmro, Lakes (O Natlonai Register Study List Historic Distdct or m mea exra temnarm)ads<Emma' FIGURE 6.3: CULTURAL RESOURCES 4$ Attachment 6.4.1 49 Chart missing title: Acres along the feft column and Number of Farms along the right column. FfG URE 6'=l: ORANG,E:000NTY AGRICl1CTURE,.195.9-200 2 0 1 600 160,0 0 , 140,000 - '.1,400 120,000 - - 1,200 .~,, 100,000 1,000 N. 000 80 - - 800 LL , Q o :60,000- __ `'.*' .;~, ~ ~ 600 ~ ~, .; ~, 40,000 - - ,_ 400 20,000 200 0 ~ 19591964 1969 1974 1978 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002' :Land In Farms 145,9131,5. 110,7 87,81 87,34 - 90,57 81,10 67;4.9. 72,67 71,01 # of Farms 1;418 1,115 895; 631 - 564 599. 522 433 577 627 - 'Source: 1959-2002 Census of Agricull'ure, US Department of Agriculture 50 2 3 4 5 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 Attachment 6.4.3.1 THE CENTURY FARM PROGRAM The Century Farm program provides yet another honorary program for North Carolina farmers. This special program was initiated in 1970 when the North Carolina State Fair chose to highlight its theme "Salute to Agriculture" by searching for North Carolina families who had maintained active farms for more than - -- -- ~- --- - - - - --- - - .,~, 100 years. Today almost 1,600 farms _ are listed in the program including ~ ~~ fifteen from Orange County. ' I ~ ~. ~ _-- F ~ - Agriculture and preservation work hand- ~ in-hand to preserve and conserve I cultural landscapes. Honorary programs ~ such as the Local Landmark Program, the National Register of Historic Places, and the Century Farm Program provide j opportunities for recognition, awareness, and preservation of Orange . ,~ ~~ ~ -- .. 1 ~ ~ - py ~.. - rear v.~r~h 4-vrv483ti!r: r'~ r _,,.. County's rich agricultural history. ;....... _ .. .. ... ......... ............. ..... Participation can offer financial incentives in the form of rehabilitation . tax credits and/or property tax deferments. Preservation programs can dovetail with agricultural programs such as Voluntary Agricultural Districts and agricultural conservation easements to increase awareness for agri-tourism and direct marketing purposes, and to minimize nuisance-related concerns.z ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Orange County .has sponsored numerous archaeological surveys, particularly in the last five years. Information from these projects is shared with the Office of State Archaeology but is not made public due to salvage concerns. Since the design of Little River Park and Natural Area in 1999, the County has conducted cultural resources surveys as part of the master plan design process for new parks. In October of 2006, the Board of County Commissioners adopted anew policy requiring cultural and archaeological surveys for all County development projects. Surveys are conducted by archaeological consultants who meet National standards and typically include: background research, systematic surface and subsurface investigation (digging based.on a grid system), field reconnaissance, and a reporting of the results. Information from these surveys can be used to assist in the siting of future facilities and/or for identifying areas of historic and cultural interest for possible interpretation. ' The Orange County farmers include: Elbert H. Allison; N. K. Andrews; Elizabeth N. Blalock, Thomas N. Blalock, James M. Blalock; J. Fred Bowman, Betty Bowman; Jane M. Branscome, L. M. Merritt, E. Mangum; Flora Dick Dellinger, Edna Dellinger, Cothran Dellinger, Gene Dellinger; Estelle Haley, Frances H. Griffin, Wade E. Griffin; Katherine L. Kirkpatrick; Floyd Fox Miller; A. Gordon Neville; Ralph Neville (Heirs): Anne Neville Williams, Jane Neville Harley, Bryant Neville, Claude Neville; Shelton L. Ray; Richard Roberts, Ollie Roberts; Bryant J. Walker; and L. Phillip Walker. 51 Z See also information on Barn Again! in the Trends Section of this chapter and in the Agricultural Chapter of this Element. 52 1 2 In addition to archaeological surveys conducted in advance of new 3 County development projects, local residents can also ensure the 4 documentation and preservation of valuable historic and prehistoric 5 archaeological resources. The value. of an artifact is in its context 6 (original location), its relationship with .other artifacts, its structural 7 elements, or its relationship to natural features. Once removed from 8 their context many artifacts lose their value.3 Residents are encouraged 9 to use the Office of State Archaeology (OSA) to determine the 10 appropriate course of action regarding archaeological finds, particularly 11 those that may"involve old cemetery sites. The OSA can help residents 12 record, map, and catalog sites, thus preserving valuable locations 13 information on the future. 14 HISTORIC CEMETERIES 15 Historic cemeteries offer an invaluable link to the past. Often, smaller 16 family cemeteries are subject to abandonment and neglect over. time, 17 resulting in the loss of valuable genealogical and historical information. 18 Increasing development in the region further jeopardizes these cultural 19 resources. The OSA can provide information on the State Cemetery 20 Survey and the state statutes (N.C.G.S. Chapter 70, Article 3), regarding 21 the handling of human skeletal remains.4 22 SCENIC RESOURCES 23 During the late 1980s to mid 1990s, Orange County Planning staff 24 , working in conjunction with the Planning Board's Transportation 25 26 Advisory Subcommittee (TAS), researched scenic road programs in other states and localities, and developed a :proposal for Orange 27 County. -The Scenic, Rustic, and Rural Roads Program separated 28 potential corridors into three categories based on the focus of their 29 designation-natural features, historic or cultural resources or rural or 30 , agricultural context. The group systematically ranked roads based on 31 criteria and produced a Scenic Road Corridors Map, which included 32 segments from fifty (50) local roads. (See Map 6-6: Scenic Roads Map.) 33 While, the initial proposal was voluntary, the map was included in the 34 Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan and referenced in the 35 Flexible Development option of the Subdivision Regulations. Views 36 from the identified corridors are considered conservation areas in the 37 Flexible Development standards. 38 39 The HPC is currently evaluating the corridors shown on the 1981 map 40 to rlPfiarmina ~nih~rh r.,~~l ~o.•,w,~~+~ ,.+:n ..............___._ ~___ .. _.. ' Archaeological research in the late 1970s and early 1980s led to the creation of an "Archaeological Potential Map," which reflected the likelihood of finding resources based on topographic features such as ridges and drainageways. The map lacks the precision to replace site specific-fieldwork for predicting the location of archaeological resources and should only be used as a general guide. a ERCD works with the Durham-Orange Genealogical Society of North Carolina (D-OGS) to inventory cemeteries in Orange County; information on their cemetery census is available online. Olra.vu~~Ccruvi~y Co-~~v~~.c~,v~-rvPiP~av~ Public Hearing Draft 5-6-OS Page 6- 45 53 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 HPC has also been working to develop a new heritage/scenic corridor program As development continues to occur rural roads and their associated agricultural vistas may become compromised unless additional measures are adopted. The North Carolina Scenic Byways Program offers another form of ~ ~"'~ recognition to special road corridors ~~Y- ~== ~ -- that contribute to the visual ~ E - -`~-=''~~~= ...~ ~' ~-- ~ ~-~°] character of a community. Honorary ~ ~~~~~ in nature• there is no regulatory component to the program, nor any preemptive development ~ - ' -~ ~-- --•-~- restrictions. Three North Carolina Scenic Byways pass through Orange County-the Colonial Heritage may the Football Road and the Scots-Welsh Byway. tSee Map 6-3 in the Summary section of this Element.) HIGHWAY MARKER PROGRAM The North Carolina Highway Historical Marker Program was established in 1935, based on the marker program in Virginia established -in 1926. The Department of Cultural Resources' Research Branch and the Department of Transportation's Traffic Engineering Branch, Division of Highways administer the program jointly. Eligibility is subject to specific criteria based on state significance. Unlike the recognition of historic structures or archaeological sites, the markers typically commemorate important individuals who have been dead for twenty- five or more years. Today there are more than 1,400 state markers throughout North Carolina, at least one in every county. Orange County currently has twenty-four markers, including those within the towns of Chapel Hill and Hillsborough.s S The twenty-four North Carolina State Highway Historical Markers located in Orange County include: G-3 Thomas Burke; G-4 William Hooper 1742-1790; G-9 Archibald Debow Murphey; G-10 Francis Nash; G-11 Thomas Ruffin; G-16 Thomas Burke; G-19 Edmund Fanning; F-23 Regulators Hanged; G-26 Thomas H. Benton; G-33 Occaneechi; G-37, G-38, G-39 Bingham School; G-40 William A. Graham; G-48 Paper Mill; G-64 Moses A. Curtis; G-66 Hughes Academy; G-84 Old Eno Church and Cemetery; G-88 North Carolina Society of the Cincinnati; G-90 St. Mary's Chapel; G-92 University of N.C. at Chapel Hill; G-100 Harriet M. Berry 1877- 1940; G-103 J~ G. de Roulhac Hamilton; G-108 James Hogg 1972-1804; G-115 Elizabeth Keckly ca. 1820-1907; G-122 Hart's Mill. 0~~•aau~iCvy.~vity Ca~v~he~.~r'~v~.~rra~w Public Hearing Draft 5-6-OS Page 6- 46 54 1 2 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3'S 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 N ~~1 t~ ~~~+~ra~~al ~~~1'IC~ ~~ic~5 ~G~Ctt~ ~t~!'CI~IOC` ~C~~C'~S w,.., dr .~ s,~~J ~,~ ~~bi/H. w~ VIlY n~ MAP 6-6: ORANGE COUNTY SCENIC CORRIDORS~R$&E3s MAP Oi~a~~Ccru,v~~y Cv-vv~r~ehc.~~%verP~. Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 6- 47 c~~i R rrdc~r Attachment 6.4:5 1 Another watershed within the Neuse basin in northeastern Orange County is 2 the Little River Watershed. The Little River features a North Fork and South 3 Forl< in Orange County, before the two merge downstream in Durham 4 County. Finally in the Neuse, the headwaters, of the Flat River are located in 5 far northeastern Orange County. Both the Little River and Flat River continue 6 east. into Durham County into reservoirs before joining the Eno in Falls Lake. 7 These are also water supply watersheds for Durham County. 8 g Southern and western Orange County lies within the Cape Fear River Basin. 10 The Cape Fear River begins a few milesetje-~ south of fratn-Jordan Lake, 11 southeast of Orange County, and flows to the Atlantic Ocean south of 12 Wilmington, but its headwaters lie far to the west, north of Greensboro. In 13 this region, the Haw River and other streams feed Jordan LakeL a large 14 reservoir located southeast of the County line, -and thence the Cape Fear. 15 16 Many of these streams flow west/southwest into the Haw River or south 17 and east into New Hope Creelc/River- -the collector stream for the portion 18 of the Cape Fear basin in Orange County. The Haw itself is the southwestern 19 boundary of Orange County, and also has the distinction of being the only 20 river or stream that touches Orange County from an upstream source. Within 21 the Cape Fear Basin in Orange County are severalty-any watersheds that drain 22 to the Haw: Bacl< Creelc and Haw Creek to the northwest and west, and Cane 23 Creek and Collins Creek to the southwest In the sautheastern part of the 24 County, ~rrd-Morgan Creek flows into Jordan Lal<e, and New Hope Creek 25 and its tributaries flow east and south to briefly become the New Hope River. 26 just before entering Jordan Lake. WWater supply 27 impoundments within the Cape Fear in Orange~hts-County. include Cane 28 Creek Reservoir and University. Lake. Portions of western Orange County in 29 the Cape Fear basin drain west into Quaker Creek Reservoir northeast of 30 Mebane. 31 32 Finally, a small portion of northwestern Orange County is part of the 33 Roanoke River Basin, and the two streams in this area -North Hyco Creek 34 and South Hyco .Creelc, drain north into Caswell County and the Dan River. 35 The Dan straddles the North Carolina-Virginia border and eventually 36 becomes the Roanoke River, flowing east to Albemarle Sound. 37 38 In all, there are 15 different watersheds in Orange County within these three 39 river basins. (See Map 6-9). 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 55 56 1 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 so s2 54 s6 ~..~'~~e~.~ ~" ~t~~i'~ ~ ~`J~§i '~ r-h _ ~!~~yi - ~,r ~N~ri~ iz''t,,=.'l-.. r 4`'~ f-.( Y rr ~*y~1~~~ ~ ~~ ~t~~~iL 7 ~~ i ~. is f. ~l C.!~f(~~f ~~ r~ 3 ~ ~ Q,:ti~o-' ~ 1~l r- J ~ So~d1a ryW~~l ~. ~ ~ 2~' ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ->a ..~ ~' ,~, it ~ ~~' ,(~ ~. ~ r~xnr.~ ~ r zo / l _ s ~ ~,;,•~ f;'~ ~' ,a l • '~ ~ r, y ~,~~~~'` -~~ °n ~, ~~~i-~,' :.~ a ~ -a~a crt ~"~.. "~ "~ ~ ~ ,~ ;Legend ~', ! , .,,, ^'"• • ~~ Watersheds: k.t0 piB a A`~c~ 1 ~ ~ ~r, ~ ,-;; >, ~, A ij < ~' ~'" Protected Water 5upp(y ~~ Un rotected Water Su i `~ `~:, t:~;'.~'~: ~~''~ ~ :~a%e '~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~riticalArea a,,t._,..~ t ~ ~ ~~ ,~~~ ~ ~~ ~ - •' ~ ~~ River Basin Boundary ,r . , ,~ ~17c G~~~h~~~~-~-~, '~ Streams ~~ ~ ~,~''~ a~~f~~~~~ ~~~'+ ~` ~' i Municipal Jurisdic4ons r- 1 ~' .+r l ~ t y ~ ~~.. ~ ~i.;-+b~'4 ~ ' ~- ~' Nola: T7ceswatersksdrnaprap2acaspravioustxrsioxs, y ,~ ~ 1' ~ ~~za ~ _ ~ ~ Referaxce: Ora~gs CaunfyZaning Ordinance :(,/ j~ } .. ~ ~ .., 1 F !-' O.ryn Gr.) /~.revrL44.fsnmmOep.rvcn -T'4 l-; .. !~ ~ .: ~ Sr ~ ~ - C6^YA Prod lpFUmn~d.... 1 i ~'" ...' :~h i krd . n~..a,m..n.r: w...,t,<a,icr„,an„adrr.r~,ca... NP~xu~ R..-r.G, 6m.r0.. O.d.c Am] 4.r.m MAP 6-9: ORANGE COUNTY WATERSHEDS. d irate Cat,~.vt;~y Co-vv~v'~-1`t~uve~ ~la~vtr Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 6-2 57 Attachment 8.4.6 CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT Established in 1909, ~e Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools CHCCS ~Bi-strict provides educational services to school-age residents of the two Towns and some unincorporated areas near the Towns. The district operates three high schools, four middle schools, a-~ ten elementary schools a school for young people being treated at UNC Hospital and an alternative program for high school students. These schools which serve more than 11,000 students. -r".° °~~°+°rr,-~ ' .CHCCS employs 1 870 staff members, of whom 1 150 are teachers or administrators. The The mission included in the CHCCS Strategic School Plan for 289-2008-2013 +"«-,e-m;-s~Ta~-of ~nr-wa-s «n~ tnn°a~fnr °"o ~, C+„~°.,+~~ is "Empower all students to acquire the knowledge,. skills and insights necessary to live rewarding productive lives, prepared to contribute positively to the global community." The plan laid out annual capital expenditures for school facility and recreational expansion, identified funding sources for these projects, and set a schedule for implementation. 'n + +.,^;~;+:° ^r^c°ct.,. The school district ' updates its strategic plan regularly ORANGE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT The Orange County School District provides public education services to student- age residents of Hillsborough, the portion of Mebane that lies in Orange County, and most of the unincorporated areas of the County. It operates seven elementary schools, three middle schools, and two high schools, and an alternative school. Orange County Schools has a projected enrollment of 7,000 students for the 2008-2009 school year. Board approved capital improvements for fiscal year 2007-2008 include over $2 million of improvements to existing facilities; including maintenance of heating and cooling systems, bathrooms, updating health and safety features, and improving athletic facilities' . The district provides its students with a wide range of excellent educational opportunities; ti+~~lt 58 In 2008, Orange County Schools completed a series of studies that will increase efficiency and improve responsiveness district-wide. The Orange County Board of Education approved a re-allocation of Title I funding that will provide district resents with three pre-kindergarten classrooms for early intervention. In the fall of 2003, Orange County Schools organized a task force of parents, students, community members, teachers, school administrators, and other staff to develop afive-year strategic plan for the district, which was later adopted by the district. Since that time, the plan has guided programmatic, operational, and financial decisions within the district, using five overarching priorities: 1. High Student Achievement; 2. Healthy Students in Safe and Caring Schools; 3. Quality Teachers, Administrators, and Staff; 4. Strong Family, Business, and Community Support; and 5. Effective and Efficient Operation. Attachment 9.0 ~ ^~~" ff ~~ ,~r~u ~ ~ _ _ ..,r , ~ I7 1`,~~ I~~.:~wY ~ w%.J ~ .,•d u.. ~ 0 ,~.. J ..JET $ ,,,,,,, d ~~ -Idw d~ 6~ L ~ ~' 'r ~' ~~;--- - --- - - 2 ~.~. Pi~6~~C)SE 3 This Transportation Element provides guidance and direction regarding future transportation 4 efforts in Orange County. The goals and objectives identified within this element serve as the 5 foundation for establishing future transportation policies and action strategies undertaken by 6 Orange County, its advisory boards, and staff. This specific process for developing a 7 transportation implementation strategy is outlined in Section 1.4: Administration and 8 Implementation Guidelines. 9 3.2. S~~llI6A,RY 10 Orange County's transportation system is often described as a network. The term network 11 describes a collection of destinations and edges C~P7t]Q:C$%O/7S. On the ground in a 12 transportation network, the destinations would be areas where people live and destinations 13 people have outside their homes, places like work, shopping centers, parks, government 14 offices, etc. ~Edg-e~ GOf~~7~C~'1O/'IS are the routes ,people take to travel between nodes, 15 between home and work, for instance. Destinations and ed-ge~ CO~1Y~Q'C~'i®P1S together can 16 be viewed as the physical structure of a transportation network. Another term, traffic, is used 17 to name the activity that takes place on the network. 18 Planning for a transportation system requires planning for destinations and ed-ges~ 19 Ctaili]~C~'9®~'1S, as well as traffic. All three components are essential for a logical, robust 20 network. 21 22 Orange County's transportation network is comprised of a hierarchy of roads that moves 23 automobiles and provides access to land developments, railroad lines that allow freight and 24 commuter trains to move through the County, bicycle routes that provide access to points of 25 interest and recreational trails, and local sidewalks and pedestrian facilities that foster walking 26 in neighborhoods, downtowns, and at commercial and employment centers. 27 28 While the County, in partnership with the Towns of Hillsborough, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and 29 Mebane, has been along-standing proponent of a multi-modal transportation system, more 30 can be done to encourage non-automobile forms of transportation. New facilities and 31 improvements are needed to encourage a more efficient and effective transportation system 32 that achieves the County's goals of achieving long-term sustainability and maintaining Orange 33 County's distinctive community character. 34 TRANSP©RTATIC7N PLANNING 35 ~~~Na,a«: ,~.:y,.,,,,.., ~~~...,....~... ..._ 36 37 38 ~ ~ ' 39 ' 40 ' 41 ~ ~ ~ 42 , 43 44 59 60 ~,,....~... ~'he~~te~ ~. ~'rc~n.~p~Ytctti~~a Elerrlent Transportation Planning rn Oranae County is guided by 3 faders/legislation that requires states to carry out a continuing 4 cooperative, and comprehensive statewide mraltimodal transportation s planning process that facilitates the safe and efficient tnanagernent, 6 operation, and development of surface transportation systems that ~ will serve the mobility needs of people and freight (inclu ing s accessible pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities) 9 aid that fosters economic growth and development within and to be~reen States and urbanized areas, while minimizing transportation 11 related fuel consumption and air pollution in all areas of the Stater 12 ~nclud~ng those areas stabiect to the metropolitan transportation 13 planning requirements. The "three®G" process (continuing, 14 cooperative, comprehensive) includes the development of a long 1s range statewide transpoa~ttation plan and statewide transportation 16 emprovement program (ST/P). The State Long Range Transportation r~ Plan and Transportation Improvement Program is developed in 1 s cooperation with the Metropolitan Planning Organization desianated 19 by federal legislation for the metropolitan area The State consults 20 wpth the local officials of the affected nonmetropolitan area to develop 21 the transportation plan and TlP for nonenetropolitan areas 22 23 The Durham-Ghapel bill-Carrboro (DCJ~IC) Metropolitan Planning 24 4rganozatoon (MPO) is the regional organization responsible for 2s transportation planning in the western part of the Research Trianale 26 area, encluding the eastern, and more urban, portions of Orange 27 County. The DCI-IC MPO Transportation Advisory Committee, the 2s polacy and decision making body of the oraanization, is made up of ._... 29 a acted officials from the Local jurisdictions in the Metropolitan Area 30 boundary, the North Carolina Department of Transportation member 31 representing the area. The Triangle Area Rural Plannina Organization 32 (TARPO) coordinates the transportation planning in the rural areas 33 outside the Metropolitan Area boundary of Orange Countv and 34 'Chatham Countv and for all of Lee and Moore Counties The TARPO 3s . Rural Transportation Advisory Committee (RTAC) is made up o_f 36 elected officials of the member jurisdictions and the Division S North 37 Carolina Doard of Transportation member These are the two 3s organizations through which Orange Countv coordinates its plans for 39 local transportation ~iroiects for implementation through regional 4o pro_grams. Map 9-9 shows the transportation planning jurisdictions in 41 the Research Triangle region. Orrav~,r~~ Ca-rtvtty Cv~m~av~e~~vvPi ~ ],cam Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-2 3 4 5 6 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 101 ~'h~ C'~ae~~te~ 9. T~c~a~s~o~t~tion Element MAP 9-1: REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS Map 9-2, below, shows the boundari~5 of the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organizati~Cn and the Triangle Area Rural Planning Organization within Orange County. 61 Or~'crvu~feiCv~~y Co-m~E~e.Yu~.v~ve~~rasti Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-3 62 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 °'°' Cha~ate>r 9: T~ans~a®~tati®n Element Insert map of MPO boundary in Orange County. The ~L6B'~?~/77-C~'ii c~~DG'I ~'1~0-Ga~P"f ~J®~"O Metropolitan Planning Organization (M PO) coordinates planning and development of transportation facilities in its jurisdiction through two primary planning mechanisms: Discuss ~RTP first, then MTIP - ----- ©~~Cai,~v~ty Co-w~F°eh~i~v~Pa',a.w Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-4 ~'hapte~ 9: '~~c~~s~aa~~a~lfi®n .E`~ement ,.,, 2 ® Long-Range Transportation Plan. The plan is a guide for major transportation 3 investments in the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning 4 Organization area. It is designed to support land use and air quality goals for S the urban area, and is prepared in accordance with federal requirements. The 6 plan projects the amount and type of transportation demand over a 20-year 7 minimum period, and is upda$ed every four years fo $ demonstrate compliance wigh air qualify standards. It 9 identifies priority highway, bus transit, rail transit, bicycle, and pedestrian 10 improvements needed to service future populations, and the projected costs of 11 these improvements. The ~®nq ,range Transportation l~/an iS 12 fiscally constrained and idenfifies viable anficipafed 13 funding sources for pro%ects proposed in the plan. 14 ¢- ' 15 > 16 17 ' 18 19 f Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program. 20 ~ ' ' 21 ~ .- - • 22 23 24 2s This program is a seven year documenf that is included in 26 the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program and 27 contains funding end scheduling information for bicycle,. 28 pedestrian, highway, rail, public transportation, and 29 enhancement projects Every two years, the Metropolitan 3o Planning organization develops a prioritized list of 31 pro%ectS to be considered for funding in the .biennial 32 update of the Metropolitan Transportation Improvement 33 Program Projects must come from adopted 34 transporfafion plans. 3 S t- 36 37 38 39 40 ~~ 41 42 43 44 ~ ' 63 Oara~iCv-uvLty Co-vvi~~v~e,~.ev~~ve~~lcw~~ Public Hearing ©raft 5-6-08 Page 9-5 64 •••••r••~ ~~RGt~13. G-! .J• .f ( VZ(YJ~I®! R4rf.R@®lL ~&GI/LG(RL 4~'~! c 3 . 4 5 f_ 6 8 $- 10 ~- 11 12 . 13 ~- 14 15 16 17 18 ~-8~-5-~rat~-rarer. 19 20 The Triangle Area Rural Planning ®rganizaton (TARP®) coordinates 21 the transportation planning in the rural areas of Orange County and 22 Chatham County outside the 1Vletropolitan E3oundary Area and for all 23 of ~.ee and Moore Counties. (See Map 9=9.) Triangle J Council of 24 governments is the administrator and lead planning agency for the 2s TARP®, and coordinates transportation plans and programs and 26 /and, use policies and programs in the four county planning area 27 The general purpose and responsibilities of the Rural Planning 28 Ors~anization are $o: 29 30 1. t~evelop long=range local and regional multi=m®dal 31 transportation: plans in cooperation with the area 1~Ietropolitan 32 PBanning Organizations (I~POs) and the iVCDOT: 33 34 2. Provide a forum for public participation in the rural 3s transportation planning process. 36 37 3. Develop and prioritize suggestions for transportation projects 38 that the RP® believes should be included in the State 39 ~ Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). 40 41 4. Provide transportation-related information to local governments 42 and other interesfed organizations, 43 Oravw~Ca7,w-,ty Cv-w~v~e~un~%wer~~a.w Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-6 °"'"'•• ~'la~~ate~^ ~: 'I'~c~~cs~a~~tatit~aa Ele~tze~tit 3 4 5 6 7 9 to 11 12 Tl7e Orange Unified 7"ransportation Board (OUTBoard) is made up of ~4 citizens and_~uvo ex-officio liaisons from tine hoard of County 13 Identifying and setting priorities for the County's roadway and transit needs 14 along with associated costs and specific sources of funding; 15 Assisting in development and review of the transportation component of the 16 comprehensive plan; 17 Providing recommendations to the Board regarding Federal and State lg legislation affecting transportation in Orange County; and 19 Exploring and make recommendations on innovative techniques and methods 20 to improve the efficiency and capacity of existing and future transportation 21 systems. 22 23 C4~tt~T-'~-~I~aly-~4~l-D-~I~E~'~ffl~t-K 24 ~ . ~~~ ~~~a~ a~~w~ ..u„ ~., ' 25 ~ 26 27 28 29 ' 30 ' ' 31 32 ' 33 34 35 36 37 ' 38 39 40 41 42 f~el aw: ' 65 ©i,~,~Co-~,w~ty Co-v~n~v~~,~,ev~~-we~P 7~cwv Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-7 - ----- ,hoard of County Commissioners rec~ardinc~ overall planning an proc~ramn~inr~ of transportation improvements in tlDe County, including: 66 .,...~.°... C'h~~tea~ 3: Tr~nsla®Ytati®n Elemcnt ~..,, r '2 COUNTY-1li160E R0~4D NETWORK 3 Orange County's road network is comprised of a hierarchy of roads 4 encluding interstates, major US and IVC highways, hlorth Carolina s Secondary Roads, and local roads that serve different fu,~ctions in ~6 providing access to other regions and within Orange County 8 Interstate 40 and Interstate ~5 are part of the Federal Interstate 9 Highway Systertt and are fhe ma®or corridors that provide star 1o transporf of people and goods through Orange Gounty to other 11 regions, including employment centers in the Triangle Area (Durham, 12 Research Triangle Park and Raleigh) to the east and the Triad 13 (~GrLenS~bor®, ~1/inston-Salem and i-~'i~~ Point) to flee wrest 14 1s Ma®or US and /VC routes linking Grange County with surrounding' 16 areas a/so provide infra-county access and linkage to the ruraA areas 17 of the County. US 70 is a. major highway that provides east-west 18 access through Orange County, linking the City of Durham in Durham 19 C®unty, the Town of Hillsborough in Orange County and the Town of 20 Mebane in Alamance County. US 9v and US g09 provide north-south 21 access linking the city of Durham to the Towns of Chapel Hill and 22 Carrboro and the Town of Pittsboro in Chatham County iVC 86 23 provides north-s®uth access .through Orange County from Caswell 24 .County and links the Towns of Hillsborough and Chapel Hill nIC 57 2s provides north=south access from Person County throe h Orange 26 County to the Town of Hillsborough. NC 54 provides linkage ,between 27 Research Triangle Park in Durham and Wake Counties, the Towns of 28 chapel Hill and Carrboro, and Greensboro in Guilford Ccaunt~ 29 3o A widespread state-maintained system of Secondary Roads provides 31 access to the major regional corridors from the rural areas of the 32 COUnty. 33 34 Local roads emphasize the /aid access function, and connect rural 3s residential and commercial development with the Secondary Road 36 System and major US and f1-C corridors. 37 38 Map 9-3 below illustrates how Orange County road network functions to provide 39 infer-county and infra-county access. OrraiCo-uv~,ty Co-nn~v~eh.~v-~vve~~ 7,cY.w Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-8 ~'~apte~ ~: T'r~~es~®~-tali®~ Eter~tea~t 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 ORANGE COUNTY MAJOR ROADS 67 ©~~aCcruv~,tyCo-vvy~r~ehevi~yiv~~~a~w PcrblicHearingDraft 5-6-08 Page 9-9 ®_~'- 68 ~,.....<.,, ~'hc~pte~ 9. T'~c~~aspo~IF~tio~a ~'T~met~t ~.,, 2 3 ALTERNATIVE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION 4 5 6 Dranpe County residents have several options for using alternative 7 modes Of transp®rtation, 8 9 Three public transportation systems provide bus service in Dranpe 1o County. - 11 12 ^ Triangle Transit " 13 14 _ 15 15 u;"~,.,,,,.,,„~~. -the "TT" provides regional bus service 17 linking the Town of Chapel Hill to research Triangle /'arks 1 s l~aleigh-Durham lnternationad Airport, Duke University, NC 19 State University, and other ke y regional locations, TT 20 also contracts with Orange Public Transportation (the 21 "Dranpe bus"} to provide service between the 7`owns.of 22 /-Hillsborough and Chapel hill." In addition, TT has a 23 vanpoo/ program for commuters that have a. greater than 24 2®-mile round trip. 25 Chapel Hill Transit -the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro, and the University 26 of North Carolina-Chapel .Hill partner to provide daily fare free bus service to 27 routes in Chapel Hill and Carrboro. Services include fixed route bus service, 28 park and ride shuttle service for special events, shared ride feeder service to 29 areas which do not receive regular bus service, and EZ rider service for 30 individuals with mobility limitations. Many of the bus stops are shared with ~ 31 TT, and provide access to the larger regional bus system. 32 ® Orange Public Transportation -Orange County provides bus s~~iee-~ta 33 ~~ 34 35 service to County residents on the "Dranpe Dus" 36 including fixed route (in partnership with TT} general 37 public service door to door pick-up and drop-off service 3s for human service. contracting agencies, deviated fixed 39 route service for the general public, and paratransit 4o service for disabled residents. 41 42 Private Sector Transportation Services - Several for profit private 43 sector Transportation Services. services are available to transport ©raa~,~eiCc~uv~y Cavv~pv~e~u.n,~w~i~lari. Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-ZO ~•••""°• ~'~a~~a~e~~ ~: ~`~~nsg~a~tca-i®~a .E'~eme~~f ~~,. ~. ,~• cost effective for individuals and groups and maybe more 3 some transportation needs than the above named systems. 4 s 6 • 7 8 9 to Orange County residents have opportunities to rideQshare through 11 various private transportation providers as well as through Tr-angle 12 Transit's van ool ro ram. TT also hosts a webs-te for Share the 13 Ride 1VC, a statewide ride share matching service for both local and 14 inter Cot-nty trips. . is 16 grange County has an active bicycling community ghat Uses ®range 17 county roads for recreational riding, compet~t-ve tra-n-np, and 1s commuting grange County's ~-cycle T'ransporfatron flan -dentifies 19 maior routes for improvements to facil-tafe bicycle commutes. The zo bicycle Transportation Plan is included en the reg-onal B7ChC Long 21 Range Transportation Flan ~Ithough there are currently no bicycle 22 lanes on Orange County roads outside mun-cipal-t-es, Orange County 23 has been able to obtain modest improvements for b-cycles, such as 24 two f®®t paved s.hou/lets on secondary roads, through ~'CDt~T 2s programs for resurfacing roads and spot safety pro-ects. A Sfate 26 Transportation Improvement Program pro-ect that w-1l -dentsfy popglar 27 cycling routes on an Orange County dike leap -s underway, anc~ 2s should be com leted b the end of 2008, hC®OT w-ll -nstall numbered 29 bike route signs as part of the overall development of the county bike ~o route system. 31 32 There are no pedestrian trails outside of parks and greenways. 33 however, several plans outline a connected trail system throughout 34 the County through parks and environmentally sens-t-ve areas alone 3s floodplains from Chapel hill Road in ,Gorham. 36 37 Amtrak passenger seivice traverses central Orange County through 3s the Town of hillsborocigh, but currently does not stop m Orange 39 County There is widespread cornmun-ty support for a passenger 4o train stop in Orange Gounty All local County -ur-sd~ct~ons, -n early 41 ZOOS, indicated their support for a train stat-on ~o be located m 42 1°lillsborough and the Town of 1-lillsborough requested ~lorth Carolina 69 DF~aiCv~.w~ty Cc~~vehev~-r'>v~~T,c~.n. Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-1.Z 70 ,,...,.<.,, ~'la~~a~e~ 9. T'~ans~aoYtc~tion .Eleme~~ ~`"' " "~~ ®epartmenf of Transportafion Rail t?ivision, iVorth Carolina 3 ~'ai/r®ad and the ,iVafional Rai/road Passenger Cor~oraf®on to consider 4 adding a stop in ~,lillshorouc~h. Officials with the N C ®eparfinenf o~ s Transportation and Amfral~, in July 2008, confirmed thaf a passene~er 6 ~ tram stop an f-lillshorouc~h is a financially viable endeavor according to ~ a financoal Impact analysis conducfed by Amtrak s c~i~a~iCauvti;ty Cv-w~av~e~.c~,visS-r",verP~ Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-12 ,S: ~~ C s 0 s .4~. ®. O V i 4 le p U ' V O ~ ~ 'rr ~ ~ ~ o C~ t~ T O ~=- L N O ~ O O -~ 0 p ~ t~ v ~ ~ o ~ 0 d' ~ .~ ~ ~ O d 'p ~. y_ = -.'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d' N li) U •N ~ N ~ ~ W ~ (U L O _' ~ Rl o 0 ~ .~ U ~L O lf7 ~ ,m ~'~ ~ ~ C O ~ ~ _ o '` o Q. , ~: Q f~: Ll. ~ ago , IN R3 -.(. :-:: .U ~ ~ O ~ N _ ~,. ~ ~ ~ C (- p. ~ CO r c~ o ~ ~ ~ c O U ,?' . ~ L1 m ~ `~ ~ : O. U aj ~ ~ O .Q t~0 C ~ ~ I- O V 0 0 0 d- op N t~ N ~ O O O ~ ~ ~ C'7 d' d' d' 0 0 0 Q O O O O O O 0 ~ ~ ~ h- O O r- p O O [" OO Lid N d' r- ~ t'7 r- o ~ o N O Imo- N ~ D0 t0 ice- I` U N (/~ L G U O O O d' r M O .~ O O ~ N O ~ Lf') r' O o ~. U d' ~ °° ~m aNi o ~ L ~ ~ ~ c ' ~ o o U _ ~ ~ ~ ~ to = O p U ~ o j O O Q ~ tS5 ~ N U s p O p o p ~'~C~C~~~Lb~ 71 U_ '~ C (U Q Q Q .~ N fYl c cll v c~ O O N N a~ 72 Attachment K 73 U.S. ®epartment of the Interior, National Park Service NATIONAL REGISTER CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION Criteria for Evaluation The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and. objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and: A. That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or B. That are associated with the lives of significant persons in or past; or C. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. That have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. Criteria Considerations Ordinarily cemeteries, birthplaces, graves of historical figures, properties owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes, structures that have been moved from their original locations, reconstructed historic buildings, properties primarily commemorative in nature, and properties that have achieved significance within the past 50 years shall not be considered eligible for the National Register. However, such properties will qualify if they are integral parts of districts that do meet the criteria or if they fall within the following categories: a. A religious property deriving primary significance from architectural or artistic distinction or historical importance; or b. A building or structure removed from its original location but which is primarily significant for architectural value, or which is the surviving structure most importantly associated with a historic person or event; or c. A birthplace or grave of a historical figure of outstanding importance if there is no appropriate site or building associated with his or her productive life; or d. A birthplace or grave of a historical figure of outstanding importance if there is no appropriate site or building associated with his or her productive life; or e. A reconstructed building when accurately executed in a suitable environment and presented in a dignified manner as part of a restoration master plan, and when no other building or structure with the same association has survived; or f. A property primarily commemorative in intent if design, age, tradition, or symbolic value has invested it with its own exceptional significance; or g. Aproperty-achieving significance within the past 50 years if it is of exceptional importance. 74 Attachment L 7 5 The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation The Secretary's Standards, as they are often referred to, are listed below in their most current version (1992). 1 . A property shall be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property shall be avoided. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties shall not be undertaken. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible., materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. $. Archaeological resources shall be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. 76 Attachment 2 77 Staff Recoen~roendations on Courtesy Review Comments To address City of Durham's comments: 1) P. 3-23, lines 30-32 -The County is working in partnership with the City of Durham Cep to plan for a an area along US-70 in the US-70/I-85 Economic Development District. 2) P. 6-53, lines 40-43 - ®biective CR-10: Establish a dialogue with the other jurisdictions in and adjacent to Orange County to address cultural resources in areas with or without designated Historic Preservation/District Commissions aesigef;~~-ed~a~te-s• 3) P. 8-9, line 25 - CITY aF DURHAM-C9~U~P~T~F 4) P. 8-9, line 29 -The City of Durham is expected... Note: Staff does not feel any revisions are required in response to courtesy review comments received from the Town of Chapel Hill Planning Department. ~s 3une 24, 2048 The Honorable Barry Jacobs; Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners POBox$181 Hillsborough, NC 27278 . Subject: Orange County Comprehensive Plan Update JUN ~ s 2008 B`~. Dear Chairn~-3 . o s: ~~Z~ Thank you for the letter providing a status. report on the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Update and extending an invita-tion for the Town to provide courtesy review comments on the draft Plan. The Orange County Plamm~.g Department has provided information to our Planning Departm-ent and we have been following the process of the Plan Update. It was our understanding, anal your letter confirmed, that the Plan Update does not propose any major changes to~ existing/current policy directions anal it does not include specific implementation recommendations. . rtunily for courtesy comments by August 1. As you are In. your letter, you provide an oppoL aware, our Council has its last business meeting on 3une 25th and then will not meet again until September. I've requested the Town Manager and staff review the coffin ntes~ ~Te would date and identify any issues on which the Council might wish to provide appreciate the opportunity to provide comments in September if necessary. Meanwhile, I'll ask our staff to~ review the Plan Update and provide us with comments, if any, in September. Thank you again for the opportunity to review the Plan Update. Sincerely, 6 Kevin C. Foy Mayor _, ~ ~~ . ~~ ~ '~~ MAYOR' S OFFICE Town of Chapel Hill 405 Martin Luther ICing 7r. Blvd. Chapel Hill, NC 27514 phone (919) 968-2714 fax (919) 969-2063 www.town ofchap elhill. org 79 Page 1 of 1 80 Tom Altieri From: JB Culpepper [jbculpepper@townofchapelhill.org] Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 4:54 PM To: Craig Benedict Gc: Roger Waldon; David Bonk; Tom Altieri Subject: Comp Plan Update Courtesy Review Comments Craig -Thank you for providing time for us to complete our staff courtesy review of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Update. The Mayor provided a letter to Orange County in June stating our understanding that the County's Plan Update does not propose any major changes to existing/current policy directions and it does not include specific implementation recommendations. The Mayor asked the staff to review the Plan Update. With our review, we also found no major changes proposed to policy direction. We do have a general comment on the County's Plan Update to provide: We found that there seems to be an existing inconsistency between the strategy of promoting economic development at the three development zones along I-85/I-40 and the stated goal of also encouraging the use of alternative modes of transportation, transit, bilce and walk, through mixed use, transit friendly development. If future non rural growth outside of Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Hillsborough is going to be limited to those economic development zones, they do not appear to lend themselves to mixed use or to the provision of transit services. It is also unclear who would provide the high levels of transit service necessary to support and promote non auto mobility in these development areas. Please let us know if you have any questions and, again, thank you for providing this opportunity, JB ,, ~ ~ a JB Culpepper Planning Director r .l ' ~" Town of Chanel HiII - 405 Martin Luther King Jr Blvd Chapel Hill, NC 27514-5705 Phone: (919) 968-2728 Fax: (919) 969-2014 9/23/2008 81 DURHAM c~~ a~ ~u~a~a,~ $ fj ~ OFFICE OF THE MAYOR cmraFrr~oiaNe 101 CITY HALL PLAZA ~•DURHAM, NC 27701 919. 560.4333 ~ fax 919.560.4801 www.durhamnc.gov July 16, 2008 The Honorable Barry Jacobs, Chairman Orange County Board of Commissioners 200 South Cameron Street Hillsborough, NC 27278 Subject: Comment on Draft Orange County Comprehensive Plan Dear Chairman Jacobs: JU[_ 2 ~ 2008 BY: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft Orange County Comprehensive Plau. I am pleased that we continue to cooperate on issues and projects that affect both our jurisdictions: I commend you on all of the hard work that you, the Orange County Board of Commissioners, anal your staff have put into this planning effort'. ~ ~ ~ . There are a number •af positive statements and policies that I see contained in the Plan, such as the~support of increasing mass transit capabilities in our region, fording more ways to partner on open space protection and park development, such as with the New Hope Creek Open Space Plan, and success with our cross jurisdictional planning efforts such as the Ena Economic Development District Plan. There a're, however, a fevv points in the document that I believe need some clarification or correction. In section 3.9, on page 3-23, the Plan refers to the recently adopted Eno Economic Development District. There are two points regarding this sentence that should be addressed: o It is the City bf Durham that is involved in this project, not Durham County. o I would like further clarification on what is meant by the term "unified development district". As I am sure you are aware, the Eno Economic Development District Plan calls' for eventual public water and sewer provision from the Ciry of Durham in this portion of Orange Gounry. Current City of Durham policy is that in order for the City to extend public utilities, a petition for voluntary annexation into the City must be submitted. If and when the prbperry is annexed, the City obtains full right of regulation regarding development on the land. While the City is fully in favor of working on joint long-range planning efforts with Orange County regarding this area, and has participated so far in these efforts, the City does plan on Good Things Are Happening !n Durham 82 The Honorable Barry Jacobs July 16, 2008 Page 2 exerting its full authority over any areas it annexes, whether they. are in Durham County or Orange County. Objective CR-10, on page 6-53, states that Orange County should "Establish a dialogue with the other jurisdictions in and adjacent to Orange County to address cultural resources without assigned advocates." The Draft Plan could be improved with a full explanation of "assigned advocates". Durham has a joint city-county Historic Preservation Commission. Would this commission be our "assigned advocates" regarding cultural resources? Anal, therefore, would Orange County not desire a dialogue with Durham on cultural resources? ® On page 8-9, line 25, Durham County is listed as a wastewater provider. Durham County is not a utility provider. This I'abel should be changed to the City of Durham. Again, thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important endeavor by Orange County to shape it future over the next few decades. Sincerely, Willi V. Bil " ell, ~~~,~~ ~~:~~ ~ 8 3 ®range County Comprehensive Plan ZTpdate Public Input 1dleeting January 28, 2008 7:OOpm - 9:OOpm Southern Human Services Center, Chapel Hill, NC Summary Report Staff Note: This summary report Izas been posted on-line o~z the Comprehensive Plan Update website (http•//7ar~i~i~~ co orange nc usi7~lannitz~-IcorTatare ct~update.as») and distributed to Element Lead Advisory Board members, Element Mangers (Sta, ff), and Consultant to be used as an additional resource during development of the draft Comprehensive Plan. Approximately seventy-five people attended the Public Input Meeting, including members of the public, staff, and board members. Listed below are those who signed-in or who stated their name while speaking. Meeting Attendees: Moses Carey, Jay Bryan, Renee Price, Michelle Kempinski, Brian Crawford, Bernadette Pelissier, Sandy Quinn, Sam Lasris, Bryant Colson, Robbin Taylor-Hall, Spence Dickinson, Marc Scagnelli, Blair Pollock, Mrs. 5cagnelli, Bonnie Norwood, Joan Jobsis, Tom Allison, Mary Beerman, Deloris Bailey, Steve Peck, Ken Dawson, Vasu Kilaru, Holly Reid, Caroline Poole, Robert Reid, Cara Lacey, Adam. Klein, David Logicina, Ben Lloyd, Rita Leadem, Gordon Brown, Dolly Hunter, Desiree Goldman, Jean Earnhardt ,Chris Moran, Fred Black, Sharon Riley, James Carnahan, Martin Rody, Allan Rosen, The Daily Tarheel. Orange County Staff Present: Craig Benedict, Tom Altieri, Gene Bell, Karen Lincoln, Karen Markovics, Perdita Holtz, Dave. Stancil, Rich Shaw, Tina Moon, Tara Fikes, Lori Taft, Kate Lowe, Tom Konsler, Roger VJaldon, consultant MEETING NOTES Staff/Consultant Presentation: ® Tom Altieri welcomed everyone to the meeting. Updated everyone and reminded attendees that the process has been adopted by the County Commissioners. The first of the eight elements, The County Profile Element, is completed. Tonight's meeting is to provide a status report so the public understands the process; has an opportunity for input, and allows the county to collect input to be used by advisory boards, staff, and the consultant as the plan is developed. Want to make sure everyone has a chance to speak. Roger Waldon of Clarion Associates has been contracted by the County to help synthesize the plan. The county has been working on the Comprehensive Plan by updating the 1981 Plan. This is the first time to look at the whole package and refresh data, goals, and objectives as a county.. Clarion works with staff, the advisory boards and citizens to complete the plan. The County Commissioners have adopted the eight guiding principals and have embraced a set of goals. However, nothing. at this point is concrete. The plan schedule is fixed, but everything else can change. Clarion is working towards putting the pieces already gathered together in a common format and framework. At this stage the focus is trying to create objectives to accomplish the goals and principals. The target is to be on the County Commissioner's agenda late spring for public comment on the draft 1 of 4 84 Comprehensive Plan Update. Information needs to be available for people to have input - that's what tonight's meeting is about. People have a lot of ideas, wishes, and desires for Orange County. Some of those may fit the format of goals and objectives and others maybe too specific for the plan at this stage. We are currently collecting ideas for implementation, but they may not go into the plan right now. The target is to get the County Commissioners to adopt the new Comprehensive Plan and as implementation measures are addressed, there will be a "whole container of great ideas to accomplish these goals." Public Comments: (Each bullet point indicates a new speaker's comments) ^ 1) Sustainability overall importance to Orange County; 2) Buckhorn development and the "multiplier" effects on the economy, schools, housing, taxes - 20% increase; 3) Importance of railways for dense walkable communities. ^ Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition includes 8 different organizations that have developed ideas for the Comprehensive Plan. 1) Orange County's Comprehensive Plan needs to reflect a "coherent whole;" 2) Can we get all parts of sustainability; 3) Clearly identify where nodes for development will be specified and accommodate population demand; S) Affnxnative public commitments to infrastructure to achieve plans; S) Mechanism to align capital budget with Comprehensive Plan; 6) Small areas plans and major developments are in progress and can be assessed against Comprehensive Plan goals. ^ Specific objectives needed to determine common ideas. 1) Forms of development -land use and transportation need to be compact; 2) Maintain agricultural land and watersheds; 3) Support public transportation; 4) Support economic/mixes use compact form development; S) Support local businesses. ^ Cluster developments like Meadowrnont and Southern Village have had problems but are examples that are better than sprawl. Would like to see more about TDR strategy in the Comprehensive Plan. ^ Concerned about schools. If they consume most of the County's budget why are they not addressed in greater detail in the Comprehensive Plan? No one from the school system is here tonight. ^ 1) Shared values needed; 2) Contradictions and conflicts exist in Planning and community goals such as environmentalism and housing; Provided example of a "green shelter" project; 3) Non-profit community shares the goals of the larger community; Suggested County have more outreach into non-profit community for input; 4) Tax Burden should be shared by businesses and shift off private residences; S) Social services should strive fora `quality of place' with diverse economic opportunities; 6) Provide water/sewer to clustered nodes. ^ 1) Planning Department should have a concise expedited approval process; 2) Shift tax burden to business and off of personal property. ^ 1) Comrnercial/R.esidential tax base out of balance in county; 2) Look aggressively at places in the county for economic development transition areas -such as I-8S/40 corridor 3) Rethink conventional wisdom about allowing Public W/S in to watershed critical areas; 4) Sustainability ^ 1) Water critical areas from 7-mile creek need to be removed to allow economic development to occur. 2 of 4 85 ^ 1) Farmers own most of the property in the northern county-thee land is their `retirement;' 2) Concerned about definitions of watershed critical areas and how they are applied - e.g. 1/z mile measurement from water; 3) Wants to remove 7-mile creek critical areas from. map; 4). Comprehensive Plan should be flexible enough to allow new technology to meet rules. ^ Supports Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition. 1) Supports ideas to designate specific areas for development to drive costs down; 2) Need a separate review process for expedited economic/industrial projects; 3) Need incentives for workforce housing in county; 4) Recreation and Parks facilities need also to be considered when planning for growth. ^ 1) Balance and equitable distribution of housing within County; 2) The Comprehensive Plan is a guide -there maybe conflicts between elements but the process should continue. ^ 1) Vast majority of undeveloped property is in Northern Orange County; 2) Need greater representation from Northern residents in the process; 3) Agricultural land is not parkland for others. ^ 1) Underscore link between land use and transportation; 2) Need transit-oriented development including rail, bus, bike, pedestrian, for regional connectivity. This area has high sprawl; 3) People need to expand their notion of desirable places to live. ^ 1) Greater interest and demand for local foods is important for a sustainable future; 2) People have to be able to afford to keep their land in farming - i.e. lower tax rates; 3) Agricultural land is in transition, small farms are expanding; 4) Proponent of dense development near towns to avoid nuisance complaints on farm activities. (See additional letter provided by Mr. Dawson.) ^ Concerned about affordable housing. ^ Problems arise as farmland converted to housing subdivisions; for example, restrictive covenants wouldn't allow chickens as pets. ^ 1) Concerned about neighborhoods destroyed by cluster development and growth; 2) Don't feel like people are being .listened to in land use situations; 3) Wants more public input in land use decisions. 1) Technology/Irmovation -codes and planning process need to be flexible to allow for changes in technology, such as gray water reclamation and low flow toilets; 2) Mixed Use developments are beneficial to the community; 3) Public investment in projects can bring positive rewards to the community- good schools/ soccer field- the Buckhorn example. ^ 1) Farmers are aging out and family farms are not being passed down. Need ways of preserving farmland for futures; 2) Community ownership. of land is an idea with training for future farmers; 3) Building and land use regulations discourage ability to promote apprenticeships with on-site housing for apprentices ^ As these ideas come to fruition, the county may run into NIlVIBY situations and clashes of goals and personal values. Need to be flexible but keep pushing for the community good -1) Village Clusters; 2) Economics. ^ Site landfills and waste facilities in Orange County. 3 of 4 86 Break Out Session Notes And Comments: LAND USE ELEMENT ^ How do we achieve mixed uses in transition areas and EDD's? ^ Workshops/charettes for small areas where development will go. ^ Importance of projects even if you live in a municipality. ^ Preserving farmland in LUE? ^ Explore innovative wastewater treatment. ^ Transit -oriented development ^ Create administrative systems and mechanisms to expedite desirable development. RECREATION AND PARKS ^ School facilities, such as tennis courts, should be open to the public. ^ Regional and local connectivity between parks and school facilities. ^ Rural Ways (for biking, hiking, wallcing) such as linear paths and critical recreation for Orange County. Use donated or purchased easements. TRASNPORTATION ^ Rural Ways -pedestrian and biking connectivity through easements. PROCESS ^ How do we keep track of the potential costs of the principles that we might adopt? HOUSING ^ Please resist the urge to accept payments in lieu of affordability if/when development set- asides apply and developers don't want to comply. We need the units. Instead work with non-profit developers during the applicant processes to determine innovative, high- dernand ways to make set-aside compliance meet needs. ^ Don't reduce language around affordable housing to "workforce" housing. ^ Smaller houses. Recommended a book, "Tin Houses." There ought to be a way in Orange County to have smaller houses. Current building practices set up to support .corporations. ^ Recommendation to look on-line for Seattle co-housing information. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ^ Balance county development by developing a commercial sector that provides a third or more of county revenue. ^ Link between economic development, population growth, etc. this also includes planning for schools and water supplies. ^ Expedite desirable commercial and light industrial projects. ^ Create lab and commercial space for UNC ideas to become businesses. 4 of 4 g 87 Orange County Comprehensive Plan Update Public Input Meeting April 9, 2008 7:OOpm - 9:OOpm Southern Human Services Center, Chapel Hill, NC Summary Report Staff Note: This summary report has been posted on-line on the Comprehensive Plan Update website (http:!/www.co.orange:nc.us/planning/compre_cpupdate.asp) and will be included in the Board of County Commissioners and Planning Board's agenda packet for the May 19th Joint Quarter Public Hearing. Approximately fifteen people attended the Public Input Meeting, including members of the public, staff, and board members. Listed below are those who signed-in or who stated their name while. speaking.. Meeting Attendees: Marc Scagnelli; Joan Jobsis, Rita Leadem, Barry Katz, James Carnahan Orange County Staff Present: Craig Benedict, Tom Altieri, .Karen Lincoln, Karen Markovics, Perdita Holtz, Tara Fikes, Tina Moon, Glenn Bowles, Kate Lowe, and Andy Sachs, Dispute Settlement Center, Inc. MEETING. NOTES Welcome and Introductions: Andy Sachs welcomed everyone to the meeting. Staff Presentation: - Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Plaluzing Supervisor, made a presentation and in general conveyed the following: The purpose of tonight's meeting is to make sure attendees understand what is in the draft plan, how it was generated, and to provide an opportunity for additional public input. The meeting is also to inform the public. how to participate in the public hearing for the Board of County Commissioners on May 19. -The purpose of the plan is to provide a long range decision making framework for the county. The plan will guide future growth and development and serve as a statutory basis for land use, regulations in the county. Zoning ordinances should be consistent with the Comprehensive plan. - The scope of the plan extends through the year 2030, which is as far as a population projection can be made with a reasonable degree of accuracy. This does not mean the plan won't be revisited unti12030. The plan focuses on Orange County's plamling jurisdiction -area outside municipalities and their ETJs. - The Comprehensive plan is a two-phase process with phase I having been completed. Phase I consisted the development of 38 goals and a county profile/data element. These 88 9 documents were sanctioned by the County Commissioners in a public hearing in August and the planning staff was authorized to use these goals as a guide to the remainder of the plan. - Opportunities for public input include countywide meetings, open houses, formal public hearings, and the 8 advisory board meetings which meet monthly are also open to the public. The public can access information by contacting staff, advisory board members, attending meetings, visiting the website, obtaining copies of public hearing materials at County libraries, and reading press releases. - The Board of County Commissioners adopted the time table and guiding principals of the plan. They will ultimately consider adoption of the plan. Advisory boards work with the consultant to prepare the draft plan and review it. Clarion Associates is the consultant for the project, headed by Roger Waldon. County Staff partner with the consultant to review documents. They have also written sections of the plan to be considered by Advisory Boards. The public attends meetings and provides input and feedback. - The consultant has collected data and information from staff, advisory boards, and studies and reports done in the county to use as a source to prepare the first draft plan. The first draft plan was delivered to staff and advisory boards early in March to staff. Advisory boards are working now to review the plan and have until April 14 to send comments to the consultant - There are 13 chapters in the first draft and the 8 elements are represented. Each element has as sunu~nary'and overview, purpose statement, data, analyses of trends, needs (policy, data, programming, facility), goals and objectives, links to other elements, key documents (reports and studies), intergovernmental coordination. Tom briefly went over highlights of each chapter. - The next steps include the May 19 public hearing. Input from this meeting will be written into a brief summary prepared by staff and posted on the website. Advisory boards and County Commissioners will be encouraged to review it: These comments will also be part of the public hearing agenda packet for the May 19 meeting Public questions and Comments: -Andy Sachs of the Dispute Settlement Center facilitated the Question and Answer portion of the evening. "Public" -What are Clarion's qualifications as a consultant and are they familiar with the county? Mr. Altieri -Roger Waldon worked as Planning Director for Chapel Hill for approximately 20 years before joining Clarion. Leigh Anne.King graduated from the masters program at Chapel Hill. They have also been working for Orange County and l0 89 the Town of Hillsborough on a Strategic Growth Plan for Hillsborough and areas of Orange County along the Hillsborough fringe. "Public" -Why did the county hire a consultant? Mr. Benedict, Planning Director -The County Commissioners asked for a comprehensive review of various subjects discussed in the plan. Everything was done independently by staff and advisory boards and therefore we do not have similarity in structure of studies and reports. The consultant was lured to standardize and synthesize the plan. However, the plan is more a product of,advisory boards and staff than the consultant. Mr. Altieri -The original proposal to County Commissioners did not involve use of a consultant. The process was going to take 3 years and County Commissioners wanted a shortened timetable. The consultant helps meet this deadline. "Public" -The County Commissioners are probably voting as early as August. Are parts of the plan expected to change between now and then? What's still up for revision? Mr. Alfieri A lot of changes have been recommended so there will be lots of changes between drafts. The plan needs editing for readability. and flow and the consultant will now be asked to do that. Changes will be tracked for the public. "Public" -Have you gotten public input that are specific issues? Are there things that have come up from public input that are now being reconsidered? Mr. Altieri -Public, input is expected at our Countywide Meetings and at the public hearing. A lot of input is already reflected in the draft as a result of prior public input meetings. "Public" - The BOCC is a governing body and is changing in November. If there is an approval of the Comprehensive plan can the BOCC ignore the plan? Is the plan legally binding? Mr. Altieri -The plan is not a regulatory document it's a policy guide. Hope they would not adopt a plan they don't intend to implement. The plan is not legally binding. "Public" - It takes several years to change ordinances. Do you expect the BOCC to actually try to make decisions consistent with the plan? Is there buy in from the commissioners? Mr. Altieri -The commissioners have buy in to he process and the role of advisory boards. The document has only been available since March so we will have to wait to see if they will have buy-in. 90 11 "Public" - It is crucial that municipalities integrate their growth. Is there a mechanism to have some or all the municipalities adopt land use plans that are consistent with the comprehensive plan? Mr. Altieri -There is extensive amount of coordination -not to that extent. Examples include the Joint Planning Area, transition areas, and a Small Area Plan. Karen Lincoln, Transportation Planner -with regional transportation planning the elected officials from all jurisdictions are members of the board; lot of discussion on land use; these elected officials stay apprised to what's going on around them. "Public" - Get a sense that you have municipalities that wont buy in? Projection of growth will mainly happen in municipalities -they will have to handle the growth and these will dictate what happens in this county. Buy in from municipalities is crucial. Andy Sachs -What does the InterGovernmental Coordination part of the plan say about this? Mr. Benedict - In NC a large amount of independence is given to municipalities. There is not a county master plan for cities and counties combined. This is the legislative structure of NC. Orange County, more than any other county, has tried to better set urban service boundaries and set an idea of their capacity to grow. We are taking leaps as far as planning in NC and we would lilce to do more. We are challenged by the limits of state legislation. "Public" -This question .deals with the urban services boundary (USB) around Chapel Hill and Carrboro. From now to 2030 the towns will acknowledge that they have build out with this boundary -how do they incrementally expand USB into county (adjacent land)? Does the plan take this into consideration? Glen Bowles, Planner II - Carrboro and Chapel Hill asked if the Orange Water and Sewer Association (OWASA) system could sustain their jurisdiction's density. OWASA came up with an affirmative answer. They are not expanding and instead just planning for' higher density within what they already have. "Public" -They are going to reach a density that is enough and there will be pressure because they have reached a critical density. This is all prime land that will be developed in high density. Is there a rational, organized way to incrementally expand the USB in the plan? Mr. Benedict - An analysis was done for the Orange County jurisdiction. Based on all population projections, we have enough land designated in urban growth areas to accommodate future populations. One thing not there -how much of future populations will go into municipal areas and their ETJs and how much will go iota Orange County's urban and rural areas? The Shaping Orange County's Future plan makes a reference that 2/3 will go urban and 1/3 rural. There are no standards in the plan except to say that of 12 91 that 1/3 in Orange County's jurisdiction, the majority of that growth will go into urban transition and the rest will go rural. That needs to be addressed in the future. "Public" -Will public comments that are taken at the May 19 public hearing matter? Will there be another draft created for adoption? Mr. Alfieri -Yes. Following the public hearing they will consider public input and make recommendations back to the commissioners about what they would like to see in the next draft for adoption "Public" -Will the County Commissioners adopt the plan in August with the idea that they still want changes? Mr. Alfieri -They can adopt it as it is, they can incorporate changes the planning board suggests, or they could table it. "Public" -Realistically, is there time for what is said at the public hearing to have an impact before the BOCC adopts plan? Mr. Benedict -Yes. There may be a topic that commissioners say the plan should address and they would direct staff to go back and work on this. There may be a topic that we can adjust later without holding up the plan's adoption. There is an existing land use map, which will not change until the commissioners say to. When the plan is adopted, each advisory board will pick a priority that needs to be accomplished. There is a host of work in the plan that needs to be implemented and that won't happen in the first year. Comments "Public" -Chapter 11 is really important and should follow chapter 2. The overarching goal for the whole document is found here. I'm not satisfied with language, but that can change later. The most important issue is climate change and we're running out of resources. I want the document to reference. climate change -carbon reduction goals. We don't even talk about this in the plan. "Public" -The overarching goal for economic development needs to reference climate change. We have a responsibility to the future. Prioritizing locally owned businesses and their networking is important. Innovation and attracting, supporting and integrating local businesses are crucial. "Public" - The BOCC composition changes this fall. Are we expecting politics to shift dramatically? Will there be greater representation of the north? Mr. Benedict -There shouldn't be that much change. The goal is to make this a learning process with more synergy. There should be more representation of the north. There is a website on the voting process and districts. 9z 13 "Public" -The West 10 sewer line to schools -does the Comprehensive Plan still call this agricultural residential? Is there a limit to 10 acre lots? Glen Bowles - No, that area would have 1 acre lots or two acre lots depending on location. "Public" -With Mebane growing is there foresight to say go ahead and plan that as a more residential area and make it an economic base for the county? Orange County can still get taxes on it and plan for that. I encourage the board to rethink emphasis of growth on this area because it needs to go somewhere. Growth is going to head north because Chapel Hill is expensive. Plan for the growth towards Mebane Perdita Holtz, Planner II -Look at the Efland-Mebane plan on the website. There are water and sewer boundary agreements in place that would make it difficult to plan for higher density south of West 10 road. That's why the boundary is there. That whole area is slated for growth. "Public" -Mebane is going to do its own thing and annex into Orange County when it wants and we can't stop it. Why not assume it will happen and make the best of it? Ms. Holtz - It is more expensive for Mebane to move east because of the lift stations they have to maintain. "Public" - My suggestion is to reevaluate atax-base opportunity near Mebane. Ms. Lincoln -There is a lot of pressure on municipalities. They are concentrating density too because extending services is more expensive than cheapness of land. "Public" -The future of residential housing is not in single-family homes for density reasons and cost of living. People will locate closer to nodes because gas is too expensive. Suburban life is going. Chapter 4 acknowledges the economic engine of this county is the LTNC health care system. How do you anticipate growth along the transportation corridors? Is there a map for this? Mr..Altieri -There can be no fixture land use map changes and no rezoning. An example. The 7 mile creek watershed -there is an objective that points to evaluation of that area. Following this we could see map changes. Implementation of map changes recommended in small area plans will be on the front burner "Public" -The numbers aren't important. Carrying capacity is not an exclusionary principle. I am concerned that we figure out how we want to accommodate the growth so when it happens the impacts are sustainable. I want a vision of what the outcome looks like. 14 93 "Public" -Ordinances will achieve what. it looks like and that will be difficult to lay out. It is hard to picture it right now because things will change. 94 15 Orange County Comprehensive Plan Update Public Input Meeting April 23, 2008 7:OOpm - 9:OOpm Exchange Club, Hillsborough, NC Summary Report Staff Note: This summary report has been posted on-line on the Comprehensive Plan Update website (http://www.co.orange.nc.us/planning/coinpre_cpupdate.asp) and will be included in the Board of County Commissioners and Planning Board's agenda packet for the May 19th Joint Quarter Public Hearing. Approximately twenty-five people attended the Public Input Meeting, including members of the public, staff, and board members. Listed below are those who signed-in or who stated their name while speaking. Meeting Attendees: Bob Barrett, David Patterson, Jennifer Boroski, Ruby Sinreich, Fred Black, Elizabeth Walters, Jim Parsley, Carolyn Parsley, Dolly Hunter, Christy Ravlli, Robbie Taylor-Hall, John Gardy, Ann Gardy, Tom Soranno, John McAulay, Karen McAulay, Bill Reid Orange County Staff Present: Craig Benedict, Tom Altieri, Karen Lincoln., Karen Markovics, Perdita Holtz, Kate Lowe, and Andy Sachs, Dispute Settlement Center, Inc. MEETING NOTES Welcome and Introductions: Andy Sachs welcomed everyone to the meeting. Staff Presentation: - Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor, made a presentation and in general conveyed the following: The purpose of tonight's meeting is to make sure attendees understand what is in the draft plan, how it was generated, and to provide an opportunity for additional public input. The meeting is also to inform the public how to participate in the public hearing for the Board of County Commissioners on May 19. -The purpose of the plan is to provide a long range decision making framework for the county. The plan will guide future growth and development and serve as a statutory basis for land use regulations in the county. Zoning ordinances should be consistent with the Comprehensive plan. - The scope of the plan extends through the year 2030, which is as far as a population projection can be made with a reasonable degree of accuracy. This does not mean the plan won't be revisited unti12030. The plan focuses on Orange County's planning jurisdiction -area outside municipalities and their ETJs. 16 95 -The Comprehensive plan is a two-phase process with phase I having been completed. Phase I consisted the development of 38 goals and a county profile/data element. These documents were sanctioned by the County Commissioners in a public hearing in August and the planning staff was authorized to use these goals as a guide to the remainder of the plan. - Opportunities for public input include countywide meetings, open houses, formal public hearings, and the 8 advisory board meetings which meet monthly are also open to the public. The public can access information by contacting staff, advisory board members, attending meetings, visiting the website, obtaining copies of public hearing materials at County libraries, and reading press releases. - The Board of County Commissioners adopted the time table and guiding principals of the plan.. They will ultimately consider adoption of the plan. Advisory boards work with the consultant to prepare the draft plan and review it..Clarion Associates is the consultant for.the project, headed by Roger Waldon. County Staff partner with the consultant to review documents. They have also written sections of the plan to be considered by Advisory Boards. The public attends meetings and provides input and feedback: - The consultant has collected data and information from staff, advisory boards, and studies and reports done in the county to use as a source to prepare the first draft plan. The first draft plan was delivered to staff and advisory boards early in March to staff. Advisory boards are working now to review the plan and have until April 14 to send comments to the consultant - There are 13 chapters in the first draft and the 8 elements axe represented. Each element has as summary and overview, purpose statement, data, analyses of trends, needs (policy, data, programming, facility), goals and objectives, links to other elements, key documents (reports and studies), intergovernmental coordination. Tom briefly went over highlights of each chapter. - The next steps include the May 19 public hearing. Input from this meeting will be written into a brief summary prepared by staff and posted on the website. Advisory boards and County Commissioners will be encouraged to review it. These comments will also be part of the public hearing agenda packet for the May 19 meeting Public Comments/Questions: Andy Sachs of the Dispute Settlement Center facilitated questions during this portion of the meeting. "Public" -People can send written comments to what email for the May 19 meeting? Mr. Altieri -Through the website you can ask questions about the plan update and submit comments. Citizens are also encouraged to attend the public hearing. There is an email notification list for meetings and you can join the mailing list from the website. 96 17 "Public" -For the public hearing draft, will subdivision data be updated? Mr. Alfieri -This will not be available in the public-hearing draft but I expect that it will be in the plan that is ultimately adopted. Staff is working to update the data. "Public" - I Suggest to add a column to the subdivision data that includes an average the overall number of lots created each year. . "Public" -What is the real power of the plan? Does it have funding associated with it or does if pick up the force of law? Do County Commissioners' just refer to it when making decisions? Mr. Alfieri -The document is a policy guide for the County. Comprehensive plans are not regulatory in NC. One portion of the plan that is close to being regulatory is the future land use map. In Orange County to rezone property it has to be consistent with the future land use map. There is a strong linkage between zoning and the map. Nothing is binding or requiring the County Commissioners to carry out the goals. "Public" -Has it been a strong guide in the past? Or does it only just satisfy participants without much impact? Mr. Altieri -The plan from 1981 identified goals and the county has done a good job of trying to achieve those goals. Through our public outreach efforts, we have learned that the County has made more progress on some goals than others. It has been a strong guide in the past and I expect that to continue. Mr. Benedict, Planning Director -You are asking how will the plan be operationalized? Boundaries of urban areas surrounding existing municipalities have been a strong link to a lot of other decisions that have been made in the past. For example -where will public water and sewer be? The document helps guide and is a foundation for a lot of fiscal policies and public service policies. "Public" -Ultimately the only tangible product of this process that people adhere to is a map? Is the process going to shape a new map? Is it also going to be the document that will shape the new map that will be adhered to? Are there comments as to why this policy should affect zoning? Mr. Alfieri -Overall, the Plan is a policy guide. However, the Future Land Use Map or Plan supports the County's Zoning Ordinance and map and therefore, has regulatory aspects. There are objectives in the draft Plan that could lead to map amendments. For example, the draft Plan recognizes some inconsistencies between the County's Water and Sewer Boundary Agreement Map and the Future Land Use Map that is included in the Comprehensive Plan and includes an objective to study and eliminate inconsistencies through map amendments. 18 97 "Public"• -Usually the immediate next step with all regulatory aspects of a comprehensive plan is to presume the county will implement goals of the plan and make them into laws. The plan covers unincorporated areas, but there are also areas where they are tied together -transportation, development, sewage, what are you doing to incorporate the other jurisdictions? Are you getting input from other planning boards? Mr. Alfieri -Intergovernmental coordination is found in each element. Land-area wise we are only spealcing of Orange County's planning jurisdiction. However, several of the County's facilities and services cross jurisdictional boundaries. Plan implementation; which will occur in phases, will requixe additional intergovernmental coordination, public input, and public hearings. "Public" -What is the status of the 7 mile creek watershed? Mr. Alfieri - We are not making map changes as part of the process. A number of objectives may lead to map changes: During the break-out session, I can share the specific objectives that may relate to your question regarding the 7-Mile Creek Watershed Critical Area. "Public" -What is the time table for implementation? Mr. Alfieri -This will be a long term process and implementation will be incremental. There are general timetables for each objective in the Plan. "Public" -There is a consultant for the Buckhorn sewer area. Is that going to be included in this document? Mr. Benedict - We would notput an ongoing project in the plan at this stage. Ifwe update the plan, the first incremental tier of amendments will start adding things That may affect the plan. This plan and small area plans have been ongoing and the first run of zoning map amendments will be to implement that micro scale of the work that has been done over the last three years. Small Groups Session: Attendees broke into small groups. Each table represented a different element of the plan and people could visit a table tended by a staff member. Although there was considerable dialogue at the tables, only a few specific public comments relating to the contents of the draft Plan were documented. Natural and Cultural Systems Table: "Public" - •Suggests that there be an executive summary of the document made available to the public. Parks and Recreation Table: 98 "Public" -The County should create nature parks without soccer fields, baseball diamonds, swing sets, etc. "Public" State programs are put on by professional, paid staff and there are plenty of volunteers with experience in recreation and parks that you wouldn't have to pay. Example -Nature programs for young children. Land Use/Economic Development Table: 19 "Public" - We need to decrease sprawl and plan for organic communities. A~~.,~-~ C9range County Comprehensive Plan Update Public Input Meeting January 28, 2008 ''1:OOpm - 9:OOpm Southern Human Services Center, Chapel Hill, NC Written Public Comments Staff Note: The following are written comments submitted by the public with regard to the Comprehensive Plan Update Public Input Meeting. WRITTEN COMll~NT #1: Ken Dawson Ongreserving the future of apiculture in Orange County Agriculture should be a significant component of Orange County's future. It is well known that agricultural lands present less demand on county services than residential areas. Agriculture that is focused on providing food for the local community will become more and more important as fizel costs continue to rise. It will become more expensive and make less sense to import food from across the country and around the world; therefore, maintaining land for agricultural production will benefit the community at large. Further, the environmental costs of burning fuel to transport food long distances will be seen to be too high and thus local food production for the community will make sense fiom an environmental perspective. Local food production should be considered a component of a secure and sustainable future for the county. The demand for local food is growing rapidly and small farms that produce for the local market are thriving. With over $3 billion dollars spent annually on food in Orange, Durham and Wake Counties, the opportunities are excellent for Orange County farmers who produce for local consumption, and particularly for those who direct market their products. Dollars spent on food locally stay in the community longer and therefore boost the local economy. The county should support local marketing efforts for local farm products. In order for agriculture to have a place in the county's future, several things need to be considered in creating the Comprehensive Plan: • Taxes on agricultural land must be kept low enough so that farmers can afford to hold land for farming. • Farmers should be protected from nuisance suits brought by their new neighbors who move from the city to the country and then discover they don't like the smell of manure. • Farmland must be preserved for future agricultural use. • Farmland must be affordable for those who wish to begin to farm and must buy land to do so. Farmland in Orange County has become valuable for its development potential. For many rural landowners, this value is all they have to finance their retirement and to pass on to their children. It would be unfair to such landowners to restrict their ability to cash in on the equity in their land. At the same time, farmland should be preserved for agricultural use and be affordable for those who will farm it, for the benefits to the community that are mentioned above. There must be a provision whereby rural landowners can be compensated for giving up the right to sell their farmland to the highest bidder for development. The burden of providing the above mentioned benefits should be born by all members of the community, not just by current rural landowners. 1 of 16 100 The same would apply to rural landowners whose lands are in critical watershed areas. Yes, those areas should be protected from development, but the current landowners should be compensated for providing that protection. Confining residential and commercial development to designated areas, particularly along current and future transportation corridors, makes sense. Agricultural communities would thus be protected from excess encroachment by urban sprawl. Farmland could remain a productive asset to the larger community, and farming a viable part of the local economy. Critical watersheds could be protected by environmentally sound farming practices. The community as a whole would benefit, therefore the costs should be born by the community as a whole. Such planning is necessary, and rural landowners must be fairly compensated for participating in such a plan. Ken Dawson Cedar Grove, NC Farmer President, Durham Farmers Market, Inc. Past President, Carrboro Farmers Market, Inc 2of16 101 WRITTEN COMIVVIENT #2 -Allan Rosen MEMO To: Orange County Planning aizd Element Lead Advisory Board Members From: Allan Rosen, The Village Project Board of Directors and Acting Chair, the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition CC: Roger Waldon, Clarion Associates; Comprehensive Plan Update Project Management Team Date: January 28, 2008 Re: Public Comment on the Comprehensive Plan Update I'm Allan Rosen, a 15-year resident of Orange County. I live near the Eno Economic Development District and served on the county's Affordable Housing Advisory Board for five years. On behalf of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition I'd like to thank you for scheduling this session. The coalition represents a broad cross section of community stakeholders. Presently we have eight member organizations. Representatives from all eight are here with me. Tonight,. I'll make some remarks about the coalition's Statement on Objectives (CSO) for the Comprehensive Plan Update (CPU). Last Friday the statement was mailed to each planning and advisory board member. Our hope is that these boards will take our recommendations into account as they draft the CPU. The CSO includes a goal statement and objectives for the eight plan elements. There are 44 objectives in all, including two for a new category we suggest be included in the CPU, "Performance Indicators and Review". Our CSO is subject to change. After we review the draft CPU this spring, we'll have further comments. And we are likely to bring forward more detailed and/or new recommendations as we study this issue more. Now, I'd like to point out that the CSO is influenced by three criteria* which the coalition will use to evaluate the CPU. Posed as questions, the three criteria are ® Will the CPU result in a future where "environmental conservation, energy efficiency, affordable housing, social equity, a thriving economy, regional agricultural production and 3of16 102 (the predominance of) transit-ready, walkable, mixed-use, communities" are all present in sustainable and equitable proportions? ® Will the CPU be clear about where "new compact, walkable, mixed-use, transit-supportive growth and development" can be built and built in sufficient number to accommodate the demand that Orange County attracts? and Does the plan"make affirmative commitments to providing public sector infrastructure investments to stimulate" the kind of sustainable development the coalition hopes results from the CPU. (see below* *). The coalition does not expect the CPU proposal to completely satisfy these criteria. We realize trade offs and compromises will be required. Still, these are our core criteria and if the CPU falls significantly short, it will cause concern for us. Finally, there are two more items, which I personally believe warrant special attention beyond those found in the CSO. First, the CPU should include a mechanism for aligning the county's capital budgeting and public finance capacity with the goals and objectives of the CPU. Issues related to water and sewer infrastructure investment are particularly important. Second, the CPU should include a mechanism for assuring residents and other stakeholders that the recent and ongoing small -area planning initiatives, including the Hillsborough/Orange County Strategic Growth Plan, and major development proposals like Buckhorn Village are consistent with the direction the CPU is taking. Thank you for your time. Allan Rosen The Village Project Board of Directors Acting Chair, the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition * These criteria are included in the coalition's vision statement, which is printed in the coalition's brochure. ** from the coalition's brochure, "The Coalition defines sustainabilrty, as managing the impacts of human activity on local and global resources and habitats in order to ensure that we provide for the needs of current residents without compromising the quality of life for future generations. Our primary goal for the people of Orange County is to achieve this "sustainable" outcome by creating ecologically-sensitive patterns of development, especially by concentrating our urban footprint. 4of16 103 Staff Note: Additional written materials submitted on behalf of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition to follow, including: ® Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition Brochure ® Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition Statements on Objectives ^ Lettel^sofSupport Sofl6 104 :m :~ a ,~ :~ -~ ~ ~` ~ :~' ;~ . ~ ~ W ~ ~» a ~ :o. . . i;.d. ~ c~ ~ SJ,. o y ! ~ ' ' ~~ t i ~1-+ .4 1 ~ Ph •~ (Y(. ~~, ~ Clran~e Cgpnty i Comprehensive Plan ConlitFnn. i Cfd Tt1r, +}rllirgg RrOj~k hO ~~X•&S5 , Zerrboro, tii°?751p; ;o r~. c. m i I ;~ ~ ~''. ~ ~.. 0 p Q C ~ C1 xs ~q( ~~ ix,~-- ~.+ ~ ,. ~ ~, ~ a ~. ~ ~-~ ~ ~` ~ 6of16 105 . i vi ~ .: > p "a 4> C. W c N ~ ~.~ h. ~'. oty a tiI`. IifiV ~ , 'CS 'af r ~~ ~U'. ~: J or ~ ~ ~~`, ~: ,k c~. a o a. ~ ~: '~ { ..a, o o :.~ to ei w .~ ca,, !=,, c~, ~ 't3:. 'ti 'ti fig: a.:. , ; ~ C7 "~~ 'h CSI QTi ~ f:J Y'17 D ~'~ ~..a4.. w, q 'q ~: C,f ~ ? .C !`2 ice G X.. 31; ,....~ n .~ a ~: . ez 'p . ~ ~ 'y : ~~ a cs ~, a a ~ ~ ~ ~.` ~, ~ a ~~ :~ u a. ~ ~, , ac a µ. c as x.. v c ,.~ A S° ~ Q ~ C a ~~ , m o. ~ 8, 0 ~' {' W ~: ~. ~. t9 ..~. iYf: ~~. i~ ~' //~~' ~d {',~}. «~ ',Rr. nf• ~ ~. nI G ~ m. ,an IlI C C L c .` ~~ 'm ~~ ~ o; a a:z:. .~'• rt;~ ..,,. .G3.'. .~ }' .. ro :¢u ~ c". N;YU ~ u. ~'. L tN ~ ~ ~.•: ~, ~ » ~; O: V1. J V y C C: `••cn U m: m: C- t]. C7 t;? > ~ ~ w ~ -p 7. r X b _Lri; 4~, ~ N „^ ~, y .:;i :' n v r ~: rs C b v..= O .tea •,.~: ~Ci ~ ,~,. a. ~ ~ ~ ~::y E ~ '~ ~ Q M+ `Q y A4: :j:~. ?. V- ~ ~:. C~ ~~ C L3 C ~ o m: ~ ~- 0 ~. ,~ ~. ~ ~, 'q G' ~,. a Q- m; ~ :~, va v.:Gi C ~ "'G: fT "~ u ~ .~ ~ ^. ,6' G ~ ,.~ a o '~ ~ ~s'~ Q h' id . ~ Ol ~ b ~ . M ~ V .~ ~ G ~' ~ Q IQ . . - ~ . ~ _ 11 d C Qi q i+ ,~i 6 ~; h Q ~ d 'R C.r ~~' C~ U ~• v.y ,:~ .C 7 C. :3 O d ' ~ _~ ~ .: 4 : { f. ~c :C. ~ a. m:~,., o a ~. ro C ~.'~. °~ ~ ~ w n u ~. , ~ G. fj m t.: ~ 17 'u "ZS ~ r, ~ ~^ ; ~ y ~ ~~y -~ y rl I.J r ~ rc m, , o o ~ ~ ~ `~.. .., C C ~ ' ~ Q 47 p. b b tr ~.~:. C C; . fiI G 'i~ U •' ~ ti '~ G- /z ~: C bC: ~ c •' ri +~. U ~pp ~~ } U.~ A. ~: ~ ~: o a ~. u ~ ~: ~ ~; ~' ;.., ~': ~:.' ~' ftS .~' .`~., iJ!' !^~' ~^^,,~. W; i".3 rd' y •Y+' c <~.. a u` _'d D ~. ~i,~ ~ N ~~ D My. A ,. a o 'c- t~ N - C °' c :o: an a. ~ -; e ~ j":~ r~. u d ,~ o •,~ C y O/ ~+ [i G U .~+•~QS V C ;''' m ~ p ~ °. ~ V G! ~ ~ C a ~ ,;, m w'-~~ at m .?- c: cs q ~ ~ C2. ~ O u +.. ~ ;~ ~ q. ~ ~ >'u q.. ' ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ui ~ t ll ~~ 1 w D), :~ ~ .q ~ a, Lti . :~ ~'s t : C . rv . . ~ a s ~ `"~ c Cr c w.c ~.:~ ~ :~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~. ~C7:.-fit'. ~' `C' tt ,~' Y a 3 u N 7of16 106 ~c~~~;~,:~r~z~ >trri~rrtcr: ~,~. r~~ctntzr nr~rfirc.IrFra~ rr,~ri~i~~ Cerra:liuY+lrbrJ of tl~r.: (i/rruiE(rli /prrtfrar, ~i?Tt/cPis rlrtfl jlc~Y,rtiulo{t a~• jrrl,~r.~;ruurlrlj~r; .cu'fj ru~ru laGtl~tai:u.~'Gaai~~• ~erzu;c rinrl~s cxll?rrs sr~'~lrirar?:~a rnc~a~l Else rte*tr's nJ•{''lJurl~;~ ti,'arrfl3~+'s9h~f~u,7:rArr{~il~ oE~lrry~;~'. %+rrrrs~rrrl ~ fIr at~~ i sw~lsp~z f trr~ 1~lfr~r Z~ii~~l t ~~ rLc ~rll a ~ectlt°i'S. I."[~~It~.~~t'BUY}'i1;1'-Ct7.[~4C~I'~~kOi1IS: ~`.~.~IYL*:~r1/1IY' 1sm~rc)isi~crtta~ tirc~Fra~t'~i~j-: ~ustlutz~blc, ~~toi~a~es 1ac111k s'els'SVltat~•~canc~inc clevGlnjtlc,[fi, eFi~;cridc.rs.; sc~e.•il uclttitt7 ~=tt~ i[icletttes+2~i~tt~u~t;dt~i" ~s•:ff'ozilulilr3• tia lac 1~~]t~ s~f ilI ;iric~ti'nt'1cu~lti:; . :C = lic znc~iz:de eel. tariff ~ti~ian:tinti ieiry,(c-=dcitn£'rcd E~,;sit~aymii: eatxid~~s,.~u~i ne.ur ~`T~ul>xl:i\.orlu~,`> vi7licec;d~tYtsir- ~zricrttcd, xxu.~.~K;<:I LThe, Klr:c4lKSp~t~;clcas ~I)pxaplxn~Ni I~. I~tti~t:~iirls?e nc.~ ,(Iti elririLxxeGtotitstc"Ie o~ dcss,{x3ttted G~1~ I)rat.sdY, uLr.eutti tzs:titttl Z,C.1Tt4Kllt3$ Clx1't:.,j)TC7 I.C.C dte f,+G'p y,b`t71iC~ li]~'L'a(.`~L'!irZ~ t~xititX~j; lnnds~~~ntr,.>;s alt;rsl<~L aEG~,'4~;, rw ~:rsY7c C;(~s~K x~y~rr>~ri~ttiav tU rn;tlt4 clzer+x 'i[U,'aCY.icrC lrs rlSC ~?rit dt~`,liiir~gL7jy~}1~•,Y7C.C~'~Sit1~~ l'~iY ennu~ixtc ~ticr.~ss. ci: rt1lK~c,cxc:xesirlenrs:4Edensires•ua~~C7.tlsn[le+-c3s~ sctf~xcti„n[ c2i.~ttlilyat,[ rr~s(t>~tatri a:Ficasci~hl4 e: Ffxililct~' a'r`iiir, ututlecl sitxri;srrram1iziet3 . f' 1zni~s AC~c lr~catecl in (st7;+hs ~i'l~li:'~aerin~ir~~: ax~Ea~' ~~ Ira ~c,).l x`lic [a: il~rel~pnxcnz lialtls t~ 1•EZ~cjixwt?c.rs iu `:~c.ccziat}g:sxezs" (sttclx ~s CC7i~s~; ~: 1~~rlxin CyG7'~5 css iblaSEr ~ir~: I'c~r n~t~,lxfa,iix~t~.ticI s~h~tyl~ ~uf(lya[i: j~ ElkXxt#y:~liai~~t~r,r~~ ~ahcyi . aliilclrcir Cii>c, E'r511:ii;~ i?I3stnii2g,~iiia'cl:ntail T%luikrci: tc~[tizr3~ z~r~ta c~~pt~ ~,j- ~rrt,r,ry yv~r'txctzln,~~~1•~Upam~t~,~=~or~rf! ,rl>ft~,ritr r+f`(7rhtr~r, C"virir~+ea,rtiz ar I~ r('Yvur~ saf, de4iil;. tre':ssl1~ t tnrd~r~otrki(rra ltniri;{;~,; :C.:, .1~TS~S.r14?SPT~.1 ~I)~ULCI:tTIt~' '~r~^~y;:ifl{Slyt;;'C>.tY[tl~r~ t :..:. sttbdtv;tsian-rc~uY:t;r~esi}s, .uatl prrritclc ttitrti~ ca tt~~rictc•asc.l,~t'sxn~~uj~,l~i~t as*nilfigl5 rc~ ~hi~C:~5uc1#y's xv«tI;#~;IZC4, ~c=.~i.~an catu4ux. and I~cal)lc tu:iIrux~ buctwct.n a0 xnd.'i?30 I)CS.cC k!I ai tlL~ #rra•~ gx4dj~An I.Szcra~ar, li: lft'~Iiz?ii'~Ct Cl[~f#~t:~ua7i:~r ~rcta,ti'n(ictg~,zciiu':~~ cltstaiac~ ri~nn':ana131e au'cl °ctir:crse stlpplu~uf~ Ixr,EU``~1.13~ c: .Ir'tipi~3lt~ thet:clati<~lal~ixi~nt ~j5{rXriritl Ixti~essi cr~tti 1 li Qjc.a4~ xktt[ er?t~,xxzt::tci px~vc13s1fl' ~~axl~fc~xc~>;itacl ~laeaial ~rails~Ixoti~xn~ 2. htstu.lt~; ttururEtl xtc~clcti, tttt3 3 clusiet dqY+elapm~ists t3irratz~IS;c~irr, rui:;il citc.is,.. [~ I'ralnrate ttatlUt"11f;'SirC ~t~)~ICaaGltX.S'ia ~]i51YJ..1q~ylr.' tlx j itiiiat:tta Ejr~xlit~, ci~`eac.~~~ hnsc~}x cCfi~etau~s;tttd:i•<;rluc:4 canst7.i+CEiaxi ,kind fh]31idSirt]U3C,1r C(?A1$: t; ~nabt:.~;N~ rsppWi'tuiitues`~i~r lte.~riEUt c;~ri~Ylia of'I~aritl •clui~elti~rnen. anri lxatxsin~ ~~~e:s:tcs lyrnaden iatc chplc.~W <>E t~u[Y.srq~; y~iX~jti~, li~gs• ~:~fJt l~s. 8of16 ~o~ cca~~r~iwr~. x~a~~rlwoi~v~-~r~ r ~rl~lvl~zrl~r~r {~ozarrr~ Sr1?!rz irti~ijir~r 4J' i'yciiarrry n-~.~r~rclrrn;;.,~ zf f~'trrul~ ~rrf:srrsl r+#~ri rnrnnn,u rlYlvat-lupr,r~rtYlir,t a~ar(rrl,~~ttrlr bosh f,r,'+cr;}sniril .rr/!rslryx rsr.~,nrra t,, ~l ~:, l~'u,z-~s ta+l, nurr'it~:.Y,r~la} n~etrr bt>;hcr',~trll+"~`or ~o vrll+; rl..r tt nl.;. lur?9l- t)~'l-s~;tJllittll YC.k'C7111L~,.; ygcn<•tES ~sr +l:c ])res'at Yc[iF' l;ilutct b~tYkacan s=aae7~~ u~r., i'nc io)xrttz+ t`s; »ctxl ; <tC's..~tsk.try~:~4 l~trrletGiUir <){'n:t~lteal rc~auicex. Q~)-.~! i7v ~ a, T'7~iti%7t~ tlyc.lttixcn~r ~'f,: rixr. c:c+, z„:ii rcrrl i'rX.l7~ksc: 1~~ 51rCCtay'I7r~~t`t~l ~uc.c>xu;71;7n1; c>p;~gitY77uctr:4'S~r' c,orriir7crr7al an'c•Lltlyltea~adusa rrl dc~ it ~~i)ic7tc +wiClin ] o>•7rokzc"si11}~ ~ku<S ~?c.rtc~ all}• n,+~ed-u5c cli5C13c:,xt~l~h7t;~rratixil~'~)1~(}o~tkiii7~~ ~~,Y.?e: Ltrtrhtitlilti; i .cranc7tt7ic C'~ex clo~itli=ttrl~75tlcz'). li: rows:lxulY7tc.tci~rc.s,tt7clits lntt c.alixt~l. !l7,1,7.nxtern~nt~'YZt GO.+~s,~tztil c,cypiklr-t 71c.4ric1; eCtorts=tip=7x1,t:incslrit,.ii. n7iY7tclp.xl ~,c7x untn4urs: C. t1CCC).G7 7j'L njiStlt?tr 71 t)CYi1t)l1Cl CQLt17211`•7.Ci~~:TtStc1 lrylit i~ltdu,tr7iil~.j)rn}eccs3t) t1YC~ C,+~~~,~~ uid l c~irinmtcJ:7ui=c:Yt~p~ttt,t3t17istrlx:ts. cl. ]ansiyi~ cisttt•~~rtua~;1r~ 1'aCJf ~'S,ntxil 1 c.oi'oiaic LSCx~zlolit~rer7t(.~x~r; <as~5 t~c)nelacix~e tc7Uii~-iess• c3¢x rlttptztc:~7it• n. 1 xr`iiitl ctlkt~auon•~,~o~.atixs Jt, + te711 ~'rr~1f ~utt.luod.[c?rr;e; fty7 h7~1~,,yuKLtyn "~,7c'-c;tt w1Slr"~~7t>pi)L~usitu~.a.: F. itnGSlf L' itc iltc• ~1.Lcciol7a.i~:s7ti•, b~lr eltti~elY7:C7]Cilrl:l,) nC.G1tit,?7",lx~`~' SCY.S7;~ 1 lxsit3~stics ari ;C)rlka.~c~<StAaii:S1,. i)4iV Cour~rl t'i ui inS:t3p~lyd a ri F)euter7t i.c~7d r1cEi*i~iir ~rR.ti~vsrc~: rn.~~~c~w1J1/E?vr~i~l? {(;oi7rsYy 7?f:it Cli:tpi;wt;iA) . {~~ ~vez•~rclytz~ ~o tt 'li;.e.(jrctrr•t r;t'zllirilrtrr~rr'' + =itri, ilz rJ rnit!.h JRs7~Hrit j,f~ ~r r!Jt(iz,,, rCr,rri a~gJt~ irrrrlor;~'d~rtil,t3.r njlatr,,s,)ra,#JPrayt. t3tatk111(1ixt4l7c' YGClUli vii; atYtc.t'7XEki''s,: rllct Z)~TC7[?t=K tic47~yi'fmr t'usc- ii,r,dc.5 itr;llt new.. ,dcv2,k~~inx n!, aiitl lntbli'c1~ l u7xclril;l».AjeCts; li: ).c`>caic;itc~a(,sciivdt'(,)~il~s~rtut7tii~':.r~trc:~S;tli~ii~,' cl:i»sit caaxi~bz~;alTlac;tc<;,s,'cn,47ry?3y ~'~,C1~~s cl~ar,c-ill,~'uplYir7c,c+y tktni7tt, t•S'i7e±eut, :intk tclt~lzlc puUlt~, tcu7t~u t:.: \~ oti. ~uttlt loc.'tl u)d cogionkl st:iltel c~Jtlit;s'nricT ~~)~!~~ tU l.it.411J'lr d)Stt,ifll.aUnc3x~:;ip tnxl,siiica7t~ i7a'rli~ ~'outt+l+ n+~ds:esy tli>r':iiceas ox c:~>.cti:ts,;.~c~est,aans,;:iad crankit:u~crs, Si: itr7il,'Gminl 1 i~ixagl)otfntiin I'ac.nYa~kc3: . C:-, r:. p( ija¢cr4 rir;l Cli7jon.ti>:scci;7kes: 1?rrlc~.:x'i+ t 9of16 CJliiec_, tx~es ;c, Sltppax~t.tTte iisc;s>G rlYlctliii51.! in~3i: 10 8' ~'Ci~'TI[C37*t "I'~;S ~L~Ti~NT rr]nr[i' r,~„it,~cr'ita Irtsa,~cr(Z;tt k~e,~icnirr'~ avntrlitr,,lzil Jiurr/ frt^i,~rlrtti, Ctr~rl,~krX+r, rlc ~icrtr'1/!'~ dfi~rrrrYinuPr~t ~r~Y r~rnal~arirlnfruisrtc,~aru/~r.,rtrti4rJ~ fprutt,~< ~olilr~= ,.. urrrf t~r~~;jjrstyx;a.;iitur'tt{r!'~r~tirizil aiu! rtatri m!%~sortnc~~: L',(]~llirit]tx~£fccsxiixnxri~~Cd CnnL~:: t1xr~]tl;liiGir khc t,c]i~]ty~ Lit ~z~-Anrr 14+t~;'accertt~?)+ tt 111,tri?,:. t3ilon~„ rind ~iiGiiz cnrixciu;rt,1 ttii~l~ ~s[uzt•~; `'bf .uecicata~n als~o'tu[uu'~y,licitat ";kinsaivc":ittad i(c ~kc, f'trcnrn~os~1;c} p'(zlcs:;ty Itry~ra rcona~)cx;f:s •FU ~k]Ctr~~! 3~i1d tit }tce;~i~l>i,~.,.i(:;i h khZ~. C)}rkr>stiv-~s ~ 7~'11ix a>4xd.l~xti3ci'~iihue t`wct~aiics:~rrc~~.~al~itb rind';}c]z rbc'12c°ncfit of Cx~acv}Ix C,~ppcsriuitir}~ ;~X~ci~: fs lli;~:rlop nn~32iec~rrsrt.ed•ltetrc~atzon tG7ytirits Pro,~[zzu +:1}itr..fpll5~ tirtl~es cvria[a~ x~s+?.iircCs' [ta;~~sc.s~ir~g ~"t~utxt} 'lvidc~ u.t=iraiklo[i petl~:. iu, lrtlra'at~iii~ecl:txtt`~s::rcretcirin Va(.tt[iyr+'c ~paaes ~cidi gccim~ac~s; utxtl orliet ic~ac»iAly, corixdais (~ g t.tc ~i'autr~itns cb ~e~( 1`st[i~i f rK]r>rd[ria,c`s.,cTi~. a c~~1 ~4tih t(xe, ..~.}[(,~Zl~lrc~ T_~ti3ii~3t_ Cttsci]k]t~[at :u~rl SSx]ai~ic a(?i'CSrl;S 1'~i:tc 1]2~:~~idcni[tier~'svcli Lict~][],cs ~ixid cozrCctei;:: lr~rcyz}~c]t;afit~ u'Ytli l ~~{awtcic.5 atRxiit~~ittccr~[t t~:iiti- a~.zxeta;y:aiycl ie~au~c• ef'3[uti(viclf':g~y.[Ig ii~lvrli~~ Iv~h Ixrf<yr:tnnncc l3[titdtr+~ st'~nd;ei•.i3rt, ' Ct7U'IV'I`'S'' 1~1~C;tL~I~:~ ,~L)A'y'A);1^ Y.:E~1tE1~'1 £. Csjilnd:p~:ay4ar]is w.sll~,~rrrc'.chcloexl; (Cozuiry2'1'~n''Cha~rr~r.:3) ~~>ziculh[ral wt,rinpmv [ncluclisxglocul'.fi]Riers riarkct•~.iizd a:;aus,]1>Ie a,har~d-i[yc. ! tt~i(iixrs f~'~f Cn[t~t x:ovntitt~litr[tr rra~(1,~~ talirr(re ~ 'aii:~r t> tnrtF . . 1X1Y7dt2CCfC)n aTxd blCi"1~,iL C3F ~'AjILC "1G1t1Cd,~ C)G]rk~, f f Mhrt~ !rl{~tt f1JlfYI~TA1yJJlri r 1'YJQ•~?a rJ~Jfflllt«'t rG p!{~YJ ~~ g. IncrixlrQl<nte peii;oizutixcu snensuxc, in c ' µ ,rres~rulr ~ rr,~frrf, ctJtrl r~leJrtnf-;in r1IJ gtlfir T:llJr.JJtr a ~ z! p; Counn~ a .U*i (.1o~tncrit C7xt~ua~ice cliac:~t"][L he?(~, , ~'rtn;pr~li~nixrx ~?uv . preacluGt. ~'b]It ruuucnaact]r~tlnt adfiticsrcb tutitpnc~[iecgdcnt~ nad tlxr,'dc~rrc.for~at~cti~ry GnR~,liS}an Recazii~nxe.,r~ti4rr~,,~w~i;},;~. ti~r~;tilc. rtt~K~lit]grh(>ots: Coz~,pzilzr.~ran:c d:tt~ [[ac. dir'~ clo~~:tl anci' uia"3i?GCi izt t]• k'~1'15i11$'Cllt fi:i.~tCi.QSt;~t7,~'x1'ttUT1}I.LCSf7ULCC. flit; ~.t~][:11tL'~?r<')GC~iS.lE?(.ail?.t[lt[rit.t;?lttltlLStt'S~(t,4G!~1'I]~'. 17T/3LCC`ctOClull?i:`SlSs11.'GCL-L'tl'LlQlll;'t7Y.il1.lCillC4l.'ICi:IC1G'IS.~ ~&~111G`~C~E.?~.$~3i~.i[11:CCl1.Ct',C'[T.iCC7'I51SY{,."ftTk~. `3'~tsStllcuti~h~q~r:G7f~ltct] Cslt4'+l?C@n'pf(y].tCxlil)l tliCoi:In.~CGO7L1tC{(;tttptehCa,4I~~~?Ii[tlab.~tix(7AG(]~;il~L`:Ll{4'l7f[~fCx 4t)17111.1~:1i5'tli[tliil':~34.tY(%.3.1f1 I",.ItIYtCIlC'Z,CpY•l .'~i~`dt$Q.1~' ['l(1$.PdF~ gg~IBC.~EI':id (jt4'.~:ll:(tll'.OC lZ'f3li:tly(,yy Atl[1~ ~.~laCil131 .'i.4411'Ct.`.l's,'ti.~ ' 1~`ccrn=e~~ ~(~ lr~oixrinlxn. to prttar:~s~elp ccnsei~s*G ~fu]cta tbrrculturu,tsr[a;3~ ti.ie~>;tihcrl~t e~a~.+:t~r3 ~]tlz: C1717C~1.hf[E}!C[135. . la fict~goals'1rxvnioducaan,.~xxou-essu}~:~iii ~t~catss of'li~~zl1: gocvta Ft~~i~, c 'Set goals ~oi.c~,tt~anxcdvottr~ri; x~tcer;: ci]iisfri-,~,tloni u]]d [~ir;~lt-tltt} d ~s~G~alti f;~rlaunl ~cit~r(i]a,:(ii cri~i'~-.Ylir~ti~~i ];at'. ofxenevtlble rw~spuxces, ~.. ~~Enpt ~ cki.~lc.lopixicik nxdaxa~~~. tltr~):? 10 of 16 >~lvl~~.~~~ tu~.~cltt~~..~xvU cl~:r~.x~u~r~i.:: S~STELVr~u (lr;l~/Il;(Jti~hiPri~,~Y"1'~:~1.EM~i~iT ('Gatiir!•y ~?lari:.~7~a~urx~,i C~ixinrvavt~cvrrclnii]~'~or]t r"lso4riztttt$leur'uu rJntl rr~~nKirl&ur+ f ,(r~r~~ ~ urflrrizr~ r{utf ~~tr~„~fiJirt71'rF,ra~i,~rs. 109 ~'s1'~T~T'I`T~S' (GarJrlcnr T~~zz L.tirrj-~f~r:9) Caunt~°a7~crarcfiinr~f~ir'7! F'r:a r~Pbrrmii!rr rr1 u.El,I l~~r 5 .r~rJr„i,.rrr o/ trt~rl~r r~'e C~irul~ t l7+rr~ arrrl , trNtr7~eJ Ivhs(x ~~s~tl~trt,,Jz~z"inrj~~~lo.,~rripirYti st,,:3~~~1.drenlit~;itrpuUa~r:~irw~ zrr1~.C_t`r 4 °lti~rvk lu{.;:I~a ~arJ~~'a~ArrlurstrYtmf ~:ttlrtr,~i i?r.l?IJi,.Z,G {~il7tinn Tteramtne77dret C_. ~ .iia, la l~eijLm aGl nGtt`CJ?11711.11t,a'~71L SYSCItEl St.l`SJC~S Ln~ 11,L`fILfJC11YL c~nsis:er,c~y,p1~?-:ulc+.~:Ln ~~>~• eGr.~Io~zc~r1J~T;~uscaati~ft9~1c c 7~]:ac~zi cl•L tc.;vx7Esj?ai ky?.nnd c.zll~stncc~~cn~Z~ntin IY.1l:lG.7.71$..0.~ ~f~.L.)':C~t?I)'E731t1'~-.~latl:7l. {Yi~llilii4'd,, ~]I~JL't711: t:CCJJ~GIIn}`~ EQC L'S. CL'~:CrY7E=. rl: Ci9etii~,t;ltitl::}i*_~ntn~yltr~uc tf'',i~iit' alitsv' f'c~r itxlc5 .iititl tir•F7ete suTeli R C,L15:1£l151115 LI7('.,tT CLiSUYC ~i7TtliSc4; T.fi't173~4Cl~iI`~~ ~l', SlaG~l ~SYTbC4SL1,:... . e. 1 n:,ticc!~ tk7~U c7nC7~unc~}~;:xcsrGna3c c ~nl)<lrtycsT. achniiLs, Lnd.tlac EuU,rnF~i GrEaacictl,csetce I xcsix~lcd bj~ c1ie C'oa~nt~' nsxd LT ~~ i~cin iSrraCt: iirescicters:~rine: a~~.1ila3>le.crirLC7azxe77td~*'1ti~.F17 nc•.~ Tlii a; Sid reeric>irrri•i'Ali~~c;j 1?~n~7ning.l3nat'c's anr3'(:irrii J 5171711' ~~;'~~fjh. ~~~rr~~~~c;r :z~x7zr~.x+~~.s Vie: ~~~~; ~7__ I,~~e~ttt es 1 '~i~l"YrClt)1).=17n'S~71C~F.711.1 1)L 1Ct:i"cal t)LC~E.i)i~T7~tt1~CiCY7~Ci'7:1. Pca>: CIE T ~lemcuts:in rl>c ~~aLpielacr~st~a 1~1:7n. Yi: tn7pi4pTC*~itrt ac,~vl;arFt7dra;ti~f t~it,CsZunkl y ;iihac.s crriint .hf;Cli4~c,,.~~cu(ni-f1) t, ate inciicnr~ii's,171x. .ui a,LClel~~aL:;lenr;assessor. as,rbe ~riaarzon ~e~r.u 1?n~,c:9 elf =1- 11 of 16 110 2oDa hoard rrDirettors ~ ' '~~ CHAPEL, HILL CARRBOR(~ Chamber o f Commerce BIII Bunch, Chair VJ71iam H. Bupth, CPA, PA Peter Tompkins, vice Chafr JaIlUary 2g 20~$ The Chapel Hili News , Pogi Bra, dy, Treasurer BBl4T Greg Connor, General Counsel To Oran e Count Plannin Staff and g y g The Connor law Hrm Element Lead Advisory 13oard Members, John Anderson ~ Wachovia Bank - The Chapel Hill-Canboro Chamber of Commerce expresses its support for the AnifaBadrock Smithey&Assoclates, int. . Oran a Coun Com rehensive Plan Coalition. The Chamber believes a g tY P Delores Batley community is strangest when it has a thrivingeconomy healthy environment and EmPOWERmen4lne Creighton Blackwell ,, , an equitable society-all goals embodied by the Coalition. Further, the Chamber RBC Centura Bank . believes the Comprehensive Plan should be an affu-rning document that reflects Jan Bolfck Business Gan, Inc the intersection of interests within a community and communicates those values to Anthossy Carey county staff and potential development projects. The Siena Hotel Rlck Chambless sanTrust Bank Marla Corprcw As a partner member of the Coalition the Chamber views the goals.and mission r Town Piapner Community of the Coalition as critical to the future economic success of Orange County. The Calendar Juana Fiore Chamber supports the Coalition's strategy of specifying where development Journal of Actounan~y. AICPA should occw, giving clarity and certainty to, the development process. Further, by Toywn of Chapel Hili accelerating the development of model commercial projects, the county's ' Jack Graham commercial tax base will grow in a sustainable and e uitable fashion a al of the Grvbb & Ellis Glen Greenstrcet q , go Chamber. ' Greensveet Builders ' Berkeley Grtmball Grlmbnll Jewelen In addition to sound economic development, the Chamber supports the . Terry Basnight Hamlet S.H. Basnighi 8. Sons, Inc transportation, housing and land use goals of the Coalition. The Chamber James Harris believes that it is in our members'-and community's-interest to have a robust Town or Gnboro and diverse trans ortatlon stem that uses fewer natural resources It is also clear P ~' BarbaraJessic•Biatk The PTA Thdk SBop, Ina ~ . that new and relocating businesses are drawn tocommunities that offer a range of ' Ken Kernodle Doke Energy housin o floras arks and recreation o ortunities, The Chamber believes the g P sP PP Ken Lerner strategies put forth by the Coalition go a long way in promoting a community with Blue Cross Blue Shield of NC John McKinney SUCK aSSetS. BeIlSoulh TeJecommunintlons Diana Mints A Better Image Printing In closing, we thank you for reviewing the Chamber's reason's for support of the Greg Overbeck Coalition and its oats and ho a Oran a Coun staff and officials will take these g P g Chapel Hiil Restaurant Group Dr. Nall Pedersen goals into account when crafting the Comprehensive Plan. Chapel FGiI•Grrboro Gty Schools Todd Peterson UNC Hospitak Pat Phelan Edward Jones Irnesrments Gerald Ramoln Sincerely Pcrforsmnca AuWMali , Luke Riggshea ' Nigh and Rubfsh insurance KeNn Schwartz The Daily Tar Heel Walter 5wrdivastt I36DAM WCHL Dr. Tony Waldrop n .Nelson UNC Chapel H11 President and CEO Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce Post Office Sox 2897 • Chapel Hill, NC 27515 (919) 967-7075 • (919) 968-6674 Fax www.carolinarhamber.org 12 of 16 111 aoard of Directors ~~a~b$N i17pAIF ~' "11e v~.~' Anita Bodrark ChUr 6mither & AUOdams, inc. Bill Bunch, Vice Chair Wham H.Ounch, CP0. PA _ ' ~ -' " ' ~ i .E ' Pogl Brndy, Trrssurcr 08&T Chulia Fisher, PatCloir '. purrs Lm Y`AC Aswdaw Gregory Connor, Ganeml Coue,el . TheConnor law firm _ ' ztnanimers AIovember29`b,2007 •• 1360Ah1 WCHL Dolours 0oiiry EmPDwERmenL IrK 0 To whom it may concern, erelgntan madme IIBC Genova Jan oolitic B d ~~ l^~ el Tull-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce expresses its support for e Cha Th a ^ Anthony Carey rd Sl H Th p e Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition. Tha Chamber be loves a o em e Rid[eiwmbleze community is strongest when it lies a thriving.econorny, healthy environment, and SunTrvrt Dank ' Ravin Foy M uitable society--alt goats embodied by the Coalition. Further, the C am er ayor Town of Chpel Hiii e t G an eq believes the Comprehensive Plan should bean affirming document that re Bets me reans Glen Gnemu'oet Butldort, Inc the intersection of interests within a community. and communicates those values to earkdey Grimball GdmM1aveweier. county staff and potential development'projects. Tory Hamlet iH. gavd6ht$Sona lnc _ Jam°: Harfla artner member of the Coalition, the Chamber views the goals and mission As a Yown of Grtbora Barbara Jatie.Black p of the Coalition as critical to the future economic success of Orange County. Tha The ITAThnh Shop, ine Mdu ne ~ h Chamber supports the Coalition's strategy of specifying where developmen • n y Aa Thn clarity and certainty to the development process. Further, by ivin ld Mary MewbTl sma~i BroedanAssodavs.l~ g occur, g shou accelerating the development of model commercial projects, the county's Diana Miata row in a sustainable and equitable fashion, a goal of the will ba c l A Bctur Image PrinanL g se tax ia commer Davis Montgomery Dake Energy . Chamber. Greg Orerbedc elapel Hitl twowan[ Group n P h . In addition to sound econamic development, the Chamber supports the ar am I Clupal HItl LMVmmwn Pormenhip A transportation, housing and land use goals of the Coalition. The Cham er erzen Dr. Nan Pa gnpd Hig.cariBara arysd,aab believes that it is in our members'-and community's-interest to have a robust Tadd PctersM ahhara UNC H d dzverse transportation system that uses fewer natural resources. Tt is also clear e Pat Phelan an that new and relocating businesses are drawn to communities that offer a range of Cdwud Jones investmenu ld Ramotn G ks and recreation opporhmities. The Chamber believes the li era PerremnnrcAamMrn R ia ons, ar housin o g P P ut forth by the Coalition go a long way in promoting a community with ies te t a mm~na Or+nge County FCC Miehaol Roach p g s ra . such assets. Blue CrasilBiua SM1idd of NC Hevln 8cfiwerrz The Drtly Tar Heel In closing, wa thank you for reviewing the Chamber's reasons for•support of e Mark Sherburne [ M Coalition and its goals and hope Orange County staff and officials will take these ungeman Est Weae Putnen wmccr sammva,rt l into account when crafting the Comprehensive Plan. la6BAHwaI oa g s , Peer Tompkins Tha Chapel HN Ncwa Dr: Tony Waldrop UNC Ckap<I Hig Chamher S}aff Sincerely, ' ' Aaron Nelson Itesidencand CEO e"""''Bed[ Aaron M. Nelson ' Vim PmsWmc Trary Hager Vim Pmidene for Membemhlp ' Bendy 0ehmide Intormadon Sysams Mam[er Adam (Vein President and CBO Dlrestor of Gavemmfni nataaom and Economic Dnrolopmo,rc Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce nlmsantan Community DovelopmmcGOrdlmtor Foundation for a Sustainable Community Meg Bnmon Memberttelatioty Coordimtor . Anne Mci(una Time Werner Sunalmblilry fCBow 13 of 16 112 November 15, 2007 The mission of the Community Action Network (CA11~ is to fielp unify our community. We share deep commitments to a sustainable community, fairness for all citizens, and ' open and participatory government. As we strive to create better places to live, work and play, we actively seek the many different viewpoints that contribute to the vitality of our community. To fulfill these commitments, C~1N supports positive leadership and broad citizen input, balanced land-use planning, responsible fcscal policy, and creative partnerships. CANwill examine and promote legislative, regulatory, electoral, and private efforts that advance these goals. In keeping with the above goals, CAN supports the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition to proactively encourage policies that lead to more livable and resource efficient land use patterns, expand transportation planning, and alternatives, encourage more affordable workforce housing, improve air quality, preserve natural resources, conserve agricultural land and open space, and establish local economic and social vitality. It is with great enthusiasm that we as an organization engage in this process and hope that our Orange County elected official, the staff, members of the advisory boards and commissions, and all of our citizens recognize the importance of stakeholder input and it's value in planuhlg for our future the an updated comprehensive plan. Por the Board, F1red Black Chair 14 of 16 113 Walkable Hillsborough Coalition (WaHC) December 13, 2007 To Whom it May Concern regarding the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Update Coalition The Walkable Hillsborough Coalition (WaHC) would like to express its support of the Comprehensive Plan Update Coalition's effort to bring community stakeholders togetherto learn aboutthe elements of Orange County's Comprehensive Plan Update (CPU) and to provide input based on our shared values as diverse organizations. WaHC is a volunteer group formed in 2001 whose mission it is to promote and advocate for pedestrian- friendly communities. We recognize the importance of walkable communities for improving individual health, community health, environmental health and economic wellbeing for Hillsborough residents, for surrounding communities, and especially for our Orange County school children. Some of ourvolunteer work has included co-sponsoring an annual Walkable Hillsborough Day in June for the past five years with the Town of Hillsborough, as well as applying for Active living by Design and Fit Communities grants to seek funds and support for pedestrian-first communities and walkable schools. NCDOT has referred to WaHC as the first pedestrian-only advocacy group Jn North Carolina. WaHC supports the CPU Coalition's efforts to have the CPU reflect our organization's interest far new and appropriate existing development to be compact, walkable, mixed-use and transit supportive. We appreciate the wori<ofthe Coalition to find common ground across divergentorganizationswlth diverse missions, as well as the Coalition's push for public involvement. early in the CPU process. Holly Reid, co-founder Walkable Hillsborough Coalition 15 of 16 114 'Board of Directors Ann Henley presrdent Rick Allen Vice-President Don Willhoit measurer Cad Taylor Secretary Ben Baldelas Chris Belhom Taffy Chodorow Richard Edens Chades House Rebecca McCulloh Herb Paul Abdul Sun Honorary Lrfe Board Member Robert Seymour Execn[rve Director Chris Moron e~Dt Those info ~g O ~. 3; w Inter-Faith ~o~tncil for Social Service December 6, 2007 To Whom It May Concern Re: Orange County Comprehensive Pian Coalition Dear Friends and Partners: The Inter-Faith~Council for Social Service (IFC) takes great interest in Orange County's process to update its ever-complicated Comprehensive Plan for its citizens and all of our stakeholders. We hope that this process will not only be transparent but lead to all-encompassing frameworks, protections and service products for those who are disenfranchised and impoverished in Orange County. The socio/economic values we subscribe to as a nonprofit organization include the county's means to promote living wages, quality health care; affordable housing, social equity, . affordable childcare, inciusionary.zoning, community education, rural.waterand wastewater options, mental health services -all necessary for a sustainable community. IFC representatives have been actively involved with the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition, an impressive group of diverse partners who want to learn more about the county's planning process, wrestle with its various intricacies and team about coilaborative.ways to provide greater input for many of the improvements that are needed. Our Board of Directors officially endorsed the coalition's vision statement at its August 75, 2007 meeting. The IFC continues to be an the cutting edge of addressing multifaceted socio/economic disparities and service gaps in Orange County, Joining a wider federation of community partners has helped.us to (earn about the planning process, find some common ground with a diverse group of organizations and learn how to impact community policies for the betterment of those we represent. Coalition discussions have been valuable for us. Different organizafional values and points of view have been shared and well received. Our understanding and appreciation of the county's pianntng process has improved with our association and we are very interested in educating others about how a new Comprehensive Plan will have a tremendous impact on ail of us who live and work in Orange County. Do not hesitate to contact me about IFC's participation or any of these matters. Si~ncperely, lt.-- Chris Moran, Executive Director Inter-Faith CGUncil for Social Service Giving help and hope to those in need 110 w. Main Street o Carrboro, North Carolina o 27510 o www.ifcwe6.org Phone (919) 929~638D • Fax (919) 9283353 0 E-mall admin@ifcmalibox.org ISdongie Unihec9Wa9 16 of 16 36 115 MEMORANDUM Date: To: CC: From: R e~ April 17, 2008 Orange County Planning Board Clarion Associates, Tom Alfieri, Craig Benedict, Laura Blackmon, Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition Initial Coalition Comments on First Draft, Orange County Comp Plan The Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition recognizes the tremendous challenge of preparing a Comprehensive Plan Update fox the county in less than two years. The planning board and element lead advisory boards deserve much credit for undertaking this challenge. Such commendation also belongs to the planning department and other county personnel who have worked with the planning and advisory boards in tlv.s effort, as well as the consultants hired. The coalition shares the common desire that the updated plan be a bedrock upon which the sustainable development of Orange County will be anchored for the next twenty years. While the update made available last month has the flaws to be expected of a first draft, it meets its most daunting challenge head-on. Unlike the proposed Land Use Element update of early 2006, the cw:rent proposal aims to combine eight wide-ranging elements into one document. Better yet, the current draft shows strong indications that it will integrate these elements in a manner that facilitates both the sustainable development of Orange County as well continuing to preserve its highly-prized natural and cultural resources. However, the Coalition believes that ongoing public participation is crucial to ensure public support of the Comprehensive Plan Update. As such, we axe disappointed that the project management~team discow-aged us from presenting our initial comments regarding the. draft goals and objectives on the wine schedule as the Element Lead Advisory Boards. We had hoped that our comments would have been given as much consideration as possible prior to the preparation of the second draft. This is especially so since we presented a very complete statement on goals and objectives in January. The problem of limited public participation is further compounded by the fact that the second draft won't be available for public review until less than two weeks before the Map 19 Public Hearing. Although the coalition is optimistic that the plan will truly be a cornerstone, this compressed titneframe introduces an element of instability because public participation is being truncated. Of course, we recognize that neither the planning board nor the project management team set the timeline. As such, we will bring these specific concerns about the public participation process to the attention of the county commissioners. Be that as it map, we still plan to immediately share with Clarion Associates the following comments: 1. Chapter 11, Toward a Sustainable Future, provides an important conceptual framework fox how the various elements of this comprehensive plan are intended to work together and mutually re- enforce each other. Similarly, it animates, ox operationalizes, the county commissioners' core planning principles found in chapter 2. As such, Chapter 11 should be expanded upon, improved, and moved forward in the update. We recommend that it be placed immediately after chapter 2. X16 37 2. The update should include both simple and practical performance criteria for all objectives in the Comprehensive Plan and refer to regular, to-be-specified performance audits of the County's achievement of the performance indicators by an independent assessor. Procedures for periodically updating the county profile should also be specified. 3. The document refers to "Orange County" at different times to include the incorporated cities witlvn the county and also only as those areas outside of the municipalities. Since this Plan will not apply within incorporated areas (they have Comprehensive Plans of their own), the default should be that `the County" means unincorporated Orange County. This needs to be extremely clear in oxder for the document to be useful.. Similarly, as much as possible, data should focus on unincorporated Orange County rather than including data from the incorporated cities and towns of the county. 4. General terms such as "enhanced community character," "quality of life," and "hipness" should be avoided since they connote different images and meanings for each person. Instead, specific tei7ns that specify what is meant should be used -such as, "pedestrian-friendly," "diverse," "mixed-use," and "ecologically-sensitive." 5. When making longitudinal comparisons,.especially with environmental and traffic data, it would be more helpful to know per-capita figures than percentage changes based on gross units disregarding population. Coalition readers would also like to bring the following copy-writing suggestions to pour attention: 1. Move the. County Profile. (chapter 3, in its entirety) to the Appendix. 2. Subsection headings are hard to follow when they span multiple pages. Placing subsection indicators in a sidebar would facilitate document navigation. 3. Also, please convert the document's styles to bookmarks within the PDF and have them be hyperlinked from the table of contents. This is practically a necessity in a document of this complexity. 4. This draft does a poor job of integrating the figures and tables with the text. Figures and tables should be called out in the text and the data put into context. Citations of data from other sources should provide the dates on which those data were taken. 5. Rather than defining certain terms in the Land Use Element, include a "Definitions" section of the Appendix applicable to all elements of the plan: Page 2 O. C. Comprehensive Plan Coalition Memo to county Plansiing Board, April 15, 2008 ~~~ Comments from the ®range County Comprehensive Plan Coalition on the Land Use, Transportation, Economic Development and Housing Elements May 5, 2008 The coalition's comments axe based on the March 5, 2008 draft update. These comments are guided by two of our preferred outcomes. First, we want the plan to place a priority on the creation of new compact, walkable, mixed-use, transit-supportive growth and development within the county's planning jurisdiction. Second, we want the plan to make affirmative commitments to providing public sector infrastructure investments to stimulate such development. Coalition members believe that compact, mixed-use developments are critical to promoting economic pxospefity, social equity and environmental health. The coalition's comments focus on four plan elements because compact, mixed-use developments succeed when these planning elements complement each other and sensible implementing ordinances axe adopted. We believe our recommendations enhance the positive linkages between these elements. The comments fall into four categorti.es. The first three comprise our most constructive criticism. These are: 1. Objectives the coalition recommends be added to the plan 2. Goal statements and objectives for which the coalition recommends major changes 3. Goal statements and objectives that the coalition recommends be removed from the plan The final category addresses those goal statements and objectives which the coalition endorses either as written or with minor changes (for the purposes of clarification and specificity). Coalition members have worked together since August 2007 in order to present a common voice for diverse stakeholders regarding the county's future. We present these comments in the hopes they will have a meaningful impact on the plan that is adopted. After all, the updated plan will be the key policy document to guide the county's growth and prospefity. We axe disappointed, however, that the second draft was not available for review much earlier in the process. Releasing the draft less than two weeks before the public hearing presents formidable challenges fox concerned stakeholders to prepare thoughtful responses to such an important document. Fox instance, had the second draft been available sooner (at least 30 days in advance of the May 19 public hearing), the coalition would have had time to modify our comments. Still, we trust these comments will be useful to the planning board and ultimately the county conunissioners in their efforts to craft a plan update that will promote sustainability anal bewidely- suppoxted in the community. . Allan Rosen The Village Project Board of Directors For the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition Upd~.iCecl; ~11 /~.I~ItIB 'I: ra.npc~rcahcu.i .E?li~m.ent 118 L Objectives the coalition recommends be added to the plan. LAND USE "Objective LU-4.5: (ShortShort Terml: Amend the regulatory process to expedite the review and approval of residential cluster development forms throughout the County, including in the Rural Buffer and other areas zoned for low density residence." TRANSPORTATION Transportation Demand Management strategies should be added to Goal 1, 2 or 3.' Reduction in parking requirements should be added to Goal 1, 2 or 3. 39 Transit oriented development and mixed-use need to be mentioned in the transportation section (Goal 1 or 3) to provide access to services for those without an automobile and as a way to encourage the use ofnon-motorized modes of transportation. "Objective T-1.7 (Short'Terml: Promote and protect existing smaller, narrower roads to reduce car speeds and preserve neighborhood safety." "Objective T-1.8 (Medium Term.): Coordinate with Orange County schools to provide safe walling and biking routes withisi 1.5 miles of all schools for children during school hours and residents after hours." "Objective T-4.3 (Medium Term): Locate new Growth Opportunity Areas along transit corridors. Allocate density in GOAs that will support convenient, efficient, and reliable public transit. Incorporate Smart Growth planning principles into the zoning of these Growth Opportunity Areas." "Objective T-4.4 (Long Terml: Implement the Special Transit Advisory Commission (STAG) recommendations for regional transit (including adding light rail, passenger/commuter rail, expanded bus and transit-oriented development at a future Orange County station in Hillsborough)." ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT "Objective ED-1.8 (Long T~rml: Develop an incentive policy to use in targeting companies and enterprises that will build upon and expand core assets & diversify the County's economic base. Incentives should be tied to the number and type of jobs created." "Objective ED-2.12 (Medium Term): Initiate asmall-scale "community" sewer. & water pilot project at one of the County's Rural Nodes to enable mixed commercial & residential development of greater intensity than would be supported by traditional well & septic systems." "Objective ED-2.13 (Long T_~rml: Make the formation of locally-owned businesses that are creating products and services for regional use and export a strategy of the County's Economic Development; encourage import substitution to prevent externalized environmental & social impacts such as high transportation costs and pollution by overseas factories." "Objective ED-2.14: Establish a "one-stop" central permitting/license office for business and development applications." U~~~datc.cl: 4/<l~/t}8 T.t:ansport~ttic,.ti .element ~11~ 9 ®biectives the coalition recommends be added, 2nd page "Objective ED-2.15: Work closely with UNC's Office of Technology Development to identify commercial space needs of businesses created by UNC research, promote development of such space within the County, and actively encourage UNC businesses to stay in Orange County a$er leaving the university." Objective ED-2.16: Develop marketing material promoting Orange County as a good place to operate a business and target distribution to desirable businesses." "Objeective ED-3.6 (Long Terml: Work in partnership with Durham Technical Community College-Orange County Campus and other training institutions to develop training programs fox "green collar" jobs and enterprise creation. Other partners should be the Small Business Technology Development Center and the Service Corps of Retired Executives (SCORE)." HOUSING "Obj_ective H-2.4 (Medium Term): Develop strategies for supplying an adequate number of single adult housing units (xooining houses, boarding rooms, SRO's, shared housing units, studio apartments, etc.) for persons with disabilities, serQice economy workers and special populations including the homeless." "Objective H-2.5 (Long Term): Embrace opportunities for alternative forms of land development and housing types (such as movable homes, manufactured homes, shared living arrangements, single-room occupancy units, apartments, efficiency/studio units, cottages, work exchange units, temporary units, group homes, Section $, tax credit properties, public housing) to broaden the choice of housing options." "Objective H-4.5 (Long Terml: Expedite the development approval process for projects that commit to providing workforce and special needs housing; for housing in rural nodes; and fox cluster developments throughout aural areas." "Objective H-4.6 (Long_Term): In Growth Opportunity Areas adopt zoning, subdivision regulations, and provide incentives to increase housing supply available to the County's workforce, senior citizens, persons with disabilities, and people making between 30 and 140 percent of the area median income." "Objective H-4.7 (Long Term): In Growth Opportunity Areas adopt zoning and provide incentives to ensure a mixed-use development pattern putting employment, shopping and recreation within walking distance of an ample and diverse supply of housing." "Objective H-3.5 (Long Terml: Promote innovative approaches to housing that are responsive to the needs of Orange County, maintain quality and human scale, increase energy efficiency, and reduce construction and maintenance costs." ' Updated: ~l/~I•/t1$ "1'i°ans~~c»-tatiou.l'lement 120 II. Goals and objectives for which the coalition recommends major changes LAND USE LU-2.4: "Evaluate tl~e development potential in rural crossroad communities to ident~ whether current regulations permit ina~ipropriate development that is out of character with these communities, and whether j~ote~ztial development in these areas would require significant expansions or cause depletions ofpublic services." Define inappropriate development. . TRANSPORTATION Overarching Goal (rewrite): "New development and redevelopment within the County are walkable, bikable, and transit-oriented. Local and regional destinations are accessible without use of automobiles. There is universal access for people with disabilities. Air, water, and soil quality are protected both locally and globally." 41 T-2.5 (rewrite): "In order to foster developments that support non-automobile modes, especially walking and biking, the County will work actively to bring about changes to County, Municipal, and NCDOT regulations that prevent "walkable" street profiles." Goal 3: `°A multi-modal transportation ystem that serves existing development, ~ focuses future development into compact, walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods, and p~sep-~ enhances community character consistent with the , county's land use plans. " T-3.3 (rewrite): "Discourage disconnected roads. Instead use traffic calming devices such as narrow streets, large trees, on-street parking, etc iii arder to maintain human scale and safety of neighborhoods. Avoid Cul-de-sacs, as they significantly inhibit connectivity." ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Overarching Goal (rewrite): "Economic Development in Orange County is actively addressing the challenges posed by fossil fuel price volatility and the externalities associated with its use. The County has a robust, resilient, and diverse commercial base achieved by recruiting, retaining and creating enterprises that utilize the County's human and intellectual capital and the Triangle region's economic assets. While responsive to County environmental and social objectives, commercial development .and activity focus on growing high quality private sector jobs and raising wage levels, and yields a third or more of County tax revenue." ED-1.4. (comment only, no specific language at this time). Objectives relating to job creation and increases in the commercial tax base for the 2008-2030 Comprehensive Plan Update should not reference verbatim the goals set in 2005-2010 Strategic Plan for Economic Development. While objectives for these .two important measures should be specified in this update, growth rates should be a benchmark standard -- either as a substitute for or in addition to -- benchmarks sets a specific levels. Objectives relating to-job creation and increases in the commercial tax base should be expressed in terms of sustainable, long-term growth levels. For example, create adequate jobs to accommodate anticipated population increases. Increase commercial tax base so that an appropr7ate ratio of commercial/residential tax base is maintained. ' Use of italics indicates language taken directly from the draft update. Use of boldface language indicates substitute language proposed the coalition. These instructions apply to sections II, III, and IV of the comments. [_)pdakc.cl: ~•~•/t1~/tl8 1'.tansport<itic,n .l~lement: 1~ 1 Goal and objectives for which the coalition recommends major changes, 2nd page Goal 2: "I~ f asti~rcture that suppy S~~-'dw 'pl~ 1 atuge deve opmena ino orporating en egy efficuento& integration of local business water conservation design. principles and affordable housing." ED-3.1, "Develop and nurture partnerships that support workers and their families at all stages of their lives and provide oppo~~tunities for lifelong learning and retraining in response to changing economic conditions," and ED-3.2, "Promote access to living wage jobs that o`er bents and career advancement potential," are commendable but not specific enough to incite any type of action. What types of partnerships should be developed? How will access to living wage jobs be promoted? Goal 4, "Pai~tneiships that ensure the county remains agreatplace in which to livee nod Sork," is very vague and should be revised to identify the types of appropriate partnerships to acliev HOUSING H-1.4: " Maintain an adequate supply of residentially designated land to accommodate ,,z,,~,y.AP'---~' elf-ejpopulation growth and a diversity of housing types ~- beyond municipal boundaries." H-1.4 (rewrite alternate): "Encourage greater municipal/county collaborations regarding the allocation, efficient use and adequate provision of affordable housing dollars to both safeguard and expand the number of housing units for underserved populations and service economy workers." H-1.5: `insure that a variety of housing types can be developed in appropriate locations (Growth Opportunity Areas) throughout the county in a ~tstziitiable manner that ~ciently uses resources and existing and planned public services, including water & sewer infrastructure, transit options, and social, health, educational and emergency services." Goal 3: "TI~e preservation, repair, and replacement of targeted segments of the existing housing supply." The preservation, repair, and replacement of existing housing supply is the responsibility of the private sector. What criteria would be used to identify existing housing supply that should be targeted for such preferential treatment and what funding source would be used to do this? H-3.3: "£.~~nd Provide assistance •in-the for retrofitting repair, and maintenance of existing homes owned by financially ,~ challenged households, H-3.4: "Provide financial and technical assistance that targets ~ni-c~erit.~~1~`iectl low wage households in danger of becoming homeless." Goal 4: "~e~~~`~~~~ Zo~g~ subdivision regulations, and incentives ~that-inerease housing supply available to the County's workforce, senior citizens, and households earning between 30 and 140 percent of the area median income C.?~~?d,.uc~rl: <1~/~~~%t}~ °T't•an;lx•>rtaticx~.l~lemc.nt. 122 Goal statements and objectives that the coalition .recommends be removed LAND USE 43 LU 3.4: `~ecogni~e the right to farm and discourage the location of new non farm development, particularly more intensive residential development, within farming areas to minimise the incidence of complaints and nuisance suits against farm operations." Define and encourage Rural Node development. Let people who choose to move there deal with what comes with a ruxal lifestyle (noise,. smell, etc.). Goal 5: "Life, health, and property safe from natural hazards." The Orange County Hazard Mitigation Plan addresses this objective. TRANSPORTATION None. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ED-2.6: "Accommodate office facilities in areas that are desirable and attractive to major corporate users and others who seek high prestige areas." ED-4.2: "Provide lifelong learning opportunities, from early childhood through senior citizens." It is redundant with objective ED-3.1. ' ED-4.3: "Wlelcome and promote greater inclusiveness and diversity." ED-4.4: "Promote hipness by focusing on the uniqueness of each municipality and the county as a whole." HOUSING H-3.2: "Kequire that all new housing built or located in Orange County meet the minimum standards specifzed in the State of North Carolina's Building Code, as well as Department of HUD and Farmer's Home Administration's standards, when required." What outcome is sought by this objective? Would coalition-proposed objective H-3.5 achieve a similar result. HUD code and Farmer's Home Administration regulations are sometimes incompatible. A home cannot be built to meet the HUD code and the NCRBC. FHA standards are probably at or below minimum NCRBC and are intended to apply only when an FHA loan is involved. Compliance with NCRBC is not optional and is mandated in other regulatory documents. H-4.2: "Ex~iand tax assistance for elderly households who have d~culty affording their home property tax." U7>dared: ~}.f~.;t)8 1'.ran}~c~rtaac~ca l-~tr:mcnt 1~ 3 Goal statements and objectives the coalition endorses with minor changes or as is LAND USE -minor changes recornrnended Goal 1: Avoid language such as hig1~ quality of life that can be defined differently by each person. LU-1.1: "Coordinate the location of higher intensity l hig1~ density a~sidential a~ad non-residential development with existing or planned locations ofpublic transportation, commercial and community services, protected natural and cultural resources, and adequate a • ~~.,,,~f... saLpp09'tZ12g Z1~ astructure (i. e., water and sewer, ~aigh~~~~'~"=L~ streets, and sidewalks). This could be achieved y isacreasing allowable densities and creating new mixed-use ,honing dist~zcts where adequate public services are available." LU-1.2: "Evaluate and repo~~ on whether existing and approved locations for future residential and non-residential developments are coordinated with the location ofpublic transportation, comme~zial and community services, and adequate supporting infrastructure (i.e., water and sewer services, ~igla-f~iee' ~ { ' °t ~""°"', streets and sidewalks). " LU-1.3: Avoid language such as enhance community character that can be defined differently by each person. Goal 2: Define community character. LU-2.2: Specify for what purpose, and for the benefit whom (the land owner, the public, etc.) the County will protect valuable resource lands. LU 2.3: "require non-residential and higher-density residential developments within Transition Areas to use Best IVfanagement Practices (BMP's) for storr~awater control, as outlined within tl~e Orange County Zoning Ordinance and Sedimentation Control Oadisaance, to ensure thatpotential adverse impacts on the water quality of existing and proposed reservoir sites are avoided." '• LU-2.7: "Develop Green Building Standards to guide the design, siting, co~astructioaa and management ofpublic buildings and public housing in a manner that conserves energy andloruses nonpolluting renewable energy sources. Provide incentives for those developers who choose to follow such guidelines for private developments." LU-2.10: "Develop design standards orguidelines that address scale and densi ~ " for residential, mixed-use, industrial, and commercial land arses to promote ~~-~th~~~~'the protection of the visual and cultural environment of the county." LU-3.7: "'~ ` ~ ' ~' c:' Ensure that development standaa ds for rural Community, Rural Neighborhood, Rural Village, rural Industrial, Commercial, and CommerciallIndustrial Nodes encourage a clustered, walkable development pattern ,xud diset~=-+t9-ip--dE~velepm~ent " LU-3.9 (second LU-3.8 in the draft plan): "Create new honing district(s) which allow for a mixing of commercial and residential uses,-a mixing of housing types, and creates a more pedestrian friendly developmentpattern where appropriate. New districts should be applied in areas where public services exist or are planned for in the future, in areas thatpromote higher intensity and Nigh density uses on tl~e Future Land Use Plan map." LAND USE -endorsed as is Overarching Goal: "Coordination of the amount, location, pattern and designation of future land uses, with availability of county services and facilities sufficient to meet the needs of Orange County's population and economy consistent with other Comprehensive Plan elementgoals and objectives." LU-2.1: "Maintain the rural, low-density land surrounding Transition Areas as rural Buffer lands, as designated by tl~e Future Land Use Plan. Future consideration should be given to designating rural Buffer areas around other municipalities w1?ere such interest exists." LU-2.5: "Adopt and implementpolicies that specify appropriate land uses and intensities of development in Protected and Critical 1~ater resource Areas that will not have potential adverse impacts on water resources." LU-2.6: "Designate and then periodically review prime reservoir sites, based on an evaluation of water resources throughout the county, to protect those areas from adverse development impacts and to ensure that regulations for these areas are appropriate." LU-2.8: "Develop performance standards for development on lands with non-renewable resources to ensure a sufficient level of environmental protection for these resources." LU-2.9: "Evaluate tl~e carving capacity ofgroundwater and surface water resources of the 95 watersheds in Orange County." Goa13: "A variety of land uses that are coordinated within a program and pattern that limits sprawl, preserves community and rural character, minimises land use conflicts, supported by an ~cient and balanced transportation system." C.Jj>dacrc~cl: ~1•lrl~i tl8 "1 ra.nspo~tatic~.t.~ l~:lernetYt 124 Goal and objectives the coalition endorses with minor changes or as is, 2nd page LAND USE -endorsed as is continued 45 LU-3.1: "Discourage urban sprawl, encourage a separation of urban and rural land uses, and direct new development into areas where necessary community facilities and services exist through periodic updates to the Future Land Use Plan." LU-3.2: "i~/heri revising the Future Land Use Plan, coordinate land use patterns to facilitate the expanded use of non-auto modes of travel, the increased occupancy of automobiles, and the development and use of energy-~cient transportation systems." LU-3.5: "Encourage energy ~cient industries to locate or expand in the County in I~urallndustrial, CommerciallIndustrial, and Economic Development Nodes as delineated on the Future Land Use Map." LU-3.6: "Establish consistency with the Future Land Use Plan and the T~ater and Sewer Management Planning and Boundary Agreement and Map." LU-3.7: "Determine whether development standards for Kural Community, .aural Neighborhood, Rural Industrial, Commercial, and CommerciallIndustrial Nodes encourage a clustered development pattern and discourage strip development." LU-3.8: "Develop a process for implementing small area plan recommendations through the revision of county policies and regulations." Goal 4: "Land development regulations, guidelines, techniques and/or incentives thatpromote the integrated achievement of all Comprehensive Plan goals." LU-4.1: "Support the use of individual mobile homes as a useful housing resource in the county by increasing the opportunities where these units can locate by-right." LU-4.2: "Keview and amend the Orange County Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances to ident~ and eliminate existing regulatory impediments to objectives identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Such objectives include the development of energy ~cient buildings within the county, development of a~`ordable housing and permitting of solid waste management facilities in appropriate locations." LU-4.3: "Determine how best private developments can accommodate or provide public and private commercial recreational facilities to serve Orange County's residents." LU-4.4: "Encourage the provision of a range of a~ordable and suitable low and moderate income housing by means of development incentives in order to provide a balanced housing stock for the residents of Orange County." Goal 6: "A land use planning process that is transparent, fair, open, ~cient, and responsive." LU-6.1: "Undertake a comprehensive ~ort to inform and involve the citizens of Orange County in the land use planning process." LU-6.2: "Maintain a cooperative joint planning process among the county municipalities and those organisations responsible for the provision of water and sewer services to guide the extension of service in accordance avith the Comprehensive Plan and the policies of municipalities." TRANSPORTATION -minor changes recommended Goa11: "An ~cient and integrated multimadal transportation system that supports the environment and public health and minimizes negative impacts on the quality of our air, water. and soil. Transit and pedestrian-oriented development is a critical nexus of transportation and land use." T-1.1: "Coordinate land use planning and transportation planning to facilitate the increased occupancy of automobiles, the expanded use ofpublic transit (including intercity passenger rail), walking and biking asprimarymodes of travel, and the overall development and use of a more energy-~cient transportation system. " T-1.2: `Develop new transportation facilities in a manner that minimises negative impacts on the environment, on air, water and soil quality, on historical or cultural assets, and on existing neighborhoods, and that enhances the overall rural character in Orange County. " T-2.3: "Update applied site design and labeling standards for new development to include pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly road design standards that ensure adequate emergency vehicle access.to the development and appropriate street naming and building numbering to improve the response times of emergency vehicles. " T-2.4: "Improve Orange Public Transportation (OPT) transit services and the county's emergency disaster transitprovision for the elderly; ensure that those without automobiles are served during emergencies." Ul•~dat<:cl: ~.1 /~a.(tl8 °Pi-a.nspoxc~~drui I~lemcut ~~ 5 Goals and objectives the coalition endorses with minor changes or as is, 3rd page TRANSPORTATION- minor Chan es recommended continued T-3.2: "Develop and adopt a Comprehensive Transportation Plan that addresses and maps future strategies for all transportation modes, i~acluding bicycle/pedestrian facilities, I~ighways (including a functional classification of roads and a Collector Street Plan), and transit facilities (including infra-city and intercity rail). " T-3.4: "Make necessary multi-modal transportation improvements to service lands that are slated for future intense development, such as Economic Development Districts -with emphasis on investments fox non-automobile accessibility." T-4.2: "Improve coordination of all greenways, bikeways, and public transit routes and services within Orange County and the Triangle F~.egion." TRANSPORTATION -endorsed as is T-1.3: "Increase safety on existing Orange County bicycle transportation routes." T-1.5: "Expand the availability and use of public transportation throughout the county to provide better access between employment centers, shopping and se~wice locations, and other key points of interest, particularly for the county's senior and disabled populations." T-1.6: "Construct bicycle facilities in Orange County that will make cycling for transportation purposes safer, more convenient, and more efficient.". Goal 2: "A multi-modal transportation ystem that is affordable, available, and accessible to all users." 'T-2.1: "Increase t/~eprovision of bikeways, walkways, and supportive facilities such as bicycleparking hones." Goal 4: ".A regionally-integrated, multi-modal transportation planning process." T-4.1: "fork with nearby jurisdictions to integrate Orange County plans with regional goals and objectives for an isatermodal tra~asportation ystem to meet projected travel demand that reduces congestion a~ad reliance on single occupancy vehicles." ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -minor changes recommended ED-1.3: "Develop clear criteria d~ning desirable socially, economically and ecologically sustainable businesses for the next five years." ED-2.5: " Designate suitable land to accommodate the expansion andgrowth of commercial and industrial uses ~e-e~~ty-in areas that are desirable and attractive to corporate users." ED-2.7: "Select industrial sites in Economic Development Areas based on present and planned sipporting ystems, such as water and sewers capacity, presence of a local workforce, andgood highway or rail access, and ~'ec~~~:~minimize detrimental local and global environmental impacts or negative social ~~ outcomes. " ED-3.3: "Form partnerships with Durham Tech, UNC-Chapel Hill, Chapel HilllCarrboro Schools, Orange County Schools, and others to provide adequate training and education to enable County workers to obtain ~h~;~~~`~Jobs that pay a living income and benefits." ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -endorsed as is ED-1.1 Focus public education efforts on sustainability issues, looking at the social, economic and environmental contributions of local businesses, " ED-1.6: "Provide outreach; recog~aition andl or expedited service to new and existing businesses that meet development criteria." ED-2.1: "Encourage compact and higher density development in areas served by water and sewer." ED-2.2: "Encourage mixed use pr jects that support walkable communities." ED-2.3: "Promote public transportation, alternative modes of transportation, and encourage carpooling and pdrk-and-ride participation." ED-2.10: "Extend water and sewer into all three Economic Development Districts." Goal 3: "Effective systems to train and support residents and those who work in Orange County." Urx3atc.cl: <.}./~#•/(}g '1,.ta.napr>rtat7oca T?lem.c:ut 126 Goals and objectives the coalition endorses writh minor changes or as is, 4t~ page ECONOMIC DEVELOPMEN'T' -endorsed as is continued ED-3.5: "Ensure County avorkers and those preparing for the zvorkforce have access to transportation, child care, elder care, and affordable housing." HOUSING -minor changes recommended 47 Overarching Goal: Use a different word than citizens; county housing availability should also include those who work in Orange County but do not pet live here. Goa11: "A ?vide range of types and densities of quality housing affordable to those who live or work in Orange County as appropriate to surrounding land uses." H-1.1: Assist in the rehabilitation and development of affordable housing and community developmentprograms in the. county using multiple strategies including implementation of the county-wide Housing and Community Development Consolidated Plan." H-1.2: Define the process that will be used to identify areas that have severe housing and community development needs. H-1.3: "Increase the provision of housing ~ resources for financially-challenged households ee,~~~s~tgh t ' ' ' ' and ~eo9~ien coordinate avith public and non profzt organisations responsible for providing community services and housing in the county." H-1.5: Define in a sustainable manner, and existing and planned public services. Goal 2: "An adequate supply of accessible and affordable housing is available for special needs populations, including the elderly. H-2.1: "Accommodate the development ofgroup homes, ~d foster care facilities, and transitional housing facilities and other housing types in appropriate locations to provide increased opportunities for social interaction, a de-institutionalised lifestyle, andgainful employment. `Appropriate' in this case includes siting residences in compact, mixed-use developments that are within wallaing distance of office and retail districts." H-2.2: "Develop a plan to end chronic homelessness, utilizing multiple strategies including the Orange County Ten Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness, Inter- Faith Council's plans for relocating its men's residential facility to a new location, and sustaining on- going HomeStart and Community House programs." H-2.3: Include elsewhere another objective that encompasses other types of housing for the elderly, not just multi family housing units and also multi-family housing fox households other than the elderly. See proposed H-4.6 below. • H-3.1: "Achieve residential neighborhoods that are~e livable, wallcable, safe and aa~ell-maintained." H-4.1: " .Allow HUD code-compliant manufactured housing the same locational opportunities as state building code-compliant single family units." H-4.3: "~'°~~e-~~b~~-af Explore new public/private development incentives to stimulate the production of needed a. ffordable lozv income housing. Ul~>d,uecl: ~l•l`a~/t~~ 'l ransl?orcariou I~'lemeut 127 ~ ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ .N ~ .N o Y .#.r - -° ~ ~a ,N ~ V /Np~ ~ is . N ~ ~ •QJ ~ 0. ? ~ t L ~ S. L W Y~ ,V ~ = ~ m ~ j ~ V ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ • t6 ~ ~. ,~ . p7R ~V S.n Aq ].~ ~ ~ ~ ~ >^ ~ Lj ® ~ ° c ~ a '`~` nui ® `~ ~ ~ ~.~ I~ ~ .~ o U L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~. ~_. ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ,~ ~-., ' 8 v ~ ~ ~ Q~' -~:. ~ v . lr7 ~ a S S -i-,~ ~ a a, ~' L ,~, -~ ~ o :~ o ,~ ~l ~, ~ . o , +, v a o U o.~ ti ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ -c 128 ~,; o. ti a N ~ ~ ~ N ~ q~ ~ ~ II • u . ~ ~ _a `' ~ ~ c ¢~ '.o 'ta v o , ~ o ~ ify •~ ~ ~ a p' d:+ ~ ~ O ++ -Q . ~ O i Q. ~, C a ~ ,~ ~ o O v °?, ~ - a, a ~ c ~` ~ o -i ,.; ci v o 1 c.v o a ° ~ ~ ~ a v ~ a ~ ~ ~ s~. o ~ ° ~ c,] h ~'' ~ a U ~ ~~f ~ ~ ' ` ~ n. . n °~.' a -~ + S a~ e~ s~ _. o v -c a v 3 a ~ c o ~ v ~ •~` `-. a +; ~ ~ 0 C '~ -~ Q ~~, e ° a ~ :~ e a: ~• v> ~ Y v ~ ~ ~ ,a, v !~ s _. , O a' . v ;~ °. ~_ ~. T > ~ 0 3 `~ `~ 4' y O _ v Q: .rJ ,~ c . ~ ,; 0 0 m ~ ~ w L V ~ o c a •L ~ ~o. a 'O ~. c. `° ~., ~ ;~' y c ~ O = O OJ cv -~ N L ab Q- c ~ L ~,'.U ~ °' ,~. tin __ .~ C o. U c a~ c t~ L 0 O 3 3 a. L ++ U d ffl °' . °' ~, ~ c E ra O a o c v u ~ ~ o 'O 41 O O to ~ o ~ ~ O~ o~~ ^. u ~ 4J ~ ~, @1 u ~ . ~ f6 C. O ~ ry u ~ L ~ {J. ~ c ~ ~ M ~ ~ O- L Q ~ N N p1 'CF, _ ~ ~ u'1 U Z m N Q1 ~ y„ ++ u .~ m v -' ~ s x m o ~i ,_ s . O I- ~ m .a _ ,' ~ ~' ~ u a v a w 5, ~~Pu, . L C (n ~' ~ ' ~ I ~ L~ ~ ~ >. N 1 C6 C 1 I C •~ • ~ s ~ - ~ L ~ ;~~ `!~ ! G c p^ .i.~G ~ ~ 'O ~' '~ L ~ L o , m '~'' "O ~ O L]:t Ll O ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " am ~ '~'' ~ 1 -p .O C'~~ ~ ~? „' O 4- , ~ N ~ L j N p O v ~ O , ~r ~ rn ~ ~ :~ O ~ ~ 4 ~ C , ~ f6 ^ ~ / , '~= c6 V 'im` ~ ~ } U O ' O vl +~ _: O t0 O - L N In ~ ~ ~,:: . ~~ N } .+ C ~t- O ~p L O ;~, u ~ N U = C c c~,.; ~ L ~ O OJ v ~ ' O ~ ~ O tID N ~ ~ v c `' c E m > v .~ o c o o Vf o v- .~-~ ~ ,_ ~' ~ `- c o ~ ~ ~ .~' in ~ +~ ra ~ o p V1 v aNi '`"' +~ o ~ .~ ~ co c o L C ~ . ~ ~ ~ ..ice L ~ ~ ~ Q. ~ p d ~ a ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p ~ ~ L Ll ~~ ~ c ~~~ ~ (n L L L p ^ ~' ~ C ~ ~ ~ L ' W V Q `+- . a 4 • - O U ~ 'O °' L U X 'O . 4- ~ ~ . .I O ~ ~ fD In c = ~ ~ v ~ ` ~ H- b0 N C V ~ . vi ~ ,?~ ~ O !_ Q ~ ,. i-~ •~ ~ O ' ., l0'~!.c O - O 1 c '~ c 4J to . c "O m ,3-I _ > ++ L L cn N '. 6y. U... t1A C L rn O m +J ~ U . C]. F= cc V O C Q. N O U N 4- L ' c i ~0 U ~ '+~ ~' O + ~ O aj i N O it O - c U o i-1 . G.1 t10 O . '. S ~-,, O ~ ; N • a-+ ~ p ~ O d ~~ ~ O ~ ~ N N 'S N m .? o ~ ~ ~ ~ O O ~ v o .~ ' ~ u ~ ~ c O w~~ s v ~ c -a ~ ~ O u .~ is ~ O p ~, B ~- N aJ N i Q ' : i O '~' O O C O ~.,.~. O y O .F, ~ . ~ ~_ ~ ~ ~. ` O > .O O 0.°'.C c ~ c u ~ 4J ~ °' Q~ a~ *_' L -o ~ a ~ .N L ~= > n. o ~ ago °-' ~ ~ ca •° ° ~ ` ~ a, ~ w ~ p J m U ~ v ` U n i a ~ ~ .~. , is o ~ c v ~ tin w ~ ~ In > O -0 ~ ~ In O y c '~ ~ ~ Q. ~ t6 0 U ~ ~ ~ '~O ~ ~ ~ p a ~ '~ ~~ O ~ ~ O + ., O O C ~ _ ~ V O ,Q O O ~ '~ f 9 ~' dS _= Q I v i~i1 O U ~ L O ~p N a Q ~ v L ; ~- ' t~ ~ L L N~ B O ~ N rn ~ ~ p Y v to N N O c O C ~ -~ a ~ Z3 O `+~ ~, ' a1 a.., N ~ O c O L O O u L C Q f0 L .t N + v~ L > t- Q ++ N In I 3 O .Q u O p u !0 v :tr I ~ ~ L Q> S ~ O , ~.. ,c . . + . d- _ C ~ pJ ~ tco c L p O ~ s o o ~ ~, ~ C C ~ ~ ~ U ~ p j i O :N ~ ~ O B, ~ ,O p v 129 Tom Altieri From:. Chris Heaney [cdheaney@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 11:36 AM To: CompPlanUpdate Subject: Request to include detailed plans in the Orange County Comprehensive Plan to support the Rogers-Eubanks communities To whom it may concern: I am writing to request that the Orange County Comprehensive Plan include specific plans and recommendations for solutions to the issues raised by the Rogers-Eubanks Neighborhood Association (RENA) and the Coalition to End Environmental Racism (CEEB). These issues include: 1) Ending the 35 year burden of hosting of solid waste facilities by the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood; 2) Providing public funding for provision of public, regulated drinking water and sewer service to all households in the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood and Rogers Road Historic Area; 3) Providing funding for other basic municipal services to residents. of the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood and Rogers Road Historic Area including, but not limited to paved roads, paved sidewalks, stormwater drains, street lights, public bus service (including covered bus stops), emergency protection services (i.e., fire, police protection, ambulatory and rescue squad). sincerely, Chris Heaney 1000 N. Greensboro St. Carrbor_o, NC ?7510 1.30 Tom Altieri From: Barbara Hopkins [tayesue1 @yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 7:53 AM To: CompPlanUpdate Page 1 of 1 I,Barbara Hopkins,request that Orange County Comprehensive plan include specific plans and recommendations for solutions to the issues raised by the Rogers-Eubanks Neighborhood Association (RENA)and the Coalition to End Environmental Racism(CEER).These issues include: l.Ending the 35 year burden of hosting of solid waste facilities by the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood; 2.Providing funding for provisions of public,regulated drinking water and sewer service to all households in the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood; 3.Providing funding for other basic municipal services to residents of the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood including,but not limited to paved roads,paved sidewalks,storniwater drains,street lights,public bus service(including covered bus stops),emergency protection services(fire,policepmtection and rescue squad). Sincerely, Barbara Hopkins 5/19/2008 131 Tom Aitieri From: tmaguire@newspaper.com Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 11.:19 AM To: CompPlanUpdate Subject: Comments I have reviewed the updated version of the Orange County master plan and offer these brief comments in making three recommendations. The first is that I do not believe that transportation other than automobilies ought to be considered "alternative". Rather, I think that all transportation modes ought to be considered on .the same basis. An automobile is one, a bus another, trains, feet, bicycles, etc. None is more "equal" than any other. The second is that I believe we should commit ourselves to having as fully functional a sidewalk network. in Orange County as we do one for automobiles. In other. words,- if we are going to consider comprehensive plans for how our automobiles and other vehicles get around the county, we should do the same for. people who choose to walk. The current sidewalk route throughout the county is abysmal and demands and deserve the same level of attention as that given to the road system. The third is that I do not recall seeing in the document a comprehensive discussion of energy production and use in the county. Perhaps I just missed it, but I think any master plan today ought to contain information on energy consumption and on local energy production. Again, I would not use the term "alternative". Solar energy ,production, .for example, deserves to be treated in exactly the same way as any other energy we produce here. Thanks for considering these views. Terry Maguire 143 Graylyn Drive Chapel Hill, NC 27516 919-960-4503 mail2web.com - Microsoft° Exchange solutions from a leading provider - http:%/link.mail2web.com/Business/Exchange 1 132 PRESENTATION TO ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, MAY 19, 2008 At the previous public hearing an the update to the Comprehensive Plan, I requested the Board of Commissioners to explore the idea of establishing another Element in the Comprehensive Plan to address Planning Principle No. 8, Preservation of Community Character . My proposed Element read: Maintenance of Community and Preservation of Community Character This request was forwarded to the Planning Board. In the fall of 2007, the Board formed a subcommittee consisting of members Renee Price, Judith Wegner, Bernadette Pelissier and myself to examine the idea that had been proposed. In March of 2008, the Subcommittee.submitted areport tothe Planning Board. The report consisted of a history of community building efforts in the County, including a detailed discussion of the report of Shaping Orange County's Future Task Force, and the subcommittee's recommendations concerning the establishment of a new Element and attending goals and objectives. The Planning Board discussed the report briefly at its monthly meeting in March. There was no consensus or vote on the recommendations although there was some concern expressed about how such an idea might slaw down the overall process for updating the Plan. Tonight, on my own, I am asking that instead of establishing a new Element for community building and maintenance, certain Objectives be included in the land Use Element. These Objectives are attached to your copy of my remarks as Exhibit A. Also is attached a copy of most of the recommendations of the Shaping Orange's Future Task Farce regarding Community Building. Goal 6 of the proposed Land Use Element entitled, "Aland use planning process that is transparent, fair, open, efficient and responsive", would be one possible location far some or all of these objectives. I believe there are also other goals under which these objectives may fit. In summary, I strongly believe that the ten principles of community building listed in the Task Force's final Report: provide the glue and accountability that bind together each of the Comprehensive Plan's Elements and their goals and objectives. The Task Force's overarching goal of community-building connects the Comprehensive Plan's individual Elements to each other to create interdependency. This goal ,coupled with the attached Objectives, also transcends each Element and serves as abroad- spectrumvision by which the goals and objectives of the Elements, as well as those of the social, economic and environmental sectors of the County, can be better accomplished. Thank you. Jay Bryan 133 EXHIBIT A ' ®BJECTIVES FO-Ia. C®IVI~RE~NSIVE PLAN'S I,t~ND USE EI.~ElVIENT a. Develop a process far using principles of community building (See p. 2, Repart.of Shaping Orange County's Future Task Force) as a checklist for evaluating the Oraitio G ciuhllong and short term planning and development builds and maintain community ' g ty b. Establish the use of mediation, conflict resolution, public participation and facilitation practices among Orange County and municipal boards, elected and appointed (p. 25, Report of Shaping Orange County's Future Task Force). c. Establish collaborative initiatives with municipalities within the County to work tabgu dui on a plan for community building and maintenance and how to implement community- g strategies into their policies and procedures (p. 25, Report of Shaping Orange County's Future Task Force. buildin roundtable of County citizens to meet periodically and d. Create a community- g discuss/evaluate the County's progress in building and maintaining community. e. Create ways for fostering collaboration toward community buildmg anal maintenance between County government and for-profit and non-profit sector leadership and members. f. Develop opportunities for younger citizens to participate in the comm>~ 5hbuilding anal maintenance plan for fixture development of the County anal States P g. Explore the idea of a position of an "extension" agent for community building and maintenance. h. Create a data base of community events and celebrations, both within the county and regionally, that build community and preserve community character. i. Establish an annual day to celebrate the County and its, citizens and their efforts and initiatives to build and maintain community. i. Evaluate the recommendations of the Shaping Orange County's Future's Task Force regarding "Put Community Building First" (other than. any that already stated in Objectives) for implementation. j. Determine where principles of community building should be incorporated into other Elements of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan. 134 SECTdON III ~~~ ~~~~~ ~~ ~' ~ . ~~.. ~, '~,~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~ A .SUSTAIIVA~LE COM1l~UNITY ~l ND ~'OMMUNITY-~UILDINGs 17 I~r®du.ct~~ The next two sections of this repoThe first se Lion focuses on achieving ourttwosoverall themes: strategies to achieve those goals Sustainability and Community-Building. These themes serve as a framework for all of SOCF's work. The next section (Section N) is again organized into a series of goals, recommendations and action strategies, but focuses on five topical areas which are important to address: Environment and Land Use, Economy, Housing, Human Services, and Education. This section begins with an explanation of the two SOCF themes, Sustainability and Community-Building, and then presents goals, recommendations, and action strategies to address these two broad objectives. 135 1$ 136 Goals end Recommenda~aons: 21 137 Though community-building is part and parcel of being a sustainable community, the way we interact with one another to build community is so basic to the outcomes we hope to achieve that it seemed appropriate to adopt the concept as a project cornerstone in its own right. Principles of Community ~uildinq Community-building is the means by which past generations in a given locale are bound to new generations, and how the current residents relate to one another. Each generation must establish the ways in which it will, embaondd thep successors mlay experience and advance thel aoncept of ral principles m order that they ». "community . 1. Developing an awareness and understanding of the local traditions, history, heritage and memories; 2. Creating and maintaining a sense of identity and belonging; 3. Honoring a framework of shared values; 4. Establishing and maintaining networks of supportive individuals and a climate of caring, trust, teamwork, and shared responsibility; 5. Establishing and maintaining institutional arrangements that diminish polarization, teach diverse groups to know one another, and encourage coalition- building, dispute-resolution, negotiation, and mediation; 6. Supporting wholeness within diversity while allowing healthy conflict and an atmosphere of open dissent; 7. Establishing and maintaining collaborative ties among leaders of different generations, jurisdictions, communities, economic sectors, and organizations. 3. Supporting strong individual communities that recognize and accept responsibility for the larger community's well-being; 9. Maintaining the existing infrastructure of neighborhood associations, congregations, citizen groups, youth-serving organizations, and professional and volunteer associations; and l O.Fostering a community-wide commitment to the common good. Applying these principles to community issues and decision-making will help people to work together effectively and live in harmony. * Adapted and modified from an influential article written by John Gardner, entitled `Building Community", published in 1996 by Independent Sector; Washington, D.C. 20 138 G~.~I. 1. .Pzzt ~'® u~.zty .~rxildi~a,~ ~~'~t Rationale To have a truly sustainable community we must foster multicultural involvement in the local traditions, history, heritage, and memories. We need to fully include all people within the community, minorities, seniors, children and youth, and people with disabilities. Thus, our community's diversity and inclusiveness is the foundation for creating and maintaining a vibrant, healthy community life. We need to strengthen relationships and understanding between Orange County's rural and urban residents, among residents of varying ethnic, racial, and economic backgrounds, and. between the University of North Carolina and all of its Orange County neighbors. It is also important to understand that in order for our community to be truly diverse we need to ensure that people who work here can afford to live here. Thus, the availability of affordable housing for low and moderate income households is a critical requirement. To deepen the sense of community in Orange County, the community building principles listed in the previous section must be applied whenever we attempt to understand and make decisions about our area's problems and directions. In particular the local elected boards, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and the Orange Water and Sewer Authority each have a responsibility to advance and expand the building of community because of their obvious and determinative influence in so many of the issues facing Orange County. The pressing problems of each year, or five or ten years, may stay the same or they may change. Certainly, they will increase in number and complexity. What we need, then, as a basis for generating specific solutions to those problems, is a shared sense of community among all of our county's individuals and institutions. We do have much in common here in Orange County: our rich cultural life and history, and our dedication to the community's accomplished artists and artisans. The presence of UNC, as well as many other organizations and institutions provide the community with cultural opportunities, galleries, and performance space. Parks and recreational. activities also provide opportunities for Orange County residents to build community through sports and outdoor activities. The county also celebrates its significant cultural history, bath historic and prehistoric, and its abundance of historic resources: The county's cultural, recreational, and historic resources must be solidly supported and nurtured by the community, so that each Orange County resident has the opportunity to participate in and enjoy these remarkable assets which enrich all of our lives. Open space,, farmland preservation, natural resource protection, and environmental quality are widely shared values in Orange County. All of these provide citizens with many opportunities for meaningful volunteer efforts in their support, for partnerships between the University and the community at-large, for unique identity-enhancing events, and for the highly participatory and effective interjurisdictional collaboration required for their safekeeping. 22 ~; ~ ~ . ~OCd171111L'llC~a~lOll '~ : Foster community interaction and activity. t~.~$i.on S~rate~~es: A. Increase opportunities for residents from different parts of the county and different backgrounds to work together. The SOCF process has raised our expectations for what is possible through the collective efforts of a diverse set of citizens. To continue building a sense of community, we must continue to invent.and embazk upon joinf projects that embody such shazed values as our desire to provide basic human services to all of our citizens, to preserve open space and the environment, and to develop our young people to their fullest potential. B. Create multi-use community facilities that would enable a variety of functions such as a school, community center, senior center,. senior care facility, adult learning center, teen center, day care facility, medical clinic, branch library, arts space, and outdoor recreation. Locate these centers in town neighborhoods and villages located in town transition areas. . C. Promote neighborhood design, for new neighborhoods which encourages social interaction. D. Create more all-county shared events, such as an Qrange County Fair, art, drama, and music festivals. Strive to make events multi-cultural and of interest to all residents of the county.. E. Improve relationships between the University and Orange County residents. The University is both a means by which some community-building takes place and an impediment to it. We note with enthusiasm the community building aspects of the UNC athletics program, and our citizens' access to the University's libraries, cultural evegts, and amenities. We acknowledge with appreciation the University's role in attracting our base of highly educated and active citizens, and the valuable links beyond Orange County generated by the University's cultural and academic programs. While there are many positive links between the University and the larger community, there aze also some things that could be done to improve those connections. The University could: ^ Increase staff assigned to local and community relations. ^ Elicit citizen and county representation on appropriate UNC committees and boards; ^ Increase the Uruversity's contributions to local problem solving by encouraging faculty and staff involvement. ^ Ho]'d "open houses" on various topics, information sessions, and celebrations. ^ Make a more public statement of the campus resources and activities available to local citizens. ^ Share recreational facilities and services on a planned schedule. F. Publish an Orange County community handboolr/calendar for organizations and their activities, community events, cultural and artistic opportunities, etc. A copy to be available to every family and in the library. Encourage UNC to do the same covering events and campus organizations which provide community activities (i.e. Think Alain, the coniinuing education publication which has information on all the not-for-credit learning opportunities the University makes available). Publish this information on the Internet as well. G. Establish partnerships between urban and rural residents through community support for local farming by: ^ having farm tours for school children as well as adults; ^ creating links~with organizations that support farming; • supporting mazketing and consumption of local farm products; and ^ surveying local citizens' needs/desires for farm products. 139 23 140. w T ~ {~ e, t1 F .-... ... -.~ ~ ,~ ` .. . `l .. ~ .. ~~C®Ii'iIY1L't1C~~'~IOII 2: Support purposeful inclusion of all people. Action strategies: A. Support the Human Rights and Relations Commission and its charge to~build community ^ Form abroad-based coalition utilizing existing organizations to develop a plan to foster multiculturalism in the community. ^ Provide adequate staffing for plan development. B. •Comply fully with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Create a position for afull-time County Disability Services Coordinator. The goal of creating the position would be to ensure that governments, businesses and individuals act in full compliance with the ADA. The coordinator would initiate and oversee a public awazeness campaign, conduct an inventory of~businesses and government agencies to determine compliance with ADA regulations, act on discrimination complaints, serve as an'advocate for persons with disabilities, and serve as staff to the Orange County Disability Awareness Council. C. Improve services for I.atinos/Hispanics and other non-English-speaking populations. ^ Service provision should be integrated and include: • referrals to and information about available services in our community; • translating and interpreting; • assistance with housing concerns, financial and consumer issues, and emergency assistance. (It is suggested that such services be located at schools since children are akeady located there. Public safety needs should be addressed as described under Public Safety on page 62, Recommendation 3.) ^ Recrdit bi-lingual employees to government positions, and provide Spanish'language training to employees. ^ Encourage the UNC School of Education to increase its focus on bi-linguaUESL training and education. ^ Provide English as a Second Language classes (ESL) so that non-English speakers have an opportunity to learn English. (See also Education Goal 1, Recommendation 6, page 69 and Goal 2, Recommendation 2, page 70). D. Encourage diverse citizen participation: ^ Aggressively recruit a diversity of citizens, with an emphasis on recruiting people from under-represented groups, for local boards and volunteer organizations. ® Send representatives to African American and Latino centers, housing complexes, and churches to foster dialogue. - E. Ensure that affordable rental and owner-occupied homes are available for low and moderate income households. See page 58 for details on action strategies to address housing issues. 24 ~f ~~r ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ..~ .~ .. ~gCOrp~@11t~a~1®11 3: Reshape local governance for community-building. A framework that establishes effective communication among public officials will lead to a stronger sense of community among citizens. Public officials can lead by example and by .authority in this important and vital endeavor by adopting community-building principles into ordinance form and putting them into practice as they conduct and consider their business. Establishment of a community building ordinance will ensure that acommunity- building framework will be maintained, even as boards of public officials change with new elections, appointments, or resignations. AC#:l®n S$r~te~ies: A. Have the Board of ®range County Commissioners, the HfIIsborough Town Board, the Chapel Hill Town Council, the Carrboro Board of Aldermen, and the Boards of Education for the Chapel Hill-Carrboro !City Schools and Orange County each approve a set of ordinances that would specify how community building would be integrated into their own individual procedures as well as into the processes by which they conduct their collective work across jurisdictions. The Boards as constituted could approve ordinance language as provided to them, such as the following: ^ A general definition of what is necessary to insure community building and maintenance. ^ Principles for discussion that would apply to each elected Board, joint board meetings, and the various advisory boards, committees, work groups and task~forces that assist the boards with policy and decision making. Examples of such discussion principles could be found in those adopted by the Carrboro Board of Aldermen, or in Roger Schwara's article, "Groundrules for Effective Groups," published by the UNC Institute of Govemrnent. ^ Principles end steps for collaborative conflict resolution could be adopted. The steps for such a process might include acknowledgement that there is a conflict and the need to settle it; identification of the affected parties and effective ways for them to participate in face-to-face sharing of information about the dispute; joint brainstorming by all parties as to potential solutions and shazed evaluation of the ideas; selection of a plan that all agree upon; setting aside time to implement the plan and evaluate how it is working; and the use of mutually acceptable third party neutrals (mediators and facilitators) who could help parties use the conflict resolution process. • ^ Principles for how citizens are to conduct themselves at public hearings. Examples of such principles can be found in those adopted by Carrboro's Board of Aldermen. ^ A definition of"consensus" that would permeate the framework. B. Support and commit to the participation by appointed and elected officials in programs that reinforce the shared community building framework, explore community building •principles, and provide opportunities to develop community building skills. The commitment to such government official education could be made by joint policy enactment, and might include a recommendation that members of advisory boazds participate, as well recommending that elected officials take a refresher course at the midpoint of their terms. By making such a commitment, the Commissioners and members of the various town boards would be demonstrating to citizens that they aze willing to learn about community building and abide by their own rules. Such modeling by boards and commissions would set an example to motivate citizens to follow the disciplines ofcommunity-building, consensus decision-making, and conflict resolution. The program(s) might cover: e the set of ordinances, rules, policies and agreements approved by the local jurisdictions for consensus and decision making described above; and ^ the use of effective communication, conflict resolution, mediation, meeting facilitation and other community-building and community-maintenance techniques. 25 141 +SS' . ~ ` 14 2 ~' CHAPEL HILL CARRBORO Chamber o f CommeYCe May 19, 2008 Good evening Commissioners and Planning Board Members, 104 south estes drive p.o. box 2897 chapel hill, nc 27515-2897 919.967.7075 919.968.6874 fax www.carolinachamber.org My name is Adam Klein, I am the Director of Government Relations and Economic Development at the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce and member of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition. I am here to offer a few brief remarks on the second draft of the Comprehensive Plan, ' specifically the economic development section. In. my professional opinion and the opinion of our Coalition members, the economic development section is missing a major strategy namely working with UNC-Chapel Hill to retain many of the businesses created at the University. UNC in many ways is our business incubator.ln the words of Chancellor-elect Holden Thorp, UNC's challenges in the coming years will be to "Cure diseases...fmd and invent clean energy... feed seven billion people" to mine a few. As UNC strives to tackle these issues, researchers are generating cutting edge products and devices that are spinning off into new businesses. These businesses are based on innovation, pay good wages and have little environnoental impact in a nutshell businesses we want in Orange County. Yet, out of 29 UNC businesses spawned since the year 2000, only 3 are located here. The majority go to RTP because they can find readily available office and lab space and a welcoming business environment. We can do much better than this and it can start with our Comprehensive Plan. I ask that you consider including a new objective of "working closely with UNC's Office of Technology Development to identify commercial space needs of businesses created by UNC research, promote development of such space within the. County, and actively encourage UNC businesses to stay in Orange County after leaving the University: 'This should be one of our primary strategies for economic development. Lastly, in order for the County's commercial tax base to expand and for more businesses to locate in Orange County, it is paramount that water and sewer be extended to all of the Economic Development Districts. In the current Comprehensive Plan draft, extending water and sewer to these districts is listed as a Long-term goal. The Coalition strongly urges that this objective be reprioritized as a short-term goal as so much of the other objectives within the Economic Development element hinge on having the necessary infrastructure in place to allow commercial and light industrial development. Please.. consider these changes as you review and edit the Comprehensive Plan. I thank you for your time and for the opportunity to give comment on this important document. Adam M. Klein Director of Government Relations and Economic Development Tt's smart business. 143 Orange County Comprehensive Plan Update May 19, 2008 Public Hearing Comments, Allan Rosen Members of the.Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition want the updated plan to declare a reference for compact, walkable, mixed use, and transit-supportive developments within the county's P planning jurisdiction. This development pattern is vital to achieving many key components of sustainability including affordable housing, an increase in the commercial tax base, reduced. vehicle miles traveled, and improved prospects for local and regional public transportation. We are leased that language throughout the plan emphasizes this preference. Overall, the plan is a big p step in the right direction, but there is still much roam for improvement. In order for compact, mixed- use developments to become the preferred mode of new development, the planning elements of the u dated comprehensive plan must complement each other and sensible implementing ordinances need P to be adopted. Coalition.members prepared comments on the goals and objectives from the first draft for the Land Use, Transportation, Economic Development, and Housing elements. Since the language of the Public Hearing draft is virtually the same, the comments are still current. These recommendations (found on pages 38-47 of the agenda packet) provide examples of how the current goals and objectives can be improved and how the linkages between the elements enhanced. The viability of compact, mixed use developments depends on the availability of public infrastructure, including water and sewer. Thus, the coalition recommends that the planning document make affirmative and unequivocal commitments to providing the necessary public infrastruchue in a timely manner. Work remains to be done in this regard also. I recommend a section of the plan be dedicated exclusively to the goal statements and objectives that address both zoning for compact mixed use developments and planning for the requisite public infrastructure. This section should assure the reader that work on these critical objectives is coordinated and finished such that the infi-astructure will begin to come on line within the next 3-5 years, if not sooner. As it stands now, it's not clear when and how this will happen. 144 Personally, I support the emphasis on compact mixed-use developments not only because it's a good conservation strategy, but because this is the best strategy for significantly increasing the supply of housing affordable to working and middle class households. To put it another way, if the plan's implementation does not result in an increased supply of less expensive land - an a per lot basis -- for residential development than currently available, then the comprehensive plan update will have little or no impact on reducing the shortage of workforce housing in the county. This points to the main flaw with the plan's housing element. It almost exclusively focuses on issues related to affordable and special needs pausing; albeit an area of concern which I fully support. However, the housing element should also address the systemic problems which cause the county's housing market to skew towards upper-income housing and recommend actions for bringing the market into a mare equitable balance. Finally, I encourage the commissioners to ask themselves if they've heard from as many stakeholders as they feel is appropriate for a policy document of this significance before voting on the plan later this summer. I believe the compressed time schedule put a strain on the planning and advisory boards & diminished the opportunity -especially during Phase II -- for widespread and continuous community input. As such, I encourage the commissioners to immediately solicit the written comments of each lead advisory board so that their comments can be utilized by the planning board as they continue to refine the plan this summer. Indeed, one or more joint advisory board meetings at this stage would be useful in assessing community support for the proposal, as well as gathering constructive recommendations for final improvements. May 19, 2008 Public Hearing Comments; Allan Rosen, page 2 14.5 Orange County Comprelieusive Plan Update May 19, 2008 Public Hearing Comineirts .prepared by Dolly Hunter, Conuiluiuty Action Network The Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coali ion has the following comments abouf the Land Use Element: The wording of Land Use Objective 3.4, which discourages the location of non-farm and intensive residential development within farming areas, could exclusively prevent Rural .Node and cluster development in all rural areas. We recommend that Rural Node development be allowed in farming areas where appropriate transportation and services can be accessed. Aland use pattern for Rural Nodes should be identified on the Future Land Use Map. To protect farms from complaints and nuisance suits the new neighbors should be given notification of the right to farm. .The coalition recommends (see comments dated May 5) several additional Land Use Objectives, including: I. Amend the regulatory process in order to expedite the review and approval of residential cluster development forms throughout the County, including the Rural Buffer and other areas zoned for low density residence. 2. Expedite the development approval process for projects that commit to providing workforce and special needs housing; for housing in rural nodes; and for cluster developments throughout rural areas. Additional Comments from Dolly Hunter The tables of development activity for major, minor and exempt subdivision data from 1999 to 2007 be should be included in the County Data Profile. This is absolutely necessary to accurately evaluate development trends. If placed in the Data Profile it can be updated with future years activity data. The tables and analysis of population data should very clearly delineate the population of unincorporated areas from that in incorporated areas of the county. The populations of Chapel Hill and Hillsborough should be removed or delineated to honestly reflect the unincorporated population. This is especially important iri population comparisons and projections. Two examples That need accurate accounting are: «' The Land Use Map 5.5 which shows the percent of population growth of each Township. Tlie map should show (a) the number of additional people and {b) the change in populating between 1990 and 2000 population per Township; The overall density of Orange•County is 305 persons per square mile if one includes Chapel Hill and Hillsborough. Using data only from the rural part of the county, density is closer to 100 persons per square mile. When comparing Orange County to other counties, the other counties should be identified, rather than not as is currently the case. Most importantly all analysis should be objective and not subjective and speculative. All subjective analysis should be removed from the text because it is in many cases misleading: In conclusion; Orange County leas done an excellent job controlling growth alld protecting the envirotuz~ent. I hope that now the county will being acconuilodating and directing growth in a visionary pattern to aclveve social, econonuc and' envirolunental equity in the future. 146 Comments on Transportation Element Holly Reid Walkable Hillsborough Coalition May 19, 2008 My name is Holly Reid and I am a co-founder of the Walkable Hillsborough Coalition, a group of community volunteers who have worked the past seven years to advocate for pedestrian and bike ways for Hillsborough, surrounding communities and Orange County. l have been involved in the exploring the possibility of reopening a train station in Hillsborough. I am also one of the twenty-nine members of the Special Transit Advisory Commission, whose charge was to recommend a regional transit system for the Triangle region to our joint Metropolitan Planning Organization representatives. Our final report will be presented to the MPO's this Wednesday, May 21, in Raleigh. Over the years and especially through my involvement on the STAC, I have learned that the Triangle area is one of the most sprawled regions in the country and that we expect` a million more people to Wake, Durham and Orange Counties in the next 20 years. I have learned that we are off-the-scale auto centric in our country, and that we are realizing the great costs of this choice every day: poor health, poor community connections, dangerous and unattractive alternative modes of getting around, disenfranchised young and old, loss of commerce in our downtowns, and an irresponsible carbon footprint, to name a few. I believe our Unified Transportation Board recognizes these huge community costs. They have listed many of these them as key issues in a future Comprehensive Transportation Plan that is recommended in Objective T-3.2, and they see this plan as addressing strategies for all transportation modes, including bike, pedestrian, rail and all other critical transit facilities. What is absolutely critical to righting our heavily over-weighted single modal car culture is a new multi-modal transportation system that is well emphasized in Goal 3. What needs just as much emphasis in Goal 3 is future development that is compact, walkable and in mixed-use neighborhoods along transit corridors supported by transit. Transit and pedestrian-oriented development is the critical nexus of transportation and land use and it needs to be highly emphasized .and cross-referenced frequently in our Comprehensive Plan. In my view and the Coalition's view this needs to be written right into the Overarching Goal as the most important change in transportation and land use, agame-changer for our future. I am also going to emphasize a couple of other objectives that our Coalition recommends to be added to the Comprehensive Plan. We recommend a new Objective T-4.4 to implement the Special Transit Advisory Commission's recommendations for regional transit (including light rail, passenger/commuter rail, expanded bus and transit-oriented development at a future Orange County train station in Hillsborough). Being very involved in Safe Routes to School initiatives I am also very interested in our Coalition's recommendation to add Objective T-1.8 to coordinate with Orange County schools to provide safe walking and biking routes within 1.5 miles of all schools for children during school hours and residents after hours. Connectivity for 147 our communities between key public institutions, commercial areas and neighborhoods will bring the vitality and foot traffic back to our community lives that we have lost over years of exclusively accommodating King Car. Our County's Comprehensive Plan is our way to receive gratitude instead of disdain from the next generations for our foresight. Let's make a difference now. Thank you. 148 From: "ann and john-Gandy" <~ ;,: ~__~_> To: "Robbie Taylor-Hall" <:_. _.._ ___._._ . _.----.-.___._.:~_..._> Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2008 4:46 PM Subject: Re: Land Use Plan Meeting > Robbie: > Please present this to the Commissioners at the > Land Use Plan Meeting. > The late Simpson Efland left six heirs. Siblings > Ann E. Gandy and Mack P. Efland, jr. were his > Administrators. Both have power of attorney to > dispose of the land. > Mack Efland and I hereby request, representing > the heirs, that water critical be removed from > this property and that water and sewer be brought > to land in the Efland Small Area Plan. > It is the intention of the heirs to effect an > orderly disposition of the land holdings. > We have the properties listed with Taylor-Hall > Properties of Hillsborough. Ms. Bobbin Taylor-Hall is > our agent, and is authorized to speak to you on > our behalf. > This letter has been approved by Mack Efland. > Thank you for your consideration. > Ann E. Gandy,PA > Simpson Efland Heirs > > May 17, 2008 You Count In Orange County Page 1 of 1 149 http://gis.co.orange.nc.us/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=YouCountGI 5... 5/19/2008 Summary C1 wilding (~ Land CD Documents CD Prior Owners D Addresses Create Print Data Page , ,_ 150 ' ' •_:, .1 ail ,~' -~ '~' ~ ~~• ~~ ~ ~ 4s •/ 41 ~ fit, ~i.. ~ ;~. .iii+~~•~ ffi,~i~l~~: .~, •r c° ! . , oaMtinoforoo t 1 .+ i . •il ~ ti ~ ~-' ~I i i ~ o ' ( m m tri i ~ ~`` t 1 ri+ _ ..~: ' L'. ,( ~ t ~_+. _... '..._ `_ 11 tt~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~.Y 1' ypRO l ~ o m •~:1 ( .~ ( _ t ( ~ I -a'! -r s 'sit . 71 ._. f•- c m o4 ~ .. _ y l,. - m _ t . -x ( i 1.L! .n s !off, ~ s ~ s .~_~' _ _~' ! moo. I '~ o _:I_ t r.. •••s ..-~:i~'~::r~. _ =~.'' -'off- ` ' i ice. i ' 1 I _- .': ..__.. ' i~. ,. .t.__! ~ ~I~--' :1i :~~' .._ 2 o a m ' . ~. :. . '~ i 'ley ~ 1 ~j c '~ ~ m.. ~~ - ( r 't ~ i @! oHOWH7 ~~~ ,~, ~,;-~~-- •_o~,b , aooao t ~ ~.• i ~ ~ t? ~_ _ _.y it a j . it i i ,; ` ` t( _. T t= •; l I 'I j 1 d 8 0 ~ o da'. iata_` ( ion ' a(;15,;~ s.. _'.(-~Y..• ..~• ,1 s ~ j ' ,,r11'! ~i f'' -f,il I~t i t, 1 ~ I 'I, ~ lviiis, I' '•!: 1-~1~~,t~.l~-) +z''~S• ~'~ S+~~I~ `L..~i~ ~1... .r_ .I '~ il., .• .'' ^~®~~ ,. I~,. 1 +ti,l Iltkk it,,. 1 ;;iSS I I ~' i• i'~: ~` p ~ ,. ~~ 1 1 t ~ ` II ~ j t ' s 1 tcp;`'c;nR{t~ s s tS .T~ ~ y j i .. _ r. 1~1 ~ z i &4 i',~ ~~ t t'tl a ~ ,~; ~~tr=~.F :.I ' i ~'r il~;'„S.' S ',1~ ~ ~ '', r' - , i. , ~ L~ t f ~® •~ ~a 5 s •: '.ao ~' y it~a,yiyl~'rct i': y• M1, .,1 :f-~ ~ '.~ ~ "/ S 1 v w w w o '' .ti•• z ;a ,! i}iti~iS.,~i'~l.ti"'Z~ i.Yl',y,,,~'f, .. ,~_ ~ ~, q~f ~ •,•+•,i, , '.: ' •' .' I_ 4 t `~.-Jtiy "%t~~ ~_..-.LI~~~ ~ti•.~,•"-z'-_:~ fi {l •'Y~ _.-/-r .. ~shj '~° .; "' 'Okt - !- "4 rt _ •- 1 .. j I ~l.. ~ ~~'-EB-i~--i~-'6y~~,t1 gg `} ~:' ~ , _ • ~ ~ It :»` - {{FXEg40 ~ ~E Q m 5 li 'cprtl3n4oN' ~~ ~ _-? _..._-i , Av oy~bu'. • • - J •S •f ~;It+ ~(-.'.S.S;i•tiA •. _(.il 1_t "~i '5~.. t! yy0 (t~' •~ n. _ ~~ ].. t , _ it, .~ fir; • ( ... _.. ~ 1 A1.: jl '~~ b Page 1 of 1 151 Tom Altieri From: stanleyjones919@bellsouth.net Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 7:17 PM To: CompPlanUpdate Cc: rena_ceer@yahoogroups.com Importance: High From: Neloa Jones (neloaianesCa~bellsouth.net) Subject: Comprehensive Plan Update To: Com.RPlanUpdateC~co orange.nc.us Date: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 I, Neloa B. Jones, request that the Orange County Comprehensive Plan update.. include specific plans and recommendations for solutions to the issues raised by the Rogers-Eubanks Neighborhood Association (RENA) and the Coalition to End Environmental Racism (CEER). These issues include 1) ending the 35-year burden of hosting solid waste facilities by the Rogers-Eubanks Roads neighborhoods; 2) and providing funding for infrastructure and basic municipal services including, but not limited to a) public regulated drinking water to all households b) sewer service c) paved roads and sidewalks . d) street lights e) fire hydrants f) storm water drains g) public bus service (including covered bus stops) h) emergency protection services (fire, police, and rescue). Sincerely, Neloa B. Jones Resident, Rogers-Eubanks Road Neighborhood 1708 Purefoy Drive Chapel Hill, NC 27516 5/30/2008 X52 Tom Altieri From: Camellia Lee [luvearth333@whale-mail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 6:57 PM To: CompPlanUpdate Subject: Orange Comprehensive Plan Dear Comprehensive Plan Coordinators, I implore you to ensure the Orange County Comprehensive Plan include specific plans and recommendations for solutions to the issues raised by the Rogers-Eubanks Neighborhood Association (RENA) and the Coalition to End Environmental Racism (CEER). The Rogers-Eubanks communities are vital to the development of Orange County and have been forced to live with a landfill that collects the gargage of ALL Orange County residents. The community needs remedies for the following issues: 1) Ending the 3 S year burden of hosting solid waste facilities by the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood; 2) Providing funding for provision of safe, public, regulated drinking water and sewer service to all households in the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood; 3) Providing funding for other basic municipal services to residents of the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood including, but not limited to, paved roads, paved sidewall~s; stormwater drains, street lights, public bus service (including covered bus stops), emergency protection services (i.e., fire, police protection, ambulatory and rescue squad). Page 1 of 1 I'm seventeen years old, and I've spent almost nine of those years loving Chapel Hill for its "words-in- action" atmosphere. Here, we don't just talk environmental responsibility, we have free buses. Here, we don't just talk tolerance, we elect LGBT leaders. I'm ready to see us turn our words into action, so I can say to myself of my new home: "Here, we don't just talk justice, we right old wrongs and ensure justice for all our neighbors, even when it's tough." Sincerely, Camellia Lee 20S Black Tie Lane Chapel Hill, NC 27S 14 http://toolbar.Care2.com Make your computer carbon-neutral (free). http://www.Care2.com Green Living, Human Rights and more - 8 million members! S/30/2008 Page 1 of 1 153 Tom Altieri From: john Chapman [john.k.chapman@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 2:53 PM To: CompPlanUpdate Cc: rena ceer@yahoogroups.com Subject: Environmental Justice . Dear Comprehensive Plan Coordinators, I urge yoii to make sure that the Orange County Comprehensive Plan include specific plans and recommendations for solutions to the issues raised by the Rogers-Eubanks Neighborhood Association (RENA) and the Coalition to End Environmental Racism (CEER). The Rogers-Eubanks communities are vital to the development of Orange County and have been forced to live with a landfill that collects the gargage of ALL Orange ' County residents. The community needs remedies for the following issues: 1) Ending the 35 year burden of hosting solid waste facilities by the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood; 2) Providing funding for provision of safe, public, regulated drinking water and sewer service to all households in the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood; 3) Providing funding for other basic municipal services to residents of the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood including, but not limited to, paved roads, paved sidewalks, stormwater drains, street lights, public bus service (including covered bus stops), emergency protection services (i.e., fire, police protection, ambulatory and rescue squad). As a longtime resident of Chapel Hill, a social justice advocate, a member of Chapel Hill's Sustainability Committee, and the chair of the NAACP's Historical Commission, it is important to me that the needs and concerns of this community are. incorporated into a plan that is truly comprehensive. Orange County's atkempts to create a comnprehensive plan should not exclude any community, but should treat all communities equally to ensure "justice for all." Sincerely, Dr. John K. (Yonni) Chapman 5/30/2008 154 Tom Altieri Frorn: hmsafron@email.unc.edu Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 11:30 AM To: CompPlanUpdate Subject: Orange County Comprehensive Plan Hello, I don't know if it's too late, but I would like to also contribute my brief thoughts on the Orange County Comprehensive Plan. Unfortunately I was unable to attend the meeting last night. Regardless, here are my comments: I, Helena Safron, request that the Orange County Comprehensive Plan include specific plans and recommendations for solutions to the issues raised by the Rogers-Eubanks Neighborhood Association (RENA) and the Coalition to End Environmental Racism (CEER). These issues include: 1) Ending the 35 year burden of hosting of solid waste facilities by the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood; 2) Providing funding for provision of public, regulated drinking water and sewer service to all households in the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood; 3) Providing funding for other basic municipal services to residents of the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood including, but not limited to paved roads, paved sidewalks, stormwater drains, street lights, public bus service (including covered bus stops), emergency protection services (i.e., fire, police protection, ambulatory and rescue squad). Sincerely, Helena Safron UNC-Chapel Hill Graduate Student M.A. Folklore Curriculum Page 1 of 1 155 Tom Altieri From: Tracy Kuhlman [tckuhlman@nc.rr.com] Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 6:32 PM To: CompPlanUpdate Subject: OCCP and the Rogers-Eubanks Neighborhood To Tom Altieri and others whom it may concern: I am writing to request that Orange County's Comprehensive Plan take into account the needs of the Rogers- Eubanks neighborhood. These needs have been clearly defined by the Rogers-Eubanks Neighborhood Association (RENA) and its supporters in the Coalition to End Environmental Racism (CEER). They include the need to end the operation of all solid waste facilities in the historic Rogers-Eubanks Neighborhood; the need for funding to provide safe drinking water and sewer service to the neighborhood; and the need to provide other municipal services as stipulated by the Rogers Road Enhancement Task Force (the task force that was created by Orange County to asess these needs). The Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood has lived with Orange County's garbage for over 35 years; now is the time for the county to say "Thank you" and invest in this important neighborhood's well-being. Sincerely, Tracy Kuhlman 1009 Tallyho Trail Chapel Hill, NC 27516 5/30/2008 1.56 Tom Alfieri From: Dara D. Mendez [ddhall@email.unc.edu] Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 4:39 PM To:~ CompPlanUpdate Subject: The Orange Counfy Comprehensive Plan ~, ATT2294141.htm (14 KB) Dear Comprehensive Plan Coordinators, I, Dara Mendez, request that the Orange County Comprehensive Plan include specific plans and recommendations for solutions to the issues raised by the Rogers-Eubanks Neighborhood Association (RENA) and the Coalition to End Environmental Racism (CEER). The Rogers- Eubanks communities are vital to the development of Orange County and have been forced to live with a landfill that collects the gargage of ALL. Orange County residents. The community would like remedies for the following issues: 1) Ending the 35 year burden of hosting of solid waste facilities by the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood; 2) Providing funding for provision of safe, public, regulated drinking water and sewer service to all households in the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood; 3) Providing funding for other basic municipal services to residents of the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood including, but not limited to paved roads, paved sidewalks, stormwater drains, street lights, public bus service (including covered bus s.tops), emergency protection services (i.e., fire, police protection, .ambulatory and rescue squad). As a resident of Chapel Hill as well as a public health activist, it is important that the needs and concerns of this community are implemented into a plan that should be comprehensive. In Orange County's attempts to create a comnprehensive plan, this plan should not exclude any community but should treat all communities equally. Sincerely, Dara Mendez Dara D. Mendez, MPH Doctoral Candidate NRSA Predoctoral Fellow Department of Maternal and Child Health UNC School of Public Health ddhall®email.unc.edu 2000 Baity Hill Drive Apt 210 Chapel Hill, NC 27514 157 Tom Altieri From: Joan Jobsis (jjobsis@nc.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2008 12:32 PM To: CompPlanUpdate Cc: MarcScagnelli Subject: Removal~of 7-Mile Creek Restrictions To: Orange County Planning Board Attn: Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor. As I understand it, the restrictions on. land use in the 7-Mile Creek area in the current Comprehensive Plan are out-dated and no longer useful since a reservoir is no longer planned for that area. I also understand that the proposed Comprehensive Plan acknowledges this and proposes that the 7-Mule Creek land use restrictions be eliminated. I SUPPORT THE REMOVAL OF THESE LAND USE RESTRICTIONS. In addition I would like to request a specific timetable and responsible County agent to ensure the implementation of this proposed removal of land use restrictions in the 7-Mile Creek area (so that this proposal is carried oizt in a timely manner & is not lost in potential red tape). Thank you for your consideration. Joan Jobsis 1634 Bushy Cook Road Efland NC 27243 1 Page 1 of 1 158 Tom Altieri From: Janet Schoendorf (Janet@schoe.com] Sent: ~ Sunday, June 01, 2008 4:34 PM To: CompPlanUpdate Subject: One small comment Dear Members of the Orange County Department of Planning and Inspections, Please refer to the p.32 of the Services and Facilities Elementof the Comprehensive Plan, Objective PS-T-6 which talks about limiting the number of future wireless telecommunication facilities by identifying preferred locations. I am opposed to the dea of limiting cell phone towers, because no one, but customers of Alltel, receives adequate reception on his/her cell phone in Chapel Hill. This has essentially created a monopoly for Alltel, which dreadful for the customer. It is also a problerri for visitors to the.area who use other cell phone companies. Really, it seems backward to be in a place like Orange County, with so much other high tech activity going on, and then not to be able to receive a decent signal on one's cell phone. It is very frustrating, and not very good for business or consumers. In addition, I don't think cell phone towers are more offensive in appearance than any other utility pole, so if we had more than we needed, it would be preferable to an insufficient number. Perhaps some compromise could be reached? Maybe Orange County could request that all cell phone companies that wanted to do business in Orange County put in a specified amount of money into a cell phone tower pool. This pool of money could then be used to build cell towers that all companies would share. Orange County wireless experts could specify where these towers should be built for maximum coverage with a minimum of towers. Companies, new to the area, could be added on for a fee. Please modify the plan to insure that Orange County has sufficient towers to provide adequate wireless coverage, no matter what cell phone company one uses. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Janet Schoendorf 6/6/2008 Page 1 of 4 159 Tom Altieri Frorn: Janet Schoendorf (janet@schoe.com] Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2008 2:03 AM To: CompPlanUpdate Subject: Comments on the Comprehensive Plan Janet Schoendorf 1925 Fountain Ridge Rd. Chapel Nill, NC 27517 May 31, 2008 Dear Members of the Orange County Planning Board, and Board of County Commissioners, T attended the public hearing concerning the Orange County Comprehensive Plan at the Orange County Courthouse in Hillsborough on Monday, May 19, and have reviewed the Comprehensive Plan on your website to the best of my ability. I think the overall plan with its focus on~sustainable growth and economic development in conjunction with the preservation of rural Idnd use, and' natural areas is excellent. After some reflection, I would like to make four points about achieving those goals. Point 1-- Emphasize the retrofitting of existing developments and neighborhoods into sustainable, walkable communities by increasing density, installing bike paths, and sidewalks throughout, and changing zoning to mixed-use, so people actually have places to which they would want to walk. Mixed use developments, like Southern Village, and Meadowmont are very popular with the public.. Why do we have to tear up virgin land to have this kind of development? We should encourage businesses to flourish in all neighborhoods, not just in these upscale new ones. T would love to see a coffee shop/restaurant/bookstore, banking facilities, a general store, doctors', dental offices, day care, school, park with outdoor swimming pool, library/reading room etc. reside in my neighborhood. If we want to decrease automobile use, we must have places within each neighborhood that people need to walk to like the places listed above. Research indicates that children learn best in smaller schools. I would love to see small schools spring up in all neighborhoods. Let's bring back the neighborhood school (existing houses, ideally ones that are already for sale, could b~ converted into schools- probably at very reasonable costs), because it is not only good for children and their families, but among other benefits, it supports several of the County commissioners' planning principles (energy efficiency, sustainability, preservation of community 6/6/2008 160 Page 2 of 4 character, etc.). Kids in the neighborhood could walk to their neighborhood school, eliminating the need for school buses. Besides saving school districts transportation costs, this one act would address several other important concerns as well: reducing obesity in children (by getting kids to walk), reduction in our dependence on foreign oil, and the reduction i~n the emission of greenhouse gases. T would definitely Like to see the establishment of small neighborhood schools encouraged in the CP. Of course, this would require intergovernmental cooperation (school board, city council, county commissioners), something again supported by the county commissioners. I am aware that in many cases, this would racially and culturally segregate schools, because neighborhoods in which people live continue to be racially and culturally segregated. However, I contend that schools are not the place to artificially force integration. Instead, incentives need to be put in place to encourage neighborhoods to voluntarily integrate themselves; and then, in turn neighborhood schools will naturally become integrated. Mixed-use zoning and perhaps tax incentives might hasten the. resolution of this problem. I also recognize that mixed use zoning in existing neighborhoods, and small schools within each neighborhood are not in the public consciousness yet; however, with the continued rise in gas prices, I believe people will start to find this idea more and more appealing, and then with proper marketing, I think the public could really come around. The public needs to be made aware that in many different places around the world, businesses, public buildings, and residences have coexisted for a long time in very charming ways. They are very lovely, delightful places to live. Finally, to encourage water conservation in existing neighborhoods, incentives (perhaps tax credits) should be given to property owners who recycle water by installing rain catchment devices, and cisterns. Point number two: Improve the safety of our roadways by adding adequate lighting and shoulders to existing roads. The Comprehensive Plan talks about the changing demographics in the county, how the number of elderly will continue to increase over the years in Orange County, and that the county will need to plan accordingly. As one ages, one needs more light to see well at night. Therefore it is necessary that Orange County improve the lighting on our roadways. Presently, the lighting on .our roads is either grossly inadequate or non-existent all together. In addition, many of our roadways are very unsafe because of a lack of shoulders. I feel. very unsafe driving at night in Orange County, and most other places in North Carolina. With respect to future road construction, the Plan should stress that roads be constructed in a way that minimizes fuel usage, as well as fosters safety. To this end, 6/6/2008 Page 3 of 4 161 grid like road construction should be encouraged in the plan. This is the safest, most efficient way to move traffic along roadways. The plan should also specify where major roads should be constructed in the future, similar to what is done in Midwest where major roads were built a mile apart on a grid before any building developments were ever put in. Point three: Increase home safety. Incentives should be put in place to encourage people to minimize the use of wood in the construction of homes and other buildings. Outside of adornments like molding, I believe wood should even be prohibited in the construction of apartment complexes, office buildings, motel/hotels, and other multi-unit structures, mostly because; of the danger of fire. Countries in which wood is not used for construction have almost no building fires. And then, termites are another problem with wood. It is bad for the environment to be dousing one's property with dangerous chemicals to kill termites. Both fire and the use of,dangerous chemicals to kill termites could be avoided with non-wood building materials. We have lots of red clay in North Carolina that could be turned into sturdy, insect resistant, inflammable bricks. Incentives should be in place to increase their usage. Point four: With respect to fostering economic development in a sustainnble way in Orange County, I see the need for nthree-pronged approach. A. Encourage close collaboration with UNC researchers to develop new products, technologies, and services that can be "greenly," and cleanly developed and produced in Orange County. B. Since North Carolina is a state which denies workers the right to unionize and thereby protect themselves from the abuses of employers, it is incumbent on state and county governments to do that for them. The comprehensive plan should advocate for livable wages, and the 40 hour work week fior all employees. This would be one way of addressing the need for affordable housing, and the elimination of poverty. C. Improve education to meet the needs and talents of all children. I think we know how to educate academic, college bound kinds of students; but we still have a way to go if we want to develop swell-trained, competent cadre of trades people. In order to do that,. we need to show respect and appreciation for students who are more inclined toward vocational competencies, rather than academic skills. We must show our respect by offering top notch training and apprenticeship programs in a variety of vocational careers at the beginning of a student's high school career. Students who opt for a vocational track should have the option of participating in any vocational program within the county, either at a high school, or a community college, if a comparable program is not offered at 6/6/2008 Page 4 of 4 162 the high school in their district. No student should be made to feel that s/he has to acquire an academic degree in order to be a successful, contributing member of society. We need to be sure that we embrace and foster a variety of human competencies and that we pay all of them well for a job well done. This leads us on to examine what is happening in the lower grades. Educators in this county, state, and nation have all been struggling with No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation. However with a little scrutiny, I think one will come to realize that the children without mentally or physically handicapping conditions who have been left behind (non-proficient children, as determined by End of Grade Tests) in Orange County, as in other places, almost without exception, come from families who have been left behind. Either they are from families that do not have literate cultural traditions, or they do not have job skills. Some come from families in which substance abuse or other social issues are a problem. Others come from families in which English is not spoken in the home. Instead of laying all of the burden of educating these children at the doorstep of the school, de facto, in the laps of teachers, it is imperative that the challenging issues facing these non-proficient children and their families be addressed by the whole community, not just the schools, in order for real success to be made educationally with the children, .i.e., "failing children," as defined by End of Grade Tests come from "failing" families. What can we do in Orange County to make sure that no family fails? When we can answer that question and act upon it, we will have, with few exceptions, no non- proficient children. I thank you for your consideration of my ideas. Sincerely, Janet Schoendorf 6/6/2008 Page 1 of 4 163 Tom Altieri From: James Carnahan ~jcarnahan@mindspring.com] Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 8:52 AM To: barryj@earthlink.net; Valerie Foushee; mcarey5@nc.rr.com; gordonam@mindspring.com; mikenelsonnc@aol.com; jaybryan7@msn.com Cc: Tom Altieri; Donna Baker Subject: Comprehensive Plan Update [also attaching Word file of this letter] Dear Orange County Board of Commissioners, As you know, The Village Project is a nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting wallcable communities in Orange County. As such, we have taken a great interest in the update of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan. Because we see the importance of this process, in 2007 we convened a diverse coalition of stakeholders to help engage the community and to provide input on the Plan, the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition ("Coalition"). The Coalition submitted input on the draft Comprehensive Plan on January 28, 2008 and May 5, 2008. The Coalition believes that incorporating this input into the Comprehensive Plan would greatly help it establish a sustainable path into the future for Orange County. The Village Project encourages the County to consider these comments carefully; they are the result of an intensive dialog held over many months among community leaders from all sectors on future growth in Orange County. The Village Project submits herein additional comments on its own behalf regarding the May 2008 draft of the Comprehensive Plan for consideration by the Orange County Planning Board and Board of Commissioners. The following comments thematically summarize our findings from a detailed review of the May draft Plan, which we will submit separately at a later date. We are also including in the accompanying attachment proposed edits & revisions to Chapter 1, section 3, "Toward a Sustainable Future." 1) Sustainability and Global Climate Change. Chapter 1, section 1.3 represents a good start at articulating a shared vision for the county's sustainability and provides the basis for a set of "sustainability principles" intended to serve as overarching goals for the County. To be truly "comprehensive" the plan must define and utilize sustainability in the broadest context: environmental health, economic vitality, and social equity. Our quality of life is impacted by global events, and our daily decisions and activities have global impacts. Global warming is an epochal challenge, now widely aclrnowledged as caused and exacerbated by human behavior, including choices we make in Orange County. Global warming has the potential to alter the planet and way of life we now enjoy beyond recognition, with possibly catastrophic results. We have a shared responsibility to future generations to take steps to reduce our per-capita. contributions to climate change by living as efficiently as possible. Acknowledgement of this responsibility and of the global context should be explicit throughout the plan and should play a foundational role in the Plan's Goals and Objectives. We feel that, if the County is seriously committed to sustainability, the. Plan should go further in this respect. 2) Localizing Economic Development. Economic activity over the last 50 years has been conducted as if resources were inexhaustible and the fabric of the planet was indestructible. Because it does not 6/6/2008 Page 2 of 4 164 account for its longer term. and wider impacts ("externalities"), such "business as usual" is not a sustainable path. Orange County can do much better for its citizens and the environment. The Comprehensive Plan should seek and embrace economic activities and patterns that promote sustainability both locally and globally. Such an economy would be substantially locally owned; and would export as much as it imports or more. Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan should bring about a "local living economy" that uses sustainable practices to produce knowledge, goods and services, and offers predominantly high-quality employment opportunities. This vision includes -and will resemble -the County's laudable support of our local agricultural systems. 3) Investing in Public Infrastructure. Public infrastructure, particularly water and wastewater services, is necessary for the compact, mixed-use, economically vibrant, and transit-supportive communities that, in our considered judgment, are the best form. of development for Orange County. The Comprehensive Plan should explicitly state the County's intent to immediately begin to provide the infrastructure and management mechanisms to enable compact and sustainable land use patterns (a.k.a. "smart growth.") and to ensure that areas identified as suitable for growth (such as Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) "receiving areas") are developed sustainably. 4) Zoning for Mixed-Used Districts: Compact mixed-use developments will require new zoning designations; currently, there are no true mixed-use zoning districts in the County. Within these zones a minimum residential density of 8 to 15 dwelling units per acre is necessary to support bus service; 20 to 30 units to the acre are needed to support rail transit. The new zoning districts must effectively "upzone" areas most suitably located for intensive development and should enable uses that are mixed vertically as well as horizontally. Ideally, such zoning changes will be undertaken as part of a larger TDR program, so that upzoning and downzoning do not create inequities among affected landowners. These new zones must be available for application in areas where the County decides to provide new infrastructure to enable compact development to take place. 5) Inclusionary Zoning in Mixed-Use Districts. The goal of increased housing opportunities for our workforce, for lower-income residents, and for special needs households should be addressed by an objective to implement inclusionary zoning requirements iu growth areas with three criteria: price (rent or purchase cost), square footage, and number of bedrooms. Limiting size and requiring minimum densities in growth areas encourages multi-family structures that use land, water, and energy far more efficiently than single-family detached dwelling units. Moreover, such patterns are an important and increasingly demanded form of human settlement because they provide the social benefits of living among a diverse population and increased amenities due to economies of scale. ~ Adaptability as a Key Component of "Community Character." Historically, human settlements evolved at crossroads and other transportation nodes. They were compact, mixed-use, and had local identity. It is therefore ironic to us that the concept of "community character" is sometimes wielded to perpetuate homogenous, low-density, suburban development patterns that isolate neighbors and fragment our rural lands. Such developments do not adequately preserve habitats or viewsheds, and they add significantly to per-capita resource consumption and pollution generation. To be consistent with historical precedent, Orange County should allow more intense development at rural crossroads. Ideally, our economic development efforts would produce local businesses such as markets that generate local income, sales taxes, and jobs and also reduce transportation emissions. The most important historical characteristic to observe in such areas is the ~CUMAN SCALE. Green building and a diversity of uses rriay call for additional flexibility and community involvement in how we conceive of appropriate design. The Village Project offers its assistance to the County in this regard. The County may ultimately wish to follow other innovative communities in adopting form-based codes and having designers participate in the development review process. 6/6/2008 Page 3 of 4 165 7) Requiring Energy-Efficient, high-]Performance Buildings. The Comprehensive Plan must ensure that new construction and renovations result in energy-efficient, high-performance buildings. Abundant resources are available that would provide starting points and guidance for the County in this effort. Orange County should lead the state, as it has in the past with other critical environmental issues, in modeling codes and ordinances that will reduce the impacts of new growth and per-capita resource needs when it is most efficient to do so: at the time of construction or rehabilitation. The housing, commercial, industrial, and institutional development envisioned by the Plan will be around long into the future. Let's make it worth keeping anal maintaining. On a procedural note, we encourage the Board of Commissioners to ask each Element-lead advisory board to submit comments by July 9 to the Planning Board for their consideration as they continue to refine the Comprehensive Plan this summer. Regarding stakeholder participation generally, we also request that the County advise the people and organizations who have generously volunteered their time to understand the Plan and the planning process how their comments have been and will be taken into account in the final drafts of the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent implementation planning phases. In conclusion, we return to the topic of sustainability. One final comment on the Plan illustrates a tension we have long noted in the County and would lilte to see resolved through the Comprehensive Plan: The term "carrying capacity" is a useful concept in population ecology, but in a planning document at the County scale, "carrying capacity" is a dubious and misleading notion. In order to analyze "carrying capacity," the analyst must define the boundaries of the system. For animals, this involves looking at foraging, habitat,. migration patterns, etc. The concept of carrying capacity is highly problematic when applied to I'[TTMAN populations. Human populations and developed nations in particular 1) exploit the resources of the ENTIRE planet, and 2) affect the ENTIRE planet with their waste (pollution). Until this is no longer the case, using the concept of carrying capacity -particularly for relatively small areas such as a county - to "analyze" the number of humans an area can support is arbitrary and erroneous. The most prudent course of action is to use the resources we have as efficiently as possible. As residents of one of the wealthiest nations in the world, we have not met this challenge adequately. If Orange County were to maximize the efficiency with which it uses its resources and to find ways to recycle•our waste, additional population could easily be accommodated in the county without additional environmental impacts. It simply depends on the choices we make. As a society, we are trying to bring about a major shift in how we live. Unfortunately, we are late. It is incumbent upon all of us, and governments in particular, to do everything in our power as humans to live in ways that tread very lightly on our beleaguered planet. There is much work to do, but we see the potential of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan to make a positive difference for people and for the environment. Sincerely, James Carnahan, Chairman, 6/6/2008 Page 4 of 4 166 on behalf of the Board of Directors of The Village Project, Inc. June 4, 2008 6/6/2008 167 ~R u~ the fi ~' ~~~~ Creati~.g s ° ti~ ~~ ~ ~~~ - Wc~lhable ~11~ ° ~~~I "~~~Sr~. Communities ~~ June 4, 2008 Dear Orange County Board of Commissioners, As you know, The Village Project is a nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting wa]kable communities in Orange County. As such, we have taken a great interest in the update of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan. Because we see the importance of this process, in 2007 we convened a diverse coalition of stakeholders to help engage the community and to provide input on the Plan, the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition ("Coalit ion"). The Coalition submitted input on the draft. Comprehensive Plan on January 28, 2008 and May 5, 2008. The Coalition believes that incorporating this input into the Comprehensive Plan would greatly help it establish a sustainable path into the future for Orange County. The Village Project encourages the County to consider these comments carefuIly; they are the result of an intensive dialog held ovex many months among community leaders from all sectors on future growth in Orange County. The Village Project submits herein additional comments on its own behalf regarding the May 2008 draft of.the Comprehensive Plan for consideration by the Orange County Planning Board •and Board of Commissioners. The following comments thematically summarize our findings from a detailed review of the May draft Plan, which we will submit separately at a later date. We are also including in the accompanying attachment proposed edits & revisions to Chapter 1, section 3, "Toward a Sustainable Future." 1) Sustainability and Global .Climate Change. Chapter 1, section 1.3 represents a good start at articulating a shared vision for the county's sustainabil ity and provides the basis for a set of "sustainab ility principles intended to serve as overarching goals for the County. To be truly "comprehensive" the plan must define and utilize susta inability in the broadest context: environmental health, economic vitality, and social equity. Our quality of life is impacted by global events, and our daily decisions and activities have global impacts. Global warming is an epochal challenge, now widely acknowledged as caused and exacerbated by human behavior, including choices we make in Orange County. Global warming has the potential to alter the planet and way of life we now enjoy beyond recognition, with possibly catastrophic results. We have a shared responsibility to future generations to take steps to reduce our per-capita contributions to climate change by living as efficiently as possible. Acknowledgement of this responsibility and of the global context should be explicit throughout the plan and should play a foundational role in the Plan s Goals and Objectives. We feel that, if the County is seriously committed to sustainability, the Plan should go further in this respect. Tlie Village Project ° PO Box 685 ° Carrboro NC 2751.0 ° 919-942-6114 ° w~vwthevillageproject.com 168 2) Localizing Economic Development. Economic activity over the last 50 years has been conducted as if resources were inexhaustible and the fabric of the planet was indestructible. Because it does not account for its longer term and wider impacts ("externalities"), such "business as usual" is not a sustainable path. Orange County can: do much better for its citizens and the environment. The Comprehensive Plan should seek and embrace economic activities and patterns that promote sustainability both locally and globally. Such an economy would be substantially locally owned, and would export as much as it imports or more. Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan should bring about a "lo cal living economy" that uses sustainable practices to produce knowledge, goods and services, and offers predominantly high-quality employment opportunities. This vision includes -arid will resemble -the County's laudable support of our local agri cultural systems. 3) Investing in Public Infrastructure. Public infrastructure, particularly water and wastewater services, is necessary for the compact, mixed-use, economically vibrant, and transit- supportive communities that, in our considered judgment, are the best form of development for Orange County. The Comprehensive Plan should explicitly state the County's intent to immediately begin to provide the infrastructure and management mechanisms to enable compact and sustainable land use patte111.S (a.k.a. "smart growth.") and to ensure that areas identified as suitable for growth (such as Transfer of Development Rights (IDR) "receiving areas") are developed sustainably. 4) Zoning for Mixed-Used Districts. Compactmixed-use developments will require new zoning designations; currently, there. are no true mixed-use zoning districts in the County. Within these zones a minimum residential density of 8 to 15 dwelling units per acre i.s necessary to support bus service; 20 to 30 units to the acre are needed to support rail transit. The new zoning districts must effectively "upzone" areas most suitably located for intensive development and should enable uses that are mixed vertically as well as horizontally. Ideally, such zoning changes will be undertaken as part of a larger TDR program, so that upzoning and downzoning do not create inequities among affected landowners. These new zones must be available for application in areas where the County decides to provide new infrastructure to enable compact development to take place. ' 5) Inclusionary Zoning in Mixed-Use Districts. The goal of increased housing opportunities for our workforce, for lower-income residents, and for special needs households should be addressed by an objective to implement inclusionary zoning requirements in growth areas with three criteria: price (rent or purchase cost), square footage, and number of bedrooms. Limiting size and requiring minimum densities in growth areas encourages multi-family ' structures that use land, water, and energy far more efficiently than single-family detached dwelling units. Moreover, such patterns are an important and increasingly demanded form of human settlement because they provide the social benefits of living among a diverse population and increased amenities due to economies of scale. 6) Adaptability as a Key Component of "Com munity Character." Historically, human settlements evolved at crossroads and other transportation nodes. They were compact, mixed- The Village Project ~- PO Box 685 a Carrbaro NC 27510 ~ 919-942-6114 a wwwtlievillageproject.com 2 169 use, and had local identity. It is therefore ironic to us that the concept of "community character" is sometimes wielded to perpetuate homogenous, low-density, suburban development patterns that isolate neighbors and fragment our rural lands. Such developments do not adequately preserve habitats or viewsheds, and they add sigr~ficantly to per-capita resource consumption and pollution generaflon. To be consistent with historical precedent, Orange County should allow more intense development at rural crossroads. Ideally, our- economic development efforts would produce local businesses such as markets that generate local income, sales taxes, and jobs and also reduce transportation emissions. The most important historical characteristic to observe in such areas is the HCTI\/.CAN SCALE. Green building and a diversity of uses may call for additional flexibility and community involvement in how we conceive of appropriate design. The Village Project offers its assistance to the County in this regard. The County may ultimately wish to follow other innovative communities in adopting form-based codes and having designers participate in the development review process,. 7) Requiring Energy-Efficient, High-Performance Buildings. The Comprehensive Plan must ensure that new construction and renovations result in energy-efficient, high-performance buildings. Abundant resources are available that would provide starting points and guidance for the County in this effort. Orange County should lead the state, as it has in the past with other critical environmental issues, in modeling codes and ordinances that will reduce the impacts of new growth and per-capita resource needs when it is most efficient to do so: at the time of construction or rehabilitation. The housing, commercial, industrial, and institutional development envisioned by the Plan will be around long into the future. Let's make it worth keeping and maintaining. On a procedural note, we encourage the Board of Commissioners to ask each Element-lead advisory board to submit comments by July 9 to the Pla~.-uzing Board for their consideration as they continue to refine the Comprehensive Plan this summer. Regarding stakeholder participation generally, we also request that the County advise the people and organizations who have generously volunteered their time to understand the Plan and the planrii~.tg process how their comments have been. and will be taken into account in the final drafts of the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent implementation pla~.-~ning phases. In conclusion, we return to the topic of sustainability. One final comment on the Plan illustrates a tension we have long noted in the County and would like to see resolved through the Comprehensive Plan: The term "carrying capacity" is a use ful concept in population ecology, but in a planning document at the County scale, "c arrying capacity" is a dubious and misleading notion. In order to analyze "carryi ng capacity," the analyst must define the boundaries of the system. For animals, this involves looking at foraging, habitat, migration patterns, etc. The Village Project • PO Box 685 • Carrboro NC 27510 ~ 919-942-6114 ~ wtvwthevillageproject.coin 170 The concept of carrying capacity is highly problematic when applied to HUMAN populations. Human populations and developed nations in particular 1) exploit the resources of the ENTIRE planet, and 2) affect the ENTIRE planet with their waste (pollution). Until this is no longer the case, using the concept of carrying capacity -particularly for relatively small areas such as a county - to "analyze" the number of humans an area can support is arbitrary and erroneous. The most prudent course of action is to use the resources we have as efficiently as possible. As residents of one of the wealthiest nations in the world, we have not met this challenge adequately. If Orange County were to maximize the efficiency with which it uses its resources and to find ways to recycle our.waste, additional population could easily be accommodated in the county without additional envirgnmental impacts. It simply depends'on the.choices we make. As a society, we are trying to bring about a major shift in how we live. Unfortunately, we are late. It is incumbent upon all of us, and governments in particular, to do everything in our power as humans to live in ways that tread very lightly on our beleaguered planet. There is much work to do, but we see the potential of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan to make a positive difference for people and for the environment. Sincerely, J a wc.es ca rwa !~ a w James Carnahan, Chairman, on behalf of the Board of Directors of The Village Project, Inc. The Village Project ~ PO Box 685 • Carrboro NC 27510 m 919-942-6114 = www tlievillagepraject.com 4 171 The Village Projzct ~'omments on the Oral~ge Cou~lty Conlprelicxxsi~re Plan Update Draft 2 Orange County Comprehensive Plan DRAFT 5-6-08 1.3. TOWARD A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE An emerging point of consensus in Orange County is that we need to act in a manner that will achieve a quality of life that is sustainable into the future. Objectives include environmental conservation, energy efficiency, affordable housing, social equity, a thriving economy, regional agricultural production and the availability of transit- oriented, wallcable, mixed-use communities. C ~~ 7,'1'4. ., t7.nt++ 41,.,4- .• J Orange County residents understand the linkages that support a sustainable future. Examples abound: To help preserve rural character, shop at a farmers market to help keep local farms in production. To help pay for schools and services, encourage growth of the non-residential tax base by locating residences close to business and retail centers. Reduce growth in carbon emissions by achieving compact development patterns Page 1 Village Project Suggested Revisions to Section 1.3: (new text italicized & bolded) 1.3. TOWARD A SUSTAINABLE FUTITRE An emerging ref consensus in Orange County is ~ha-tie the need to act in a manner that will achieve a quality of life that is sustainable ' '' +'' ~ '+"" .Local and global natural resources are fznite. Local activities have global consequences that must factor into our decision-making. Limited oil reserves and the onset of global warming compel us to embrace economic models, development patterns, transportation systems, and public investments that will result in steadily decreasing COa emissions. 9ti j~ee~~~ Our principle tenets including environmental conservation, energy efficiency, affordable housing, social equity, a thriving economy, regional agricultural production and the availability oftransit-ready, walkable, mixed-use communities must be tailored to enhance current prosperity and well being without reducing choices for future generations. C ~ 7,'1'4,x. ,o ., +7,0 +7..,+ ,. [This sentence panders to the reader and is actually false. The linkages are complex and poorly understood. Even issues as simple as litter or as pervasive as stornzwater runoff are poorly understood.] .7 + '1 t 77~.,.a,,.. June 6, 2008 ~ ~ 2 The ~Iillage Prr~ject Can~~~lents on the Orange Cou~~.ty Canlprehensive Plan Uladate L~3raft 2 We need to use the resources that are available to us today in a manner that protects them for future generations. Following is a sw.mnary of the key ideas presented in this Comprehensive Plan that relate directly to the goal of achieving a sustainable future. Refer to each of these Plan Elements for more details. 1.3.1. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT iveet~ei~e-~-~~~~ p~e~~- ;;'-L~~ ~'^r ~•'~~~° m ~-^*~^„°. Following is a slurnnary of the key ideas presented in this Comprehensive Plan that relate directly to the goal of achieving a sustainable future. i? ~ + 1, ~ 41, ~D7 E]'t ~ f ,. ,~,,,-.,,~r 1.3.1. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Economic development, above all, must address the challenges of global warming and the rapidly diminishing. availability of fossil fuels by initiating the transition to a "Post-carbon Economy" in which local COa emissions are reduced to levels that will support climate stability. Long-term economic vitality is best created by developing productive capacity from within. These efforts should result in an effective infrastructure for developing and supporting local enterprise and entrepreneurial efforts, including apprenticeship programs, entrepreneurship training, community-developed finance and investment orga~zizations, and Local Living Economy support networks. Research shows local enterprises create a higher multiplier effect, generate more local revenues, cost less in terms of governmental services and incentives, reduce carbon emissions, and provide stable employment with better wages and benefzts. All of these are lost when development offices recruit large scale, non-local, non- integrated, and cost-externalizing . companies that undermine local enterprise initiatives. Considering current social, economic and Page 2 June 6, 2008 1`he ~ri[lage project Ca~nments on the Orange County Comprehensive 1~1aL1 Ul?datc Draft: 2 The County has established Economic Development Districts wherein public investment will be focused to stimulate and accommodate development in strategic locations that can be served by transportation systems and public infrastructure, and be convenient to housing opportunities. The County's Economic Development Commission works with local, regional and state governments and agencies to attract and promote the types of businesses suited to Orange County. Focus on these efforts is recruiting appropriate businesses that will . provide jobs to local residents and provide a more balanced tax revenue structure that relies less on the generation of private property taxes. The County and Economic Development Commission have identified Action Steps in the report: "Investing in Innovation: Orange County Econor~zic Development Commission Five-Year Strategic Plan." To meet the demand for locally grown products; the County is working with Alamance, Chatham, and Durham Counties Page 3 envirorznzental realities, local development efforts should emphasize: X) green-collar jobs and businesses including green refzts and upgrades, rezzewable energy capacity arzd distribution, gree~z building, and innavative water capture and reuse; and 2) brain-based, information age, and knowledge ecology jobs that include all forms ofhigh-value, innovative enterprises ranging from high-tech innovators such as Red Hat to community-serving invest~ne~zt services such as Self-Help. The County has established Economic Development Districts wherein public investment will be focused to stimulate and accommodate development in strategic locations that can be served by transportation systems and public infrastructure, and be conveniently integrated rvitli housing and efficiently co~zce~ztrated local se~wices. The County Economic Development Commission currently works with local, regional and state governments and agencies to recruit the types of businesses s-tti~e~-fie that Izelp fulfill Orange County goals. Focus on these efforts is recruiting appropriate businesses that will provide jobs to local residents and provide a more balanced tax revenue structure that relies less on the generation of private property taxes. The County's Economic Development Commission has identified Action Steps in the report: "Investing in Innovation: Or°ange County Economic Development Commission Five-Year Strategic Plan." To meet the demand for locally grown products, the County is working with .Alamance, Chatham, and Durham counties to establish avalue-added food processing center, whexe farmers and et-~er~ related 173 June 6, 2008 X74 The ~~iila~c Project ~'omrnents on the Oraxlgc C~o~.~t~ty C~omprehe~~sive Plan t.~pdatc Draft 2 to establish avalue-added food processing center, where farmers and others could make value-added products, such as jams, pickles, or tamales. 1.3.2. HOUSING . Page 4 producers can make value-added products, such as jams, pickles, or tamales. Other significant initiatives include farmer incubation projects,, land-trust and la~zd- care development projects; farmer training and networking events, community awareness and education events; a "sustainable living",educational center; and developing local farmer cooperatives capable of purchasing vital processing facilities (of their own choice) such as those needed for chicken and meat processing and produce cleaning azzd packaging. 1.3.2 HUMAN .DEVELOPMENT No plan for the future can be complete without provisions for long-term social and economic vitality. High-value local enterprise and committed, critical-thinking citizens are best developed in educational settings that emphasize meaningful, hands- on, problem-solving experiences and creative, cooperative learning. The best schools also implement model communities and economies, which help students build confidence and know-how while learning about all the practical aspects of life, from balancing a checkbook and working with others to starting a business and negotiating contracts. Empowering, cooperative education builds community ties along with know-how. 1.3.3. HOUSING Housing that is affordable across the full price spectrum is indispensable to a diverse society and a Izealtliy economy. The County must provide both incentives and regulations to ensure that people who work in Orange County can find truly affordable housing located within walking or biking June 6, 2008 175 The ~jillagc Fro~ect C'ominents o~ the Orange County C;oniprehcnsive Flan Update Draft 2 The County supports an array of affordable and workforce housing initiatives, designed to support non-profit organizations, make use of state and federal funds, and provide housing opportunities for County residents. By providing additional affordable housing initiatives within the County, opportunities for living and working in proximity increase. The County is actively pursuing options to provide residential opportunities for homeless individuals and families, contributing to the area's strong emphasis on social equity. 1.3.3. LAND USE Mixed-use districts are being actively encouraged, and locations for new mixed-use centers are being identified, providing live- Page 5 distance,. or accessible by transit, from the places they work, shop, learn and play. Housing options should be dense enough to support public transportation. The County supports an array of affordable, workforce housing initiatives; designed to support non-profit organizations, make use of state and federal funds, and provide housing opportunities for County residents and workers. By providing additional affordable housing initiatives within the County, opportunities for living and working in proximity increase. The County is actively pursuing options to provide residential opportunities for homeless individuals and families, contributing to the area's strong emphasis on social equity. 1.3.4. LAND USE on .natural systems. standards can further energy and resources. Land use is instrumental in the reduction of carbon emissions. Transportation energy is greatly reduced by aggregating facilities so that people can walk or bike or take public tra~z s-it to most if not all daily activities. Vertical development forms reduce the footprint of the built environment, conserving energy and mitigating impacts "Gree~z" building help to conserve [Repositioned paragr°aph from bottom of section to here) ~.~a*;~t~e~ Siting "Growth Opportunity Areas" near transit corridors and along major thoroughfares .will encourage more public transportation use by County residents and workers. Actively encouraging mixed-use districts and identifying mixed-use centers that provide live-work-shop opportwzities will June 6, 2008 17 6 T'he ~liflage Projecfi Comments on the Orange Cou.~lty Comprehensive P1aL1 Update Braft 2 work-shop opportiuzities that minimize travel needs. The County is exploring a Strategic Growth and Resource Conservation program that will help to focus new development in areas that can best accommodate it, in•proxirnity to jobs, housing, transportation, and services near transit corridors. Simultaneously this program will also help to preserve/conserve rural and agricultural land with compensation provisions for rural property owners. The County's development of an interconnected system of pedestrian and bicycle trails will both provide recreation opportunities and also hold promise for increasing mobility choices available to Orange County residents. Identification of growth opportunity areas near transit corridors and along major thoroughfares encourages more public transportation use by County residents. 1.3.4. NATURAL AND CULTURAL SYSTEMS As of 2007, over 22,000 acres of land in the County has been protected through various land conservation programs. These efforts support the goals of sustaining a balanced and healthy diversity of native plant and animal populations, providing a network of protection natural, cultural, and agricultural lands, and achieving and adequate level of protection for important natural areas, prime forests, and wildlife habitat. Ideas for expanding conservation efforts include improved monitoring of critical natural lands and expanding the County's inventory of critical lands to include new areas not before assessed. Preservation of working farms, forestry, and Page 6 minimize travel needs. The County is exploring a Strategic Growth and Resource Conservation program that will help to focus new development in areas that can best accommodate it, in proximity to jobs, housing, transportation, and services near transit corridors. Simultaneously this program will also help to preserve/conserve-. rural and agricultural land with compensation provisions for rural property owners. The County's development of an interconnected system of pedestrian and bicycle trails will both provide recreation opportunities and also hold promise for increasing mobility choices available to Orange County residents. Repositioned paragraph from here to top of section) 1.3.5. NATURAL AND CULTURAL SYSTEMS As of 2007, over 22,000 acres of land in the County has been protected through various land conservation programs. These efforts support the goals of sustaining a balanced and healthy diversity of native plant and animal populations, providing a network of protection natural, cultural, and agricultural lands, and achieving and adequate level of protection for important natural areas, prime forests, and wildlife habitat. Ideas for expanding conservation efforts include improved monitoring of critical natural lands and expanding the County's inventory of critical lands to include new areas not before assessed. Preservation of working farms, forestry, and June 6, 2008 ".l"he ~~illage Projeci Con~nlents on the Ora7~ge Cot~~~ty Comprelzei~sivc Plan Update Draft 2 177 ancillary agricultural businesses is supported by the County. Farmland preservation districts, agricultural preservation through private conservation easements, and the use value taxation model are working to protect farmland and the farming industry in Orange County. More can be done, and County regulations are being reviewed to identify impediments to farming practices. The potential for the Strategic Growth and Rural Conservation program and enhanced farmland preservation districts could provide additional opportunities for farmland protection. Developing a local food system that links local producers and consumers is of high importance: The number of farmers markets operating in the County has increased in recent years, exemplifying their success. Agri-tourism and faa_ming events have also proven popular. One idea to expand on the success of our local agricultural industry is to identify suitable locations for agricultural facilities, such as processing. centers, community kitchens, demonstration tracts, community gardens, and the like that can bring together producers and consumers and educate the next generation of farmers. Orange County, Chapel Hill and Carrboro initiated a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory and Reduction Action Plan project in 2006. More can be done to improve air quality and reduce the use of non-renewable fuels over the planning horizon. Ideas include the promotion of private and public use of alternative fuel sources and power generation options, such as harnessing and using landfill gas, and participating in green energy production programs. Our historical character has been protected through the efforts of national and local level preservation programs. Cultural landscapes, historic structures, and even scenic roadways Page 7 ancillary agricultural businesses is supported by the County. Farmland preservation districts, agricultural preservation through private conservation easements, and the use value taxation model are working to protect farmland and the farnnng industry in Orange County. More can be done, and County regulations are being reviewed ~to identify impediments to farming practices. The potential for the Strategic Growth and Rural Conservation program and enhanced farmland preservation districts could provide additional opportunities for farmland protection. Developing a local food system that links local producers and consumers is of high importance. The number of farmers markets operating in the County has increased in recent years, exemplifying their success. Agri-tourism and farming events have also proven popular. One idea to expand on the success of our local agricultural industry is to identify suitable locations for agricultural facilities, such as processing centers, community kitchens, demonstration tracts, community gardens, and the like that can bring together producers and consumers and educate the next generation of farmers. Orange County, Chapel Hill and Carrboro initiated a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory and Reduction Action Plan project in 2006. More can be done to improve air quality and reduce the use of non-renewable fuels over the planning horizon. Ideas include the promotion of private and public use of alternative fuel sources and power generation options, such as harnessing and using landfill gas, and participating in green energy production programs. Our historical character has been protected through the efforts of national and local level preservation programs. Cultural landscapes, historic structures, and even scenic roadways June 6, 2008 178. '1'he Village Project €`~'omn~ents on the Orange Cou~~ty Comprehensive Plan Update Braft 2 can be protected through existing preservation programs. Advancement of preservation goals could include funding assistance to landowners needing additional resources to maintain historic properties. 1.3.5. SERVICES AND FACILITIES Water conservation efforts have been a critical piece in managing water supplies through recent droughts. County level coordination is needed to manage water resources that will serve future populations. Placing public water and sewer facilities near areas targeted for dense development can reinforce a more sustainable land use pattern. Erosion control and stormwater management efforts in the County are paramount for protecting natural areas from the adverse effects of development. These efforts can be expanded by improving surface water mapping and collecting additional water quality data to inform development management efforts. The County has set an ambitious waste reduction goal of 61%l. Orange County has surpassed state mandates for. waste .reduction ' in 1996 and 2001. Continued efforts to identify waste reduction opportunities is supported by the County. The identification of a future waste transfer site and landfill location are critical needs that will be addressed over the planning horizon. can be protected through existing preservation programs. Advancement of preservation goals could include funding assistance to landowners needing additional resources to maintain historic properties. 1.3.6. SERVICES AND FACILITIES Water conservation efforts have been a critical piece in managing water supplies through recent droughts. County level coordination is needed to manage water resources that will .serve future populations. Placing public water and sewer facilities near areas targeted for dense development can. reinforce a more sustainable land use pattern. [There are numerous ways to increase the number of people that can be served by a given amount of fresh water. For example, the county needs to explore ways to provide water and wastewater service to the mixed- use nodes where centralized water and sewer are not appropriate. Currently, county residents use water quite ine~ciently.J Erosion control and stormwater management efforts in the County are paramount for protecting natural areas from the adverse effects of development. These efforts can be expanded by improving surface water mapping and collecting additional water quality data to inform development management efforts. The County has set an ambitious waste reduction goal of 61%1. Orange County has surpassed state mandates for waste reduction in 1996 and 2001. Continued efforts to identify waste reduction opportunities are supported by the County. The identification of a future waste transfer site and landfill location is a critical needs that will be addressed over the planning horizon. Page 8 June 6, 2008 The Vitlage Project Com111ents on the Ora~~ge County Comprehensive Plan Update Draft 2 17 9 1.3.6. RECREATION AND PARKS By investigating new forms of recreation to meet new demands (seniors, changing demands for youth), the County is pro- actively planning for the range of needs and demands that will accompany residential growth. By plamiing for Joint use of facilities by multiple users and jurisdictions (e.g., the two school systems acid recreation departments), the County is encouraging efficient use of land and wise use of public financial resources 1.3.7. TRANSPORTATION The Gounty is actively encouraging alternative modes of transportation and ride- sharing, expanding possibilities for mobility by means other than single-occupant automobiles. Examples of alternative modes of transportation include, but are not limited to: Interconnected pedestrian and bicycle trails; Transit lanes along major thoroughfares; and ® Considering the development of park-and-ride lots that would encourage use of public transportation to travel to and from Page 9 1.3.7. RECREATION AND PARKS By investigating new forms of recreation to meet new demands (seniors, changing demands for youth), the County is pro- actively planning for the range of needs and demands that will accompany residential growth. By planning for j oint use of facilities by multiple users and jurisdictions (e.g., the two school systems and recreation departments), the County is encouraging efficient use of land and wise use of public financial resources. 1.3.8. TRANSPORTATION [The discussion of sustainability in t~°ansportation options is inadequate so long as density is left out of the equation. At minimum, state what professional consensus is about the minimum housing and other densities necessary to support public transportation.) The reduction of carbon emissions is an inescapable imperative and the County must actively encourage the transitio~a from automobile depe~adence to alternative modes of transportation and ride-sharing; a-t~en~el~es. Examples of alternative modes of transportation include, but are not limited to: ® Interconnected pedestrian and bicycle trails; ® Dedicated transit lanes along major thoroughfares making public transportation an expeditious and attractive option; and v ~~e~ Development of park-and-ride lots that svet~ encourage the use of public transportation to travel to and from June 6, 2008 180 The Vi.Ilage Project Comments on the Ora~l.ge C~:ount~~ Can~prehcnsive Plan Lipdate l:~raft 2 work. Increasing public transit by expanding public and special transportation. services for seniors, and individuals with disabilities, increases choice and opportunity. Increasing bus service, designating public transportation nodes throughout the County with facilities to accommodate pedestrians, park. and ride lots, and bicycle racks all contribute to mobility options. These initiatives reinforce each other. Taken together, they form a platform. of sustainable practices upon which current and future generations of Orange County residents can build productive lives. work. Particular attention must be given to increasing choice and opportunity for seniors and individuals with disabilities by expanding public and special transportation services. Additionally, increasing bus service, designating public transportation nodes throughout the County with facilities to accommodate pedestrians, creating park and ride lots, and providing bicycle racks all contribute to increasing mobility options. These initiatives reinforce each other. Taken together, they form a platform of sustainable practices upon which current and future generations of Orange County residents can build productive lives. Page 10 June 6, 2008 Page 1 of 1 181 Tom Altieri From: Tom Grizzle [griz@mindspring.com] Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 12:32 PM To: CompPlanUpdate Subject: Comments on Orange County Plan To whom it may concern, ! was born in Chapel Hill in 1958 and have lived here for most of my life. I currently reside in Chapel Hill where !own and operate a small business (Toxicology Services, Inc.) as a toxicology consultant. My main concerns for the future growth and development of Orange county are general, and relate to an ever increasing minimization of the consumption of energy (both direct and indirect) and activities that consume energy. This is because... 1) I believe that "Peak Oil" (see http~//en wikipedia org/wiki/Peak oil) is upon us and there will only be higher and higher oil prices and so conservation/minimization and changing to another energy source for essential activities has to be the umbrella under which EVERYTHING is considered, and ... 2) Global climate change, brought about by human activities like burning hydrocarbons, will gradually transform Orange County into a different place, probably a hotter and dryer place, but that's not yet known. Th ns nto account when ALL future growth and development tare UST be fully and completely take considered. The current paradigm for growth and development no longer applies. We not only need to think outside the box, we have to recycle said box! This 20 year plan is already obsolete. Great emphasis needs to be placed on things like (not a comprehensive listing)... ® obtaining food locally and supporting those engaged in this, activity (the 18-wheelers will stop magically appearing to resupply Harris Teeter) ® creating and encouraging local sources of essential goods a converting power sources for essential services to "off the grid" and non-C02 emitting (OWASA, for example) ® making everything bicycle friendly, including building out planned greenways and dramatically expanding current and new greenways as bike and foot paths Either we consider and aggressively respond to these issues now, while there is still a limited window of time to react, or actions/reactions will be forced upon us at much greater societal and financial costs. Thanks for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Tom Grizzle 919.967.5199 7/11/2008 182 Tom Altieri From: Eileen Camp [Eileen.Camp@Quintiles.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 6:17 AM To: CompPlanUpdate Cc: Anne J. Peoples Subject: comments from the community Page 1 of 1 Hello and thank you for the opportunity to make comments about the Orange County growth plan I realize that the county needs a broad tax base and that businesses provide that. I travel across the country and there are so many Big Box stores that it's tough to tell which state I'm in -Phoenix? Jersey? Florida? -because they are all starting to look the same. I love local business and support that as often as possible; for example, I shop at the Farmer's Market and Weaver St. Market. I would hate to see Hillsborough/Orange County start looking like everywhere else -. with a Barnes and Nobles and a Target at every corner. Please try to help us grow without losing our identity. I will try and make the meeting on August 25th. Thank you! Eileen Camp 328 Mitchell St. Hillsborough NC 27278 919 732-3337 ********************** IMPORTANT--PLEASE READ ************************ This electronic message, including its attachments, is COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL and may contain PROPRIETARY or LEGALLY PRIVILEGED information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message or any of the information included in it is unauthorized and strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and permanently ..delete this message and its attachments, along with any copies thereof. If this electronic message contains a zipped attachment and you do not have a decompression tool, you may download unZIP (free of cost) from: http://www.mk-net-work.com/us/uz/unzip.htm. Alternatively, you may request that the attachment be resent in an uncompressed format. Thank you. 7/11/2008 183 Tom Altieri From: drnancygtaylor@yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 8:02 AM 70: CompPlanUpdate Subject: Correction: Health & Safety From: Dr. Nancy Taylor Phone Number: (919) 732-1426 Message: What is blatantly missing from what I read on the web site and in some of the Summary notes is a committee to address public health and safety issues. My passion and attention is on the health and safety of children in this community. Specifically we need cross walks on Churton and a CAC. I am planning an event August 9th for Child Health and Safety. I am interested in opening up these two issues up as a public forum. CROSSWALKS: Since Route 86 is a state route, this becomes a state level issue and a MAJOR problem for us locally. Recently in a local newspaper was a front page story about the very high number of pedestrian deaths in Orange County! CAC: The other issue for the community is the urgent need for a CAC (Child Advocacy Center). A CAC protects our community from crime, supports children and families who have been the victims of sexual assault on children and alters the prosecution rate from about. 12 % to 94% because these cases are managed by a team of multi-disciplinary professionals (New model versus independent agencies (old model, the old model allows too many issues to be "ignored". In North Carolina we have several counties that have CACs in place. One of the requirements to receive state funding is that a CAC operate successfully for two years. This is in cooperation with the National CAC, our local law enforcement, the Orange County Rape Crisis Center, medical professionals, DSS and a few other agencies. Dr. Nancy Taylor (919) 732-1426 1 Page 1 of 2 184 Tom Altieri From: Adam Klein [aklein@carolinachamber.org] Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 10:26 AM To: CompPlanUpdate Cc: Aaron Nelson; Anita Badrock; bbunch@williamhbunchcpa.com; kschwart@email.unc.edu Subject: Remarks on Comprehensive Plan Members of the Planning Board and County Staff, want to begin by thanking you for all of your hard work on the County Comprehensive Plan. As a member of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition, I am aware of what a massive undertaking a Comprehensive Plan update is. I want fo reiterate a few of my comments made during the May 19 public hearing regarding the Economic Development section of the plan. In my professional opinion and the opinion of our Coalition members, the economic development section is missing a major strategy-namely working with UNC-Chapel Hill to retain many of the businesses created at the University. UNC in many ways is our.business incubator. In the words of Chancellor-elect Holden Thorp, UNC's challenges in the coming years will be to "Cure diseases...find antl invent clean energy... feed seven billion people" to name a few. As UNC strives to tackle these issues, researchers are :generating incredible ideas and devices that are spinning off into new businesses. These are businesses that revolve around innovation, pay good wages and have little environmental impact-in a nutshell businesses we want in Orange County. Yet, with over 29 UNC businesses spawned since the year 2000, only 3 are located here. The majority go to RTP because they can find readily available office and lab space and a welcoming business environment. We can do much better than this and it can start with our Comprehensive Plan. I ask that you consider including a new objective of "working closely with UNC's Office of Technology Development to identify commercial space needs of businesses created by UNC research, promote development of such space within the County, and actively encourage UNC businesses to stay in Orange County after leaving the University." This should be one of our primary strategies for economic development. The second remark 1 want to reiterate is the importance of extending water and sewer to all of the Economic Development Districts. Currently, this is listed under Objective ED 2.10 and is a long term goal. The Coalition and Chamber believe strongly that this should be a short term goal. Orange County has the second highest property tax rate in the state along with declining sales tax revenues. We must do a better job of expanding our commercial tax base and that will occur most efficiently when water and sewer services are extended to these districts. My final remark is on behalf of the Chamber and not the Coalition. I would ask that you add another ED Objective within Goal 2 that reads : "Develop an incentive policy to use in targeting companies and enterprises that will build upon and expand core assets and diversify the County's economic base. Incentives should be tied to number and type of jobs created." Incentives often receive a bad name and sometimes rightfully so, especially when they are cash handouts that are haphazard and poorly conceived. However, in Orange County, our incentive policy can be strategic and well thought out, helping to overcome barriers to business location in our community. Such incentive packages could be aimed at reducing the cost of lab and office space, which as 1 mentioned above, is a major competitive disadvantage for Orange County. If we want to be serious about growing our commercial tax base the above objectives will be important pieces. I ask that you include them in your revisions to the plan. Thank you for your time and consideration. 7/11/2008 Page 2 of 2 185 Respectfully, Adam. Klein Adam M. Klein, MRP Vice President, Economic Development and Government Relations Chapel Hill-Cassboso Chamber of Commerce 104 South Estes Drive PO Box 2897 Chapel Hill, NC 27515 919-967-7075 x. 30 ~vww casolinachambei.oi~ -~t')ertse consider the eitairon~ueitt before printing this email 7/11/2008 186 Tom Altieri From: Robin Nucilli [rnucilli@chccs.k12.nc.us] Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 10:54 AM To: CompPlanUpdate Cc: Stephanie P. Knott Subject: Edits to the Comprehensive Report to the Community Page 1 of 2 Below are the requested edits from the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools. We originally sent them to Adam Klein, but ns you can rend from his response, any edits should have been sent to this a-mail address. If you cannot find the edits which Mrs. Knott refers to on page 221 or have any other questions, please let me know and I will see what I can do for you, as Mrs. Knott is currently out of the district and unable to reply immediately to e-mails/phone calls. Thank you. Robin Nucilli Publications Assistant Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools 967-8211 X214 --Original Message --- Robin, My name is Adam Klein, I received the email below from Stephanie at the beginning of the week and wanted to follow up with you all. The Chamber is actually not involved in the revisions of Comprehensive Plan, the County Planning Board is overseeing those and would be best to communicate your concerns to. Today is the final day to submit comments to the Board. You can email them at this address: CompPlanUpdate a,co.oran eg nc.us. The email Stephanie sent me below would suffice for sending written comments. One last question, I couldn't find page 221 in the document. I just want to make sure the planning board can locate the exact paragraph you refer to. Best, . Adam Adam M. Klein Vice President, >/conomic Development and Government Relations Chapel Hill-Cazrboro Chamber of Commerce 104 South J/stes Drive PO Boy 2897 Chapel Hill, NC 27515 919-967-7075 x. 30 www. cara G Hach amber.org !'!case cnnctdar tdr. <ar~irouuicr~Y before priniin,~, fHis email 7/11/2008 Page 2 of 2 187 Adam, Dr. Pedersen asked me to review the sections of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan that relate to the Ghapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools and to communicate any revisions to you. First, it looks like much of the information on p.221 related to the district came from an outdated section of our website. I have attached the revision to that page to provide you with a more current snapshot of our performance. In the last paragraph on p. 221, you cite our strategic plan. We have a new one that covers 2006-2013. That seems more relevant to this future-looking document. The new mission statement reads: "Empower all students to acquire the knowledge, skills and insights necessary to live rewarding, productive lives, prepared to contribute positively to the global community:' If you'd like to reference the new plan in any other way; here's a link to it: htt /Iwww2 chccs k12 nc us/education/sctemo/8f706c3db56d39f2ba65bd1d5281b72f/121372648612008 201.3 CHCCS Strategic Plan.pdf. I'd also review the language in that paragraph so that the transition from strategic plan to capital improvement plan is clear. Much of what is in the capital. improvement plan seems to be attributed to the strategic plan, for example. Hope that helps, Stephanie Stephanie Knott Assistant to the Superintendent for Community Relations Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Lincoln Center 750 S. Merritt Mill Road Chapel Hill, NC 27516 Phone: (919) 967-8211, ext. 227 Fax: (919) 933-4560 E-Mail: sknott(o~chccs.k12.nc.us All email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law, which may result in monitoring and disclosure to third parties, including law enforcement. 7/11/2008 188 Page 1 of 1 Tom Alfieri From: Neil G. Pedersen [NPedersen@chccs.k12.nc.us] Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 10:22 AM To: CompPlanUpdate Subject: Fwd: Feedback on Orange County Comprehensive Plan Dr. Pedersen asked me to review the sections of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan that relate to the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools and to communicate any revisions to you. First, it looks like much of the information on p.221 related to the district came from an outdated section of our website. I have attached the revision to that page to provide you with a more current snapshot of our performance. In the last paragraph on p. 221, you Gite our strategic plan. We have a new one that covers 2008-2013. That seems more, relevant to this future-looking document. The new mission statement reads: "Empower all students to acquire the knowledge, skills and insights necessary to live rewarding, productive lives, prepared to contribute positively to the global community." If you'd like to reference the new plan in any other way, here's a link to it: http://www2.chccs.k12.nc.us/education/sctemp/8f106c3db56d39f2ba65bd1d5281b72f/1213726486/2008 2013 I'd also review the language in that paragraph so that the transition from strategic plan to capital improvement plan is clear. Much of what is in the capital improvement plan seems to be attributed to the strategic plan, for example. Stephanie Knott Assistant to the Superintendent for Community Relations Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Lincoln Center 750 S. Merritt Mill Road Chapel Hill, NC 27516 Phone: (919) 967-8211, ext. 227 Fax: (919) 933-4560 E-Mail: sknott@chccs.kl2.nc.us All email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law, which may result in monitoring and disclosure to third parties, including law enforcement. 7/11/2008 189 The Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS) is one of two public school systems in Orange County, NC. Established in 1909, CHCCS is located near the flagship campus of the University of North Carolina (LTNC) and the world renowned Research Triangle Park (RTP). As a result of the district's proximity to higher education and research facilities, our community boasts one of the highest educated populations in America. The district operates three high schools, four middle schools, ten elementary schools, a school for young people being treated at UNC Hospital and an alternative program. for high school students. These schools serve more than 11,000 students. CHCCS is particularly proud of the academic accomplishments of its students and the strong credentials of its teaching faculty. CHCCS has the state's highest districtwide SAT score at 1,185, or ]:,757 when the writing component is included. The state average is 1,004, and the national average is 1,017. This high average was attained while more than 96 percent of the district's eligible students took the test. More than 1,200 of our high school students are enrolled in challenging Advanced Placement (AP) courses. This participation has earned two of the district's high schools (the third opened in 2007 and wasn't eligble) ranking in Newsweek magazine's list of top high schools. In 2007, East Chapel Hill High ranked 149, and Chapel Hill High ranked 243. Nearly 92 percent of last year's graduating senior class went on to two- or four-year institutions of higher learning. Thirty-four students in the current graduating class were named National Merit Finalists, while 15 of them. received National Merit Scholarships. CHCCS has North Carolina's highest four-year cohort graduation rate at 87.3%. CHCCS has the state's lowest dropout rate at 1.12 percent. The district was recognized by the North Carolina State Board of Education for its 28% improvement over the previous year. Thirty-one percent of the district's students are identified as gifted. More than 93 percent of students in grades 3-8 are proficient on state-mandated End-of--Grade tests in reading, while more than 83 percent of them are proficient on the End-of--Grade tests in mathematics. At the high school level, 87 percent of students are proficient on state- mandated End-of-Course tests. For the 2006-2007 school year, CHCCS had one of the state's highest per pupil expenditures at $9,779. Nearly 200 CHCCS educators hold the prestigious certification from the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). Forty-two percent of teachers hold a master's or doctorate degree. The CHCCS teacher turnover rate is 8.5 percent, half of the state average of 17 percent. CHCCS employs 1,870 staff members, of whom 1,150 are teachers or administrators. ### 190 Tom Altieri From: James Carnahan [jarnahan@mindspring.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 8:31 AM To: barryj@earthlink.net; Valerie Foushee; mcarey5@nc.rr.com; gordonam@mindspring.com; mikenelsonnc@aol.coi~i; jaybryan7@msn.com; raiprice@earthlink.net Cc: Tom Altieri; Donna Baker Subject: Comprehensive Plan Update , ~~ ~ ~ .~ .,... ,. .. . ~,~ -~ s Village Proj CPU Village Project Village Proj CPU Line item cam... comments on CP... section 1.3 S... Dear Orange County Board of Commissioners, In addition to the general comments we submitted June 6 .(also attached), The Village Project submits herein additional "line-item" comments on the May 2008 draft of the Comprehensive Plan for consideration by the Qrange County Planning Board, Board of Commissioners, and staff. We ask that all of these comments entered into the publid record of input on the Comp Plan Update. Sincerely, James Carnahan, Chairman, on behalf of the Board of Directors of The Village Project, Inc. June 4, 2008 1 191 ~ ~~~j~~ t~ r j'ra hl~,a~i~`7\w~u rte"'*~' Creating ~~~~;~~~,, ~;d ~ Wathable ° ~-~~~'~~Y~ ;~~''~== Communities CO nnents On the ay 6, versi®n Of the dated ran a C®unty CO reensrve Plan Listed in order by Element and page number Prepared by The Village Project, Inc. Global Comments In general, it is often not clear when the Plan is taking about Orange County as a whole or just unincorporated. Orange County. We have highlighted a few of the more confusing instances below, but this is a persistent clarity issue in the Plan. It is a particular problem for tables and figures throughout. Chapter 3• Economic ®evelopment Element p.3-1, Section 3.2 (Summary, Background) It would be worth discussing at a broad level here any spatial mismatch between workers and their j obs. For example, do residents of unincorporated Orange County work in unincorporated Orange County, OC municipalities, and/or outside Orange County? In what proportions? How many people generally are coming into the county to work? p.3-2, 3.2 (Summary, Key Facts) Include the following from Appendix A, p.6-2 (Economic Highlights section): ® In 2000, 60,860 Orange County residents were employed. Of those, 42.4% commuted to another county for work. 0 In 2000, 24,096 commuters worked in Orange County, representing 40% of the county's workforce. Include as well data about the types of jobs & median wages found in each cohort and any data on the specific destinations, locality-wise, that are available. p.3-3; line 27 (Summary, Key Facts) This bullet is slightly misleading: not all agricultural land is taxed under a discount. It is our understanding that a property must be registered under the Present Use-Value Taxation Program to receive this benefit (but this should be verified). p.3-5, Section 3.2 (Summary, Estab-ishment of Economic Development Districts) Including residential development in EDDs is critical to a sustainable local economy in which many if not most employees can walk or bike to work, shopping, recreation, etc. Commercial and industrial developments are not necessarily incompatible with residential uses. The Village Project m PO Box 685 ~ Carrboro NC 27510 m 919-942-6114 m wwwthevillageproject.com 192 p.3-6, Section 3.2 (Summary, Map 3-1) To better support coordinated planning let this map also show Urban Transition Areas that are contiguous with the EDDs. This will greatly help visualizing & implementing the desire expressed in Objective ED- 2.2: "Encourage mixed use projects that :support wallcable communities," expressing emerging land use philosophy that would place jobs in closer proximity to housing (to the extent possible). p.3-7, line 1 (Summary, Key Issues) ' Revise the third bullet as follows: "® Ensuring that land, housing, and public services are in place to support desired economic development." p.3-7 (Summary, Key Issues) This section should include the need to address the fact that 40% of Orange County residents are commuting out of the County to work, and that 40% of Orange County jobs are held by employees commuting in from other counties. p.3-7, Section 3.3 (Historic Data, Current Data, Evaluation of Trends, Emp-oyment Trends By Industry) Include here data about how many of the jobs at our top employers, UNC-CH, UNC Hospitals, and Chapel Hill-Carrboro Public Schools are held by Orange County residents p.3-ib, Secfian 3.4 (Needs Assessment). It is important here to state the need to transition to an economy that is predominately locally owned and focused on producing for our use and export more technology, services and things we need for our daily lives, and maintaining a healthy balance of goods produced for export and goods imported for sale. In addition to our ongoing effort to support local agriculture and secure a local food supply, there is growing support among residents for enabling a "Local Living Economy" that prioritizes local ownership of businesses. This section should also discuss addressing the growing need to support a "green economy" and discourage undesirable and unsustainable business and manufacturing practices both within our borders and beyond. This includes supporting local businesses that respect environmental constraints and reduce or eliminate C02 emissions, and avoiding the importation of goods whose production involves environmental degradation and/or global climate impacts. Chapter 4: Housing Element p.4-1, lines 15- i 7 (Summary) "insuring that all households are provided safe, adequate, and affordable housing that is proximate to needed services is an important issue that will need consideration and action over the planning horizon." Which households are being referred to here, existing residents or new residents? It seems clear that the County cannot provide housing to all households who would like to move here. It's hard to imagine what this .statement could mean in practice. Also, insert the word "coordinated" before "action" to imply collaboration with OC municipalities (stated later but can be implied here). p.4-1, lines 44-45 (Summary) "New housing should be located proximate to needed services, shopping, and employment centers to ensure long-term sustainability of the housing stock." The Village Project m PO Box 685 ~ Carrboro NC 27510 m 919-942-6114 ~ wwwthevillageproject.com 2 193 How do these location factors influence "long-term sustainability of the housing stock"? p.4-2 thru 4-4 (Recent Housing Studies) Clarify for each study whether it included municipalities or was just of unincorporated Orange. p.4-6, line 24 "In 2000, the majority of homes..." "Homes" connotes single-family dwelling units. Would either of the terms "dwelling units" or "housing units" be more appropriate? p.4-10, Figure 4-5 Can figures for unincorporated Orange County also be presented? p.4-10, Figure 4-6 Clarify that figures are for County as whole, including municipalities p.4- T 2, lines 39-42 "Appropriate areas for future development to provide new housing that are proximate to schools, employment centers, and needed commercial and social services, will need to be identified;..." This is an interesting statement considering the fact that most of the services mentioned are located in OC municipalities, some of which are surrounded by an urban growth boundary. It would be better if the County were planning for all of'these things in conjunction with one another, rather than sequentially or . in a reactionary fashion, as this language implies (i.e., wherever the services happen to be, that's where we'll put the housing). It's on the right track, but this doesn't yet sound like a coordinated, integrated approach to ensuring that growth is smart and well managed. p.4-13, lines 24-25 Edit the bullet as shown: "Land use planning efforts need to provide opportunities and incentives for the joint location of housing and employment centers" p.4-14, Objective H-1.5 Edit the bullet as shown: "Ensure that a variety of housing types can be developed. throughout the County in a sustainable manner that locates housing near and within employment centers and commercial centers..." p.4-15, Objective •H-3.6 "Work within the Orange County government system to identify and resolve existing policies which may be at odds with historic preservation goals,... Recast: Work within the Orange County government system to identify and resolve existing policies which may be at odds with owls related to preservation of historic structures and community character,... 5: land Use Element • p.5-1 (Orange Covnty Board of Commissioners Planning Principles) Principle #5, "Preservation of Rural Land Use Pattern" should not be applied to 100% of the county, particularly those areas that no longer have a true historic rural land use pattern. The Village Project m PO Box 685 ~ Carrboro NC 27510 b 919-942-6114 a w4vwthevillagepraject.com 194 p.5-2, lines 51 thru 61 (Planning wifhi`n Orange Covnty) The fact that OC has sole planning jurisdiction in unincorporated areas is stated twice. p.5-4, Map 5-2 (Joint Land Use Planning Areas) The urban services area is shown as a DASHED line on the map, while the legend shows the boundary as a solid line. p.5-8, lines 28-29 (Shaping Orange County's Future) "...progress has been made toward realizing these goals" This is a subjective statement and evidence should be provided for the claim. p.5-9 (The Need to Update the Comprehensive P-an) The list of bullets needs more explanation introduction. Then, each bullet should first state the need that was identified through the evaluation, followed by a statement of how that issue is addressed in the current CPU. p.5-9, lines 68-7I (The Need to Update the Comprehensive P-an) "The guidelines for Plan review and evaluation that were contained within the 1981 Plan were not followed. Guidelines for Plan evaluation and update are included in the updated 2030 Plan in Section 1.5: Monitoring and Evaluation Procedures." This information is inappropriately placed, based on the introductory material that precedes the bullets, which indicates that the bullets are about substantive findings of the evaluation, whereas this is more of an overarching finding. The bullets are all supposedly to specify how the actual CP update met the needs/concerns ("areas") identified in the evaluation. p.5-10, line 18 (The Need fo Update the Comprehensive Plan) "More emphasis is needed on Objectives and Policies that further address the following 1981 Plan Goals..." Objectives and Policies of what document? Is this a finding of the evaluation or a general. conclusion? If the latter, this bullet does not belong in this list, as it is an overarching conclusion that probably did not directly result from the substantive evaluation. p.5-10, line 35 (The Need to Update the Comprehensive Plan) State how the sustainability indicators will be lined to the metrics developed for plan evaluation. The evaluations should be viewed as measuring outputs (plan evaluation) and outcomes (attainment of sustainability indicators). Plan monitoring and evaluation in general merit a more organized and specific treatment. Such a section would provide an opportunity to summarize prior assessments as well. p.5-12, line 31 (Orange County Strategic Growth and...) What were the relevant findings of the Phase I and II of the TDR study? Can they at least be summarized? p.5-12, line 41 ("encouraging appropriate development in transition areas') "Transition areas" is a term used to denote suburbanizing areas around the fringes of core urbanized areas. In a word, it is usually sprawl, since such transition areas are very rarely walkable or transit- oriented and have high housing costs. This phrase should be recast as "encourage development in appropriate locations" p.5- I4, Section 5.3, line 32 (The Future Land Use Plan) "The Map also provides the development community and staff with clear guidance to the locations in the County.where re-zonings may be appropriate and where they are not. The Village Project m PO Box 6$5 .p Carrboro NC 27510 ~ 919-942-6114 a wwwthevillagepraject.com 4 195 How does the rnap provide guidance on which areas are appropriate for rezoning? How can a map provide guidance on something it does not represent? Please explain more thoroughly and clearly and ensure map is consistent with text. p.5-14 thru 5- i 7 (fhe Future Land Use P-an) This section should state that there are no true mixed-use land use categories and whether this is something that the County will address. p.5-15, line 1 (fhe Future Land Use Plan) Developed Land Use Categories -Proposed Urban Activity Node. Please state why there no proposed activity nodes in Hillsborough, Mebane, or Orange County. p.5- I6 (The Future Land. Use Plan) Under Rural Land Use Categories add the following: "Rural Village Node Land located around designated road intersections available for compact, walkable, mixed commercial & residential development served by small-scale community water & wastewater technology that meets adopted guidelines for oversight & maintenance." p.5-21, line 3 (The Future Land Use Plan) Please state what spurred the creation of EDDs. p.5-21, Section 5.4 (Historic Data, Currenf Data, Evaluation of Trends) Include the following from Appendix A in this section: "Sixty percent of the labor force lives and works in Orange County. The remaining 40% commute to other counties for employment. Likewise, 40% of Orange County's labor force commutes in from other counties." Include as well data about the types of jobs & median wages found in each cohort -the group commuting in and the one commuting out. We need more detailed information in order to be able to address issues associated with this condition, including: 1) the carbon emissions and air quality associated with high vehicle miles traveled; 2) the need for recruitment of jobs for which our residents are qualified; 3) the need to provide housing affordable for the full spectrum of wages being paid for various kinds of jobs in the County. p.5-22, Section 5.4, lines 9- I 1 (Historic Data...) Clarify that "growth" in the context of the townships refers to POPULATION growth. Please also state rate of land conversion (growth in developed acreage) in as much detail (e.g., township level) as possible, separating out data for unincorporated areas whenever possible. p.5-27, lines 2l -25 (Population Projections) The last bullet should be phrased more clearly to make the point it seems to be getting at: The incorporated areas are growing in population at a faster rate than the unincorporated areas. In general, this eritire section needs to better differentiate between data presented for Orange County INCLUDING its municipalities vs for just unincorporated Orange County. p.5-29, Figure 3-5 (Median Housing 1/alue Trends} This chart should show an additional set of bars for unincorporated Orange County The Village Project ~ PO Box 685 a Carrboro NC 27510 ~ 919-942-6114 m wwwthevillageproject.com 196 p.5-29 (Housing Trends) Overall: clarify whether/which data are for unincorporated vs all of Orange County p.5-32, lines 43-44 (Devetopmenf Constraints) "Natural development constraints that would once prohibit development from occurring can now be overcome through new building materials and engineering designs. In response..." The fact that these constraints can be overcome does not affect the wisdom of building in areas with natural constraints (presumably you are talking about areas with steep slopes, poorly draining soils?? Hard to know...) For example, better onsite wastewater systems technologies may enable development to take place on lands with natural constraints. These poor soils maybe highly erosive as well and therefore highly susceptible to producing sedimentation during the construction phase and after. Also, we disagree that the County's adoption of the programs mentioned was "in response" to these changing technologies. The county has simply been more proactive than other counties in overseeing the development it has been faced with and especially in focusing its enforcement efforts in areas that have natural constraints and are more susceptible to damage. The County has been less proactive about restricting development from encroaching upon sensitive areas at the landscape scale (as documented in the earlier section Environmental Trends on the losses of sensitive lands and habitats) in the first place. While Orange County is certainly at the forefront in environmental protection efforts in the state, a great deal more needs to be done if we are to provide for current and future growth without further compromising environmental quality and affordability. p.5-35, line I 1 (Orange County Land Use Needs) Add "walkable" to the list of characteristics of sustainable land use: "These zoning changes should reflect the objectives that promote sustainability including walkable mixed-use development patterns, transportation linkages, economic development, and diversity in housing opportunities." p.5-36, Objective LU 1-3 The suitability of the overall site for the uses and intensity proposed need to be evaluated as well. This criterion can result in more appropriate development in the short term and will inform future land-use planning efforts as well. That is, if a lot of developments are being proposed in an area the reviews show are problematic, zoning changes or TDRs should be examined for that area. This "checklist" should go beyond on-site considerations, e.g., to consider what schools, transportation, supporting commercial activity, etc are nearby to support the development. p.5-37, Objective LU2-3 Require higher density and all nonresidential developments to do stormwater BMPs or equivalent protective measures REGARDLESS of where in the county they are located. (EDDs are not Transition Areas.) p.5-38, Objective LU2-4 The evaluation is described as PREVENTING NEGATNE types of development, but certain kinds .of development in crossroad nodes may be beneficial, and opportunities to realize such types of development should be identified and implemented. For example, locally owned markets selling basic goods in such areas could generate income and jobs and reduce VMT for area residents. Because of their inherent accessibility and higher traffic, the potential for such areas to help balance the county tax base should not be overlooked. The Village Project a PO Box 585 ~ Carrboro NC 27510 ~ 914-942-6114 m www thevillageproject.cam 6 197 p.5-38, Objective LU2-8 Please provide some examples of nonrenewable resources that should be covered by the performance standards. We would argue that the performance standards should be developed for development, period, regardless of whether "nonrenewable resources" are involved. p.5-38, Objective LU2-9 Possible yields in terms of water quantity should be evaluated for ground and surface water. "Carrying capacity" is a very subjective concept and can be affected by a number of factors, such as household size, per-capita usage, irrigation practices, and conservation programs. Carrying capacity far too often assumes a static per-capita level of use that greatly exceeds what humans actually need to survive. If "carrying capacity" is included in the analysis, it should be as a suite of possible outcomes: how many people can be supported under various scenarios. p.5-38, Objective LU2-10 There are several problematic elements, in LU2-10. New development and redevelopment, especially "green" development and smart growth, may look slightly different and be somewhat denser than historic land uses. The Objective could be interpreted as supporting opposition to such new development and redevelopment that would be a net positive for the County. The environmental impacts of a development need to carry significant weight in the decision making process. There are numerous ways to minimize such impacts; however, some of them may be perceived as conflicting with historic vernacular and character, such as increased densities and greater mixing of uses than the County has historically experienced. We wholeheartedly support such a shift, and offer our services to help communities work toward new developments and redevelopments that respect community character but are walkable, transit supportive, and energy efficient. Also, "community aesthetics" and "the visual... environment" are synonymous. Please edit Objective as shown: Develop design standards or guidelines that address scale, density, and aesthetic considerations for residential, mixed-use, industrial, and commercial land uses to promote community aesthetics, energy efficiency walkability and accessibility; and the protection of the visual-a+~d-natural and cultural environments of the County. (See also Housing Objective H-3.1.) p.5-38, Objective LU3-1 Is development not going to tape place AT ALL in locations where necessary facilities do not exist? Please cross-reference an objective that sets forth how new public investments will be targeted. p.5-39, Objective LU 3-4 Please state how "farming areas" will be defined p.5-39, Objective LU3-7 Such "nonresidential" clustered nodes should be mixed use, i.e., include residential development (cross- reference Objective LU3-9) p.5-40, Objective LU4-1 Add "and multifamily dwellings," which achieve a similar objective, to wit: "Support the use of individual mobile homes and multifamily dwellings as a useful housing resource in the County by increasing the opportunities where these units can locate by-right." p. 5-40, Objective LU4-4 Insert "quality, energy-efficient" before "affordable," to wit: The Village Project a PO Box 685 ° Carrboro NC 275.10 ° 919-942-6114 ° www thevillageproject.com 7 198 "Encourage the provision of a range of quality, energy-efficient affordable and suitable low and moderate income housing by..." p. 5-40, Objective LU6-1 Active citizen engagement may be difficult to bring about if there is little confidence that the input will be heeded. Provide mechanisms to ensure that public input will be incorporated into the planning processes it is solicited for, or, at minimum, that it is made clear how the input was considered and what aspects were incorporated. Call for standards to be established on how long before public hearings documents under consideration must be made available for public review. Establish a Task Force to evaluate how the County could better inform, involve, and engage citizenry, and implement its recommendations. Chapter 6 Natural and Cultural Systems Element Overall Despite the initial statement that these elements are put in a single chapter to facilitate their collective understanding and cross-pollination, the only notable result seems to be a very long chapter. We do not see cross-pollination among the elements or multi-objective solutions. p.b-51 (Internal Po-icy Conflicts) The discussion of how new development may conflict with existing structures and preservation at historic crossroads in terms of scale and vernacular should mention these concerns as considerations and state how they might be overcome, e.g:, by the implementation of form-based codes or review by a professional urban designer or advisory board p. 6-62, lines 3-6 "The conversion of natural lands to urban or suburban uses results in habitat loss for native plants and animals, and can result in loss of native species." What about rural residential development? Its effects on habitats and species should be specified, since it is such a dominant zoning designation in the County. p.6-64 (Land Protection Efforts) So, land acquisitions have focused on agricultural lands and lands for public parks, but~what about the need for better connectivity between them, for both human and non-human mobility? Land protection efforts should include greenways and wildlife corridors. p.6-64, line 50 (Land Protection Efforts) Preserves should most certainly NOT be "surrounded by low-density development" (also in NA-11). They should be contiguous foremost with ONE ANOTHER. When not contiguous, they should be connected by greenways and wildlife corridors, and located adjacent to areas developed in a smart growth fashion where they can be utilized as recreation areas by residents. Low-density development is far from the most, suitable choice for locating near preserved areas. p.6-65 (A Monitoring Program for Orange...) The need for field work and cost constraints are noted, but couldn't some of this be done by volunteers and supervised/data compiled by staff? p.b-67, Objective NA-9 . This objective should be stated as flexible/optional for development taking place within an EDD, TDR receiving area, or that is infill, in order to allow for greater densities in areas deemed suitable for growth The Village Project a PO Box 685 ~ Carrboro NC 27510 ~ 919-942-6114 ~ www thevillageproject.com 8 199 p.b-68, Objective IVA-lb: This has much more to do with protecting the viability of working lands than the environment. This objective belongs with agricultural objectives, not NA objectives. p.b-69 (River Basins) "The Neuse River begins .east of Orange County, emerging from Falls Lake in Durham and Orange counties" should read "emerging from Falls Lake in Wake County" as the river is the subject of the sentence, not the lake p.6-72 (Watersheds) Is it worth noting that all Neuse watersheds ultimately flow into Falls Lalce, which serves hundreds of thousands of Wake County residents? p.6-77, line 5 (Historic and Current Data -Surface Water) "Minimum lot size limits help achieve the goal of limiting human impacts and is a broad tool that is widely in use.." This tool is increasingly being recognized as outdated and ineffective because it means that per-capita impervious cover is HIGHER. Smart Growth is now much more widely recognized in watershed circles as the best "land use" measure for watershed protection. The EPA has even issued a report "Protecting Water Quality with Smart Growth" documenting how low-density development is inferior to compact, mixed-use, smart-growth type development for water quality. p.b-77, line 6 (Historic and Current Dafa -Surface Wafer) 'This sentence needs to be recast: "Accompanying limits on the amount of land that can be impervious cover to water infiltration helps maintain infiltration of precipitation into the soil and reduce sheet flow surface runoff into streams and encourage infiltration into the'soil." p.b-77, lines 5-27 (Historic and Current Data -Surface Water) The first three paragraphs on this page are not about data or trends; the County's approach to watershed protection should be dealt with in a separate section. p.b-77, lines ]5-i'8 (Historic and Current Data -Surface Water) It is erroneous to say that "in most cases, stream buffers are X". The stream buffer is only applied to NEW development DURING the development process, so what you're talking about here is a requirement placed on development proposals. Unless County has not undertaken a study to determine how wide stream buffers actually ARE, this statement is without factual basis. p.6-77, -ine 24 (Historic and Current Data -Surface Water) Where the term "100-year" flood is being abandoned in favor of the "1% annual chance flood" please include the former term in parentheses as an explanatory term (e.g., `also known as the "100-year flood"') p.b-77, lines 20-27 (Historic and Current Data -Surface Water) Paragraph on floodplains seems too basic. There are data and trends to report on flooding, are there not? p.b-77, line 43 (Surface Wafer Quantity) This section is erroneously titled. This section is about "Surface Drinking Water Supplies," unless you expand the topic to include quantities outside of drinking water supply reservoirs, e.g., stream base flows and peak flows The Village Project ~ PO Box 685 ~ Carrbaro NC 27510 ~ 914-942-6114 d wwwthevillageproject.com 9 200 p.6-78, line i2 (Surface Water Quality) First chapter under "Surface Water Quality" should talk more generally about the sources of impacts/stressors before diving into the impacts of sediment. Stressors are generally human activities, particularly agriculture, forestry, and urban and suburban land uses and their associated impervious cover. This is very important background for this topic and should be given due attention. p.6-78, -ine l2 (Surface Water Qvality) Where are efforts/measures/existing programs to address water quality discussed? p.6-82 fhru 6-85 (Water Resources Trends -the Synthesis...) This chapter has a lot of information in it that seems like more like background than trends. p.b-83, line 26 (Water Resources Trends -the Synthesis...), Bullet #1 "The County has little to no potential for new surface water supplies. This is placing additional pressure on water conservation as a means of meeting increasing demand." The part about this condition "placing additional pressure on water conservation" needs to be recast. Americans use far too much water per capita. Reducing per-capita demand is a positive thing acid long overdue. Better to have the second sentence instead say "This means that conservation is more important than ever, and will continue to be key to providing residents with potable water long into the future." p.b-83, line 32 (Water Resources Trends -the Synthesis...), Bullet #2 Nitrogen and phosphorous concentrations are important considerations for land use planning, conservation efforts, and other planning-related activities. In terms of water quality, they are constituents and pollutants. p.b-83, line 36 (Wafer Resources Trends -the Synthesis...), Bullet #3 What exactly is changing? Plow? p.b-83 fhru 6-85 (Wafer Resources Trends -the Synthesis...) Where is this laundry list of "trends" going? These items, need context and some sort of narrative. p.b-84, -ine 43 (Water Resources Trends -the Synthesis...), Bullet #i7 We believe the DWQ study you mention is pursuant to the Falls NMS, which will impact land uses and point sources. There is another Neuse study getting.underway, ahydrologic model, which is being conducted by the Div. of Water Resources; which may provide better data that might be used to update future allocations. If these two studies are both discussed, they should be listed separately to reduce confusion. p.b-86, -ine l-8, Section 6.4.5.2 (Orange County Wafer Resource Needs), Bullet #5 The so-called "nonstructural" approach (an overly broad. term used here to refer to low-density zoning) should be compared against other alternative means of managing growth in terms of protecting Orange County's watersheds, and possibly other considerations (such as wildlife habitat). For example, what if the subdivisions have been constructed using conservation subdivision design principles, or low-impact development design principles, or been mixed-use developments located near existing activity nodes? p.6-87, Objective WR-6 Please add the language underlined to this objective: "Promote land use patterns that preserve the natural hydrologic system and, in conjunction with innovative and onaoinq conservation practices, maintain a sustainable "carrying capacity" balance for the future between ground water and surface water resources." The Village Project • PO Box 685 • Carrboro NC 27510 • 919-942-6114 • wtivw thevillageproject.com 10 201 Chapter ~ Services and Facilities Element p. 8-14, Section 8.4.2 (Erosion Control and stormwater Management) In the last paragraph the text conflates requirements of Neuse Rules vs requirements of Orange County. These are different sets of requirements. Orange County implements Neuse Buffer and Stormwater Rules in all areas of County in the Neuse River Basin. Orange County implements additional controls in water supply watersheds by virtue of local ordinances. (The Cane Creek and University Lake watersheds are not even in the Neuse Basin.) This paragraph needs significant revision in order to be factually correct and clear to the reader. • p.8-17: Objective EC-4 "Use low-impact stormwater design principles when developing new or retrofitting existing drainage systems that do not functionally approximate the natural drainage pattern." What does it mean to "functionally approximate the natural drainage pattern"? There are a large number of functions provided by natural drainage patterns. Moreover, the use oflow-impact stormwater design principles should be implemented everywhere, regardless~of whether the new or retrofitted development attempts to replicate or even preserve the natural drainage pattern - LII~ can be applied in all cases, at least partially. Lastly, since this objective relates to land use and sustainability, it should be cross- referenced in Chapter. l's section on Sustainability linkages and in Element 5: Land Use. Ditto for ,_ Objective EC-10. • Chapter 9 Transportation Element p.9-21, Section 9.6, Objective T-1.1 "Coordinate land use planning and transportation planning to facilitate the increased occupancy of automobiles, the expanded use of public transit, walking, and biking as primary modes of travel, and the overall development and use of a more energy-efficient transportation system." Let this objective speak more directly about the importance of land use that •supports "...the expanded use of public transit, walking, and biking as primary modes of travel," and promote the specific minimum residential densities that are necessary to support walkable, transit-oriented land use. Appendix A County Profile (Data) Element p. A 1, Second to last line Section A. Purpose "subsequent" 7 elements should now be referred to as "previous" 7 elements. p. B 1-1 (Orange County Location) List counties included in Triangle area and justify/explain definition of Triangle as these counties and municipalities. Is this definition applicable throughout ALL of the subsequent statistics and comparisons cited? p. B 1-2; Second paragraph, ORANGE COUNTY DESCRIP710N Hillsborough also has a rural buffer, although only Carrboro and Chapel Hill are mentioned as having one. p.B3-3, Table B3a (Orange County Family Household Size by Towrnship, 2000) In addition to showing data on housing aggregated for the County as a whole, show data on housing for unincorporated areas separately. p. 62-7, Table B2i, Municipal Population Density and Percents• Comparisons, 2005 The Village Project « PO Box 685 « Carrboro NC 27510 « 919-942-6114 « wwwthevillageproject.com 11 202 There is some discrepancies between the tables and graphs. For example, in table B2i, Johnston and Lee counties are left out while they are shown in table B2g. p. 62-7, Figure B2j, MuniciAal Density Percentages, 2005 The title is confusing since the chart does not have. anything to do with density. Instead of "Municipal Density Percentages," it should say "Municipal Land Area Percentages". p. 63-1, Housing Section B3.2, 2^d Bullet HIGHLIGHTS Clarify what the 9-fold increase in housing costs is compared to: the entire US or state of NC? p. B3-2, Housing Section 63.2, 2~d to last bullet HIGHLIGHTS Clarify what type of housing the "average rents" apply to. From looking at the charts later on, this statement refers to apartments, although it is not clear the size of the apartments (bedrooms baths). p. 63-2, Table B3a, Orange County Housing Profi-e, 2000 This chart shows the median contract rent although the summary for the, section mentions the average contract rent. Can these be made more consistent? p. B3-10, Table Bap, Orange County ,4vailability of Three Bedroom Apartments by Median Income It would be useful if this chart included another row that showed what the affordable level for each income group would be. Chart B3m for the single family housing indicates what. the affordable price is and a similar value would be useful for the 3-bedroom apartments. p.B4-3, Table Bob (Regional Income Comparisons, 1970-2000) Since the comparison to be made in this table is how Orange .,County compares to other counties in the region, counties should be listed horizontally, with items being compared underneath. Basically, transpose the table. p.BS-2, Section 5.2 (Environmental Highlights) The following claim is made here: o During this same time period (1970-2004), major reductions in pollutant loadings took place. This claim is unsubstantiated by a reference and needs more context. It is likely, for example, that the reductions mentioned were PER CAPITA, not gross reductions. p.B6-2, Section 86.2 (transportation Highlights) The following, reported here in the Transportation section, should also be reported in Section B4.2, Economic Highlights and section B5.5, Environmental Highlights: ® In 2000, 60,860 Orange County residents were employed. Of those, 42.4% commuted to another county for work. ® In 2000, 24,096 commuters worked in Orange County, representing 40% of the county's workforce. This information has significant economic and environmental impact as well as relevance to the county's transportation situation. We strongly recommend that data about the types of jobs & median wages found in each cohort -the group commuting in and the one commuting out should be included as well in the appendices. We need more detailed information in order to be able to address issues associated with this condition including: 1) the carbon emissions and air quality associated with high vehicle miles traveled; The Village Project ~ PO Box 685 ~ Carrboro NC 27510 ~ 919-942-6114 ~ www thevillageproject.com 12 203 2) the need for recruitment of jobs for which our residents are qualified; 3) the need to provide housing affordable for the full spectrum of wages being paid for various kinds of jobs in the County. p.Bb-2, Section 6.2 (Transportation Highlights) The following is reported from Table B6a: The number of daily vehicle miles traveled (DMVT) for Orange County is predicted to increase by 8.3% from 2000 to 2015 (projected). Please state whether this is per-capita DVMT increase; include as well in Transportation Highlights the gross total DVMT projected increase from 2000 to 2015 of 51% (this is a significantly large number); and add a chart showing corresponding COZ and other greenhouse gas emissions from DVMT across these time frames. p. B6-8, Table Bbk Commuting Trends Info Orange Counfy by County of Workers' Residence and Table B61 Commuting Trends Ouf of Orange County by Covnfy of Employmenf These charts are confusing. What do the rows "All others" and "Total incoming" represent? p. C2-1, Age Cohort Projections Section C2.1, 2°d Bullet HIGHLIGHTS For the statement that 20% of the county's total population is under 18 years of age be compared to the entire state or the county as a whole? It is not clear whether this is a large, small or average percentage. p. D-1, Section D: Maps Orange County Idorfh Carolina The Durham population is not shown on this chart. The map should clearly indicate in which township the Durham population is located. The Village Project ~ PO Box 685 ~ Carrboro NC 27510 ~ 919-942-6114 m www thevillageproject.eom 13 204 "["he ~~illagc Project C'on~nlezlts on t)ie Orange County Con7prehensivc flan tlladatc Draft 2 Orange County Comprehensive Plan DRAFT 5-6-08 1.3. TOWARD A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE An emerging point of consensus in Orange County is that we need to act in a manner that will achieve a quality of life that is sustainable into the future. Objectives include environmental conservation, energy efficiency, affordable housing, social equity, a thriving economy, regional agricultural production and the availability of transit- oriented, walkable, mixed-use communities. Orange County residents understand the linkages that support a sustainable future. Examples abound: To help preserve rural character, shop at a farmers market to help keep local farms in production. To help pay for schools and services, encourage growth of the non-residential tax base by locating residences close to business and retail centers. Reduce growth in carbon emissions by achieving compact development patterns. Page 1 Village Project Suggested Revisions to Section 1.3: (rzew text italicized & bolded) 1.3. TOWARD A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE An emerging ~~eii~e~ consensus in Orange County is wee the need to act in a manner that will achieve a quality of life that is sustainable ` Local and global natural resources are finite. Local activities have global consequences that must factor into our decision-making. Limited oil reserves and the onset of global warming compel us to embrace economic models, development patterns, transportation systems, and public investments that will result in steadily decreasing COZ emissions. E;a~;~+~~ Our principle tenets including environmental conservation, energy efficiency, affordable housing, social equity, a thriving economy, regional agricultural production and the availability oftransit-ready, walkable, mixed-use communities must be tailored to e~ahance current prosperity and well being without reducing choices for future generatio~zs. [This sentence panders to the reader and is actually false. The linkages are complex and poorly understood. Even issues as simple as litter or as pervasive as stormwater runoff are poorly understood.] uz-ip~iiiirivr••czu-'zr1..~iiirs-'rn-p-rvu'cr'cCii7'u: Tiv July 11, 2008 205 '~I'nc ~~illage Project Comments nn the Orange Caunty C:onapreIa.ensive Plan Update Dra~fi 2 We need to use the resources that are available to us today in a manner that protects them for future generations. Following is a summary of the key ideas presented in this Comprehensive Plan that relate directly to the goal of achieving a sustainable future. Refer to each of these Plan Elements for more details. . Following is a summary of the key ideas presented in this Comprehensive Plan that relate directly to the goal of achieving a sustainable future. U f i, f tl, 7D1 T/ l nm u w {''"• 1.3.1. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 1.3.1 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Ecorxornic development, above all, must address tlxe .challenges of global warming and the rapidly diminishing availability of fossil fuels by initiating the transitiorx to a "Post-carbon Economy" in whiclx local COa emissions are reduced to levels that will support climate stability. Lorxg-term economic vitality is best created by developing productive capacity from within. These efforts should result in an effective infrastructure for developing arxd supportirxg local enterprise and entrepreneurial efforts, irxcluding apprenticeship programs, entrepreneurship training, community-developed finance and investment organizations, and Local Living Economy support networks. Research shows local erxterprises create a higher multiplier effect, generate more local revenues, cost less irx terms of gaver~nmerxtal services arxd irxcentives, reduce carbon emissions, and provide stable employmerxt with better wages and benefits. All of these are lost when development offices recruit large-scale, non-local, non- , integrated, arxd cost-exterrxalizing companies that undermine local enterprise initiatives. Corxsiderirxg current social, economic arxd Page 2 July 11, 2008 206 "('he Village Project Con~tinenes ort the Orange C~}u.nty C~on~prehc~lsive flan t.)pdate I~raf~t 2 The County has established Economic Development Districts wherein public investment will be focused to stimulate and accommodate development in strategic locations that can be served by transportation systems and public infrastructure, and be convenient to housing opportunities. The County's Economic Development Commission works with local, regional and state governments and agencies to attract and promote the types of businesses suited to Orange County. Focus on these efforts is recruiting appropriate businesses that will provide jobs to local residents and provide a more balanced tax revenue structure that relies less on the generation of private property taxes. The County and Economic Development Commission have identified Action Steps in the report: "Investing in Innovation: Orange County Economic Development Commission Five-Year Strategic Plan." To meet the demand for locally grown products, the County is working with Alamance, Chatham, and Durham Counties Page 3 environmental.realities, local develapment efforts should emphasize: 1). green-collar jobs and businesses~includinggreerz refits and upgrades, renewable energy capacity and distribution, green building, and innovative water capture arzd reuse; and 2) brain-based, information age, and knowledge ecology jobs that include all forms ofhigh-value, innovative enterprises ranging from high-tech innovators such as Red Hat to community-serving investment services such as Self-Help. The County has established Economic Development Districts wherein public investment will be focused to stimulate and accommodate development in strategic locations that can be served by transportation systems and public infrastructure, and be conveniently integrated with housing arzd efficiently concentrated local services. The County Economic Development Commission currently works with local, regional and state governments and agencies to recruit the types of businesses r,,~ that help fulfill Orange County goals. Focus on these efforts is recruiting appropriate businesses that will provide jobs to local residents and provide a more balanced tax revenue structure that relies less on the generation of private property taxes. The County's Economic Development Commission has identified Action Steps in the report: "Investing in Innovation: Orange County Economic Development Commission Five-Year Strategic Plan." To meet the demand for locally grown products, the County is working with Alamance, Chatham, and Durham counties to. establish a value-added food processing center, where farmers and e~i-ear-s related July 11, 2008 207 T11e ~~iIlage Project Comments on the OratYge C~ot~nt}' Comprehensive Plan Update Draft 2 to establish avalue-added food processing center, where farmers and others could make value-added products, such as j ams, pickles, or tamales. 1.3.2. HOUSING Page 4 producers can make value-added products, such as j ams, pickles, or tamales. Other significant initiatives include farmer incubation projects; land-trust and land- care development projects; farmer training and networking events, community awareness and education events; a "sustainable living" educational center; and developing local farmer cooperatives capable of purchasing vital pracessirzg facilities (of their owrz choice) such as those needed for chicken arzd meat pracessirzg and produce cleaning and packaging. 1.3.2 HUM,4N DE yELOPMENT No plan for the future can be complete without provisions for long-term social and economic vitality. High-value local enterprise and committed, critical-thinking citizens are best developed in educational settings that emphasize meaningful, liands- on, problem-solving experiences and creative, cooperative learrzirzg. The best schools also implement model communities and economies, which help students build confidence and know-liow while learning about all the practical aspects of life, from balancing a checkboal~ arzd working with others to starting a business arzd negotiating contracts. Empoweri~zg, cooperative education builds community ties along with lcrzow-liow. 1.3.3. HOUSING Housing that is affordable across the full price spectrum is indispensable to a diverse society and a healthy economy: The County rnust provide both incentives and r•egulatiorzs to ensure that people who work irz Orange County carz fzrzd truly affordable housing located within walking or biking July 11, 2008 2 ~ $ 'I he ~~illage 1'rojc~ct ~'an>>alents on the C)r.~~t~ge Cou.t~ty Comprehensive Plan Update Draft 2 The County supports an array of affordable and workforce housing initiatives, designed to support non-profit organizations, make use of state and federal funds, and provide housing opportunities for County residents. By providing additional affordable housing initiatives within the County, opportunities for living and working in proximity increase. The County is actively pursuing options to provide residential opportunities for homeless individuals and families, contributing to the area's strong emphasis on social equity. . 1.3.3. LAND USE Mixed-use districts are being actively encouraged, and locations for new mixed-use centers are being identified; providing live- distance, or accessible by transit, from the places they work, shop, learn and play. Housing options sliould be dense enough to support public transportation. The County supports an array of affordable, i~ workforce housing initiatives; designed to support non-profit organizations, make use of state and federal funds, and provide housing opportunities for County residents and workers. By providing additional affordable housing initiatives within the County, opportunities for living and working in proximity increase. The County is actively pursuing options to provide residential opportunities for homeless individuals and families, contributing to the area's strong emphasis on social equity. 1.3.4: LAND USE Land use is instrumental in the reduction of carbon emissions. Transportation energy is greatly reduced by aggregating facilities so that people carz walk or bike or take public transit to most if rzot all daily activities. Vertical development forms reduce the footprint of the built environment, conserving energy and mitigating impacts on natural systems: "Green" building standards can further help to conserve energy arzd resources. [Repositioned paragraph from bottom of section to here) Siting "Growth Opportunity Areas" near transit comdors and along major thoroughfares will encourage more public transportation use by County residents and workers. Actively encouraging mixed-use districts and identifying mixed-use centers that provide live-work-shop opportunities will Page 5 July 11, 2008 209 Tlie ~%illage ?'ro.~ect Comments on. the Orange Co~~r~t~r C;omprel~e~lsi~,~e Plan LJpdate BcafC 2 work-shop opportunities that minimize travel needs. minimize travel needs. The County is exploring a Strategic Growth and Resource Conservation program that will help to focus new development in areas that can best accommodate it, in proximity to jobs, housing, transportation, and services near transit corridors. Simultaneously this program will also help to preserve/conserve rural and agricultural land with compensation provisions. for rural property owners. The County's development of an interconnected system of pedestrian and bicycle trails will both provide recreation opportunities and also hold promise for increasing mobility choices available to Orange County residents. Identification of growth opportunity areas near transit corridors and along major thoroughfares encourages more public transportation use by County residents. 1.3.4. NATURAL AND CULTURAL SYSTEMS As of 2007, over 22,000 acres of land in the County has been protected through various land conservation programs. These efforts support the goals of sustaining a balanced and healthy diversity of native plant and animal populations, providing a network of protection natural, cultural, and agricultural lands, and achieving and adequate level of protection for important natural areas, prime forests, and wildlife habitat. Ideas for expanding conservation efforts include improved monitoring of critical natural lands and expanding the County's inventory of critical lands to include new areas not before assessed. Preservation of working farms, forestry, and Page 6 The County is exploring a Strategic Growth and Resource Conservation program that will help to focus new development in areas that can best accommodate it, in proximity to jobs, housing, transportation, and services near transit corridors. Simultaneously this program will also help to preserve/conserve rural and agricultural land with compensation provisions for rural property owners. The County's development of an interconnected system of pedestrian and bicycle trails will both provide recreation opportunities and also hold promise for increasing mobility choices available to Orange County residents. [Repositioned paragraph front here to top of section] 1.3.5. NATURAL .AND CULTZTIEtAL SYSTEMS As of 2007, over 22,000 acres of land in the County has been protected through various land conservation programs. These efforts support the goals of sustaining a balanced and healthy diversity of native plant and animal populations, providing a network of protection natural, cultural, and agricultural lands, and achieving and adequate level of protection for important natural areas, prime forests, and wildlife habitat. Ideas for expanding conservation efforts include . improved monitoring of critical natural lands and expanding the County's inventory of critical lands to include new areas not before assessed. . Preservation of working farms, forestry, and July 11, 2008 210 ~I:'he; Village project ~'om~~lents on the Orange C;ou~ity £.:omprel~.eusive 1?lan Ul~datc Uraft 2 ancillary agricultural businesses is supported by the County. Farmland preservation districts, agricultural preservation through private conservation easements, and the use value taxation model are working to protect farmland and the farming industry in Orange County. More can be done, and County regulations are being reviewed to identify impediments to farniing practices. The potential for the Strategic Growth and Rural Conservation program and enhanced farmland preservation districts could provide additional opportunities for farmland protection. Developing a local food system that links local producers and consumers is of high importance. The number of farmers markets operating in the County has increased in recent years, exemplifying their success. Agri-tourism and farming events have also proven popular. One idea to expand on the success of our local agricultural industry is to identify suitable locations for agricultural facilities, such as processing centers, community kitchens, demonstration tracts, community gardens, and the like that can bring together producers and consumers and educate the next generation of farmers. Orange County, Chapel Hill and Carrboro initiated a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory and Reduction Action Plan project in 2006. More can be done to improve air quality and reduce the use ofnon-renewable fuels over the planning horizon. Ideas include the promotion of private and public use of alternative fuel sources and power generation options, such as harnessing and using landfill gas, and participating in green energy production programs. Our historical character has been protected through the efforts of national and local level preservation programs. Cultural landscapes, historic structures, and even scenic roadways ancillary agricultural businesses is supported by the County. Farmland preservation districts, agricultural preservation through private conservation easements, and the use value taxation model are working to protect farmland and the farming industry in Orange County. More can be done, and County regulations are being reviewed to identify impediments to farming practices. The potential for the Strategic Growth and Rural Conservation program and enhanced farmland preservation districts could provide additional opportunities for farmland protection. Developing a local food system that links local producers and consumers is of high importance. The number of farmers markets operating in the County has increased in recent years, exemplifying their success. Agri-tourism and farming events have also proven popular. One idea to expand on the success of our local agricultural industry is to identify suitable locations for agricultural facilities, such as processing centers, community kitchens, demonstration tracts, community gardens, and the like that can bring together producers and consumers and educate the next generation of fanners. Orange County, Chapel Hill and Carrboro initiated a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory and Reduction Action Plan project in 2006. More can be done to improve air quality and reduce the use ofnon-renewable fuels over the planning horizon. Ideas include the promotion of private and public use of alternative fuel sources and power generation options, such as harnessing and using landfill gas, and participating in green energy production programs. Our historical character has been protected through the efforts of national and local level preservation programs. Cultural landscapes, historic structures, and even scenic roadways Page 7 July 11, 2008 "I~l~e ~jillage I'rajc:et Comments oi~ the Ora~~ge Cau.nty C:on~prehciisive flan L.lpclate 13raft 2 21 1 can be protected through existing preservation programs. Advancement of preservation goals could include funding assistance to landowners needing additional resources to maintain historic properties. 1.3.5. SERVICES AND FACILITIES Water conservation efforts have been a critical piece _in managing water supplies through recent droughts. County level coordination is needed to manage water resources that will serve future populations. Placing public water and sewer facilities near areas targeted for dense development can reinforce a more sustainable land use pattern. Erosion control and stormwater management efforts in the County are paramount for protecting natural areas from the adverse effects of development. These efforts can be expanded by improving surface water mapping and collecting additional water quality data to inform development management efforts. The County has set an ambitious waste reduction goal of 61%1. Orange County has surpassed state mandates for waste reduction in 1996 and 2001. Continued efforts to identify waste reduction opportunities is supported by the County. The identification of a future waste transfer site and landfill location are critical needs that will be addressed over the planning horizon. Page 8 can be protected through existing preservation programs. Advancement of preservation goals could include funding assistance to landowners needing additional resources to maintain historic properties. 1.3.6. SERVICES AND FACILITIES Water conservation efforts have been a critical piece in managing water supplies through recent droughts. County level coordination is needed to manage water resources that will serve future populations. Placing public water and sewer facilities near areas targeted for dense development can. reinforce a more sustainable land use pattern. [77iere are numerous ways to increase the number of people that ca~a be served by a given amount of fresh water. For example, the county needs to explore ways to provide water and wastewater service to the mixed- use nodes where centralized water and sewer are not appropriate. Currently, county residents use water quite inefficiently.] Erosion control and stormwater management efforts in the County are paramount for protecting natural areas from the adverse effects of development. These efforts can be expanded by improving surface water mapping and collecting additional water quality data to inform development management efforts. The County has set an ambitious waste reduction goal of 61%1. Orange County has surpassed state mandates for waste reduction in 1996 and 2001. Continued efforts to identify waste reduction opportunities are supported by the County. The identification of a future waste transfer site and landfill location is a critical needy that will be addressed over the planning horizon. July 11, 2008 212 -l he ~%illagc Prc~jcct Comments on the Orarlgc Couut~' Comprcl~ensive Plan t_I~adate Draft 2 1.3.6. RECREATION SAND PARKS By investigating new forms of recreation to meet new demands (seniors, changing demands for youth), the County is pro- activelyplanning for the range of needs and demands that will accompany residential growth. By planning for Joint use of facilities by multiple users and jurisdictions (e.g., the two school systems and recreation departments), the County is encouraging efficient use of land and wise use of public.financial resources. 1.3.7. TRANSPORTATION The County is actively encouraging alternative modes of transportation and ride- sharing, expanding possibilities for mobility by means other than single-occupant automobiles. Examples of alternative modes of transportation include, but are not limited to: ® Interconnected pedestrian and bicycle trails; ® Transit lanes along major thoroughfares; and a Considering the development of park-and-ride lots that would encourage use of public transportation to travel to and from 1.3.7. RECREATION AND PA.RI~S By investigating new forms of recreation to meet new demands (seniors, changing demands for youth), the County is pro- actively planning for the range of needs and demands that will accompany residential growth. By plaiuling for joint use of facilities by multiple users and jurisdictions (e.g., the two school systems and recreation departments), the County is encouraging efficient use of land. and wise use of public financial resources. 1.3.8. TRANSPORTATION The discussion of sustainability in transportation options is inadequate so long as density is left out of the equation. At minimum, state what professional consensus is about the minimum housing and other densities necessary to support public transportation.) The reductio~a of carbon emissions is an. inescapable imperative and the County must actively encourage the transitia~z from automobile dependence to alternative modes of transportation and ride-sharing; ~~e~c=s. Examples of alternative modes of transportation include, but are not limited to: ® Interconnected pedestrian and bicycle trails; a Dedicated transit lanes along major thoroughfares making public transportation a~z expeditious and attractive option; and ® ~~~~r~-- Development of park-and-ride lots that ~ encourage the use of public transportation to travel to and from Page 9 July 11, 2008 "1'he ~~i{lage Project Comments on the E~ral~ge C`;ount_v C`:on~.preheilsive Plan Llpdate Dra~i~t 2 213 work. Increasing public transit by expanding public and special transportation services for seniors, and individuals with disabilities, increases choice and opportunity. Increasing bus service, designating public transportation nodes throughout the County with facilities to accommodate pedestrians, park and ride lots, and bicycle racks all contribute to mobility options. These initiatives reinforce each other. Taken together, they form a platform of sustainable practices upon which current and future generations of Orange County residents can build productive lives. Page 10 work. Particular attention must be givers to increasing choice and opportunity for seniors and individuals with disabilities by expanding public and special transportation services. Additionally, increasing bus service, designating public transportation nodes throughout the County with facilities to accommodate pedestrians, creating park and ride lots, and providing bicycle racks all contribute to increasing mobility options. These initiatives reinforce each other. Taken together, they form a platform of sustainable practices upon which current and future generations of Orange County residents can build productive lives. July 11, 2008 214 Tom ~4ltieri From: James Carnahan [jarnahan@rnindspring.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 11:51 AM To: Tom Altieri Cc: Donna Baker Subject: Comp Plan comments for PB Aug 6 mtg Page 1 of 2 The Village Project has continued to follow the Comprehensive Plan Update process. Upon reviewing the agenda of the Planning Board's July 9 meeting, and notes from that meeting, we became aware of some proposed changes to the text of the Comprehensive Plan Update anal would like to make the following comments. We request that these comments be included in the public record of the Comprehensive Plan Update. 1) In Chapter 1, "Towards a Sustainable Future," changes have been proposed to the original May 6 language in section 1.3.3 that read: "Identification of growth opportunity areas near transit corridors and along major thoroughfares encourages more public transportation use by County residents." The proposed change reads as follows, including removal of the term "Growth Opportunity Areas:" "Higher residential densities near transit corridors and along major thoroughfares may encourage more public transportation use by County residents." This is a significant change that misses an important point about what comprises "sustainable" development patterns. Higher residential densities alone do not necessarily lead to wallcble, transit- supportive development. To ensure walkability and effectively reduce COa emissions and other environmental impacts -and to create neighborhoods with a strong sense of place and community - higher residential density must be accompanied by: * mixed use, including neighborhood shopping and a full range of employment opportunities; * streetscapes and urban characteristics that retain human scale and create solid, affirmative ambience for pedestrians and bicyclists; * public transit in operation or in planning for operation within 2-3 year term; * narrow, lower-speed street grids, designed after turn of the century streetcar neighborhoods, not modern suburban parkways." For further elaboration please refer to the attached file, Smart Growth -- As Seen From the Air by John W. Holtzclaw, former Chair of the National Sierra Club Transportation Committee, that explores the relationship between urban characteristics. and reduction of vehicle miles traveled. We support use of a term such as "growth opportunity areas" that is accompanied by a clear definition that would prescribe a fully walkable, energy reducing & open space conserving development outcome. 2) This revised language in ED Objective 2.6 was proposed at the July 9 Planning Borad meeting: 8/6/2008 Page 2 of 2 215 "Objective ED-2.6: Encourage and accommodate office facilities to be developed in areas that are desirable and attractive to major corporate users and that have access to public transportation networks and possibly rail transit." We recommend that this Objective be revised to more actively prescribe where and how office development takes place. The current language about public transportation & rail transit is too passive. Mixed use development that includes office (and retail & residential components) must be located where public transit including rail are h~kelu to become available if not already in place, and must be fashioned in the most compact form in order to maximize pedestrian connectivity between the transit and the destinations. 3) We emphasize again the importance of having a very well defined set of "sustainability principles" at the top of the Comp Plan, preferably included in Chapter 2 with the Commissioner's Principles, or that the Commissioners Principles be revised to have a stronger focus on sustainability. We refer you to pp. 63-72 of the Planning Board's July 9, 2008 Agenda Item Abstract; the right hand column presents the Village Project's suggested revisions to Section 1.3, "Towards a Sustainable Future." We believe it is particularly important at this time that our definition of sustainability refer specifically to "peak oil" and global warming, epochal larger-context issues that play significant roles in our quality of life and that are affected and exacerbated by choices we make locally. James Carnahan for The Village Project August 6, 2008 $/6/2008 2~6 Sn1a~t Growth -- .As Seen From the Air C®nvenient Neighborhood., Slip the Car John W. Holtzclaw Consultant, Natural Resources Defense Council; and Chair, Siena Club Transportation Com. 1508 Taylor, San Francisco CA 94133 (Frese~zted at the Air & YYaste Management Association's 93rd Annual Meeting & Exhibition, 23 June 2000, Salt Lake City, U7) ABSTRACT The design of our urban areas and their transportation systems strongly influences emissions of urban air pollutants. Smart Growth can increase neighborhood convenience, consequently reducing driving to one-fourth or less, by: ® increasing neighborhood density to raise the number of nearby destinations, including markets, restaurants and other commerce and services in residential neighborhoods (mixed-use), ® locating neighborhoods close to job centers, a providing safe, attractive and convenient pedestrian and bicycle conditions, ® limiting parking; and ® providing frequent, convenient, affordable and safe public transit. Such neighborhoods encourage wallcing, bicycling and use of transit for most trips. Equations developed from research using all these variables except parking in the Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco regions predicts 79 to 96% of the variance in auto ownership and 80 to 94% of the variance in driving (vehicle miles traveled -- VMT) for neighborhoods within those regions. Residential density is the most effective urban variable in predicting auto ownership and driving. The next most effective variable is the amount of nearby public transit. Finally comes pedestrian and bicycle friendliness, including the fineness of the street grid, provision of public sidewallcs and weather pxotection, location of buildings close to the sidewalk rather than behind parking lots, and trafl=lc safety. Center proximity slightly improved the prediction of VMT in the San Francisco area, the only area where data was available. We had no measure of the amount of private and public parking by neighborhood. The success of these neighborhoods in attracting and retaining residents also depends upon: ® nearby parks, creeks, recreation areas, and other open spaces and wildlife habitat, ® attractive, quality architecture of the neighborhood and buildings, ® quality construction, built to last much longer than housing or shopping centers located in .sprawl. INTRODUCTION Motor Vehicle Pollution Motor vehicles are the single largest source of urban air pollution and a major source of water pollution. In the San Francisco Bay Area, for instance, on-road vehicles emit 49% of the reactive 217 organic gasesl, 52% of the nitrogen oxidesi and 69% of carbon monoxide 2. In Los .Angeles, motor vehicles and their fuels account for about 90% of the cancer risk3. These toxins, along with dumped motor oils, wash into our streams and bays, becoming major water po-llutants. Nevertheless, U.S. vehicle miles traveled (VMT) grew at well over 3 percent per year during the 1980s, and is forecast to increase another 25 percent per capita between 1990 and 2010.4' s What drove this growth. and what can be done to rein it in? These questions have stimulated vigorous discussions in the transportation community. 12esearch on How Urban Design Ympacts VM7C How does sprawl drive up VMT? Low density areas are designed to force residents to drive for most trips. Their zoning requires front and side yard setbacks, wide streets and two or more off- streetparking places, reducing densities and separating destinations. Many suburbs prohibit sidewalks and convenient nearby markets, restaurants and other commerce. These government mandates force destinations farther apart, lengthening trips to where non-automotive modes become less viable. Contrast this with traditional cities which grew up around pedestrians, allowing residents to walk, bicycle or take transit to jobs, corner markets and other nearby commerce. They have relatively high densities: ranging from row houses on narrow lots through 3 to 4 story walk=ups to high-rise elevator apartments, condos and co-ops--at 20 to 200 households/residential acre. They are proximate to major job and shopping centers, but have their own local shopping and services, and sidewalks and other amenities to encourage walking. They have excellent access to transit. They were so complete that many residents seldom left them. These areas are now the central and adjacent areas of our older cities and some of the older suburbs. Smart growth replicates traditional city form. But can we measure the reductions in driving sufficient to provide reproducible emission credits to smart growth? Some progress is evident. In a survey of 32 major cities around the world, Peter Newman and Jeffrey Kenworthy found that the residents of American cities consumed nearly twice a5 much gasoline per capita as Australians, nearly four times as much as the more compact European cities and ten times th Y of three compact westernized Asian cities, Hong Kong, Singapore and Tokyo.s However, the lacked measurements of VMT, or data for neighborhoods rather than whole metropolitan areas, split into central cities and suburbs. Their data suggest that driving is reduced 30 percent every time density doubles. If so, sprawling suburban areas would benefit from modest increases in density. A few 3 to 5 story limited-parkirig condos or apartment houses replacing parking lots or other underused land along major streets could double their density, cutting household mileage 30 percent. If this relationship, a reduction in driving of 30% every time density doubles, holds up to the density of Manhattan, its families would drive only 8%, or 1/12, as much as nearby suburbanites. Travel surveys, where household residents log each trip, give more direct estimates of VMT. Newman and Kenworthy reported results of a travel survey of United Kingdom cities, which 2 218 give a 25 percent reduction in per capita VMT as density is doubled.s Similarly, a travel survey in the Greater Toronto Area suggested that doubling density results in a decrease in per capita VMT of about 25-percent.' A comparison of cities in Washington state found housing density, population density, jobs-housing balance and retail-housing balance to co-vary and to be associated with reduced driving.e But the cost of such surveys limits them to too few households to provide a statistical analysis of all the important variables at neighborhood level. The above studies were. for much larger areas than neighborhoods, limiting their ability to measure the effects of neighborhood characteristics like density, transit service and pedestrian and bicycle friendliness. A 1990 study of five communities, ranging from traditional to suburban, in the San Francisco region used actual odometer readings.9 The study found that high residential density, nearby shopping, good transit and a good walking environment go together, while low density zones lacked all these. The co-variance of these variables increases the difficulty of disentangling their effects, but does allow density to capture much of the effects of the others. The residents of higher density communities drove 20 to 30 percent per household less every time neighborhood density doubled. Nob Hill, at 32 times higher household density as San Ramon, had 1/4 its household auto ownership and VMT. However, the limited number of communities studied prevented disentangling the effects of residential density, nearby shopping, transit and the wallcing environment. Using a household travel survey in the Seattle area, Frank and. Pivo found that employment density, population density, land-use mix and jobs-housing balance are associated with less auto use.'° These relationships held up even when household demographics, car ownership and transit are controlled. A study of 27 neighborhoods in San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego and Sacramento, using odometer readings, found that doubling residential density cut auto ownership 16%, while doubling public transit service reduced VMT an additional 5%." With density as a surrogate for all the variables, doubling residential density cut VMT 20%. Kara Kockelman, in a study of over 1000 travel analysis zones. and 1,200 census tracts in the San Francisco Bay Area, found that the following influence.household VMT: household size, auto ownership, income, weighted jobs within 30 minutes, dissimilarity of the zone's major land use from its neighbors, and the balance of land uses within each zone within a half mile.'Z Robert Dunphy and Kimberly Fisher calculatedthe average VMT from the 1990 National Personal Transportation Survey (NPTS) for households whose ZIP codes had the same population density.13 For the five density ranges above 4000 persons/square mile (about 5 households/residential acre), their Table 4 shows a decrease of 38% in daily driving as density doubles. These studies have-shown-a-strong-relationship-between-urban form and driving. Of course it makes intuitive sense that people living in neighborhoods originally built for the convenience of residents without private automobiles would have lower auto ownership and, driving. But which 219 of the mix of variables that comprise these neighborhoods are the most crucial? If we can identify which of the variables. is most effective, and measure their effects, then architects and developers can incorporate ~thern into smart growth, and air quality analysts can credit such design with emissions reductions. Our location efficiency study explores the hypothesis that the average household's auto ownership and driving decrease measurably as likely trip destinations become more convenient, especially by non-automotive modes. Further; it tests the assumptions that residential density, center proximity, local shopping, public transit accessibility and the pedestrian and bicycle friendliness of the neighborhood are good measures of that convenience. Which variables do we test? ' ® Density - a measure of the number of nearby destinations. Residential density, the number of households per residential acre, seems to be the best measure, probably because it focuses on the developed area and is~not diluted by farmland or parks within the zone but outside the everyday neighborhood. But other measures of density are also tested. ® Center proximity - a measure of the neighborhood's access to concentrations of jobs and shopping. ® Local shopping - a measure of the amount of restaurants, markets, retail stores, insurance agents, and of course video rental stores, nearby. a Public transit -important as an alternative to driving. ® Pedestrian and bicycle friendliness -how attractive are areas to these alternatives to driving. We would also have liked to test the impacts of parking supply, but were barred by the lack of detailed zonal data on parking. Traditional dense areas have narrow streets and limited parking. In addition, the land required by on-site parking itself reduces the density. In the Bay Area, a 3-story apartment house's density could range from 28 units/acre to 64 due only to differences in parking requirements of existing zoning laws.14 Consequently, to some extent density captures parking tightness. This study also sought.to quantify the statistical relationship of such locational variables to auto ownership and driving to facilitate the Location Efficient MortgagecM (LEM). The LEM allows a household to buy a more expensive home in a location efficient area by committing its auto savings to repaying the mortgage, interest, taxes and insurance. I reported preliminary results of this study in the 1997 AWMA meetings.15 T]EIIS LOCATION EFFICIENCY STUDY This study, sponsored by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NR.DC), the Center for Neighborhood Technology (CNT) in Chicago, and the Surface Transportation Policy Project in Washington, DC, includes every neighborhood in the San Francisco, LA and Chicago areas. The zones analyzed are the Chicago Area Transportation Study's 316 Dram-Empal zones covering the Chicago metropolitan area, the Southern California Association of Governments' 1700 Travel Analysis Zones covering the Los Angeles metropolitan area and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's 1099 Travel Analysis Zones in the San Francisco metropolitan area. 4 220 Zones comprised primarily or wholly of parks, military bases, prisons, airports or industrial facilities are outside the scope of this analysis and were eliminated from the data base. Tlae Variables The dependent variables are vehicles available per household and vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Average vehicle availability for each zone is from the 1990 U.S. Census. VMT per vehicle is derived from odometer readings recorded when owners take their vehicles in for emission systems inspections (smog checks) in California and Illinois. Average VMT per household is calculated as the VMT per vehicle times the number of vehicles per household for each zone. The dependent variables were tested against a wide range of potential explanatory variables, including the most important socio-economic factors of household income and household size. Locational variables tested were: density, transit service and access to jobs by transit, availability of local shopping, pedestrian and bicycle friendliness, and proximity to jobs. The density measures tested were households/residential acre, population/acre and population/residential acre. Householdslresidential acre (Hh/1ZA) had the strongest correlation to vehicle ownership, while households/total acre (Hh/TA) had the strongest correlation to VMT/vehicle. Total acreage includes residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, parks and open space, and any other categories reported. The data were compiled from the census and regional planning organizations. Household and per capita income ($/Hh, $/P) and household size (P/Hh) were derived from 1990 census data. The measure of transit accessibility is zonal transit density (Tr) , which is the daily average number of buses or trains per hour times the fraction of the zone within 1/4 mi of each bus stop (or i/zmi of each rail or ferry stop or station) , summed for all transit routes in or near the zone. There is some double counting where stops are less than 1/4 mile apart, but correcting for this would not substantially alter the order of the TAZs nor the relative differences between zones. Therefore this measure provides a robust assessment of transit service. An alternative measure, the zonal transit density times the number of jobs reached within 30 minutes by transit (Tr,J) , provided no better correlation with auto ownership or driving than the zonal transit density alone. So the simpler zonal transit density is reported. Routes, schedules and stop locations are from the transit agencies or the metropolitan planning organizations, who also calculated the number of jobs accessible by transit. The measure of center proximity (CP) is the number of jobs within a 30 minute drive, calculated by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the San Francisco. region. An alternative measure is the number of jobs within a 15 minute drive divided by the number of jobs within a 30 minute drive (E15/E30). This provides a measure of the relative availability of jobs locally. Including CP in the VMT/vehicle analysis provided a marginally higher RZ, but was available only in San Francisco and therefore not included in the general analysis. E15/E30 did not improve R2 as much as CP did. 5 Local shopping (Sh) is the number of service and retail jobs per developed area within the zone, from the U.S. Census. Zones with centroids less than 1/4 mi apart were combined for this calculation. Local shopping is strongly correlated with density and transit, and did not add to the RZ after they were taken into account. The measure of pedestrian/bicycle friendliness (Ped) is the number of census blocks per hectare (scale of the street grid) , plus an adder based upon the mean year the housing was built, both from the U.S. Census, with bonuses fox traffic calming, good pedestrian conditions, bike lanes, paths, and bike parking, whether as part of the initial design or added later. Had direct measurements of the continuity, width and quality of sidewalks, nearness of buildings to the sidewalk, and traffic safety been available, we would have preferred using them to using the mean year the housing was built. A fine street grid shortens routes and offers more alternatives, and the frequent intersections slow traffic: The measure works because older neighborhoods tend to have a fine street grid, sidewalks, narrow streets, slower traffic and buildings closer to the sidewalk. We also tested socioeconomic variables available at the zonal level: average household size, average household income and average per capita income. These were derived from the U.S. Census. However, we were not able to explore any independent impact of neighborhood parking supply or cost. Analysis of vehicles available and driving The correlation of each individual independent variable (locational and socio-economic) with auto ownership and VMT was tested. Tn the San Francisco area, for instance, IIlilR.A explained 63% of the variance in Veh/Hh, followed by transit job access at 55%, Hl>/TA at 52%, transit service at 49%, income/household at 43%, shopping at 35% and household size at 28%.1n each of the three metropolitan areas, ~ explained the most variance in Veh/Fih and VMT/Hh, see Figure 1. These correlations show a very strong relationship of residential density to auto ownership and driving in all three regions studied, even before evaluating the other variables--income, household size, transit service, pedestrian bicycle friendliness, etc. When tested against each other, density, transit, local shopping, center proximity and pedestrian bicycle friendliness prove to lie highly correlated. While this makes it harder to pick apart the separate influences, it means that density to some extent captures the effects of local shopping, transit and pedestrian and bicycle friendliness. As much as possible, we based the forms of our fits on simple modeling of the physical situations. For instance, since doubling density doubles the number of nearby destinations, and doubling transit service doubles the number of destinations you can easily reach, it is reasonable to expect that for both each doubling would decrease auto ownership and VMT by a similar percentage--a log-log or power fit. However, there are limitations on how many cars a household can own, and lzow many miles even the most auto-entranced folic can drive, therefore we modified the power fit form to be bounded as the density goes to zero. Similarly, since more people in the household increase the number of drivers and people to be driven around, we expected a linear relationship of household size with autos and VMT. However, we had less reason to anticipate a particular mathematical form (linear, power, bounded power, root, polynomial, exponential, etc.) for the relationship between income or pedestrian bicycle friendliness and auto ownership or VMT. So we tested various mathematically, simple forms that had appropriate behavior over the ranges of 221 6 222 the independent variables. We derived the forms of the equations using the San Francisco data and then used these forms to derive the equations for the other two regions. Using the data available in all three geographical regions and the same equation forms, the variables which consistently explain the most variance in vehicles/household (Veh/EIli) are net residential density (I~~/RA), per capita income ($/P), household size (P/I~ and transit accessibility (Tr), see Table 1. For vehicle miles traveled/vehicle (VMT/Veh) the best variables are total residential density (Hh/TA), P/H, pedestrianl6icycle friendliness (Ped) and $/P. These are the equations which when applied in the same form in all three regions give the highest RZ. In both the Veh/Hh and VMT/Veh models, density is raised to a negative power, so doubling density causes a fixed decrease in Veh or VMT. In the Vel~/Hh model, transit service is raised to a negative power, so doubling Tr causes a fixed decrease in Veh. Household size acts as expected, each additional person adds a fixed increase in Veh' or VMT. Improvements in pedestrian and bicycle friendliness reduce VMT/Veh, but with the square root of Ped. The impact of per capita income is a little less straight-forward. It increases with ownership by declining increments as income increases. But VMT/Veh decreases as income increases. The result is that up to an annual income of $25,000 to 30,000, VMT/Hh increases with income as expected, but levels off and falls slightly at higher incomes up to $100,000 per person. The best San Francisco model for VMT/Veh using variables available in all three regions is the same as in Table 1, but with a function for Zonal Transit Density in place of that for Households/Total Acre. Tr gives an RZ of 44.1%, which is slightly better than the 43.8% in the above table. But in the other two regions, Tr in place of H/RA. reduced the RZ to ,40.0% for Chicago and 37.6% for LA, substantially poorer than the I3h/Tot Acre fit. So the recommended equations use Hh/Tot Acre. In all three cities, the R2 for VMT/Veh is much lower than the Rz for Vel~/I-Ili, indicating that neighborhood conditions more strongly impact the decisions on how many vehicles to have available than they do each decision to use the vehicles on hand. However, since Veh/Hh varies much more from zone to zone (1 s.d. equals ±25% for San Francisco) than does VMT/~Ili (±9%), Veh/Hh is more important, and the RZ for the resulting VMT/Hh is almost the same as for Veh/Hh. Data for center proximity was only available for the San Francisco region,, so none of the fits in Table 1 are based on it. The Veh/Ilh fit in Table 3 is already highly significant, and center 7 223 Figure 1. The reduction in vehicle miles traveled per household as residential density increases. riving vs Residential ensity 35000 30000 .~ 25000 ~. ~ 20000 ' ~ S F 1~ ~ ~ ~~~~ .. 15000 ~, ~ - LA ~ y~~ - - -Chicago \t ~'`. Q 10000 `~` Ly L-'° 5000 ~'`'~".'... ",....~.~..~,....vr_._._..-,.__.._._.~,..._.....,~..:.. ~~.-.~. 0 0 50 100 150 200 Households/Residential Acre proximity added no significance. However, for vehicle use, center proximity added about 5% to the total variation explained,' giving a total RZ of 53.9% for the San Francisco region. This suggests that the impacts of CP, while not measured in Chicago and Los Angeles, should be further explored. The equations in Table 2 provide a high explanation of variation. Figure 2 shows the impact of residential density and transit on VMT/Hh using the equation for the San Francisco area. This shows that a household with regional average income and family size living in a 2 HI>/RA neighborhood with zero transit service, for instance, would average over 23,000 miles annually. Raising the density to 150 Hh/RA would reduce the mileage to 10,300. But it also shows that more modest increases iri density reduce driving. It also shows that at each level of transit service increases of density reduce driving. Similarly, it shows that an increase in Tr to 300 would reduce annual driving to under 15,400. And it shows that more modest increases in transit service reduce driving. At the highest density and transit service in this example, annual mileage is 3,700. Extending These .Analyses These equations allow the use of available neighborhood locational and demographic Table 1. The best a uations 1 - 9 to redict Vel~/IIli, VMT/Veh and VMTIHh in all three re 'ons. gz 224 Chicago -0.2797 Veh _ H 1 I 1 -1.9029.955 + 1 915 _ O.ODD142 $ C P) - e 1 P ooess + 0.4893 ~~Tr + 2.960- ' 96.3% ~ Hh H VMT H- -o.os47 -116200.1662 + ~ P Cl + 0.00653 ~~l 1 - 0.0249 Ped ~- 0.0818 P - 22136 I 46.8% Veh TA H J VMT Veh VMT _ Hh Hh x Veh 93.5% Los Angeles -0.0926 Veh H1 =1.7326.155+ J 1 0.8278 _ 0.000131 ~ P) -e 1 P o tees +0.7936 1eTr+30.796-' 78.6% ~ ~ H VMT H -o.oesl ~ -116240.3432+ P 1 C1+0.01555 ~1- 0.1078 Ped)-0.04095~p-22136 42.0% TA Veh H J VMT Veh VMT _ Hh HIi X Veh 80.0% San Francisco -0.3471 Veh _ H - 4.7221 22.520 + ~ i. 386 _ O.OD0112 $ ( P, 1- e C P 02336 l + 1.0519 ~~Tr + 60.312- ' 90.2% ~ HIz H --0.0419 ~~ =103860.5041+ ~ I ~1+.0.02759 H~ ~1- 0.0704 Ped ~-0.01743 p -22136 43.8% J ) VMT Veh VMT _ Hh Hh x Veh 87.1% * H/RA is Households/Residential Acres, H/'TA is Households/Total Acre, $/P is Income/Capita, P/H is Persons/Hh, Tr is Zonal Transit Density and Ped is PedBicycle Friendliness. characteristics to predict average auto ownership and mileage by neighborhood in three of major U.S. regions. Extending the analyses to other metropolitan areas is a first step. Extending the analysis from vehicles and VMT to vehicle trips and vehicle starts would increase its applicability to air quality analysis. Expanding the analysis from just the characteristics of residential . neighborhoods to the: concentration ox dispersal of jobs or commerce would extend its utility to air quality analysis. ' This study was made in order to quantify the transportation savings of average families living in convenient location efficient neighborhoods, allowing them to qualify for Location Efficient MortgagessM. LEMs allow families to apply these transportation savings to qualifying for a higher Figure 2. How residential density and transit impact VIvIT/Hh using the San Francisco area equation. 225 impact ®f ®ensity and Transit ®n driving ; ; e~a ~. ~- I San F ra . ~~..:,c:4,,:,::_:;~ : ~_:, ....,., ,:i~,,_ i!f,;!!;_~ny_;, '.`;,jll~_i('1ti`'~~`i_~iP;~;ica-~1"!I~`;i'i;!1=°;:~IiI FI(m; ..:d:':i~ I!; a8!',, _;,.i .L:,:.1{u..~:...,.,:;i!Ira6'°i?;l€€i~i~~!e~!!~iilr~r:=:Ilhc ~;:;;~:I;e:,l'"~~ ~;: i.!! ~::::s. ~~il~!'!';id;~;;:,~.::_(~:!arUg:'~~I!~eiil' ~ ~!'~~! ;''y Ih;~ ; ;{ t K ' (~ ILL 1~ t!1 'Iti ;~ !i}1 ;!, ,~. f iv r; 4;d s ~ ~ .. I;!i i~l ~; d9; ri; ~ a .,~}I~,l i„ i'~I'h i'; ~;i !i~'!;-"; 5~-!~' I'! dln~,(i' !li';tu;li. 25000 _ ` ::~ ki;i _a-; ~~';:;i; ~~` ~~1`u1i'cl'! 1!~(•!~; i!kb~j j;il' ';:,L:aac!AF!i[; li~_ {il(!~ illlr ui'ii((i~!(~ILr~(G';1(S u9~j t ~~r Z3 20000 `!;; i~r;,~i, r (i~ .. ; ' ~I~ ' ~ ; v ; . ' ~ it ; ! ~ !; ;I I,i ' ;"~~ ..~. f ~i~l i Iii' 1 1 n ;; >/ ~ ~' i i3 N 15000 ' - ~ "'~ .... j~li ;II!'!~; i;';P il;lh ~r!(~I; s l ~ 7 d .G' 'la Ir ; ~ ~ ~ ~ . 2 Q = 10000 ~;; {~'~ ~~~'~ir11;U~;~~!~~'ti'~~~ip~j~~`~+~ ^ 150 ~ ~ L4C4ki v~ !I ~ k~~~( ~~~.~L vi~. Lail #1! 7n{ II,~,' f 5000 'Si1I!~`i ~: i' ~ 11~f ;a f~ ;~1n k~difil S't'~`s" ; III i ;~ al ! <•~:r ~(~~ t !515 Fh ~°u U~V! At'! !1 I: ,III ~. ~ j 4~Ilr. i t{ '!P~% ~ !`~i{ 3OO , , ; ii ~ (~3 `L ~ ~ I(;~ ~ ;{512( y~~..Y~ ,'~ ~ ~~,«'~.~~~1r ;~"~~,~-~~,4~~;~~ FIh/Res Acre 0 J '<.-,~r t:•y~dr~? 450 300 600 900 Zonal Transit Density mortgage. Location Efficiency analysis is already being extended to allow LEMs in Seattle, Washington and Portland, Oregon. In neither of these are mileage readings for vehicles available. The dominance of Veh/Iili in the calculations of VMT/Hh facilitated these extensions. Veh/ffii, available from the U.S. Census in all cities, along with densities, income, household size, transit service and pedestrian and bicycle friendliness, allow the Veh/Iih equation to be calibrated. Average VMT/Veh is calculated by state departments of transportation based upon fuel use, screenline monitoring and other gross measures. This allows the VMTNeh equation to be calibrated to the regional average VMT/Veh. Extending the analysis to other important dependent variables.-vehicle trips and vehicle starts - would require localized measures of these. The closest available measures are household travel surveys, but as with VMT analysis these contain insufficient data. For instance, in the San Francisco region there average less than ten households per zone. The scarce data problem is aggravated by the lack of any households in many zones, especially the denser zones, which are scarcer to begin with. Since fewer trips commence in denser zones, and are consequently less critical to transportation planning, planners have tended to slight them. But aggregating zones by residential density provides more respectable household numbers, allowing derivation of a gross relationship of trips to VMT by residential density. This relationship could be used to extend the predictions of VMT/Hh to trips/household. Similarly, the time between trips, if reported in the household travel survey, could be used to extend the predictions to cold starts. Similarly, the impacts on trips and VMT of job and commerce concentrations could be estimated by use of household travel surveys. Jobs and local shopping employees are known by zone. Grouping the zones by local shopping density or job ranges would allow shopping trips 10 226 August 11, 2008 To: Orange County Planning Board Attn: Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor Orange County Planning and Inspections Department 306-F Revere Rd., PO Bow 8181 Hillsborough, NC 27278 . From: Ken Terlep 4601 Eno Cemetery Road Cedar Grove, NC 27231 Subject: Comprehensive Plan Update: Request that Information Pertaining to Lake Orange is documented in Table 6-5 Dear Mr. Altieri: I am writing to request changes to Table 6-5 in the Comprehensive Plan scheduled to go to Public Hearing on 8/25/08. Specifically, I ask that the following_information be added to the table.: The 20 Year. Safe Yield for Lake Orange should be shown as 1.0 MGD The storage amount (useable) for Lake Orange is 409 MG Additionally, the footnote 59 should be removed as it ~s not accurate. Lake Orange is currently a source of raw water for multiple users and not just the Town of Hillsborough. Lake Orange must be recognized as an important and independent source of raw. water for multiple users in the county and its capability /.limitations documented. It is understood that the Town of Hillsborough is the greatest user of water from Lake Orange but allocations are currently in place for significant withdrawals by Orange-Alamance Water System as well as by Piedmont Minerals. The current O-A withdrawals are smaller than its allocation and the Piedmont Mineral withdrawals are very much less than its allocation. Basis for Request: I have spent considerable time over the last few weeps investigating the WFER design and analysis including the accepted 20 Year Net Safe Yield of 1.8 million gallons per day. I used the same methodology and common or extrapolated assumptions to calculate the 20 Year Net Safe Yield for Lake Orange which is assessed to be 1.0 Million. gallons per day. I have presented the methodology, assumptions and results to Mr. Paul Thames and Mr. Kevin Lindley of Orange 227 County Engineering anal also to Mr. Kenny Keel, the Town's Utility Director and Engineer. All three individuals are licensed Professional Engineers in North Carolina and are well informed with respect to the issue. All three individuals have told me that the value for Lake Orange's Net Safe Yield of 1.0 MG per day appears appropriate to them given their understanding of Lake Orange's characteristics (including reduction of effective watershed during periods of no or low precipitation), as well as the assumptions and methodology that i used, which were also used for the WFER by the Wooten Company of Raleigh, NC. That company was contracted by the Town of Hillsborough to design and analyze the WFER. Please feel free to contact me at 919-732-9744 if you or one of your staff would like to discuss this further or go through the analysis detail Sincerely, ;, . mil, en Terlep 228 Tom Altieri From: lynette_hartsell@yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 2:50 PM To: CompPlanUpdate; lynette_hartsell@yahoo.com Subject: Comprehensive Plan From: Lynette Hartsell Phone Number: 919-563-3796 Message: August 11, 2008 To: Orange County Commissioners Re: Adoption of 2030 Comprehensive Plan For the past 6 weeks, I have spoken with a number of individuals who are employees of the County, City and State governments in regard to issues at Lake Orange. While, each person .with whom I spoke was generous with her/his time and provided me with documents upon request, none mention that this document, 2030 Comprehensive Plan, was posted on the Internet. It was by chance that I and my neighbors discovered the Plan several days ago and realized that this 300+ page document was to be discussed .and adopted at the .next County Commissioners meeting. It is hoped that this letter will become part of the minutes of that meeting and that .no vote will be taken on the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan until such time as the residents at Lake Orange have had an opportunity to properly examine the document and have other such consultants as is feasible to examine the document and advise us as to our rights. The Plan contains some useful information. However ,the glaring characteristic at first glance is the sheer size of the document which insures that no average citizen could endure the reading much less attain full comprehension of the meaning and impact upon themselves, their families or the greater community. Numerous pages contain lofty goals with which no reasonable person could apparently disagree. However, embedded in this seemingly harmless document, which purports to aim towards a future "sustainable community," lurks the gravest attempt of a government entity to simply "take property and rights away from its current citizens" through the continued implementation of the Neuse River Basin Rules The stated goal of the adoption of the "Plan" is to use the document to make "policy" decisions that provide for a coordinated 'approach for future growth. The adoption of the "Plan" provides a "statutory basis" for many of Orange County's land use regulations as well as the application of zoning districts. As stated in the Overview, this document sets the course of action to guide development in the county for the next 20 years. If in fact the "county" and its "residents" are likely to realize desired outcomes, it would seem reasonable that we the "residents" should be fully informed of not only the proposed Plan but more urgently, the consequences of the acceptance of such a "Plan" that hands over property and rights to the county employees for their .determination of action on private property. The acknowledgment that the County is exercising its "police .power" to "define, regulate, prohibit, or abate acts, omissions, or conditions detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of its citizens" per N.C. General Statue 153-121 through the adoption of a "Comprehensive Plan" which would strengthen the role of zoning within the county is stated with little attention to the significance of such a statement . The appearance of involving the public is masked by the fact that no landowner at Lake Orange was aware of this "Plan" although significant personal rights are affected. I submit that the "appearance of Notice" is not equal to actual notice to those parties whose rights are affected and more specifically to those parties whose property is being confiscated by the government without payment. The fact that the. County acknowledges the use of "police power" is evidence that this process is less than voluntary and that the County anticipates the use of "force" through the enforcement of this "regulation". While no gun is held to our head for compliance with the Plan, clearly force is being .used for submission to the State interest, which is to solve a problem that does riot currently exist. What are the specific "acts,•omissions, or conditions detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of its citizens". What are these "acts" that require "police action"? While the good citizens of Orange County desire a government to govern, no one wants the government to exercise its police rights upon mere landowners that tramples the basic rights of its citizens for the sake of pursing a goal of a county government that fails to meet the statutory test. This is demonstrated in the innocuous statements in the Plan of Enforcement of the Neuse River Basin Rules, the powers of Erosion Control, Zoning and Planning. All statements seem at first blush to be harmless, but are they? The enforcement of the "buffer zones" in the Neuse River Basin Agreement are nothing s~c~ of "eminent domain" without compensation and they are cloaked as the only environmentally sound approach to solving a possible "future problem". If citizens simply submit to the Plan, we hand over to the various departments in the county government unbridle authority to "police" our property and dictate to us, the owners, who have paid a premium price for this property, the use or non-use of our property. This taking without compensation is shameful. The devaluation of private property, that is heavily taxed by the government, in the pursuit of a lofty "solution" to a future problem that may or may not occur, is troubling. The citizens who currently reside in the county, pay taxes and vote, may in fact prefer that the County take a stand against the State and stand up to protect our rights and the ownership and use of our land, rather than advocate for future residents who interests ar e certai my at best speculative. There are numerous statements within the Plan that are simply inaccurate and misrepresent the current status of water usage of Lake Orange and the impact of the proposed regulations upon the citizens in Orange County who are property owners around Lake Orange, those citizens who use the lake and those citizens who obtain water from Lake Orange. Further, the precedent set by allowing county employees to simply police private property owners is a slippery slope that could have disastrous consequences for the county.• Finally, when Lake Orange was conceived and the private property owners"donated" the land under the lake fo the county, the primary purpose of Lake Orange was to provide recreation for its citizens and to serve as an emergency source of water. What was .intended as a partnership of Lake Orange Inc., private property owners and the county has eroded over the years as the county has bargained away the rights of the property owners at Lake Orange without consulting or obtaining agreement from Lake Orange property owners as to the relinquishment of those rights. The property owners at Lake Orange are fully supportive of a sound county-wide environmental plan that protects water quality as well as habitat of fowl, fish and fauna that not only will allow for the development of a sustainable community in the future, but that respects the current sustainable community. Additionally, the property owners at Lake Orange desire to be cooperative with the County governing bodies. However, has the' County determined that the land owners around Lake Orange voluntarily agree to relinquish property rights to the boundary of the lake. Do we consent to the proposed Erosion Control authority or the Planning and Zoning assessments of setbacks and buffers. Laurie and I refute the legality of the application of the Neuse River Basin Rules as applied, if at all, to our property in the ways articulated in the plan. Further, it is clear that such a Plan is in fact an unlawful taking of private property without just cause and clearly without compensation. We suggest that the County Commissioners change the paradigm of "policing" and "controlling" its citizens to one of a synergistic relationship whereby the citizens that are already present in the county, already pay taxes and already vote on issues related to the county work, with each other to achieve realistic goals that benefit those of us who are already present in the county, not those who may or may not become residents of this county. We recommend the appointment of a task force, committee or other entity to work out a joint resolution with all of the landowners at Lake Orange and the vast number of other residents in Orange County whose property will be affected by the adoption of this or any other Plan. Such a process would ensure that each and every property owner has . "actual notice" of the proceedings; fully understands the loss of value loss of rights, loss of uses of their property; agrees to relinquish their rights and use; and that each and every property owner a ffected by the Plan agrees to the implementation of any Plan adopted by the County. If there is to be an ongoing transparent process of development within the County, we submit that the following should be considered and implemented as a process: Full disclosure should be made by the County and Cities of the following: 1. Publish a complete list of "affected properties" in the entire county, should there be an attempt to fully enforce the Neuse River Basin Rules. ( Old and New Versions) 2. Publish the total estimated cost to the county far. the purchase of the properties, conservation easements and possible protracted litigation. 3. Publish the estimated affect on the individual property as to devaluation resulting from the implementation of the proposed Comprehensive Plan. 4. Publish the estimated affect on the tax base in orange County as a result of the devaluation of property affected by the implementation of this Plan. 5. Publish any documentation related to the investigation and determination of whether or not less drastic alternatives to the Neuse River Basin Rules are available . 6. Publish any and all raw data used by the Commission, any County employee and any data considered by those assimilating the Neuse River Basin Rules. 7. Provide each citizen who is directly affected by the implementation of this plan with 2 a2H~'rd copy of the plan at no cost. 8. Schedule further and full hearings to allow a full discussion and full disclosure of the Plan. 9. Publish a statement from the Commission stating the reasons why this or any other Plan should not be subject to a countywide referendum. 10. Additionally, the County should include in any Plan the repair the weir at Lake Orange and installation of updated instrumentation that allows for greater precision in the release of water and thus, greater conservation of water that is intended as an "Emergency Water Source". County officials should explain to the. citizens why the offer of $25,000 for the repair of the gauge from the town of Hillsborough has never been accepted, and why the County has refused budgeting for the repair and implementation of modern equipment. 11. The County should include in any Plan information regarding inspection and repair the dam at Lake Orange to ensure the safety of residents down stream and to ensure the continued impoundment of water necessary to preserve recreation rights, the continued release of water and an Emergency Source of Water. 12. Finally, any Plan adopted by the County should have as its paramount goal the protection and enhancement of the rights and privileges of its citizens who currently reside in the county, as well as responsible stewardship and protection of the environment, while simultaneously developing a plan for future growth that engages its citizens in a process of proactive participation and synergistic partnership. That is a goal citizens may be willing to agree to without the need for policing through the enactment of additional regulations. It is only through the real process of involving those you. govern, that government can be truly effective. M. Lynette Hartsell Laurie J. Fuchs 1010 Lakeview Dr. Cedar Grove, NC 7329 Apple Mill Rd. Efland, NC 231 Tom Alfieri From: shipley@embargmail.com Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 9:39 PM To: CompPlanUpdate; shipley@embargmail.com Subject: Delay Comprehensive Plan Vote From: Robert H Shipley Phone Number: 9196446522 Message: The vote on this 313 page~Plan should be delayed. It has many potential effects over many years on the quality and availability of water yet very few citizens have heard about it. It appears to universally side with the State against the people of Orange County concerning enforcement of the Neuse River Basin rules. Nowhere does the document even mention "property rights" The Plan doesn't consider or even mention Lake Orange. There's no requirement for such a Comprehensive Plan under NC law -- the vote on this should be delayed so more citizens can have input. 1 232 Tom ialtieri From: mda18O@aoLcom Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 1:00 PM To: CompPlanUpdate; mda180@aoLcom Subject: Draft 2030 Comprehensive Plan From: Stephen G. Richardson & Jennifer P. McCue Phone Number: 919-643-2,811 Message: Regarding Proposed Adoption of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Just recently and very much by chance I learned of the existence of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan through a neighbor. We know for certain of exactly two people who so far have managed to read this murky turgid and cumbersome 313 page draft from beginning to end, one of us included. The draft 2030 Comprehensive Plan and its implications clearly are not understood by residents and property owners of Orange County. If they were, more than the handful would have participated in a previous hearing that reportedly took place. We would have. Formal requirements for public notice may or may not have been observed, but the utter lack of public awareness that this Plan even exists, much less is ,said to be nearing a final vote suggests to me that transparent process and visible public notice has been missing, however well-intentioned the effort. This opacity seems incongruous in terms of recent Orange County history, however. Here we have a sweeping umbrella Plan serving as the template for all future planning activity by the County (or for the Neuse River Rules by the County on behalf of the State), for the next two decades, but the Plan and its contents are so obscure that virtually nobody has heard of it. Yet in the very same timeframe, the County used more than $100K of tax dollars for consulting fees, and distributing a flyer to every voter in Orange County to hawk the benefits of a highly unpopular proposed land transfer tax. What's more, the County spent these taxpayer funds on publicity even after polls showed the tax referendum had absolutely no chance of being approved (and, of course, despite the costly flyers it was defeated 2:1). If Orange County can spare the funds to publicize a foredoomed tax referendum, where are the flyers and consulting fees for publicizing the draft 2030 Comprehensive Plan which in Chapter 1 solemnly invokes police powers for its enforcement? Why is such a sweeping policy document flying largely under the radar? Is it perhaps in part because in the entire document covering the breadth and sweep of County land use and other planning for the next two decades, the term "property rights" does not appear even once? While inconvenient for comprehensive planning purposes, the vast majority of land within Orange County belongs neither to the State of North Carolina or the County government. The land belongs to individual property owners. This land and the property rights associated with its use are not those of the State or the County to dispose of, and in no ' event can be taken without just compensation. To my knowledge none of the property owners affected by the Comprehensive Plan has been notified how their rights and interests may be adversely affected either directly by the County, or by virtue of the County agreeing without residents and property owners' consent to act on behalf of the State. We haven't been. We would request the County Commission take the following actions with respect to the draft 2030 Comprehensive Plan to remedy the fatal defects in the current draft: 1. Particularly in light of recent changes in the Commission's membership composition, place the current draft 2030 Comprehensive Plan an hold until an open and highly visible 1 233 process for review and informed discussion can be implemented and undertaken. 2. Require the County identify and notify each property owner who might be affected by implementation of the proposed plan, and in what way their property and property rights might be impacted. 3. Create and include in a new Revised 2030 Comprehensive Plan, mechanisms for property owner appeals, compensation. and other recourse for elements included in the plan. 4. Provide every voter in Orange County a written copy of the plan upon request, and automatically provide written copies to all potentially affected property owners. 5. Place the final version of the Revised 2030 Comprehensive Plan following revisions, public hearings and review, on the Orange County Ballot as a referendum. Sincerely, Stephen G. Richardson Jennifer P. McCue 4402 Arrowhead Trail Hillsborough, NC 27278 2 234 MEMO To: Orange County Commissioners, County Manager CC: Jay Bryan, Chair, Orange County Planning Board Tom .Alfieri, Orange County Comprehensive Planning Supervisor From: Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition Date: August 13, 2008 Re: Planning Board's Process for Review of Comprehensive Plan Public Commenfs The Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition has closely followed the Comprehensive Plan Update initiative. Our members have attended public input sessions, advisory and planning board .meetings, and public hearings. We have also submitted written comments including specific alternative language for many of the goals and objectives. The Coalition believes that all public comments should be reviewed and discussed by the Planning Board during their meetings. Because time is of the essence, we commend staff for preparing a Table of Proposed Revisions (TPRj, which includes the public comments. This table will be very helpful in facilitating the Planning Board's review in a timely manner. However, it came to our attention at the August 6 Planning Board meeting that not all the public comments are being included in the TPR. Instead only those comments deemed as "not too controversial or are not significant changes to the meaning of the objective" are included. In contrast, the Coalition strongly recommends that all public comments received to date -and for as long as the Public Hearing is open - be included in the TPR. The Planning Board should solely be responsible for selecting which public comments to incorporate into their recommendations rather than for Planning Department personnel to filter the comments that will be considered. Such filtering could all too easily be mistaken as staff censorship and/or usurpation of the Planning Board's role. Thank you for your time and consideration on this matter. We look forward to reviewing the Planning Board's recommendations in advance of the scheduled vote in October. Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition Member Oreanizations Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce, Community Action Network, EmPOWERment, Inc., Foundation for a Sustainable Community, The Greater Chapel Hill Association of REALTORS, Homebuilders' Association of Durham, Orange and Chatham Counties, Inter-Faith Council on Social Service, The Village Project, Walkable Hillsborough ....._ .................. 235 'i'c~rtt !'tltia~~`~ ~~~: donny~va3ker(~emaarr~ma~l .tx~rr~ Sent: Wedn~:sday, f~ug~s# 1 S, 2{748 7:81 P(t~ Tt~: C~rrt~Pt~r~lJpdate; doz~nyV4+all~et'~~mbargfnaik.com Su~aje~: 'L(]~p Gph+iPREd-4C1'~fSl"~E P~.fi~! ~?:r•om : t7C~r7x~}f vlal.lce?- T%hon.e ~7umber: 9197326670 M~ssag~c .l ~tnu7d like t~ xa~uebt tY~at this pl~~ be but on bald a~ad ~o defer tie reviewfapprova? o.. k~! is ~tLd~ to the inco'ring Ba2sc~ of County Cammis~ioners . E 236 Tom 1~1#ier9 _ Fr~rrn: j~t~'tbert~rrtinr~spring.ccrm ~Ssnf: Wednes€ia~, ,~ugt~st 13, 21148 7:~t6 PM To: ~r~mpPEartt3pd~te; jgtzibert~~i~td~prtng.cr~in Sulal~t: C~rnrn~nts li rnm ; ~7~t1z1 GLibez-~ Phone Number: 91g-732-2365 i~JBSSe.yt J;~PCrmar9.nn ~cel.ated ~:, ~.nis plan has anly recerit.ly came L.a my ai:~wz~'.~.pr.. mile I am sure t'aa.t applicable "punlic noti€lcat.ir~n and in~o:•.trement°' pxaeeciures were `ollotved, it appear's that cacti procedures u,era i.ns~~ffic~~.~nt to sn~.ure inrormed part_cipatioil b<j many ~::hv ave patential7.~J uiraar.:i~ ~~f:z~ct~ci by this plan -- such as rtiy fa;~il;j memia~.rs, ';~h~ sa.~~: pfi tha p,la~ cioc~u.,~er_t is c'aunt~~g and will rer{t~ir~ }F°`"~' ca:eefU:l •st-ut3}r be a7.1 sta}s.eholders~, TYiere are a number of key ~ur~ansurered ques.i,orts. k'c~z example, it is r±at clear horn sclapi:ion of this plan :,*i.7,7. ~t°:.~ct :f,.alca Or.~.ge and the prcpertyfp.e•opert;5r 'values ~t L•.hase 'liv:ing an T,ak~ l3raz~c•s. Crar_d~ather_ng considerations Rre, ar:ony o'G~~r t.hi.ngs, e~ctr~melir impartaiat iu lick-ht o~ the assurances pL'o'4'it~ed at ~rE: oui~s~t ~ tp LaJ=_e 4rarge, Inc. anal L•ak~ Orang'~ prope~.•t.y +~kTMiers. Res a stAkai~xol~.er i.n tzi~ matter «~aulcl _ike :.c aee act;iart da•rer~-ied u11t.~..i. suu,'h pon~is3.erations ase expli~Ci:.'1,~ 0.ddresseC, Y.G+~ietaed ~N7.L~. ~:1~, sws.k~ho.'•_der_s {far. a change) , ar_d then r e~ie.:ed w:ich tl7e i.ncc~mzn.g Count1 Comm.~sior_ers, "C'han'1~ yv11 *vpt t}:c Qpr~or~unit~• to comment at this :::itne. 237 Ts~~tt ,Q~!>ki~;ri ~'rQm: ~C~earcai f#{d~~~rrail.ccsrr~ • S~rEt: '~hUrsday. ,4ugusf 14, 2~0$ t.~C~ ~~ Tv: Cc~mpPlanU~date; Kpaareal$~9~tail.car~ ~Ubjeat: c3rarEga ~Gour~fy 2U~0 Compfeh~;nsiae #~lar~ From; Karer~ E Pearce k~~ai~~ N~im'aex: 99?325824 Messager Its a ric+~neot.rxer or_ Lake Orange. S =se:: tY~;i.A Maeda :~urtt:er study azr_e the incoming I3aard of County CamnlaA$~oxt~rs a::~ 1~a ~''-ace. It :nas nat been_ ;~~idely g~:[7lioize,.~. arad impact q.reatly t?ze homeorners it Orange County especially ins the ax•ea oL• La:tce cJx'a~1ge. ~t of°eGts ouY. ~~opeity valae aid goes agdine~ .CYIe ~iarory of w31y tn4 :i.a'ke ~,ras erected ar, the ~'axst place. i object: tn~.s gi:~n and zeque5t tun-tl:,ar stu~.~r ,~r_d p-ubiic hearings on the matter. 1 238 'Ti'~r~ ~Itier~ Front: wi9de0{}~@.mc:-u`uk~.edu ~ettk: Tt7urstiay, r'~ugUS~t 14, 2C1Q~ 1~:'i5 Phh Ta: ~gr~~P[anl~pdate; wi€d~t7€}2~tr~c.duke,edu ~ubjea~; 20~3IJ Comprehen$i~e f~tan Z'ram: A'tnnov Wi'lc~ermantt ~11ot7e ~L,;mUer.: ti~1.9) 59~l194~ ~e~Eage: = am disLU~bs~ chat .C ba.~f? not been notified by mail goy orange Caun~Gy ~egaraing this p1 an. tox Che l.a}~e v:~.te~: ~~e e't-ten though 3 1.~•~0 on Lake Qranae and '~:i.'l,] U~ ~~fe~tgd. very mucr by trie plan ii; it gs~es ir_ta eL'~e~~ without. ebange. Qne of ,the major :~en_efits Esi' ~sur•chasin~ tlte. property on L'l;e ;~.ake i~ aoce~s t4 wa~er for recrea3:ional pu.rpo5es. Lvss o€ access to the vra~pr. :ti4tYL~ actversy effect alb. property -Jaluos on and arou:~d 'Ga)se Urang4 ~,nd. I: do nat. aeP that any mo~aaetary ar~nEiaeratt:an is propaned ,~ tkta.s plan. ~ am oanoerned th.aL- th$ oY-ic~in.al ease or t.he. lake. as a reGt'e~.-.~,or~a.l. trbe for ~artharn ~rauae counL-;r }3as peen forgort~n, althnugiz tker.~ is dear dacaamentRi;lt>n {:,1ZaL-. indicates Chis :fact:. ]: object ca ~1~G ourr~nt pian•and the lack of a4i:itica~ior fo:r those aj.rectJy e~~ected, tL'~d r~uest S~ltis be pa~ptsc^,.ed for ft_trr.he:^ Btady' far a~1~, i,nsrolvad including the ir_caming Boarcl of ~.ommi.ssioncra _ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 239 ~'+arn }~,9~ier~ ~rorrr, f,dbr{cr~rr2avesa~~ratsers.c~rn Sent: 'T"l-Ee~rs~f~y, fi,~gt~st 1~4, X008 ~0;~~ P~11 T~s: Ctrrr:p~'t~nUpdat~; bofar(er~reev~~~p~-ralsars,c~4rt~ Subject: 2030 Cornpreh~nsiue gtan From: Scb ?ee~res Pha~ie ;~u~r,3aex: (9~9} 732-4459 M~ssage~ ~s a resident iri 1:Yie laca3 area, 7' hauP taken ad~an.ts.~e o~ lake Orange for L•i sting and *_•ecrna~;_or..al ~aurp~s~s • '~?he pxapased lass cf i:hia access i s d:is~.urpi :tg as thQrc 9.s nc~ rar_kz~r. ].aloe to u.ae in norti~er.i Orange L'41nty and Tc~~~abac,ca,~asdQ.d~~requegt1dt'.liat~tl'hi9 issue distances for aometl'iir~ ~~at ig curr~:~t~•.l ~~ T~.~ Y ~e delaSfeG'. g~ ~.~.at St as studied ~ a m.^.re detailed'. atsd a~en fashion t<<iL'h ail ef:fect:~ci vartz~s included. in the cx'iscasr~ioris. 240 T~arrr ~9fi~ri ~~ ~~~ . ~rx~rn: terry~dixan~~m~arc#mail.cQm ~er~t: Thursday, Augus# 14, 2~Qt}~ 9t~:~t:1 ~'~ Ts~: Cpm~planl,lgdat~; tereydixart{t~5enrfb~r+~rnail_cc~rn Sub~e~t: C7r~t~ge La~t~ I~r~{~c~sa1 Phcite 1 t~.tnbe r: 9 ;1.9 fa :~ 9- i3 J 5 3 Wlessage: 7"I1f~S ]?laic cvi11 affe~L Ci.C a€~ a lant'F.on*r_er at La?~e Uxang~. T_ just fc~at~.d aat ahaui: Gn16 tonight and ha~cre naT. haci time t~ btud~r i~. i.n s~e`a9.1 ~ ~ tt~buld 1ils~ t:~ r4qu~sN Crab this pror~c~sal !a~ do:iayed ar_d better pu}a7,i_c9.~ed to give the ~am~ot,at~r,:~ ~x~ opp~r.~an.it}! fbr cammez~t , Th~.~ lake snag arlcri.;n~ :.Z~l build for recreLj.ona s purposes, not as a rasev~iir. .. .. ~ag~ 1, oi' 1 241 Warn ~~tieri ---------------------..,....-.n_-...,.r...-_~.,.-_.~. _._ --- ~resm: Terry V~+IR~U3f~E ~trrt~~uire~nek~spaper.GOrn~ 5~nt: +~led>~esday~ august 24, 2Q{t8 9:27 PEA Tv: ~ornpP~anUp~date Su#~ject: Ent~r~y 1.3~a•~•c read ihasc particns of the ctamprehcnsi~•e plz~z that see~a to a~dcizess energy cx~izsLU~lptic~n~ ~'rat~l~ly, they are dis~,apai~tir~~ly ~~iia~pY- Z see rac7 cca~ICrUte abjccti~~es, onL;.r ~agu~ gams to i~.crease this anc3 decrease that. 1~`~tiycr, i hc)i_icvc yot~ taw~Tc it to aLI of tES to irtcl~de p~.~e~ise cabje~ti~v~s th~.t ~v~ can i't~Ji,]{}'~' ~~~ti act}~~~~:, .~.zlytbing as o•dgttc as what i fa~Gnd in tlae dra[Y mill achieve absol~stely nothing aver thal~ to r~a~~ tLie ~°rftors feel goad al~cut ha~ir~g sa3.cl the rig~lt ihi~g. This s1yo~ld be action-oriented ancL des%~ed to taring about. xesults, nc~i siz~~~ly l.o keep hc~i1~ aJi~e. The document heeds substantial revision c~a~l Elx~s~ r<aafl.ers ~~ilh ~.n eye tp~.varrl :ldtii-ng tls~: 7xrissing 5peeific~ity- l~![v ac~iress is 14~ aylyaa ~rx~4r~, £:i1ai'aei dill; NCB 2716 anal ph€~nc is ~I~-~fi{1--~-5f~3. Terra 14i:i{;311R1r 23 Jta ~ 7 4~c1c (1} 919~Abii-§~D3 ~t~•l ~2f}0~ 242 • I'a;e 1 ot'z ~'~rr1:.~~i~a-i From: Ferry MAGUif~L~ ~tm~gufre~ncvvspaper_c€rmt Sent: Ti ttursd~y+ Au~g~rst 21, 20t~811;47 A~ "t'~: Corn~~'IanCJpefa3~ ~~sbj~et: F'~elestriar:s I v4•c~ulcl. life 1.o acl~t ooze ~nclxe Fief commet~ a64ut the clra~t in€t~ter plat. ~~to~}• ~r~ t~iree its}•.ns from flat cira;it that include references to pe~estriaats. I•n editill~ the droll p1ar~, I t~rgc ya>z to treat a rtet',hrark. of sFcioti~~.ll~.s, firails, crc,ss-~alks, etc. ~'t!r pedesiriaals precisely iii the same ir~~zricr a€: ~ntx #reat ~e supporting infeast~~aetatre for duto~t~l~iles anc3 ct}x~r can~~eyances, including bicycles. lya-i- i meaty is that w~ need to have a ~.~~-~ fr~nctio~zal nefwc~rk ofpcc]esi~iati raittes tbroughr~ut the entire cvu>aty such that. a pe~sot~ eai~ waltc at feast cv~ery1vhere ti>a•~t a car can to. 'T'his net work•~leserves the same ~;~re alid attention as has k~ae1~ gi~r~l tc~ r~,~irt~ sera tYtat a car leavirr ~ ore end of the courntw urn reach tlz~ at]~e~- etari Ott soinc s;rstem ar ncturork of roads. A pedest-rzat~ i.s etatitleci la nc~tilizrg less. X live ire So~llnetn~ ~Til]age, fay` oxarrlple, arlrl Svc have a superb .network of side~vallcs ixcre. l3iit if I ~~>attt try ~,vallc tc, t;~7boro, tll~ por#~or~ ofthe ~.-a~k. that :E J~av~e rat~~tt~ cal~ttitr~d iz~ the ~~liiise ~c1c~~~T ~ ~mFth Lev~1 ~.c-~d -has na provision afi a~ i't~r ged~st~ax~s: -4'QF • ~ .1 .' . iY••.'fi I. cite ti~is oi~I}+ its an exa.~~pl~ ul:'ti~c paint i ha~-e inadc abo~~e. Pcdestriar~.s dese~~te notiru~ less fan e same level of ir~tercanneeted waikir~ rv~tes t7~al autorrtbbiles navtr ~ja. (~ran~e ~`.at~nty should cc~narnil itself, pis a goal at etc r~lli~ilntitnz; to create thfs kind of tras~.sportatian oq~tity c~~! an agbressi~re, sehedul4..At ~e vet Fast, the goal itselt'>1e~cis to 1~c a pari of ibe plan. Thank ~rau. ;'~Zv address Fs I ~3 Gr"+kyiyri T.~rxvc, Cl~apc~t Hil3, '~]~; z75 ] G ar~d the pl~arle is 9.I St-9~0-A~5()3. ~~z~i2~p8 ..... . ... ... . .... Wage ~ c~i<~ 243 "~1 C~rar~ge County's ttansp~rla~on netv~rc~ric is comprised ~of a ftierarch~r cif reads that 22 moues automobiles grid prcr~rides access tt~ land developri`Rents, railroad lines that 23 allot freight ar~d commuter trains to move tt~rr~ugh the ColirEt~~ hie~cle rc~~tes that 2~ provide access tc} points of interest er~d recreational firails, and local sidewalks and ~~ pedestrian facilities thatfr~ster walking in n~;igfibc~rhoadsT dc~~+rito~rns, and at ~~ commercial and emplt~yment centet~." ~~1 l `rL.~kl~;~-~~R~;3,~1}dr~- ~5t~~4f ~, ~R~A: f~~~~~f ~'~~~?ai~ 2U ,. Prc~visian of sidewakiCS in new de~teloprr~ents, retrafiftirtg sidewalks ~t in existing develr~prnents, Arid thy: addition t~f r~fher pedestrian 22 facilities, like pedestrian bridges, try iinl~ kE~y iocatians; and" «~ ~bjeeti~re ~'-3.2: ~~i~~k~ TY: rrt~ j ~ Develrrp end adopt a Carnprehensi~re Trans~aortation Plan thafi 1 addresses aryd maps future strategies for all tra~nsportatit~n rntxies, 32 including bic~rcaelpedestrlan facilities, highUVays E`ir~etudin+~ a ' 1~ functional classifiCatiran of gads grid ~+ Ct~llectrrr Street Plan, and i 4 transit facilities tincluding rail) The plan should be coordinated vuith is t~,o objectives of t~Eis Corrtprel~ens~ive Plan and seek to maintain and L£~ erfhanee commirr~ity character~thrr~ugh itesCc~nt a~ tnr~eh'nsi ~~ee 17 Apps~rrdix J: graft Ft'amewartc far ~t~at~g Y P ~~ 7'rarrsparta~ic~n Plan.}" 2? Jul .• 7 f~cr. C:E~apeE I~i31,?tit: ~(~} X19 9b4A503 $ Oct -1 i Tlcrv: ?iicR, i Ti+4YC~ c4if~~f~OCI~ 244 Tom {"~~ti~~'i Frain; ~4m i~lagn[asort €@pa{~clearvairo.nt;#~ ~e~nt: Monday, ~,u{~ust 26, 20i7F3 12:25 PM Tt~: `{'corn .Altieei; Ri~l~ ~#2~tv: Cfjris#rn~ M~t~rt Sut~,joct: E~~~c~mmm~ndatians re Orange Courtly Ct~rn~tret~ensEva Plart,doax teoorrtrn mendstlo rrs re C}raoge emu.,, i<7r. ~ltier:iF ~•,:L~Chcd 'is ~ ?xa~t~.~y aontrisr~~ sr;~l:i. ?.'t8t OF. ?-~COln~~fl~ed ghange:3 to t2?e cam~reM~ns:~vc~ }?~.~n- T~'iQ*Fr only r~sate tc C.he Cu:~t:tira:l Resources pori._one d€ ~:h.~ p:l.an. Gendrally, i4 1s a Sr~T:Y impressi~re t3.t7C,.t[Q8Y1C and t:h~ aut•.hc~rs are to be Co[nmC.r~eCt. Regard, Tam M~~u~aa~ ;i;G'ac~~-z7g Fa~?~ ?:6SOC7.c'1tiUII {~Yt~? 56^21.2'x$?-7.} i?~ 3csx S~3 5t;ite 2G3, ].z•f S. Churkc~r~ st Hi11S:ooro;~yii, NC 2'727$ ~l9•-63~-066[} ~}~~pe. cam.magnuson :.~.rw - tt^a~i.rgpatM , orc~ . z _.. .. ... - 245 ~ ~;'~ rt ~"~~ 'am~~#i~c~ca~nrrs~~rr.~r.7~en~2s rPgr.~r~c~ang ca ~nr-rJ~os~c~ct (lrcan~e. C'at.r.rat±~'s Ca~z~.~~•e.~~esasave ~'Ir~rz C',eneral: t -~ f• •>rL~ ° i.~ t. ~ cJ~r r~: es: (strongly recam!~nend th~z whene'~er vue refer ica pre-historic Qi historic cultural at7jeots ar places, we not use the term "resource" simply because sui;f} of~~ects are,~erteraliy rrepleceable acid ranique. l~ni'ske flora and Parana, they don't rent3w; C~~1Ci~ (~59. tE~e~r C~t~ ~eVer #~~ re~~~r+~d. ,z+.dmlttedJyr, taking this lingU(sFic step vrhen state and federal agenc(as ccrntirruo tt- refer to cultr~ral assets as tesourc$s may irs sarrre way make {Mange Co~urrty un(~ue, that st~auitl be nt~ bar to ctiangirrg the way Qr~ange Caunt~t re]af6s to rriaterta! r+spresentations of its past. They are nt~t resources, sa ci~ange tho wrrdirtg. r~.~^ ?'::£.~~a:~~. is 4. «~rrr- c C`~~~ur ~l ,ri~5r.~.s: Add an eecrnprrtit;va]ue comp4rrentto the basic e4estrr'rpttprs cif cultural assets s]milar to that contained in the descriptigri of agriat~ltttre in C7r~nge- ~elot+~1 Es a note on the RC?I apprr;ciated by Pt+9ar~rlend qrr dollars Invested in tourism. ~ieritage tout''ssrfr is a big part cat t:Jrange County's taurisi-n attraction value it. ~:~M3;~~mm~ :~h~~ ~: li~,'rirto-~.h~~:, ~'~4'E~~:tric 3.xSR„"~'t'E~u Cf~~ar-rgc~ througlrauf from "resource" is ASSET. C~-~ provide far user~fr(endiy public input process for sysiematic'sc~uis}#;an 4f inFarmation ~sbr~r~t cisituraf assets CR-2 Rarr~cvc~ "flefghbar(ng"; it is nr3edEessiy restticavr~ and mere ar ic;3s mt~arllrSgEc~ss ire the context caf presrurvafir~n ar const'rvaslcrn where the rrrasE ac#lve organi~ati©ns are not necessary local or atherrnris~ in f~range Ctaunty's rtieighbarhat~d. {~tk~erw€se, explain what is meant t7y neigtibcrrirrg organizatit~ns. C~~S charrgc~ t€~ rt'ad"...eacaurage the prlrchas~, preservation, maintc~nancc os ar~aptive reuse raf historic lar-dscapes ant# historic a~id stun #o b+s historic strtietures." in the irtirtacfutrtory (~istaria narratives under "CulturaE S~ttin~" in 2rrd paragraph includs SLAVIhIG as a major ~use~ of native depopulation,... AS ~Dra;ige's pre-srytt[ement papuiatlc~n of st~tiatters vras appar~;~t€y subatan#Fal acid irrtiTrtate]y tiad tc~ #kre tyrigi~rs of the vtfar of the Regulatlr~r3, and as tt•rert: is ampEe written records to "sridi+~ta t#re exlrriarrce df pro-seftiemerit sgtratt~rs, mentidt, their axlstorrce from 17th century t~rr+rtard. These were pc-~~i(e living irr a trua sut~sistenire oul#ure. payagraplt 4 ~xresurrres mtaTc~ krit~vw(~dgi abc>'ut the ci.ilture that wo hava. "Subsistence" ttescril3es the c~r(ture of life (ttatiue American atlt# frontier ~urc~ereans, but F~rfarkot diescribes the culture of settlers. Sut}sEstence requires i]ttle flr ng law €~r ownership of land. Settlers require ownership and oWr>,ers#tip irrt~xlEes use of (anti fesr acan€~rnlc ga+n, a market economy. To doscribe settlers as subsistence farmers aver]ooks the major transfor~'natifln ir. cul#ute that ~accurred when government arrived and imposed Irag~r( order ors apse-existing st~bs(stence environment. Chapter S, pages 8 and T ~ Fast paragraph, ~chah ge fast sect#ence #p note that we Ir~cit a mill lnven#ary. Vr1e'knr~w froa~rr court recr~rds teat in the 18 century there ~ter~e numerous knot "several"~ mills. If you shy "flour and gr(strnilis", you should also include peen m%is, saw mir(s, and fabric processing mills, csif pressess tan yards, anti ofiher water powered ar water needy enterprises. 7.x_8.3 GC7A~LS 246 In Goai ~ and ~ inci~~e rr~aintais~Er~g a:~d grov~ing the acor3am-sc uiaf3i6it~ of I~~rit~,ga tourism dnd deao9aprn~nt of infrastructure in s~~port of hertksge taurisrri. ~.+t•.3 C~t^'Ck~i~AL :~ESC3l1E~~ES Ch~nc~e resources to assets tnrougttaut, In first paragraph rect~gn3ze Ehe irreplaC~abie nature of avlEUret gssat~. Rewr€.e tE1~ second ~er~Eence tQ say, "A CulturaE Asset is ~ site, building, tano'scape ~ar r~t3~er ~rbject signitio~rrt to car 4f ideal, regiQnai, rr rtatior~al hi$tos~ or pre-fi~Fstcary." 247 • , 1"ourisrn is. aR€~ther e~gnorrtlo engine drawing ~ :• :: ... ' :• 1~afyland's c~r~ner~y. Return t~rr investment ~l~ql} .;. '. ..° : . is the keyaf our aggressive rnarKeting cam{~algrt. ``.:`::_~``::`•~• ~ ~.. .. :.. •.. ... • .. . Tt~u:ism Rt31 is x'16 toeing returnetf to tie . i'~Jaryland ecc~R€~my ire taurisrn axtaenditures fc~r . •.. • . .. • • • • . every i invested by iYte state. This translates .. •• ~ ' ' tnto S~2 is state tax revenues for every $1 -• _ .. ' inuesfc-rd. ThGS is ~zR industry that sl~aUld ~e .. • '. . . ~ratected, and its competitiveness sttauld be a ~ ' .' • . ~ • faatar in the Cornrnissiian's deliberations. In :~ :~'~;;:;.•; .';_;:•.::;; ... . `addltiora; tourism adds to Maryland's quality of life ;' ~ : ~ ;°.;:...:.::;°_~:;~ :•:-:•..'; .... . strengths. :-:.::•..'. ..• • •'.:. s. [7AVIt~ 5. FAh3h3U~Cl, SEGE~f<TRI~Y r;= ~, ~:•::::•:°•~ . ;.~. . . I+AA,FtKETI(~~G MAR'1fL.r"~f~'t3 FJR ~C+~R+It~PiilC: ;:;.`:`.;,:":;:..-":`::; ? :; .: ••`• •;~:.:.:.~ ~;''; `.":•.;.~''::;::,;~~::~ ~•: aE1JELdPiv'IE~IT .• :~: ~ - •• : ~ ' CC~fk~tVlISSi0~1 Oil hhfiF~3`€.Ai*1!~'S FI~CAI~ :. .... . STRUCTURE <:`.'`'.:.::``:°'' ..... ..• ..' , •• ~ ..... .~. :: ,. TNtJRSC7AY, O~CT~QBER ~~€, 2{~D2 . `•'::•:.•.:.; .. • '• .. . 248 P,'~ge ~. of 2 '7't>`rrt ~9~i~~~ F'ron7: t~avid ~iunt Set•rt: Tuesday, /august 28, ~t3t38 8:01 AM Ta; Taut ~ttiet'I ~uta~ect: ~'~1: i~er year request - i~ernarks from 8126 ~C Mee#ih~ an the 2~3~ Comprehensive plan FYI = E~. Hunt I=ron: 1~IDA1$©~ ac~l.eorr- [maiEta:M€~t~~80C~acs~,eam~ dent: Tues~€ay, AU~ust Z6~ 2qC}$ 12:3 AM Teo: Datriei Hcarit ~ub,~e+ct; per your r~uest - Ftem~r€cs from SJ2~ CC i~oei:ing crk the ~Q~O C~mpre{tensive Man H i! Yau requested a copy 4f my r~ernarks as ctGliuorcad, from Mcrnciay reEght'9 Canrs€y Cornrn'sssion meeting. also particuEarly appreciate pc~ur'rtaving painte€I aut the speatCer sign-up list as I aarrte irt. t•.~r. Chaim~an cnd ~ornmisslo:ncrs, goad evenirr. I'm Sieve s~ich~ardson. I've bee•~ ar {?range CUUrrty p, oparly awna: Fc~r 1 ~rer5ty yec:rs. I •a:~ce purc'rtit~s~~i a 1.3 ocre sliver oT Icnd ir. Scutherr. ~ranr~e C:au•~;ty to ddd 1o rrit' IaYc~erty whiG~ s sorn~r=bw ttiggc~-ea, o mcJcr subdivision revicw~ and astound"+nc~ly let; 4a snernber of f' .e planning board to find fault with cyan +hs name I chose `or tic ti^y sui~division. Sa I krt~w same frontlirv ren6"rie5 nt ic~nd use in t3ra :ge Go:rnty, torwhic'r=the 2U3C :'oi~prehensive plan s SU~?pJ56~ fo provi~4a f:,,F~re Cc~mrrr'ssio:ters a lerr=picte.• I also sp~c~k far r>7Y `rend 1 }~neii o Haris~;ll, an attomeywho is out of store ta~ic~ht. Ohre both serve on `he E3acsrc~ at c~,1r r!ev+ 4iv;C usscclation, Friends of Lcke Jrange. B=,~t `onlght, and in ~vrittQn comments two wec;ks c:gra, wc- speq:~ sus much fur Qurselves as for a;'~ycne else - actuary, for everyone ease >; ecause the Pspn caffeals ~reryone ir, the Cour.ry, no` just us. l;r~fl a rnoniYt ago, none of my frient~s cn~ na:g'7bo:s had h~'i~r~l o` ti-~c~ 2Lt34 Plan. or ys~u'd h~a~ve saert vs al: Here iorg age. 'vW)hiie the dre;t t~` t?~e Comprehensive I'lart may a~poo.r tc~ meet legrsi rPquiremFn's ipr }3uG~lic rlis: ussicar~, taniy a hardtvl of `hose udho knaxr of the P'an'~nov~r wf•igj's_in,T, a.i 31 t Maces, The draft bo:diy uses tt;e amlhous fetrn "pclice iaow~;rs" fai its enforc:erneni, I~ow many know there is na roquirerr~csr~t ursder slate IC+=v II :ai Crcrtge or c3ny piPr~:r Nc~rih Ugroii^.n ratln=y cvc.n h:,vc surN: a Ginrt$ Despite rrrary~,~ro;tliy things and sent%rnenrs sprink?ad tnrougli tt~e cr~rren` draff, it has ~r.ajorga~s that make it taTa'ly i!awed. The Plcn asserts confrol fflr use of land, public oriel privaic~, But nav_.-h~:re does tree Plan (cr, 4: fa: as I Gary tell, t>7a old ore it replaces; ew.~n.nren,tari:'ptcz~z~r~~t r~gflt~," Na provision for i'heir takir:,, n^ rnea~rs of rer~ours~ and chrr,ponsaticn wren the Gc~un`y i•or ifseit nr CaGniy ar: ~eha!F of frte $tgte'E~Strirrt5 ar c~i: =er~rr'sc: dispc~s~:s c~i nun prs~aerty rIgP:Ss_ 8.'251~~i~~ ~'a~e 2 of ~ 2 4 9 Dealing with property rit~htts doss add cornp!Exitp Eo,and usE plonn~ng. So I ur~derstr~nd why th~.i plQnnir`.g L~c~ard rner.~beryecrs ago objected tc earning m•,~ li~~le subdivision attor'thor:~as Jefferson, charnpiQn of property righ`s and iimsted c~avc~rri?~ent. Comrrissicners, your prape~ty deEd has your ncmo or. It..h~y deed 'ryas i7iy nGmo on It. I'rc?p~~ty tars w~ all pay ~rre oat rent for :pus use of our proper`y, witrti the State cr t+~e Count' as lanc"rlard. Tiiis':a~.;ratt can b8 fixed, bl,'t ~ha current draft is no plarf thot ar5y ~reperty owner ccuid agree to. Ttis Cornrnissicn's rr+aketrp wall chs~n~e very soon. 'fhe stated intent in establishing a separate lais`r`,ct Ca~mmissoner'or Northern ora.,ge Jaunty, arras to ~:~ive an eifectiv~ uo~ce tc the ncrthcrh Dart o. the Cou*.~ty. vVhere Is our Ira°ce in this °lan~ tynetto and I osk this Cotnmissior, to dof~r ony cciir~n ors the Gt~rr~preh~nsiva flan to tho r-aV~ County Comrr~issior. tcrk:n~ oFFic~ in Docorri~e:r. ti>tirz t~!sU ask yt~u sirrultcnQauslr sot ~~~, a~, offer; i4 ~. prc~~:~ss i o rr`=o~:nin~f~:l=y putaGc-ro fh~ P-dr,. Geash~;~ iitpr,t ~Urtr7g GcJrtrr~C wv~eks and months tca rFVis~ ii to pcknCrwledc~, e ~.nd r°Elp~s i%1F; rigttils ohd :~ti~5urs~ ~F the paapl~ whoS~ narnes aCtuc~3ly rsre writte^~ :7n orange ~:oursty ~SrQpernj d~edS. Elavinrg a C~uniy That ha;rrorizes pofcy v.~iti~ tiie cghts of its citizens is tre i:resi woe/ ::cno+r: io plant seeds chat Blower into c;c~rnm~nity consensus ysar:~tteryear rat:~erthan yield ~urnaer crags of ugly qnr~ acs"ly conflic= l hat ;ust wari t go away. .'ha^:k you. Pio-~sr~ lot ma ke~bw if tho-ro'a ~r~y t~th~r` way in w€tioh € aah help. ~'h~rtks~ Steno- F~icha=dson St~ph~n ~G. I~iuharc'tse~r3, ?~h.D, Vice president & Board h~~ember Frcencis ~,` Lake Qrpn~e ~€v€c: A~s€~ciatiQrt PUg tC}1 ~PC~e~r Grove, NC X7231 utirww .I atreo rang e. arg €t's orE€y ~ deal I{ it's t~;lere you vrant to go. 1"lnd your travel deg? hire. 8I2r5l~QQ~ 2 5 0 Page 1 of 1 '1'arr~ ,~,ii:i~ri FCq~rn; AcSarn }Clein [akiein@e.~rolir~aGl~~lmber.or~~ ~~~#: Marda~, ,4ugust 2~, 20Q8 4;2~ PM Tt~: ae~nna ~a+~er; Tom Ritl~ri Cc: Aaron iVelaon; ncprt~ufQa~!_cgrn Sub~sct. Le4:ter ~uhmission ~lelle~ (ills. Saker ae~d Mr. ~itieri, Pleasa find fife attached let#er i am subl7ti~irtg ft~~'#onight's pulal€c 17aatin~. ThanGcs Crary much B~s# regards, . ~e~arn Kleln i3d;~z;t L'1i..h'.lci,., ~:c:_ Prs:sic~er,t, F..coeie,rr:ic Develcy~zneuC axs.~ Cfocrsxxulea: ~.ela~ious t:t~apci Hill-C:~x~axo C:li~nbcx of C~exnrncn::; 7 04 Soutls Ltii~ 77rcvt: PQ Bn~c 289? C1i~pe1 Hit=, ~4t: 2"515 w~+v, casaJ.inech;imUes. ors ~,~ Nlrasr rnresl~er tLe cr.:~irnmnrtrS~ bc<}'t,r~ priutPrr~ 2k~s r.~~tuxl 2anJS ~~.~€.~' I ~JU ~un~, chair YdilllzrA Si. $uneh, CFA, Pa lcran9 Pivr~ Yia: ~~+~' jatlr:Y:l 6~I+tJ_Ct1hCtRCy AiCAA pesi Brtdyr Tfeasurar E6ST Greg Cam,ur, General t¢urssei 7Ir_ Conner I.sw arm aolxt Airdcypon uy. r,Mg9ta & rre Jotnil~ 6adrock g~~rr & rlssodaors, lay. ~eJo~ ;ley E:rPOW'Eltrrznt, arc. erTar~hh,cs SiackMmSl RBC Ceawrs Haxik tan ~orrr.~ ~~al;,ess L'Tass, lac, Antyotty Carew 'Tf:c Sienz NnxeE fllck Ct~mbic}cs SvnTrv~ £Fanlr t~+Ferchs Co,-praw Tow+= paancr LornrnUnitY txl^.hW,t t~fayor K~cxlrc Pay '.'otYn of G+apel Iaill ~I.~~,sri+ Gcut~ & Falls c~~~ Green€4ta=et r~~4~~ tt~l~ers 8wicrolayy G,vm3~xl i ~rlr~Brll~ewfilrrc Yarry k3asnigkat Harnlat S,bE.5lax6aght ~ 5a~, Irt fames Harrfs Take a CarrhnrC 8erbura JcsslcrBlacrc ThnYl'A'Fhrxt56o~ Ire. Kerr Kcrnedio Ds~ka crxvYY . {Can Lerner 81ve Crc~s 37ve Shreld o{NC Jotm MtICiVMQy 9eIl5ovth Tehcomrnar~twn~ D4inn.tdrYp q g~rtcr ~rosEx t'i4nunt; 4rag vvaarbock irEal:al Fill Rcstwrart C,,+r>;Ip Ipr, r]ril wedar~erE C.Fizp~l }illl•Gsrrboro Clty Seheo*s TatJd Ppt>crscn U, C~Fiu~spttzis Pat Phola+~ t~r,~rcF Janes L;vcs:mnts Gnrafd Ramotn pay-fa-v:nme AuuoM,,ll. Lt~w I'tlggsltee Hlgh a,ui kubis%1 Ila4f•~nGr JYtrirS 5[I'fW6rtz The {SatlyTac Wrei 'Irym''G!r StNrdlxaht J36fikf7 5M1'CHL 17r. Tony Wxh~ap t7hlt Cha~rl Hlll .~~ ~~ ~~ ~ug~tsL 75, 2f?f}R ~1`lib~.;C lia~J~i~` ~~~ ,~'4}~.1fr! LR.C27t~J'{31;E ~'itr~~ T3~ar t/atrtty CaJrirniggiotzcxs, `The C}>~.prrl. I-I~l-{.'.arrbJ~rr.~ ~;l7~rni~es of CoJ~rmc~cc is a fc~u~din~ n~eml~er of t1~o €~ratzg~'~r~.~ Tomp~:~~xensit=~ 1''1~u~ Gn~lii~an s.~cl l~.as f~eer~ are. ~cti~e and. cn~sl7ucii~rc par~cip~ant in rthe C;ninin-~I~nsiv~ .~latr. u~lt9.ate IrrocesR. E, ala~~~ ra~iti3 ufher ru~nlacrs of zlxc C`~alitivat, ~'~~ ~4vriiteit. Ietit~s 1,u ire editor fa t;~cv~J'a};~ ~'ablic: er~gttge~nent aazd partia4~ficn>: iii Ire ~:c~lt-pL~chrrnsive Ilan '7.]~C~tfi. Re~r;,tt~lai~, our t;Ualitiu>.t rcccrJti~ 1ea.a~cdti~~t i~,t~t all public coa:~>.euts err bc`zYx~ tr.~~t~l eF.lu~llyr.~cl tbaY i~e';~Iarrriin~ b~oarti ~'~as ride rec~i~lirig t';.11 cr~rrlrr~e~ts ~.~rrittcd for re~~icw. 'This is very clisk~e~rir~.ii~g ~,i~~eu tine ~ii~LOric ph~si~ vtu co~nrraunity has pl~cd ~~n pu~liG pax~t>~ip~tiQn a.~ tli~ ~'~c~r~. uL bc~~-cJ~nnncnt. ~`uri'11er, it is uar uJV~crstanda~',~ th4t tl~.e p1:.u~TJSn~ board 1Jas l~eo>:i asked to r:~~~irrs~t ~uhlic; ecrtnn3+r~t outsi€~ c~i" plaz~rJ.irJ~ bvaFr! mecEirc~. T6.is ,zs':ad of xeview daeb rir~t take serfausl~ the irr~pox~.us~ oaf c;c~~xs~dcrin~ p~ablie anTxJment or set iL~ici~ ilia t x~ecessaxy t~ adc~uate~iy TI~n1'F~i~ azzd. ct~~sidex eael~ citi7,~i~'s rernar-Ics. Ifi is rrLy l~lief, ~ci £7•J~ 1?eli~~f the ~"coalition, fhat. tJ~e qu~Iity t>'~ tl~~ CrrJ•xi~rcxa+rJtsHve ~'1~~J d~cuzn~rzt ~,~rill sui~'~r as a result a£#~:ese I-.ractices, ~3rJ. - behalf crf t~.e Chamber of C~rn~nesrc~; arld the Cc~aliiros~. l ask fhaf. ;Tau receiva all pui'rlic cr~.trJ~.eilt f~vr as 1oi~~ a.a ~~ public h~ris~g is opl~n .and t~,aithe Isiari~~ board :~vie~r~ puEalic cvznm.elri rJ?~tParrg pIan>Zing baaxd rx~.cc#a'ri{~s, not- OuthlCiu f}l t~YCJ:il. '1'1J~>;n~ you Tc~r your 1~i'~.e an3 cc~xxsir~ratinrl, ~i~~ce i : ^~ ({ ~~ ~. ItI~1Tl ~J'ice I'resid~~f, Ecc~na~~J ie l~rlvet~pm~~zt and C,rt'J'J~JP.71~J7,1, R~;laiiflris d'OSt L.tt71CC i~ VX ~A7r ~ tir tcr,ra>. r-aa+. ~ ~ ~.- •.~ ~ ••• ,t9'l~) $S7-"CI7'~ a X319} ~S-61374 n ~ ~wtrny.r~rQt'Iraar~~nb~sor~ 2 5 2 ~ Page i oi' 1 '~+a~ l~lti~rii i=rorr~: r~cprd.atQatil.com S€~ntc P~~ind~y, august ~'5, 2008 5:23 Ph~E Tee: Tim Alti~r; Q©t~na Baksr S~sbj~~f:: Fubiic H~arinc~ ~amme~r~t from ar~~~~ Ga. ~arr7~ Ptah ~oalitian Tangy a~7d 1~t~nt~a, here is a copy of the can~lent r p1~uz #.c iaresezxl. ~raz~i~t yet 11ne J~ublic: ~,7~g. ~ tXi1:5~ ,~c,~ grill iy~ ~lj~e io djsExil~~~te if i~ iJ~~ cc~t~tiaissianers and ~lanni~~ >iaoarcl members, as ~le11 ~s you this for the official znin~tes. Y ~~ ill 1~rir~g Bard ec~gies tc~~~i~ht i~ ltattd otGY. r~.j1311.~OSEI1 r +lM+......vw{.'iwr.~w\•l.Y w{{Y.~..Y{Y+YYY+\^~T+ 11\ :+^:Y~\T.'.Y'tr~n~r^^wvwr+rw.^.^^'Y.~ww^^^TMV++~vv+^-e^+v-~-~mvl~nn--.-^~r.~.~.-r.r-~^ . ~Gt.~h.C~. MapQit~sf_Tt~~ib~t. air~:c~ic~n~, Tr~~tc, has Prices ~ are! 8,~ 26r247{}~ 253 Quarterly J'ublic clearing, ;~y,ugust'?~, ~l7~}$ prangc Cat~nty Baaxd of C'c~rnmi~ssioners & Plruxning i~o~rtl ,~,~TFr1~1T~A TT~I~: C;c~mprahansl~e flan lJpclate Ylxase Il Pa~hlic {,nux~ent flzt l7reb~~f of tie [~•~uge County ~;v~l~rel~ensivc ~'1an ~:aaXiti~auT Cxav~i evening. ~y z~vtrate zs ~.ilan Rcyscn ar,c1 I a~n spca'l{ing an. behalf of'l~e Orarfge Cotailty C`.cjnxgrejxe~si~ ~ J'lazx Ca~tlitio~~; t~rl~ic~ is ~adc up of nine org~izations rcpresentixig diverse interests in Oraz~ge Ct~uxaty- J~zst this nxa~xEl~ ~~e xnarlccd our first a~~ni~~4rsa~ry. Tlie Coalition farmed to ptitrstae.twvo goals. Fist, vr~°vc nt~t~.o e~7c~•;r ct'PorC ter ~n1`arn~ i~c P7annitxg Soaa:d of our slxared priorities ftrr envi~oiunental. lieal~tx, sc~ci~ egtxiti}~, ~~i cca7aoY~ic ~ritaltty il~at ~~,~a ~>ant tea sec inoarporated fat the ~:aniprehensi~e flan. ~''ou ~~ili feud tlxal. ll~e cc~alitirrn 17.as l~rescnt~d 2l pages o1: ~vrittci~ Cbin1'C2cnt' and coaliti~nfnembcrs ha.•vepro~idetl a1~5 at3ditzc}nal fal l~agesZ_ T3xc Caalitic~n ~x~ll ~~aJt until the Pltnzni.rfg L~o~r~3 nxakes i9s recommeuciati~ons avaylal3le tc~ ik~e l~u~l~lic hcFn~ n~alr•ing iu~~ eamnzents on the plan. Since tlxose recor~~ruel7datirnxs are expected !.a b~ r~a€ly an "~epterx~l:~e,~ 22,14~onld. life is l~ighljght ai~a cor,ccrn: ~iccorcling to the timettilale, the irubl'ic ~}~ili o~}1 ha~.~e fif~ee~x da~rs trx ze~riew llxe ~71~U'1'17tg ~j[33TC1' S i•Ccc~nxmet~dati~xns aa.7d, irf turn, prelaare any rcniarlcs they feel are ~~•axra~xtecl before the ~mmfssic~as s~;hoduieci ~•Qtc cxn fJcto~rer 7. Hence, fi.~e ~:nalitaon ree4u~rnends tta ai t~~ earn~issinner's vote tales 131~ec n~a snc~uer tlxatti 3~ da'~s ~i#'ter t~e•J~l~.~t~ixtg ~cr~rd~s re~grnn~endat~ons are a~~ailal~le far public re~~iew. 1'-iot~~c~fcr, it is to our secarld purpose - e~au;a.tirag the p~~baic aha~at, ~x~d e~t~s:~~'aging fill~ir participation iu, trio caixxprclz~:nsive plan update process ~~ tlxat pz-az~xp~ts tour ~"~rCrar~'s i~xn~glx~.. bx l'~'lltetance off. this goal ~~c rnaintairr a ~~cbsitc, ad~rocated for the January Publzc Tal~tit Session, ~k'~`i.ti~o ap-$ds aaxcl. lett~-s tc~ eclit€~r~, sal up di.sp]ays at comnsunit~= c~rcn~s, presented at citi2c meetings, azxd paste~c3 c-n lac;al blame. Hapefull}~, th,cse aCt1c~7'1S 2r~ca-cased. #hc lc~ el co~xxsnaa~uty participation. ~,Ti~furtuitalaly ~e nrcenily learned tlaai tlao manner in ~~hich la~~l~lic comments a.re Laing rCSiiQwo[~ is BXC~.tESkQIx~i'y k111E~ ~j':7QrQ~~~ ~: C~~1ti"~Y~ ~.~ tl'1~ ~}US~'YQ&C O~Ca2L71x111nlt~r participati~an. A4s natCd 111 tl]C COa~lt2{3n'S memo found. Qzz page 1$7 Uf floe ~g~xda Tt~n ~~3~sts•act, "....deeause time is of file essence, we coznrn~xcl. staff' fir la~'epaxing a Table of ~`apc~secl. Re~sians {TP1.i), v~~lricla includes pttt~lic comnxents. This ta.Sale will be ~tel~ helpful in faci.litatiz~g tlxe Yla~xixi~xg hoard's review %a~ u tinxely ~x~anner. . I-lowcvcr, .... n+~t all ~e public caaunxerrts are being incla~d.ed fix ila.e TPl~-. Tr~st~ad only ihaso ct~zz~rn~x~s dcc~ricd as °`r~rrt tots cantr4~rersial ar are x~at sig~u~cant ch~zles to the rneani~~g of the ob~ecti~e" are iriclu~.cd. ~'i.e. cr~raa~a~=nts ~e~rms~! "~a,~~rQVersixal"are being {~xc.~7~c~~~' J,x contrast, t}~~ l~aai~tian slriangf~~ recatrunends that a1I public c©r~2ments receivod to rla:t~ ••-and far as Fang a~; the public fearing is open -~•bc incl2xded in the TP'R. 'i~ie 1'Ialxning l3aard slxaul~t solely be responsible ~ ycc ~}~. 22 z3, 2?• 3LI. acid 36.411 t>~ tl~e. ;vfc~y 1~1 ?ubtic I:(r.3rirg tlgcr-cia Xt~;ft~. r't~vstraz:ti a»t3 p. 7 S'? of. thr. ,~.u~ust 25 ;t stxarS. 2 Sce p}:. 32.35 of tic ~rlaf~ i9 absztact and pp- 84, 91•i~5, '1.9-13?.. '136,12-1fi5, aazd S 67-i7i~ of thc.?~.u~ust 25 abscr~ct 254 fc~r selecting r~~lzich ptal~lic can2nients to incorparata i7~lc~ tJ3ei~' zeccmrirci~datious rather to for Planni~rg Y~elaartr~xeixt pcrsannel to ~1t~~ the c+~rrrar~elxfs that will be cc~Asi~~ered_ Such ~1tci7ng could ~Jl too e~s~1.y be ruistaltc:n as staff+~ensarship aaxc3t`c~r usux-F~alat~rt c~~l't17e ~I~nin~ 1.3©a7d's raJe." Persa~xally, J cia zte~! tlxiz~k t3~e~ iiJitx~ is ini~rxti~nally cc~sorious; but ratl~t~- tlxe resuIt of t1xc;~~or1c loa€1 anti tixrxe canslr"r~i1~1s ~la~ecl tin the Pl~~~»g ~4ar~3 ~i~~ StaIJ: ~7-~crcas Pia~r~ir~g de~riartrr,~~r~t stafr «t~stucc~s~:fulJy att~~pi~. - c~4~~- a ~e~yc~tl of 1'ouz' ;re~i'S -- to ~.pclate ~n]~~ t]~o rural ~~ai~rsi~ed, residct~ty~11}r- ~cx~~~cl seciic~~s of lktc cc~uui.~r'~ 1:„at~ti J.Fse el~~i;i~nt, ~e 1?la~~ux,g ~o~rt1 has tl~e r~spcytzsybi3ity (Sttppc~rted lyy si~f.~ to speaFl~eaci a ca~plete agd~ie of the Mire eig~it-elomet~d. ~+~~x~l7xeb~xsive T'l;~ lax less #hali~l:4~v years, ~liiie also conducting its re~alHr krusiness, x~e;~ie~~ing tlxc J3uc~lxt~~n ~ilia~c pzapc~s~J ~uxd integrating eight ~ot77~ty advisar57 bc-axds Into, the pl~x npci~.#e praceSS. In tS~.is coilte~t, it's nt~t uiie~cpectecl tl~~t a tirr~e-sa~-ing meclianisrEi such as ear~ment filtering ~~•as utiliz•ecl. Mill, ci~en it the ~1t+/rin; ~~; as clone v~•itlx the best of intcntians, tlxc effect is tl~c same ~- some pul~l.ic cowments both from the coalition and all other c©ncernQC1 parties mho tcrolc tlxc tioxe t© ~gagc in t}ie process are not getting tlic €t~ll atter~ti+~n of the Planning .Board. cluriuF; their mcetings• Rath.; as tiyis process cornc~~ tc~ a close some Public cr~rnme+nts} ~txYhetJ~~• controv~~•si~ ancLlpr Prcrgxessi~e aid fc~rward- thir~kl~ng, ~x~i7J c~r~l~ be ta7~c~~ uP by ttz~ Plaixrii~ig ~c~ard i fare x~2cli~>7~u~.1 bcx~d n~et~b~z` tal«s it upvr~ J"iisfll~zs~:li'!f} b]-lzag sp~Gix~c ile~x~s to tJte l~c~ari~'s ~.tt~ttt%oyt atttt. a~~~~ocate i'c~r Gh~.«ges l.o the J~IAU. '7['iiereft~e•e the C:aa~itian strr~ugly emec~nrages 91te Cc~~nts~ ~lomrn2ssic~xters ~ make sr~re tlpat 1. all l~r~blie cninmeuts are treated e€iE9a11~• iii tie re~Ti~ev~• process, 2. tie l~lmmning I#oard has ~ui~fi~i~r~! tl~ne a~~c~rnrn.od~.l:e ~~. ~t~~ila~rl~ r~t•i~;~~ ~rc~~c~s3, azxcl ~, the comrn~issiau+ers vote on tie C:vmPr~eE~en.~ii~e J?Eon takes ~rlac~ nt~ soan~r ti~a~ ;~€} cl~vs after tllye Planning Eiaard's ~r~-ritten re~coxnrn~er~€lati€~~ts are made ~+~~il!al~le irr l:f~~ ~trlali~, .any aclvcrse, et~izsc~ucrtccs o.t ~~stcnditig tl~u process to accominadate equi>ahle Pufrlic parti~ip~tit~~z is si~xa{1 coxr~parecl to the benefits; cspcGlall3~ far a ~ocitrrt~t iritci~dccl tc- Dave sncl~ lc~na-J~astiz~g i~~G~JixenGe, laage 2, Public Coxnrnenl: a.~ be:~aIf of the Orange CQttnt}~ C'.arra~r~h~z~i~e _l'lati Coaliiicnz, A.ub. 2~, 20a8 .C>apel dill-Carrborca Cbar~ib~r e~f C~r:nm~c, ~mrnuni~y A.ctioir T~+1~t~~•c~rk, ~r~'{}'~V.I:;Rment, Use-, 1'ciundatian i'or a Sustair~al~lc O'amsu~,~t~sty, use C~'ea.tGr Gk~aPe] :Fill Asso~iat:un ~f~E.~.f,TC~RS. Htmzcbuiidei~s' ~~sSOCiatieil of7~url~am, Urruige anci t<hath~ Ot~~snties, Isiter-Fs:tl~ Couoc~l ~n social :~en~iee, '1'~e ~~illa~e Prc~icct, Walkable ]FTillsbarouglx • Attachment 6 255 Orange Unified Transportation Board's Comments on Goals/Objectives Chapter 9: Transportation Element Commissioner Cordon's comments on. Transportation Goals and Objectives are provided following the Orange Unified Transportation Board's comments. Staff Note: Proposed language is shown in large bold prim, proposed deleted language is shown in str-i{~~etk+re G®A.LS The following transportation goals will guide future policy and implementation strategies for the County. Transportation Goal 1: Integrated land use planning and transportation planning. Transportation Goal 2: Orange County Comprehensive Plan Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 256 :i,i,. ~.. n > > a%%cs~~uic w au usci J. A comprehensive network of connected transportation corridors (roads, sidewalks, rail, etc.) supporting an e-p~+a#~e-mix of traffic. Transportation Goal 3: ,- __'_J - _. ter... ~... w~ 7 7 Efficient and safe traffic movement along Orange County's routes and corridors Transportation Goal 4: a ~°~~„nw"-~«9Ta~°~~-~-~«-~ comprehensive, creative, and effective transportation planning process. ~.~ . Oi~JECTiVES . The intent of this Plan is that this list of objectives will help guide regular and ongoing decision-making by the County related to transportation initiatives. Each objective has a recommended timeline for completion.. (Definitions of timelines provided in Section 1.4: Administration and ImplementAtion Guidelines.) Objective T-1 1 • (Ongoing) O-bj~ee-~tve--flcE-$~ ~ ~ ' Channel development into ~+~ high density mixed-use development -along transit corridors. Objective T-1.2: (47naoird . - -__ -'_ _... ..-...... ~-....~ ..... a.vr...w v~ ~.u RU10.1 QJJCl3-~___F'.'._'..'' f Develop regulations to guide connectivity within and between €e~ residential development based on neighborhood size +^ ^~ ~~~^ ^^nn^~+;,,;+„ ,~,;+h;n nn~7 h.~+...,,,,r ~ ,g ..~v~~y vv~ 'R~2F~-~Q~~~~38~-S. 257 Objective T-1.3: (Ongoing) I Identify and map all major destinations in the county, such as schools, parks, businesses, shopping areas, sports facilities, etc., and determine what improvements need to be made in the transportati©n amenities such as bike facilities, sidewalks, and transit stops. V!/ork to get these improvements made in county owned facilities. Objective T-1.4: (Medium Term) • , ~-~-4~ Objective T-1.5: (Medium Term) e-C-atm-t-p~: Abje~tirve-T~-6=-EEerrrg Ter-r~3 Objective T-1.7: (Long Tern) Obiective T-2.1: (Ongoing) Identify and map major routes between important destinations. 258 Objective T-2.2: (Onaoin Identify deficie~~ynpp.~c~yiepps in the connectors, l11..:.. ..~. ~. ... T "f ^f. /YY.~~wivlr~rJ~ Improve connectors through existing processes such as TIP process, and Enhancement and Spot Safety programs. Objective T-2.4: f6Hr~fn~ Develop, in coordination wifh the Environment and Resource Conservation Department and the Recreation and Parks Departmenf, a Rural V1/ays program that provides pedestrian access connecting rural areas of Orange County with desirable destinations. Objective T-2.5: (Short Term) Identify viable routes and funding strategies to increase public transif to areas outside of municipal transit service areas. Objective T 2.6:. Revive rail transportation in Orange County. Trarisportatioii'Goa) 3 ,. :. ., .: .., . ..., ~„ .. Efficient and safe Traffic .movement along Orange County's routes anal corndors -~~ Objective T-3.1: (Ongoing) Improve the County's transportation system by first enhancing existing facilities as opposed to developing new facilities. Objective: T-3.2: (Short Term r Increase use of rail, bus, bicycle and walking as transportation modes. 259 Objective T-3 3: (Short Term) Reduce rush hour congestion. Objective T-3.4: (hang Term) ~~ Increase local production, distribution and use of renewable, sustainable fuels. Obiecfive T-3.5: Evaluate and serve special transportation needs of fhe elderly, the ,young {~:ee-~~a~e-~e), the economically disadvantaged and the disabled. Objective T-3.6: /ncrease private transit and public/private transit opportunities. Objective T=3.7. Improve county wide access for emergency vehicles. Objective T-3.8: /ncrease safety awareness between car drivers and bicycle riders. 260 -~ - ~ -. compre'hens~ue, creatwet and~effectwe rans:portat'ion planning ,:. p roce'ss ;. ,. ~. •. Objective T-4.1: (Ongoing) tre-kri-c-Fe-s: Create and implement an Orange County Comprehensive Transportation Plan. Objective T-4.2: (Onaoin Plan and integrate the County's transportation system with other public and private transportation planning agencies and service providers in Orange County. Objective T-4.3 (Long Term) Plan and integrate the. County's transportation system with regional transportation agencies and transit providers, agencies/transif providers in neighboring counties, fhe /North Carolina Department of Transportation and other state agencies, Amtra6~ and IVC Railroad. IVIEni1C~RAN ®lD IUI To: Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) and Planning Board (OCPB) via Donna Baker Prom: /dice Gordon, County Commissioner Copies: OUTBoard, County Manager, Planning Director and Staff Subject: Comments on the Comprehensive Plan Date: August 25, 2008 Since I will not be able to attend the Public Hearing on August 25, I am submitting comments via this memorandum. I would like these comments to be made part of the record of the public hearing and to have copies of these comments made available to the BOCC and OCPB, as well as the others listed above. ' There are two sets of comments. The first set relates to Chapter 9, the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The main purpose of these comments is to restore the original Transportation Goal 1 and its Objectives. Any other specific comments on the comprehensive plan will come later. The second set provides brief overall comments. CHAPTER 9 -TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT The OUTBoard revisions to the May 6 draft of the Comprehensive Plan strengthen the document in many ways. However, the revisions delete the first objective (in the May 6 draft) that focuses on a multi-modal approach to protecting the environment. Given below is a suggested combination of the May 6, 2008 Transportation Element draft Goals and Objectives, and the subsequent OUTBoard recommended changes given in the agenda packet for the August 25, 2008 public hearing. The major changes made by this combination restore the original May 6 goal T-1, and also clarify and strengthen that goal and associated objectives. For example, the May 6 Objective T-1.2 is stated. as two objectives (T-1.3 and T-1.4). Having separate categories for environmenfial impacts and community impacts is similar to the approach used by the DCHC MPO Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) when the TAC evaluates transportation facilities. 261 262 Restoring the original first goal involves a few changes in the subsequent goals and objectives to take into account other changes in the Goals and Objectives made by the OUTBoard. It also involves renumbering the other goals, so that the OUTBoard Goal 1 becomes Goal 2, and so forth. The suggested changes to the Goals and Objectives cover pp. 9-29 through 9-34 of the OUTBoard document in the August 25 hearing.packet. These pages are also numbered (at the top of the page) as pages 41 through 46 of the August 25 packet. I. CHANGES TO THE GOALS A. Transportation Goal 1 (starts on page 9-30, also numbered page 42.in the August 25 packet) An efficient and integrated multi-modal transportation system that protects the natural environment and community character. B. Transportation Goal 2 ^Integrated land use planning and transportation planning. C. Transportation Goal 3 DA comprehensive network of connected transportation corridors (roads, sidewalks, rail, etc) supporting an appropriate mix of traffic. D. Transportation Goal 4 Efficient and safe traffic movement along Orange County routes and corridors E. Transportation Goal 5 A comprehensive, creative, and effective transportation planning process. II. CHANGES TO THE OBJECTIVES A. Transportation Goal 1 (starts on page 9-30, also numbered page 42 in the August 25 packet) An efficient and integrated multi-modal transportation system that protects the natural environment and community character.~~Objective T-1.1 Expand the use of public transit (bus and rail), walking, and biking as primary modes of travel; and increase the occupancy of automobiles through ridesharing and other means. Objective T-1.2 Facilitate the overall development and use of a transportation system that is more energy-efficient and reduces carbon emissions. 263 Objective T-1.3 Develop new transportation facilities in a manner that has a positive impact or at least minimizes negative impacts on the natural environment, including air quality, water resources (wetlands, streams, water supply watersheds) biological resources, and wildlife habitat. Objective T-1.4 Develop new transportation facilities in a manner that has a positive impact or at least minimizes negative impacts on the community, including. historical or cultural assets, existincLneighborhoods, schools and ' recreational facilties, and the overall rural character in Orange County. Objective T-1.5 Identify prime viewsheds alonq_major transportation corridors and protect these areas for their scenic and natural resource values. B. Transportation Goal 3 which will become Goal 4 (starts on page 9-32, also numbered page 44 in the August 25 packet) Efficient and safe traffic movement along Orange County's routes and corridors. Delete Objective T-3.2 which would have become T-4.2, since it is now covered under Objective T-1.1. Change it to the following: Construct new bicycle facilities in Orange County that will make cycling for transportation purposes safer and more convenient. (This is similar to Objective T-1.7 under Goal 1 in the May 6 document.) Change Objective T-3.4 which will become T-4.4 Reduce the use of fossil fuels and increase local production, distribution, and use of renewable, sustainable fuels. Change Objective T-3.8 which will become T-4.8 Increase safety awareness between car drivers and bicycle riders, and increase safety for pedestrians. OVERALL COMMENTS I was impressed by all the work that has gone into the comprehensive plan, and noted the length and complexity of the document. I appreciate all that has been done by our advisory boards and stafF, and by the public in their comments. The public hearing agenda abstract lists as one purpose of the hearing to 264 "receive direction from the Board of Commissioners as to subsequent steps." According to the schedule, the commissioners will be considering the plan one more time, and that is for approval at .our regular meeting on October 7. It is my opinion that the commissioners will have to devote a major portion of that meeting to the plan and/or schedule an additional work session. ~1`T~ c~~~~vt~+~ ~ ~2 6 5 APPROVED 8/19/2008 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ORANGE GOUNTY PLANNING BOARD QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING May 19, 2008 7:30 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners and the Orange County Planning Board met for a Quarterly Public Hearing continuation meeting on Monday, May 19, 2008 at 7:30 p.m. in the F. Gordon Battle Courtroom in Hillsborough, N.C. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Barry Jacobs and Commissioners Valerie Foushee; Alice M. Gordon, and Mike" Nelson COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:.Moses Carey, Jr. COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geof Gledhill COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: Assistant County Manager Willie Best and Deputy Clerk to the Board David Hunt (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: 'Chair Jay Bryan and Members Craufurd Goodwin; Reriee Price, Judith Wegner, Michelle Kempinski, Bernadette Pelissier, and Larry Wright PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Jeffrey Schmitt, Joel Knight, and Brian Crawford The meeting was called to order at 7:37 pm. A. OPENING REMARKS FROM THE CHAIRS -Barry Jacobs and PB Chair Jay Bryan Jay Bryan welcomed everyone. Ghair Jacobs made reference to the special use permit. Jay Bryan said that, due to an oversight regarding a notice, which is a legal requirement for such matters, the special use permit will be postponed to a later meeting for a public hearing. Geof Gledhill said that the County Commissioners would reschedule this public hearing and there would be proper notice given far enough in advance. Chair Jacobs said that if residents live within the area, they will get a written, official notice from the County. If any residents are concerned that they might not get a notice, then they should give their contact information to the Clerk. B. PUBLIC CHARGE The Board of Commissioners pledges to the citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board asks its citizens to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner; both with the Board and with fellow citizens. At any time should any member of the Board or any citizen fail to observe this public charge, the Chair will ask the offending member to leave the meeting until that individual regains personal control. Should decorum fail to be restored, the Chair will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is observed. All electronic devices such as cell phones, pagers, and computers should please be turned off or set to silent/vibrate. t~',tll".i "f'!~S'.YN~"'•r+ii!saR~!~(tj.+~~:Ln 266 3. Comprehensive Plan Update Phase 11: The Comprehensive Plan is an official public document that includes analysis of existing and predicted conditions and provides guidance for future legal and policy decisions; as determined by.Orange County. The updated Plan will serve to guide development and the preservation of resources within the unincorporated areas of the County, by addressing a multitude of issues. The adopted Plan also serves as the statutory basis for many of Orange .County's land use. regulations as well as the. application of zoning districts, as zoning rr-ust be in accordance with a comprehensive plan. On October 3, 2006, the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) approved a process for updating the County's Comprehensive Plan in two phases as follows: Phase I, to include the development of Comprehensive Plan goals 'and County Profile Element; and Phase II, to include the remaining seven (7) Elements of the updated Comprehensive Plan. Phase I was completed by the..County in September 2007 and Phase. II was initiated immediately thereafter. During October 2007-April 2008, a Planning Consultant; County staff and the following County advisory boards have worked together to develop the. draft Comprehensive Plan: Affordable Housing Advisory Board, Agricultural Preservation Board, Commission for the. Environment, Economic Development Commission, Historic Preservation. Commission, Orange Unified Transportation Board, Planning Board, and Recreation and Parks Advisory Council. The Comprehensive Plan includes the following eight Elements: 1) County Profile; 2) Economic Development; 3) Housing; 4) Land Use; 5) Natural and Cultural Systems; 6) Parks and Recreation; 7) Services,, (Utilities) .and Community Facilities; and 8) Transportation. Recommendations are also provided in the draft Comprehensive Plan that addresses the administration, implementation, and monitoring of the Plan that will need to take place following its adoption. ~s7 In addition to numerous citizen comprised County advisory board meetings, during Phase II of the update process, the County conducted public input meetings on January 28th, April 3`d, April 9th and April 23`d. The draft Comprehensive Plan is available on the Orange County Planning Department website at http://www.co.orange.nc.us/planning/compre_cpupdate.asp. Purpose: To receive public comment on the updated Comprehensive Plan in its entirety and receive direction from the Board of Commissioners as to subsequent steps. Comprehensive Planning Supervisor Torn Altieri reviewed the attached items. He made a PowerPoint presentation. Public Hearing Purposes - Receive formal public comment on the draft Comprehensive Plan and receive direction from County Commissioners. - Attendees hear in general what is in the draft Comprehensive Plan and how it was generated. Presentation Overview - Purpose and Scope of Draft Plan - Process and Timetable - Opportunities for citizen access and input - . Availability of Draft Plan - Roles/Who hasbeen involved - Submittal of written comments - County Administration's recommendation - Consultant's general tasks - Overview of Draft Plan Comprehensive Plan Purposes, Scope and Process Purpose: - Framework for long-range decision making - Guides growth and development - Sets goals/objectives to guide policy decisions - Serves as`statutory'basis for land use regulations Scope: - Planning period, 20+ years. - Planning for Orange County's planning jurisdiction - Covers 8 major areas, known as Elements - Based on BOCC Guiding Principles - Includes Goals and Objectives to guide County policies and implementation action strategies Update Process and Timetable Phase I (Oct. '06 -Sept. '07): - Goals (38 in total) - County Profile (data) Element - Public Hearing (August 27th) Phase II (Oct. '07 - August '08): 26$ - Development of Comprehensive Plan o Text for remaining 7 elements o Objectives o Public Hearing (May '08) BOCC Guiding Principles 1. Efficient and fiscally responsible provision of Public Facilities and Services 2. Encouraging sustainable growth and development 3. Encouraging energy efficiency, lower energy consumption, and the use of non-polluting renewable energy, resources while promoting both air quality protection and the development of an effective transportation- system 4. Natural area resource preservation 5. Preservation of rural land use patterns 6. Water resource preservation 7. Promotion of economic prosperity and diversity 8. Preservation of community character Roles in General - BOCC -set stage; provide direction to advisory boards and staff; hear and consider public comments; adopt plan - Advisory Boards -direction to staff and consultants; provide input and feedback - Consultants -Meeting facilitation; partner with staff and advisory boards to complete draft plan - County Staff -partner with consultants; support boards - Public -attend meetings and hearings; provide input and feedback Opportunities for Citizen Knowledge, Access, and Input Meetings: - Meetings .of 8 Element Lead Advisory Boards - Countywide Meetings (4) - Open Houses (2) - Public Hearings (2) Accessing Information: - Meetings, staff, advisory board members, Internet, mailing lists, County libraries, and press releases Availability of Draft Plan - Online at: www.co orange nc us/glanning/compre cpupdate ash - Public libraries: Carrboro, Cedar Grove, Chapel Hill, and Hillsborough - Planning and Inspections Department Submittal of Written Comments - Guaranteed that written comments submitted on or before June 4th will be considered during development of Planning Board's recommendation to the BOCC. - All comments received will accompany the Planning Board's recommendation to the BOCC. - Submit comments directly to Planning Board at their June 4th meeting or in advance to: CompPlanUpdate(c~co.orange nc us OR Orange County Planning Board :.tiue.:~. a :, -tu,r.,r{,:~;: ,~,r~t,y~:i ~~,,,. 269 Attn: Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor Orange County Planning and Inspections Department 306-F Revere Rd., P.O. Box 8181 Hillsborough, NC 27278 Administration's Recommendation In accordance with the BOCC approved timetable, County Administration recommends referral of the Draft Plan to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the BOCC August 19, 2008. Clarion's General Tasks -Roger Waldon, Principal, Clarion Associates Assistance During Phase 0 1. Data and information collection 2. Meetings with Advisory Boards and staff 3. Advisory Board, staff and public input 4. Prepared 15t draft of Comprehensive Plan 5. Advisory Board and staff comments on draft 6. Developed a 2"d draft for public hearing General Comments on Draft Plan - Reflects no major changes to existing/current policy directions. - Does not include specific implementation recommendations; work on those to start after Plan adoption. - Draft Plan designed to: o Establish a common data base; o Pull together ideas and information heretofore scattered; o Set the stage for subsequent community discussions about implementation strategies Comprehensive Plan Chapters 1. Plan Overview 2. BOCC Planning Principles 3. Economic Development Element 4. Housing Element 5. Land Use Element 6. Natural and Cultural Systems Element 7. Parks and Recreation Element 8. Services and Facilities Element 9. Transportation Element 10. Toward a Sustainable Future Common Components of Elements - Summary and overview - Purpose of plan element - Historic/current data and evaluation of trends - Needs - Goals and objectives ~ ~ i\iiNl 71 `~ _.R'r: :~iRt'a i!~i~;~ PEI C'•x 270 - Linkages to other elements - Key documents - Intergovernmental coordination Chapter Highlights Chapter 1. Plan Overview - Background information and plan organization - Sustainability - Administration and implementation guidelines - Monitoring and evaluation procedures - Amendments Chapter 2. BOCC Planning Principles - Representative of the Board's values Chapter 3. Economic Development Element - Economy anchored by institutional uses, RTP - Importance of Agriculture to economy - Need to encourage non-residential development - Need to encourage development in targeted areas - Focus on Economic Development Districts Chapter 4. Housing Element: - Need more housing for future residents - Affordability and "workforce" housing - Wide-range of new housing in the right places - Network of non-profit housing organizations Chapter 5. Land Use Element: - Coordination with municipalities - Promote mixed-use development - Promote development in targeted areas - Protect environmentally sensitive land - Preserve open space and agriculture - Implementation will need to include amendments to land use plan and ordinances Chapter 6. Natural/Cultural Systems Element - Agricultural Resources - Air and Energy Resources - Cultural Resources - Historic Preservation - Natural Areas - Water Resources - Strategies to preserve and be good stewards Chapter 7. Parks and Recreation Element - Summarizes existing and planned facilities - Recognizes a growing population - Identifies need for countywide assessment of recreation and parks facilities, programs, and resources - Emphasizes coordination with municipalities and school districts ~ i,:SU'~I '7l:'::w7i!gii l;lS: ~~;j ass):'Il :'.n 271 Chapter 8 Services and Facilities Element: - School facilities - Solid waste management - Stormwater/erosion control - Libraries - Public Safety and Emergency Management - Public water/wastewater systems and coordination Chapter 9 Transportation Element: - Emphases on multi-modal transportation - Regional authorities for recommendations - Three bus systems (Orange, .Chapel Hill, Triangle Transit) - Transportation and development closely linked - County is within anon-attainment area for air quality and daily travel is increasing. Appendices - County Profile (Data) Element - Glossary of terms - Additional data and information NEXT STEPS - Receive public comment - Referral to Planning Board - Return to BOCC for action Public Comment: Allen Rosen read a prepared statement: "Members of the Orange. County Comprehensive Plan Coalition want the updated plan to declare a preference for compact, walkable, mixed-use, and transit-supportive developments 'within the County's planning jurisdiction. This development pattern is vital to achieving many key components of sustainability including affordable housing, an increase in the commercial tax base, reduced vehicle miles traveled, and improved prospects for local and regional public transportation. We are pleased that language throughout the plan emphasizes this preference. Overall, the plan is a big step in the right direction, but there..is still much room for improvement. In order. for compact, mixed-use developments to become the preferred mode of new development, the planning elements of the updated comprehensive plan must complement each other and sensible implementing ordinances need to be adopted. Coalition members prepared comments on the goals and objectives from the first draft for the Land Use, Transportation, Economic Development, and Housing elements. Since the language of the Public Hearing draft is virtually the same, the comments are still current. These recommendations (found on pages 38-47 of the agenda packet) provide examples of how the current goals and objectives can be improved and how the linkages between the elements enhanced. The viability of compact, mixed-use developments depends on the availability of public infrastructure, including water and sewer. Thus, the coalition recommends that the planning document make affirmative and unequivocal commitments to providing the necessary public infrastructure in a timely manner. Work remains to be done in this regard also. I recommend a section of the plan be dedicated exclusively to the goal statements and objectives that address both zoning for compact, mixed-use developments and planning for the 272 requisite public infrastructure. This section should assure the reader that. work on these critical objectives is coordinated and finished such that the infrastructure will begin to come on line within the next 3-5 years, if not sooner. As it stands now, it's not clear when and how this will happen. Personally, I support the emphasis on compact, mixed-use developments not only because it's a good conservation strategy, but because this is the best strategy for significantly increasing the supply of housing affordable to working and middle class households. To put it another way, if the plan's implementation does not result in an increased supply of less expensive land - on a per lot basis -for residential development than currently available, then the comprehensive plan update will have little or no impact on reducing the shortage of workforce housing in the county. This points to the main flaw with the plan's housing element. It almost exclusively focuses on issues related to affordable and special needs housing; albeit an area of concern which I fully support. However, the housing element should also address the systemic problems which. cause the county's housing market to skew towards upper-income housing and recommend actions for bringing the market into a more equitable balance. Finally, I encourage the Commissioners to ask themselves if they've heard from as many stakeholders as they feel is appropriate for a policy document of this significance before voting on the plan later this summer. I believe the compressed time schedule put a strain on the planning advisory boards and diminished the opportunity -especially during Phase 11-for widespread and continuous community input. As such, I encourage the Commissioners to immediately solicit the written comments of each lead advisory board so that their comments can be .utilized by the Planning Board as they continue to refine the plan this summer. Indeed, one or more joint advisory board meetings at this stage would be useful in assessing community support for the proposal, as well as gathering constructive recommendations for final improvements." Holly Reid read a prepared statement: "My name is Holly Reid and I am a co-founder of the Walkable Hillsborough Coalition, a group of community volunteers who have worked the past seven years to advocate for pedestrian and bike ways for Hillsborough, surrounding communities, and Orange County. I have been involved in the exploring the possibility of reopening a train station in Hillsborough. I am also one of the twenty-nine members of the Special Transit Advisory Commission, whose charge was to recommend a regional transit system for the Triangle region to our joinf Metropolitan Planning Organization representatives. Our final report will be presented to the MPO's this Wednesday, May 21, in Raleigh: Over the years and especially through my involvement on the STAC, I have learned that the Triangle area is one of the most sprawled regions in the country and that we expect a million more people to Wake, Durham, and Orange Counties in the next 20 years. I have learned that we are off-the-scale auto centric in our country, and that we are realizing the great costs of this choice every day: poor health, poor community connections, dangerous and unattractive alternative modes of getting around, disenfranchised young and old, loss of commerce in our downtowns, and an irresponsible carbon footprint, to name a few. I believe our Unified Transportation Board recognizes these huge community costs. They have listed many of these as key issues in a future Comprehensive Transportation Plan that is recommended in Objective T-3.2, and they see this plan as addressing strategies for all transportation modes, including bike; pedestrian, rail and all other critical transit facilities. What is absolutely critical to righting our heavily over-weighted single modal car culture is ,a new multi-modal transportation system that is well emphasized in Goal 3. What needs just as much emphasis in Goal 3 is future development that is compact, walkable and in mixed-use neighborhoods along transit corridors supported by transit. Transit and pedestrian-oriented 273 development is the critical nexus. of transportation and land use and it needs to be highly emphasized and cross-referenced frequently in our Comprehensive Plan. In my view and the Coalition's view, this needs to be written right into the Overarching Goal as the most important change in transportation and land use, agame-changer for our future. I am also going to emphasize a couple of other objectives that our Coalition recommends to be added to the Comprehensive Plan. We recommend a new Objective T-4.4 to implement the Special Transit Advisory Commission's recommendations for regional transit (including. light rail, passenger/commuter rail, expanded bus and transit-oriented development at a future Orange County train station in Hillsborough). Being very involved in Safe Routes to School Initiatives I am also very interested in our Coalition's recommendation .to add Objective T-1.8 to coordinate with Orange County Schools to provide safe walking and biking routes within 1.5 miles of all schools for children during school hours and residents after hours. Connectivity for our communities between key public institutions, commercial areas and neighborhoods will bring the vitality and foot traffic back to our community lives that we have lost over years of exclusively accommodating King Car. Our County's Comprehensive Plan is our way. to receive gratitude instead of disdain from the next generations for our foresight. Let's make a difference now. Thank you." Adam Klein read a prepared statement: "My name is Adam Klein, I am the Director Government Relations and Economic Development at the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce and member of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition. I am here to offer a few brief remarks on the second draft of the Comprehensive Plan, specifically the economic development section. In my professional opinion and the opinion of our Coalition members, the economic development section is missing a major strategy -namely working with UNC-Chapel Hill to retain many of the businesses created at the University. UNC ~in many ways is our business incubator. In the words of Chancellor-elect Holden Thorp, UNC's challenges in the coming years will be to "Cure diseases....find and invent clean energy...feed seven billion people" to name a few. As UNC strives to tackle-these issues, researchers are generating cutting edge products and devices that are spinning off into new businesses. These businesses are based on innovation, pay good wages, and have little environmental impact - in a nutshell businesses we want in Orange County. Yet, out of 29 UNC businesses spawned since the year 2000, only 3 are located here. The majority go to RTP because they can find readily available office and lab space and a welcoming business environment. We can do much better than this and it can start with our Comprehensive Plan. I ask that you consider including a new objective of "working closely with UNC's Office of Technology Development to identify commercial space needs of businesses created by UNC research, promote development of such space within the County, and actively encourage UNC businesses to stay in Orange County after leaving the University."- This should be one of our primary strategies for economic development. Lastly, in order for the County's commercial tax base to expand and for more businesses to locate in Orange County, it is paramount that water and sewer be extended to all of the Economic Development Districts. In the current Comprehensive Plan draft, extending water and sewer to these districts is listed as a long-term goal. The Coalition strongly urges that this objective be reprioritized as a short-term goal as so much of the other objectives within the Economic Development element hinges on having the necessary infrastructure in place to allow commercial and light industrial development. Please consider these changes as you review and edit the Comprehensive Plan. I thank you for your time and for the opportunity to give comment on this important document." r. ~ ail\~ ~~{ t'•> -e;h° ~iq{u r,.l `~t.{I't { ~L,,. 274 Rev. Robert Campbell said that the members of the Rogers-Eubanks Neighborhood Association and the Coalition to End Environmental Racism would like to bring attention to a paper written~b_y Allen Bernard of the Cedar Grove Institution of Sustainable Communities on racial segregation in residential neighborhoods. Racial residential segregation remains a fact of life in the south as well as in the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood.. Political exclusion, which it is labeled, occurs when Afro-American neighborhoods are kept just outside of a town's boundaries, resulting in a low level of service, reduced access to infrastructure, and limited or no political voice in land use and committee decisions. He said that they are. requesting that their recommendation from the Rogers Road Enhancement Task Force be included in the Orange County Comprehensive Plan, and that the plan include, specific recommendations and actions to: 1. End the 35-year burden of solid waste facilities in the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood and the Rogers Road historic area; 2. Provide public funding for provision of safe drinking .water and sewer service to all households in the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood and the Rogers Road historic area; 3. Provide funding for other basic municipal ,service to residents of the Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood and Rogers Road historic area, including, but not limited to paved roads, paved sidewalks, storm 'drains, street lights, public bus service (including covered bus stops), and emergency protection service (such as fire, police protection, ambulatory, and rescue squad). He said that in looking at the Comprehensive Plan and the inter-territorial jurisdiction plan, the plan that was implemented in the 1800's specifically has a boundary between the neighborhoods. He said that this plan excluded water from coming into the historic area. He encouraged the County Commissioners to .look at these papers. Fred Black chairs the Community Action Network and also participates with the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition. He said that this has been an amazing .process but also a very difficult process. He said that since the second draft on May 2"d, it has been hard work to delve into it. One of the goals has been to help the coalition educate itself so that it could educate the community and encourage them to participate in this process. He has concerns that enough time has not been built into the schedule to allow the thorough review, study, and evaluation that a plan of this magnitude requires. He asked the Board to consider how else to receive input from people who are going to be hard pressed in the summer to pay attention to this plan. Ruby.Sinreich said that she is still trying to learn about the plan. She agrees with all of the other comments before her. She has two main concerns. One is about intergovernmental cooperation. She does not see any evidence of this in the creation of the plan. She was the Chair of the Chapel Hill Planning Board until about a year ago, and she did not even know about this plan. She said that if the plan proposes doing intergovernmental cooperation, it needs to model that in the creation of the plan. In addition, planning in a vacuum is not useful when the borders are obviously contiguous. Her other concern is land use. She said that we have to envision a future where gas is not cheap. She is very concerned when she sees disconnected areas of development such as the economic development districts. This is not how communities grow and it does not reinforce the support of land use. She is concerned that the EDDs will encourage more sprawl. She would like to see how transportation and other infrastructure will support economic development districts and wherever there will be growth and activity. Robbin Taylor-Hall read an email from the Simpson Efland Heirs: t~,,illi,l.'!~~ . (i r.e;i~n4'":It~~i3'1I ci•=. 275 "The late Simpson Efland left six heirs. Siblings Ann E. Gandy and Mack P. Efland, Jr., were his Administrators. Both have power of attorney to dispose of the land. Mack Efland and I hereby request, representing the heirs, that water critical be removed from this property and that water and sewer be brought to land in the Efland Small Area Plan. It is the intention of the heirs to effect an orderly disposition of the land holdings. We have the properties listed with Taylor-Hall Properties of Hillsborough. Ms. Robbin Taylor-Hall is our agent, and is authorized to speak to you on our behalf. This letter has been approved by Mack Efland. Thank you for your consideration. Ann E. Gandy, PA Simpson Efland Heirs" Ben Lloyd said that 25 years ago the North Carolina Department of Commerce identified the US 70/Southern RR/I-85 corridor through Orange County as the most potential area in the state for good, clean, high-paying, low water using economic growth. As of today, not one brick has been laid. Fourteen years ago, Orange Gounty created three economic development districts, and as of today there is no activity in any of them. In 2005, the County Commissioners committed to creating 5,000 new commercial jobs and $125 million of new commercial tax base in Orange~County by 2010. Three years have gone by and nothing has happened. Today, there is nearly 19,000 acres of Orange County land in the Water Quality Critical Area where no sewage, commercial or industrial activity is allowed. He recommended that this water critical area. stigma should be removed so that some of the potential area can be utilized to provide jobs for people in Orange County. He said that the Comprehensive Plan will determine the future for a lot of Orange County citizens. People need jobs and the County needs money. He said that this is a lot of information and he suggested that the Board go slow. Jay Bryan read a prepared statement: "At the previous public hearing on the update to the Comprehensive Plan, I requested the Board of Commissioners to explore the idea of establishing another Element in the Comprehensive Plan to addressing Planning Principle No.'8, Preservation of Community Character. My proposed Element read: Maintenance of Community and Preservation of Community Character This request was forwarded to the Planning Board.. In the fall of 2007, the Board formed a subcommittee consisting of members Renee Price, Judith Wegner, Bernadette Pelissier, and myself to examine the idea that had been proposed. In March of 2008, the Subcommittee submitted a report to the Planning Board. The report consisted of a history of community building efforts in the County, including a detailed discussion of the report of Shaping Orange. County's Future Task force, and the subcommittee's recommendations concerning the establishment of a new Element and attending goals and objectives. The Planning Board discussed the report briefly at its monthly meeting in March. There was no consensus or vote on the recommendations although there was some concern expressed about how such an idea might slow down the overall process for updating the Plan. Tonight, on my own, I am asking that instead of establishing a new. Element for community building and maintenance, certain Objectives be included in the Land Use Element. These Objectives are attached to your copy of my remarks as Exhibit A. Also attached is a copy of most of the recommendations of the Shaping Orange's Future Task Force regarding Community Building. i ~ iii!: ~ L"! !['i = :~ ri .~.i t<~:: ~:; I `s'..ii ~~ ~ ri.::: 276 .Goal 6 of the proposed Land Use Element entitled, "A land use planning process that is transparent, fair, open, efficient, and responsive," would be one possible location for some or all of these objectives. I~ believe there are also other-goals under which these objectives may fit. In summary, I strongly believe that the ten principles of community building listed in the Task Force's final report provide the glue and. accountability that bind together each of the Comprehensive Plan's Elements and their goals and objectives. The Task Force's overarching goal of community-building connects the Comprehensive Plan's individual Elements to each other to create interdependency. This goal, coupled with the attached Objectives, also transcends each Element and serves as abroad-spectrum vision by which the goals and objectives of the Elements, as well as those of the social, economic and environmental sectors of the County, can be better accomplished. Thank you." EXHIBIT A OBJECTIVES FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN'S LAND USE ELEMENT a. Develop a process for using principles of community building (See p. 2, Report of Shaping Orange County's Future Task Force) as a checklist for evaluating .the extent to which long and short-term planning and development builds and maintain community in Orange County. b. Establish the use of mediation, conflict resolution, public participation and facilitation practices among Orange County and municipal boards, elected and appointed (p. 25, Report of Shaping Orange County's. Future Task Force). c. Establish collaborative initiatives with municipalities within the County to work together on a plan for community building and maintenance and how to implement community-building strategies into their policies and procedures (p. 25, Report of Shaping Orange .County's Future Task Force). d. Create acommunity-building roundtable of County citizens to meet periodically and discuss/evaluate the County's progress in building and maintaining community. e. Create ways for fostering collaboration toward community building and maintenance between County government and for-profit and non-profit sector leadership and members. f. Develop opportunities for younger citizens to participate in the community building and maintenance plan for future development of the County and State's leadership. g. Explore the idea of a position of an "extension" agent for community building and maintenance. h. Create a database of community events and celebrations, both within the county. :and regionally, that builds community and preserve community character. i. Establish an annual day to celebrate the County and its citizens and their efforts.. and initiatives to build and maintain community. j. Evaluate the recommendations of the Shaping Orange County's Future's Task Force regarding "Put Community Building First" (other than any that already stated in Objectives) for implementation. k. Determine where principles of community building should be incorporated into other Elements of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan. 277 Commissioner Foushee said that there is only one public hearing scheduled, and there needs to be at least one more public hearing. Chair Jacobs agreed with Commissioner Foushee. He said that Ruby Sinreich makes an excellent point and that the County should model the behavior that it wishes to support and should provide opportunities for all municipal boards to comment on the Comprehensive Plan. Chair Jacobs thanked everyone involved in the creation of this document. He suggested that the document say that it is printed on recycled paper. He also suggested putting the document on a CD so that searching within it would be really simple. Regarding word usage, he suggested that someone look at the difference between "more than" and "over" and "less" and . "fewer" in dealing with quantities, because they are not interchangeable. Alsa, the City of Durham is "it" and not "who." Also, Durham Technical Community College prefers to be called Durham Technical Community College; and interchanging "manufactured housing community" and "mobile home parks" would be easier. Commissioner Gordon agreed with having more time to digest this. She suggested working with the Planning Board and staff to adjust the timeline rather than trying to craft it tonight. Jay Bryan said that, on behalf of the Planning Board, it is ready to hear from the County Commissioners about their thoughts. He suggested that the Commissioners should have a work session or two before there is more public comment. Chair Jacobs said that the County Commissioners break on June 24`h, and they could consider two weeks in June where there are not two meetings. A work session could be scheduled during one of those two weeks. Commissioner Nelson suggested that it would probably take two work sessions, one in June and one after the second public hearing. Judith Wegner said that the Planning Board has been having almost weekly meetings and the reality is that the Planning Board will change significantly soon. Michelle Kempinski echoed Judith Wegner's comments and said that the Planning Board has been having many meetings. Renee Price said that she would like instructions and direction from the Commissioners as to the revisions that are going to be made. There have been goal changes suggested by the public, and she would like direction on whether the goals will be changed. Larry Wright said that the transportation objectives are not in the current draft. Tom Altieri said that they are referenced in the Comprehensive Plan and are included in the appendices. Geof Gledhill suggested that the Board adjourn this public hearing to the next public hearing on August 25th and keep the public hearing open. The County Commissioners can hold work sessions in the interim and invite the Planning Board to participate. Chair Jacobs suggested that the Board make it a point to finish the business in one work session. • A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to adjourn the public hearing to be reconvened at the next Quarterly Public Hearing on August 25, 2008. Commissioner Gordon added a friendly amendment to the motion to instruct staff to work with the Planning Board and others to develop a new timeline and also that the public be• notified of the BOCC Work Session. VOTE: UNANIMOUS i i,tlit~a: i.+r '.;tnr~lt i;.~Ptlg!?Pt! ~.: . 278 1 DRAFT 2 3 ' 4 MINUTES 5 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 6 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD ~ QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING 8 August 25, 2008 9 7:30 p.m. 10 11 The Orange County Board of Commissioners and the Orange County Planning Board 12 rnet for a Quarterly Public Hearing continuation meeting on Monday, August 25, 2008 at 7:30 13 p.m. in the F. Gordon Battle Courtroom in Hillsborough, N.C. 14 ' 15 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Barry Jacobs and Commissioners Valerie 16 Foushee, and Moses Carey, Jr. ' 1'7 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Alice M. Gordon and Mike Nelson 18 COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geof Gledhill and Brian Ferrell 19 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: Assistant County Manager Willie Best and Deputy Clerk to 20 the Board David Hunt (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) 21 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Jay Bryan and Members Craufurd 22 Goodwin, Renee Price, Judith Wagner, Larry Wright, Bernadette Pelissier, Jeffrey Schmitt, and 23 Brian Crawford 24 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Joel Knight and Michelle Kempinski 25 26 The meeting was called to order at 7:33 pm. 27 28 A. OPENING REMARKS FROM THE CHAIRS 29 30 31 B. PUBLIC CHARGE 32 The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge. 33 34 C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 35 36 1. Zoning Atlas Amendment, Planned Development Petition for Efland Commons Single- FarnilySubdivision :.~i.\iC'~1.'!i_': ittu~l; IiSira u;"'+t!;4i r'n z8o D~.FT ®NLY-l~®T APPI~~V~I~ T BX' ~®CC 36 37 2. Comprehensive Plan Update Phase 11: Third and final Public Hearing held during the 38 Comprehensive Plan update process. The last Public Hearing was held on May 19, 2008 to 39 introduce and receive public comments on the draft Comprehensive Plan in its entirety. The 40 Board of County Commissioners scheduled this additional Public Hearing on the draft Plan 41 to provide additional time for the public to review the document and prepare comments. 42 43 Comprehensive Planning Supervisor Tom Altieri said that this is actually the second public 44 hearing being held on the draft Comprehensive Plan. He made a PowerPoint presentation. 45 46 Presentation Overview 47 48 ^ Purpose and Scope of Draft Plan 49 ^ Process and Timetable 50 Roles/Who has been involved 51 ^ Consultant's general tasks 1 ^ Opportunities for citizen access and input 2 Notification 3 Availability of Draft Plan 4 ^ Overview of Draft Plan •' 5 ~ ^ County Administration's recommendation 6 7 Comprehensive Plan Purposes, Scope, and Process 8 • 9 Purpose: 10 - Framework for long-range decision making 11 - Guide development and the preservation of resources 12 - Sets goals/objectives to guide policy decisions 13 - Serves as statutory basis for land use regulations 14 15 Scope:. • 16 - Planning period, 20+ years 17 - Planning for Orange County's planning jurisdiction 1g - Covers 8 major areas, known as Elements 19 - Based on BOCC Guiding Principles 20 •- Not to include implementation actions such as new regulations or changes to existing 21 22 Update Process and Timetable 23 Phase I (Oct. '06-Sept. '07): 24 - Goals (38 in total) 25 - County Profile (Data) Element 26 - Public Hearing (Aug. 27m) 27 Phase I I (Oct. '07-Oct. '081: 2g - Development of Comprehensive Plan 29 o Text for remaining 7 elements 30 o Objectives 31 o Public Nearing (May 19tH) 32 o Public Hearing (Aug. 25'h) 33 0 • 34 BOCC Guiding Principles 35 1. Efficient and Fiscally Responsible Provision of Public Facilities and Services 36. 2. Encouraging Sustainable Growth and Development 37 3. Encouraging Energy Efficiency, Lower Energy Consumption and the Use of Non- 3g Polluting Renewable Energy Resources While Promoting Both Air Quality Protection and 39 the Development of an Effective Transportation System. 40• 4. Natural and Resource Preservation 41 5. Preservation of Rural Land Use Patterns 42 6. Water Resource Preservation 43 7. Promotion of Economic Prosperity and Diversity 44 8. Preservation of Community Character 45 46 Roles in General 47 - BOCC -Set stage; provide direction to advisory boards and staff; hear and consider 48 public comments; adopt plan 49 Advisory Boards - Direction to staff and consultants; provide input and feedback 50 - Consultants -meeting facilitation; partner with staff and advisory boards to complete 51 draft plan 281 i ~.;\';INI"+•;. ~; ~ltnr' ;ii!;tltt>,'~~iCiF'1I d... 282 1 - County Staff -partner with consultants; support boards 2 - Public -attend meetings and hearings; provide input and feedback 3 4 Clarion's General Tasks 5~. Roger Waldon, Principle, Clarion Associates 6 7 Assistance During Phase 11 8 1. Data and information collection 9 2. Meetings with Advisory Boards and staff 10 3. Advisory Board, staff and public input 11 4. Prepared 15t draft of Comprehensive Plan 12 5. Advisory Board and staff comments on draft 13 6. Developed a 2"d draft for public hearing 14 15 Opportunities.for Citizen Knowledge, Access and Input 16 Meetinas: 17 - Countywide Meetings (4) 18 - Open Houses (2) 19 - Public Hearings (3) 20 - Meetings of 8 Element Lead Advisory Boards 21 Accessing Information: 22 - Public meetings, Internet, County libraries, and Planning Department 23 24 Notification 25 26 Oranae County Comprehensive Plan 27 - Ads run in News of Orange, Northern Orange Extra, and Chapel Hill Herald 28 - Press releases 29 - Posted bulletins at post offices, stores, community centers, libraries, and other 30 government buildings 31 - Direct mail fio churches and civic groups 32 - Comprehensive Plan Update Website and County homepage "Headlines" 33 - Upon request, direct notice to individuals via US Postal Service and e-mail 34 - Online community calendars: "Around Town's Community Calendar`' and "Chapel Hill 35 Daybook" 36 - Brochures 37 - Booth at Hog Day 38 39 State Requirements: 40 - One public hearing notified through two published newspaper ads 41 42 Availability of Draft Plan 43 Available since May Stn 44 Online at: www.co.orange.nc.us/planning/compre cpupdate asp 45 - Public libraries: Carrboro, Cedar Grove, Chapel Hill, and Hillsborough 46 - Planning and Inspections Department 47 48 Comprehensive Plan Chapters 49 1. Plan Overview 50 2. BOCC Planning Principles 51 3. Economic Development Element ~~.~+"T ®NL~---l~C1~' ~Pl"]L~~VED ~E`T ~3'i~ ~'®C:C 1 4. Housing Element 2 5. Land Use Element 3 6. Natural and Cultural Systems Element 4 7. Parks and Recreation Element 5 8. Services and Facilities Element 6 9. Transportation Element 7 Appendices 8 9. Common Components of Elements 10 - Summary and overview 11 - Purpose of Plan Element 12 - Historic/current data and evaluation of trends 13 - Needs ' 14 - Goals and Objectives 15 - Linkages to other Elements 16 - Key documents 17 - Intergovernmental coordination 18 19 General Comments on .Draft Plan 20 - Reflects no major changes to existing/current policy directions 21 - Does not include specific implementation recommendations; work on those to start after 22 Plan adoption 23 - Draft plan designed to: 24 o Establish a common data base; 25 0 ~ Pull together ideas and information previously scattered; 26 o Set the stage for subsequent community discussions about implementation 27 strategies 28 29 After Adoption, What's Next? 30 Tonight's Public Hearing -Phase II Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives Identified 31 32 Next Phases to Be Determined Through a Process: 33 34 Next Phases: IMPLEMENTATION 35 - Advisory boards/staff .review Goals & Objectives, collaborate, and recommend annual 36 work plans to BOCC 37 - BOCC/County Manager review and authorize annual work plans 3g - Study and identification of implementation actions. 39 - New or changes to regulations with subsequent public hearings and community input 40 41 Administration's Recommendation 42 43 County Administration Recommends: 44 1) Closing the May 19, 2008 Public Hearing on the draft Comprehensive Plan; 45 2) Holding and closing tonight's Hearing; and 46 3) Referring the draft Plan to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to 47 the BOCC October 7, 2008. 48 49 50 Brian Ferrell took Geof Gledhill's place at Phis time. Sl 283 ~.~ :i'I~h'L tl:y '.ir3`i ,'i={tea 1;,^*: ~Ei~~.~ 284 I)~FT' ®:tITLY NOT AP~~1VEI) ~T ~Y ~®CC 1 Tom Altieri added a few things to the public record. Commissioner Gordon submitted some 2 comments. He also submitted some comments on behalf of some citizens that were received 3 since the packets were put together (comments were from Donnie Walker; John Hubert, Karen 4 Pierce, Nancy Wilberman, Bob Reids, Terry Dixon, Terry McGuire, and Tom Magnuson). 5 Comments are incorporated by reference. 6 7 8 Chair Jacobs thanked the Planning Board for all of the work dedicated to this effort over 9 several years. He also thanked the Planning staff and Mr. Waldon and his associates. He 10 reiterated that the next phase is the implementation phase, which is the phase where specific 11 neighborhoods and parcels are discussed. This process will take a year or more and will 12 involve public hearings and submission of information and comments from the public. All 13 documents received will be forwarded to the Planning Board and to the Board of County 14 Commissioners, so nothing will be filtered. He said that all of the advisory boards were asked to 15 make comments and it was decided that the Planning Board would be the ultimate arbiter 16 among the advisory boards of what would go into the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and it 17 would make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners. There are some 18 documents from an advisory board that did not meet its deadlines. In June, the Commissioners 19 specifically said that they did not want to entertain a complete rewrite of a section of the 20 Comprehensive Plan, but the advisory board went ahead and did a complete rewrite. The 21 Board of County Commissioners is interested in how the Planning Board would like to proceed 22 with this. 23 Also, the Town of Chapel Hill finally gave a response and would like to comment on the 24 Land Use Plan Update, but cannot do it until September. If the Planning Board does not object, 25 he would like to give the Town of Chapel Hill until the second meeting where this is being 26 considered, which is September 10tH 27 28 PUBLIC COMMENT: 29 Chris Moran is a member of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition which 30 represents various diverse partners. He said that he has learned a lot about this process and 31 he is encouraged to make some comments. He said that his comments were mostly with 32 regard to the housing, services, and facilities elements. He said that he was surprised that 33 there have been no major changes reflected in the plan. He is not convinced that everyone 34 understands these concepts or.the particulars of what is being recommended. This will be the 35 ,guiding document for the next 20 years, so he would like to reemphasize these points. He feels 36 very strongly that in the services and facilities portion, there is a strong emphasis on aging, 37 public health, and mental health. He would like to recommend that something about poverty be 38 included as a major focus for Orange County. He said that unless living wages are improved, 39 and unless more blue-collar jobs are provided, he does not think that very much can change. 40 He would also like to see more of an emphasis on sustainable food resources and how more 41 food can be grown in Orange County so that it can be shared with hungry persons and various 42 feeding programs. County housing options should include shelters and transitional housing 43 programs, because more units are necessary for people to work on their goals before they 44 transition back into the community. There is a great need to restore more existing units of 45 housing in the County so that people from homeless shelters can transition. He said that there 46 also needs to be quality mobile home parks for those that choose to live in them. He suggested 47~ having incentives to landlords to help energize units so that the existing housing stock is 48 improved. He said that the bottom line is that, as the County plans for• new developments in 49 Orange County, there needs to be adequate services and caregivers provided for all of the 50 recipients of those developments in case things happen, as they will 51 ~'.'.Z l'~I i~: .~ .~i El's <'I{I~:41~ ~~:1.'~'~i'.. . 1 2 Allen Rosen made the following comments: 3 Quarterly Public Hearing, August 25, 2008 4 Orange Gounty Board of Commissioners & Planning Board 5 AGENDA ITEM: Comprehensive Plan Update Phase II 6 Public Comment on behalf of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition 7 8 Good evening. My name is Allan Rosen and I am speaking on behalf of The Orange County 9 Comprehensive Plan Coalition, which is made up of nine organizations representing diverse 10 interests in Orange County. Just this month we marked our first anniversary. 11 12 The Coalition formed to pursue two goals. First, we've made every effort to inform the Planning 13 Board of our shared priorities for environmental health, social equity, and economic vitality that 14 we want to see incorporated in the Comprehensive Plan. You will find that the coalition has 15 presented 21 pages of written comment' and coalition members have provided an additional 61 16 pages2. 17 18 The Coalition will wait until the Planning Board makes its recommendations available to the 19 public before making further comments on the plan. Since those recommendations are 20 expected to be ready on September 22, I would like to highlight one concern: According to the 21 timetable, the public will only have fifteen days to review the planning board's recommendations 22 and, in turn, prepare any remarks they feel are warranted before the commissioners scheduled 23 vote on October 7. Hence, the Coalition recommends that the commissioner's vote takes 24 place no sooner than 30 days after the Planning Board's recommendations are available 25 for public review. 26 27 However, it is to our second purpose -educating the public about, and encouraging their 28 participation in, the comprehensive plan update process --that prompts our remarks tonight: In 29 furtherance of this goal we maintain a website, advocated for the January Public Input Session, 30 written 'op-eds and letters to editors, set up displays at community events, presented at civic 31 meetings, and posted on local blogs. Hopefully, these actions increased the level community 32 participation. 33 34 Unfortunately we recently learned that the manner in which public comments are being 3S reviewed is exclusionary and therefore contrary to the purpose of community participation. As 36 noted in the coalition's memo found on page 187 of the Agenda Item Abstract, 37 38 "... Because time is of the essence, we commend staff for preparing a Table of Proposed 39 Revisions (TPR), which includes public comments. This table will be very helpful in facilitating 40 the Planning Board's review in a timely manner. ~ See pp. 22-23, 27-30, and 36-49 of the May 19 Public Hearing Agenda Item Abstract and p. 187 of the August 25 abstract. '-See pp. 32-35 of the May 19 abstract and pp. 89, 91-95, 119-132. 136,142-165, and 167-178 of the .August 25 abstract. 285 2$6 I) F"T ®-I~TI~Y-1~T®~' API~I~~'6~EI) YE+ T ~'Y~ ~ O C C 1 However, not all the public comments are being included in the TPR. Instead only those 2 corni~nents deemed as "not too controversial or are not significant changes to the meaning of the 3 objective" are included. (i. e. comments deemed "controversia!"are being excluded!) 4 In contrast, the Coalition strongly recommends that all public comments received to date -and 5 for as long as the Public Hearing is open - be included in the TPR. The Planning Board should 6 solely be responsible for selecting which public comments to incorporate into their 7 recommendations rather than for Planning Department personnel to filter the comments that will 8 be considered. Such filtering could all too easily be mistaken as staff censorship and/or 9 usurpation of the Planning Board's role." 10 Personally, I do not think the filtering is intentionally censorious, but rather the result of the work 11 load and time constraints placed on the Planning Board and Staff. Whereas planning 12 department staff unsuccessfully attempted - over a period of four years -- to update only the 13 rural watershed, residentially-zoned sections of the county's land Use element, the Planning 14 Board has the responsibility (supported by staff) to spearhead a complete update of the entire 15 eight-element Comprehensive Plan in less than two years, while also conducting its regular 16 business, reviewing the Buckhorn Village proposal and integrating eight county advisory boards 17 into the plan update process. In this context, it's not unexpected that atime-saving mechanism 18 such as comment filtering was utilized. 19 20 Still, even if the filtering was done with the best of intentions, the effect is the same -some 21 public comments both from the Coalition and all other concerned parties who took the time to 22 engage in the process are not getting the full attention of the Planning Board during their 23 meetings. Rather, as this process comes to a close some public comments, whether 24 controversial and/or progressive and forward-thinking, will only be taken up by the Planning 25 Board if an individual board member takes it upon his/herself to bring specific items to the 26 board's attention and advocate for changes to the Plan. 27 28 'Therefore the Coalition strongly encourages the County Commissioners to make sure 29 that 30 31 1. all public comments are treated equally in the review process, 32 2. the Planning Board has sufficient time to accommodate an equitable review 33 process, and 34 3. the commissioners vote on the Comprehensive Plan takes place no sooner than 35 30 days after the Planning Board's written recommendations are made available to 36 the public. 37 38 Any adverse consequences of extending the process to accommodate equitable public 39 participation is small compared to the benefits, especially for a document intended to have such 40 long-lasting influence. 41 I~I~A,~'~' ®l~LY-I~TC)T ,A.I"1~~~9~D 'Y~~ ~Y ~OCC 1 2 Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition Member Organizations 3 Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce, Community Action Network, EmPOWERment, 4 Inc., 5 Foundation for a Sustainable Community, The Greater Chapel Hill Association of REALTORS, 6 Homebuilders' Association of Durham, Orange and Chatham Counties, Inter-Faith Council on 7 Social Service, 8 The Village Project, Walkable Hillsborough 9 10 11 Bonnie Hauser made the following camments: 12 13 Statement to the Orange County Board of Commissioners on August 25, 2008 14 From Concerned Citizens Against the Use of Eminent Domain 15 16 17 My name is Bonnie Hauser. I am a property owner and resident of Orange County. Tonight I am 18 speaking on behalf of Concerned Citizens against the abuse of eminent domain. 19 20 We are pleased to see this public forum and transparent act of government to agree on a plan 21 to take Orange County into the future. We are especially pleased that the plan addresses 22 economic, environment and other land use considerations and is intended for the greater good. 23 And of course, we are pleased that the plan has been made available for public debate. 24 25 We see no mention in the plan of an airport in Orange County and how that might serve the 26 greater good. In fact, the airport conflicts with multiple elements of the plan including land use, 27 economic development, provision of public facilities and services, and preservation of water 28 resources, rural land and natural areas. In the plan, we see no anticipated obligation of Orange 29 County to serve AHEC or UNC. We see no provision in our growing tax liability to pay for such a 30 project or take the needed land off our tax rolls.. 31 32 We are very unhappy that the NC legislature has granted UNC the authority to override the 33 good work of our county leadership. We believe that this is an over-reaching act of government - 34 especially since UNC and the proposed, airport authority are not elected by the people and 35 cannot be held accountable to serve the greater good. 36 37 We are more disturbed since this suspicious act of the legislature bypasses the 38 recommendations of experts hired by UNC who suggest that AHEC is best served by using a 39 private terminal at Raleigh Durham'Airport. 40 41 We ask why bother with a comprehensive plan, zoning or other protections under the law. 42 Today, the citizens of Orange County sit in fear that - at the whim of UNC or the North Carolina 43 Legislature -their land will be condemned or they will have an airport or some other fabrication 44 as a neighbor. As part of this planning effort, we ask the commissioners and the planning board 45 to stand up for the property rights of our community and to protect the greater good. 46 47 48 Steve Richardson made the following comments: 287 288 1 Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, good evening. 2 3 I'm Steve Richardson. I've been an Orange County property owner for twenty years. 1 once 4 purchased a 1.3 acre sliver of land in Southern Orange County to add to my property which 5 somehow triggered a major subdivision review and astoundingly led a member of the planning 6 board to. find fault with even the name I chose for the tiny subdivision. 7 8 So I know some frontline realities of land use in Orange County, for which the 2030 9 Comprehensive Plan is supposed to provide future Commissioners a template. 10 11 I also speak for my friend Lynette Hartsell, an attorney who is out of state tonight. We both 12 serve on the Board of our new civic association, Friends of Lake Orange. But tonight, and in 13 written comments two weeks ago, we speak as much for ourselves as for anyone else - 14 actually, for everyone else because the Plan affects everyone in the County, not just us. 15 16 Until a month ago, none of my friends and neighbors had heard of the 2030 Plan, or you'd 17 have seen us all here long ago. 18 19 While the draft of the Comprehensive Plan may appear to meet legal requirements for public 20 discussion, only a handful of those who know of the Plan know what's in it, all 313 pages. 21 22 The draft boldly uses the ominous term "police powers" for its enforcement. 23 24 How many know there is no requirement under state law that Orange or any other North 25 Carolina County even have such a Plan? 26 27 Despite many worthy things and sentiments sprinkled through the current draft, it has major 28 gaps that make it fatally flawed. 29 30 The Plan asserts contra) for use of land, public and private. But nowhere does the Plan (or, as 31 far as I can tell, -the old one it replaces) even mention "property rights." No provision for their 32 taking, no means of recourse and compensation when the County for itself or County on behalf 33 of the State restricts or otherwise disposes of our property rights. 34 35 Dealing with property rights does add complexity to land use. planning. So I understand why 36 that planning board member years ago objected to naming my little subdivision after Thomas 37 Jefferson, champion of property rights and limited government. 38 39 Commissioners, your property deed has your name on it. My deed has my name on it. 40 Property taxes we all pay are not rent for our use of our property, .with the State or the County 41 as landlord. 42 43 This Plan draft can be fixed, but the current draft is no plan that any property owner could 44 agree to. 45 46 This Commission's makeup will change very soon. The stated intent in establishing a separate 47 District Commissioner for Northern Orange County, was to give an effective voice to the 48 northern part of the County. Where is our voice in this Plan? 49 50 Lynette and I ask this Commission to defer any action on the Comprehensive Plan to the new 51 County Commission taking office in December. DST' ®l~1YfY-I®1®T 1~~'P~~VE~3 YET ~Y ~®CC 1 '2 We also ask you simultaneously set up an effective process to meaningfully publicize the Plan. 3 Gather input during coming weeks and months to revise it to acknowledge and reflect the rights 4 and recourse of the people whose names actually are written on Orange County property 5 deeds. 6 7 Having a County that harmonizes policy with the rights of its citizens is the best way I know to 8 plant seeds that flower into community consensus year after year rather than yield bumper 9 crops of ugly and costly conflict that just won't go away. 10 11 Thank you. 12 13 Please let me know if there's any other way in which I can help. 14 15 Thanks, 16 17 Stephen G. Richardson, Ph.D. 18 Vice President & Board Member 19 Friends of Lake Orange Civic Association 20 POB 101 21 Cedar Grove, NC 27231 • 22 23 www.lakeorange.org 24 25 26 Ann Joyner is a resident of Orange County and also President of Cedar Grove Institute 27 for Sustainable Communities. She has served as an expert consultant for land civil rights 28 lawsuits against various government entities. She said that Cedar Grove Institute works in land 29 use and issues of diversity and affordable housing. She made reference to the Housing. 30 Element. Regarding the affordable housing plan put forward earlier, she thinks that this is 31 emblematic of the County's attitude for the last 20+ years. She has been intermittently 32 addressing the County Commissioners during those 20+ years. The attitude seems to be, "not 33 my job." It was pointed out that when values are averaged, the numbers are not really 34 representative, but the County's table in the Comprehensive Plan gives the median house value 35 and not the average. The median value from Orange does include Chapel Hill values, which 36 are. high, but it also includes Hillsborough. She said that Orange is still the highest in the 37 Triangle. Secondly, the remark was made that developers build expensive homes because they 38 can sell them, implying that the County does not play a role in what gets built. As a former 39 developer, and as a developer whose 1987 development was used by a former. Planning 40 Director of Orange County.as the model for the first flexible development plan in the County, 41 she can say that the County's subdivision regulations currently make it almost impossible to 42 develop affordable housing subdivisions. She said that the County has a responsibility to take 43 direct action to enable, if not create, affordable housing. She does not mean mobile homes. 44 The current comprehensive plan, not the one being evaluated, did not mention affordable 45 housing except for mobile homes. She said that mobile homes serve a needed purpose, they 46 depreciate, further exacerbating the wealth gap between the haves and the have-Hots. She 47 said that, directly because of that circumstance, 11 % of the County's housing is in mobile 48 homes right now. She said that she does not see anything in the Comprehensive Plan that 49 assures her that there is understanding of this gap. Instead, there are mansions on two-acre 50 lots. She asked the County Commissioners to put something concrete in the Comprehensive 51 Plan for the next 20 years that will improve the situation. 289 290 ~'~ ®l~TI,Y--1~T®T 1-~1~I'VEI) Y~+ T ~Y ~®C;C 1 2 Spence Dickenson acknowledged the Planning Board for all of the work that has been 3 done. He wonders how much the County is using some of the benefits of the resources around 4 the country such as energy efficiency resources. He made reference to eco-municipalities and 5 that there are some resources for reducing dependence on fossil fuels, synthetic chemicals, etc. 6 He said that he is particularly looking out for the children and the future. There are only a few 7 places Jeff with unlimited expanse. 8 9 Robin Taylor-Hall asked when the critical watershed and the sewer plan for Efland would 10 be addressed. 11 Chair Jacobs said that it would be addressed in the implementation phase. 12 13 Ben Lloyd made reference to the water critical areas. He said that he is very concerned 14 with water quality. He has been on the Board of Directors of Orange-Alamance Water Systems 15 for 37 years. Ne said that Orange-Alamance is noted for providing some of the puresf and best 16 water in the state. He said that the County should look at available technology that will allow 17 reasonable growth in some of the nearly 19,000 acres of Orange County in the water quality 18 critical area where no public water, no public sewer, or commercial and industry activity is 19 allowed. He referred specifically to exits 160 and 161 on I-85/I-40 in the Seven Mile Creek area. 20 Ne said he has hosted three staff members from the North Carolina Department of Commerce, 21 one being the chief environmentalist. The opinion was that Orange County had the most 22 potential area in the State of North Carolina and any surrounding state to attract good, clean, 23 low-water using, non-polluting economic growth. There have been three economic 24 development districts in Orange County for about 15 years. The problem is that no one has 25 come because they do not like the locations or the regulations. Three and a half years ago, the 26 Board of County Commissioners made a commitment to bring 5,000 new commercial jobs and 27 increase the commercial tax base in Orange County to $125 million by June 2010. As of today, 28 nothing has been done. He said that if there is to be no reservoir on Seven Mile Creek, the 29 critical designation should be removed and the one-half mile requirement should be changed to 30 the topographical one-half mile. Due to the no-growth policy in the last 20 years, there has 31 been 20 years of continual property tax increases. In the same 20 years, there has been a 32 529% increase in the property tax. He said that lifelong County residents are leaving because 33 they can no longer afford to live in Orange County. He asked the County Commissioners what 34 they plan to do about it. 35 Dolly Hunter lives in Bingham Township and is a member of the Orange County 36 Comprehensive Plan Coalition. She thanked the Planning Board for the efforts of developing 37 this plan in two years. She asked the Planning Board to make a final effort to please consider 38 all of the recommendations made by the Coalition on transportation, housing, economic 39 development, and land use. She asked the County Commissioners to please give the Planning 40 Board time to thoughtfully consider all of the public comments'and make this a quality 41 document. She asked specifically that a table that was in the first draft of the Natural and 42 Cultural System Element be reinserted. This was Table 6.7 called Groundwater Recharge 43 Rates. This shows that the average acreage needed is 1.11 acres as a minimum lot size to 44 recharge groundwater in Orange County: This is essential information in order to interpret the 45 minimum lot size needed in the future land use planning implementation phase of this plan. She 46 asked the County Commissioners to please make the Comprehensive Plan Update a document 47 that reflects the concerns of its citizens and can easily be understood by its citizens and those 4.8 making policies from it for the next 20 years. 49 Deonna Angelillo asked about Senate Bill 1925 regarding'the airport authority that will be 50 formed. The airport will be established in Orange County. She asked how the public will know 51 who the Board of County Commissioners has appointed to this authority: She asked about the I)~F'~' ~IoTI.'Y'-I~®T Al~I"~ED ~'T ~Y ~®CC 1 reasonable timeframe of disclosure of who has been appointed. She asked for any advice on 2 the general statute that outlines the criteria for the validity of an Airport Commission. 3 Chair Jacobs said that this is a public hearing on the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and 4 he suggested that she ask the County Attorney.. about the last question. Regarding the first two 5 questions, the Board makes appointments in public session. The Board of County 6 Commissioners had nothing to do with creating the Senate bill and it was not consulted. 7 Whatever information the Board receives, it will share with the public. g Steve Yuhasz complimented the Planning staff and all of the advisory boards on 9 compiling all of the policies that form County government decisions. He thinks that the real 10 planning will have to take place in the implementation phase. This is where everyone will need 11 to stay involved and stay informed. One specific item in the plan is in the Economic 12 Development Element on page 316, lines 42-45, in particular, the statement that, "maintaining 13 this quality of life will require enhanced revenue streams to cover the costs of new or expanded 14 services." It goes on to say that, "higher level of services can be provided with additional 15 economic development. He thinks that a commitment to ever-expanding levels of service 16 provided by the County is toa much of a burden to put on the County and~to include in this 17 Comprehensive Plan. He would like to see this eliminated, reworded, or somehow modified so 18 as not to put that requirement in this Comprehensive Plan. 19 20 Commissioner Gordon submitted her comments electronically, as shown below: 21 22 MEMORANDUM 23 24 To: Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) and Planning Board (OCPB) via Donna Baker 25 Copies: OUTBoard, County Manager, Planning Director and Staff 26 Subject: Comments on the Comprehensive Plan 27 Date: August 25, 2008 28 29 Since I will not be able to attend the Public Hearing on August 25, I am submitting comments via 30 this memorandum. I would like these comments to be made part of the record of the public 31 hearing and to have copies of these comments made available to the BOCC and OCPB, as well 32 as the others listed above. 33 34 There are two sets of comments. 35 36 The first set relates to Chapter 9, the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The 37 main purpose of these comments is to restore the original Transportation Goal 1 and its 38 Objectives. Any other specific comments on the comprehensive plan will come later. 39 40 The second set provides brief overall comments. 41 42 CHAPTER 9 -TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT 43 44 The OUTBoard revisions to the May 6 draft of the Comprehensive Plan strengthen the 45 document in many ways. However, the revisions delete the first objective (in the May 6 draft) 46 that focuses on a multi-modal approach to protecting the environment. 47 48 Given below is a suggested combination of the May 6, 2008 Transportation Element draft Goals 49 and Objectives, and the subsequent OUTBoard recommended changes given in the agenda 50 packet for the August 25, 2008 public hearing. 51 291 292 DItA.~'T (~IlTI.Y-l®T®T AP'P VED ~' ~Y ®(:~ 1 The major changes made by this combination restore the original May 6 goal T-1, and also 2 clarify and strengthen that goal and associated objectives. For example, the May 6 Objective T- 3 1.2 is stated as two objectives (T-1.3 and T-1.4). Having separate categories for environmental 4 impacts anal community impacts is similar to the approach used by the DCHC MPO 5 Transportation Advisory Committee (TAB) when the TAC evaluates transportation facilities. 6 7 Restoring the original first goal involves a few changes in the subsequent goals and objectives 8 to take into account other changes in the Goals and Objectives made by the OUTBoard. It also 9 involves renumbering the other goals, so that the OUTBoard Goal 1 becomes Goal 2, and so 10 forth. 11 12 The suggested changes to the Goals acid Objectives cover pp. 8-29 through 9-34 of the 13 OUTBoard document in the August 25 hearing packet. These pages are also' numbered (at the 14 top of the page) as pages 41 through 46 of the August 25 packet. 15~ 16 I. CHANGES TO THE GOALS 17 18 A. Transportation Goal 1 (starts on page 9-30, also numbered page 42 in the August 25 packet) 19 An efficient and integrated multi-modal transportation system that protects the natural 20 environment and community character 21 22 B. Transportation Goal 2 Integrated land use planning and transportation planning. 23 24 C. Transportation Goal 3 A comprehensive network of connected transportation corridors 25 (roads, sidewalks, rail, etc) supporting an appropriate mix of firaffic. 26 27 ~ D. Transportation Goal 4 28 Efficient and safe traffic movement along Orange County routes and corridors 29 30 E. Transportation Goal 5 31 A comprehensive, creative, and effective transportation planning process. 32 33 II. CHANGES TO THE OBJECTIVES 34 35 A. Transportation Goal 1 (starts on page 9-30, also numbered page 42 in the August 25 packet) 36 An efficient and integrated multi-modal transportation system that protects the natural 37 environment and community character Objective T 1 1 38 Expand the use of public transit (bus and rail) walking and biking as primary modes of travel 39 and increase the occupancy of automobiles through ridesharinp and other means 40 41 Objective T-1.2 42 Facilitate the overall development and use of a transportation system that is more enery_rL 4~ efficient and reduces carbon emissions. 44 45 Objective T-1.3 46 Develop new transportation. facilities in a manner that has a positive impact or at least minimizes 47 negative impacts on the natural environment including air quality water resources (wetlands 48 streams, water supply watersheds) biological resources and wildlife habitat 49 ~~k"T ®NI..Y-1~T0'T A~'P1~~D `T ~Y ~~CC 1 Objective T-1.4 2 Develo new trans ortation facilities in a manner that has a ositive im act or at least minimizes 3 negative impacts on the community including historical or cultural assets, existing 4 neighborhoods schools and recreational facilties and the overall rural character in Oran e 5 Count . 6 7 Objective T-1.5 8 Identif rime viewsheds aloe major trans ortation corridors and rotect these areas for their 9 scenic and natural resource values. 10 11 B. Transportation Goal 3 which will become Goal 4 (starts on page 9-32, also numbered page 12 44 in the August 25 packet) 13 Efficient and safe traffic movement along Orange County's routes and corridors. 14 15 Delete Objective T-3.2 which would have become T-4.2, :since it is now covered under Objective 16 T-1.1. Change it to the following: . 17 Construct new bicycle facilities in Orange County that will make cycling for transportation 18 purposes safer and more convenient. 19 (This is similar to Objective T-1.7 under Goal 1 in the May 6 document.) 20 21 Change Objective T-3.4 which will become T-4.4 22 Reduce the use of fossil fuels and increase local production, distribution, and use of renewable, 23 sustainable fuels. 24 25 Change Objective T-3.8 which will become T-4.8 26 Increase safety awareness between car drivers and bicycle riders, and increase safety for 27 pedestrians. 28 29 OVERALL COMMENTS 30 31 I was impressed by all the work that has gone into the comprehensive plan, and noted the 32 length and complexity of the document. I appreciate all that has been done by our advisory 33 boards and staff, and by the public ih their comments. 34 35 The public hearing agenda abstract lists as one purpose of the hearing fo "receive direction 36 from the Board of Commissioners as to subsequent steps." According to the schedule, the 37 commissioners will be considering the plan one more time, and that is for approval at our 38 regular meeting on October 7. It is my opinion that the commissioners will have to devote a 39 major portion of that meeting to the plan and/or schedule an additional work session. 40 End of Commissioner Cordon's comments. 41 42 Commissioner Foushee made reference to a comment from Mr. Rosen regarding 43 filtering comments that come in. She asked for someone to elaborate on that process. 44 Tom Altieri said that Planning staff mutually agreed to work together to review all 45 comments submitted by the public. This review remains a work in progress. All written 46 comments have been provided verbatim to the Planning Board at least once in an agenda 47 packet, and in most cases, twice. Staff and the Planning Board are working on a draft table of 48 proposed revisions that have been prepared. Staff and Planning Board members both have the 49 opportunity or the ability to add items to this table of proposed revisions based on the review 50 that has taken place. Planning Board and staff have taken this review of public comments and 51 the handling of the public comments very seriously. A significant amount of time has been 293 294 L~ ~+ T' ®l~TI.Y-1!T®~' ~il~~° V~+ Y~+ ~' 13-Y ~®CC: 1 scheduled by the Planning Board for the purpose of reviewing these comments at their 2 meetings. ' He assured the Board that there is no censorship and aIL of the written comments 3 provided have been distributed to the Planning Board. 4 Commissioner Foushee said that she wants the .public to be clear on this. 5 6 Chair Jacobs said that because this comes back to the County Commissioners on 7 October 7th. does not mean the business will be concluded. 8 A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee; seconded by Commissioner Carey to 9 close the public hearing from May 19, 2008; close this public hearing; and refer the draft Plan to 10 the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of County Commissioners I 1 October 7, 2008. 12 Brian Ferrell suggested leaving the public hearing open for the purpose of receiving 13 comments from the Town of Chapel Hill. 14 Commissioner Foushee amended the motion to include leaving the public hearing open 15 until comments are heard from the Town of Chapel Hill and any other towns in Orange County. 16 Commissioner Carey seconded. 17 Tom Altieri said that the public hearing is being held open specifically to receive 18 additional comments from municipalities as opposed to further written comments submitted by 19 the public. 20 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 21 22 D. ADJOURNMENT OF PUBLIC HEARING 23 A motion as made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Foushee to 24 adjourn the meeting at 9:46 p.m. 25 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 26 27 Barry Jacobs, Chair 28 29 Donna S. Baker, CMC 30 Clerk to the Board ~ ' .5'I I:"i : ; ~: •: "C=r P"~ ~ t k,' i in': S~ t#'i I :.:. Attachment 9 Approved 10/1/08 1 MINUTES 2 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 3 SEPTEMBER 10, 2008 4 SPECIAL MEETING 5 6 7 MEMBERS PRESENT: Jay Bryan, Chapel Hill Representative (Chair); Craufurd Goodwin, Hillsborough Representative; 8 Larry Wright, Cedar Grove Township At-Large; Renee A. Price, Hillsborough Township At-Large (Vice Chair); 9 Bernadette Pelissier, Bingham Township; 10 11 MEMBERS ABSENT: Brian Crawford, Eno Township At-Large; Joel Forrest Knight, Little River Representative; Jeffrey 12 Schmitt, Cedar Grove Township At-Large; Judith Wegner, Bingham Township At-Large; Michelle Kempinski, Cedar 13 Grove Township At-Large 14 15 STAFF PRESENT: Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning SupeNisor; Tina Love, Administrative Assistant II 16 17 OTHER ATTENDEES: Dolly Hunter, Rita Leadem 18 19 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 20 . 21 AGENDA ITEM 2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA 22 23 AGENDA ITEM 3: PLANNING BOARD'S STATEMENT FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD 24 25 DRAFT Planning Board's Statement for the Public Record -Review of Public Hearing 26 Comments on the Draft Comprehensive Plan: 295 27 28 At the August 25, 2008 Public Hearing on the draft Comprehensive Plan, the Planning Board learned t a 29 there was some confusion in the community that the Planning Boardmay not have received and reviewed 30 all of the public comments submitted on the draft Comprehensive Plan. For the purpose of the public 31 record, let it be made clear that the Planning Board has received all public comments that have been 32 submitted on the draft Plan and all comments have received thorough and equal consideration by the Board 33 during its review process. The Planning Board attended public hearings in May and August to hear public 34 comments, reviewed all written public comments submitted, and held meetings on July gin, August bin, 35 September 3~d, and September 10~n to discuss comments and develop proposed revisions for further 36 consideration by the Board of County Commissioners.. 37 38 Jay Bryan: Are there any comments? 39 40 Bernadette Pelissier: Yes, I like what is written here, I would like to make an addition because some the commen s 41 of the public are related more to the implementation of the phase and so an acknowledgement that some things were 42 .not incorporated because they are related to implementation. In other words, we should say that those types will be 43 forwarded to.the appropriate bodies as policies or ordinances are revised for consideration: so the public knows they 44 are not being ignored. 45 46 Craufurd Goodwin: I think that's a separate issue. I mean what we're ri th nkdwegneed to keep t atgs parat e That 47 look at material, not that we didn't respond to it in one way or another. 48 could be a separate issue the reason why we haven't accepted some suggestions made to us is because it should be 49 for the implementation. But here we're responding to essentially a charge of malfeasance so I think that we should 50 stick to that and say it's misstated. 51 52 Bernadette Pelissier: I'll change my mind, I think you're right, we should stick to the issue. 53 54 Jay Bryan: We don't have a quorum. 55 296 Approved 10/1/08 56 Renee Price: I do have one more comment. I don't know if I feel totally comfortable with saying that all comments 57 have received thorough consideration. Certainly equal, but do we want to say that? 58 59 Bernadette Pelissier: I read them all more than once. 60 61 Renee Price: As long as we all have. 62 63 Larry Wright: I think that one exception could be is not due to staff problems, nor to Planning Board problems, but I 64 believe that it was the Montessori application, that it got in late and the comments came in late and we only had time 65 to scan them. 66 67 Craufurd Goodwin: ~ But this is only dealing with the comprehensive plan. 68 69 Larry Wright: I stand corrected. 70 71 The Board went through the table and made the following comments and proposed changes:' 72 73 Craufurd Goodwin: Are you going to present to the County Commissioners, the complete final report and these 74 corrections? 75 76 Tom Altieri: I am not going to go into any detail necessarily about the content of the plan. I hope they have had the 77 opportunity to read it and it has been presented in general at the two (2) public hearings. 1 will provide them some 78 type of presentation about the table and the process, explain how the table is to be used in conjunction with the text, 79 and that there are attachments to the table, also next steps. I think they will want to take time to convey to staff what $0 changes they would like to see made and have some discussion, they haven't had that yet so my presentation will be 81 very short. 82 83 Bernadette Pelissier: The new objective that was added here, Item 33, Page 5-39, Line 47, I am not sure that we 84 would review the land use ordinances and amend as needed. That's like saying oh, we'll just do whatever the 85 university wants and (,;don`t want to imply that at all. That's how it read to me I really don'tlike this objective. 86 87 Jay Bryan: I agree with you. 88 89 Craufurd Goodwin: I thought it was exactly the opposite. I mistook it. 90 91 Larry Wright: This section, limit sprawl, preserves a community's rural character; land use conflicts and supports a 92 balanced transportation system. So we're talking in terms of a response to? 93 94 Craufurd Goodwin: Can you tell us what it means Tom? 95 96 Tom Altieri: I wrote this draft objective,. it wasn't in the spirit of trying to fend it off or to accommodate these projects, 97 it was more in the spirit of these pretty. significant development proposals that we know may becoming and we need 98 to pay attention and make. sure that we plan accordingly. That may mean adjusting our ordinances to make sure that 99 it goes in an appropriate area or it may mean if it goes in a certain that we need to then do some planning around it to 100 limit potential land use conflicts. Carolina North is a big project and will have impacts well beyond its boundaries. 101 That's the spirit in which it was written and if it doesn't say that, maybe we need to look at some different language. 102. 103 Jay Bryan: I think from our point of view its related to how best to protect the overall interest of the County residents. 104 105 Torn Altieri: May I suggest a proposed revision, rather than at the end saying and amend if needed, would it be 106 better to say plan accordingly. 107 108 Craufurd Goodwin: Or review County land use ordinance to protect the interest of all citizens of Orange County. 109 Approved l0/1/08 2 9 ~ 110 Jay Bryan: The fact is that no matter what happens there will be some review done. It's just that it's so specific when 111 none of the other objectives or goals point to a specific development or possible development in this manner. It may 112 be that iYs really an idea that goes into the last box of ideas at the end. I don't know if we have consensus here, we 113 have concerns about it. It presents several possible interpretations that are risky. 114 115 Larry Wright: In the event that this does happen, this still would go through the review processes as anything else 116 would correct? We would review if they were abiding by the ordinances in the best interest of the neighborhoods 117 surrounding. 118 119 Tom Altieri: In the case of the airport authority, I think that's a little bit unknown and not fully understood yet. 120 Certainly in the case of Carolina North, yes there would be a planning process, approvals, and input. A lot of that has 121 already taken place. With regard to Carolina North, I think the proposed objective is more about surrounding areas 122 around the project if it indeed is developed. 123 124 Jay Bryan: You could just say, review County land use ordinance, period. 125 126 Renee Price: Unless you said something like, "in response to future development plans that are unknown at this time 127 that are in process" or something like this, "make it very. general that we would review land use ordinances". 128 129 Craufurd Goodwin: I say we make it stronger, say protect the interest of the citizens of Orange County. It's not just 130 the big guys flying in with the planes that we're concerned about. 131 132 Jay Bryan: So keep it, and amend if needed to protect the interest of the residents of Orange County. Board was in 133 consensus 134 13 5 Discussion about format of table, Tom will shade cells with new objectives. 136 137 Discussion on ERCD having very similar language, consensus was to go with the language used in the ERCD 138 version. 139 140 Jay Bryan: Ok, page 20 there are a number of language changes under chapter 7 141 142 Review of public comments, ECRD, historic preservation preference, letter from Mayor, staff comments. 143 144 CR-1 Discussion resulted in a consensus to include user friendly public input process but should somehow be made 145 part of the whole plan. Add additional objective. 146 147 Jay Bryan: CR-2 to remove neighboring objective, take out neighboring. Will read establish stronger partnerships 148 with preservation organizations. Board was in consensus. 149 150 Discussion on CR-5 change, Board consensus wifh comma added. 151 152 Tom Altieri: To be completely clear, the Planning Board is now considering proposed revisions from ERCD and its 153 three (3) advisory boards that happen to based upon some public comments that have been submitted. Not in direct 154 response to Mr. Magnuson. 155 156 Jay Bryan: I raised in my email for September 3~, the issue just addressing these. I appreciate that. They have 157 been and I am not going to argue greatly about it. The next ones, you have to read his letter. There's no particular 158 suggestion, just hesitancy about adding his commentary. 159 160 Jay Bryan: Suggested changes to goals two(2) and three (3)that HPC feels it is too late in the process to revisit 161 these goals. We're not hearing anyone say please consider something and HPC is saying don't do it. 162 163 Jay Bryan: On 6.4.3, rewrite the second sentence. Board was in consensus. 164 2.98 Approved 10/1/08 165 Jay Bryan: The last comment is a response to Ms. Hunter's request to reinstate an old table in the water resources 166 chapter, on ground water recharge conversion to lot size. The department's comment, they recommend that it not be 167 reinstated. 168 169 Bernadette Pelissier: It was discussed at the CFE meeting Monday too, I might note. It was discussed with the 170 water resources people including the new water resources specialist. 171 172 Jay Bryan: Was there general agreement that the table not be. 173 174 Bernadette Pelissier: Yes, that it would be misleading and we need to work on this in the future to come up with how 175 we translate recharge rates into lot size. 176 177. Board was in consensus that there would be no change. 178 179 Jay Bryan: Ok, on page 20, parks and recreation element, chapter 7, are there any comments or changes? Page 21 180 181 Craufurd Goodwin: Technical and grammatical corrections, under 3, it should be changed to "and future 1.82 agreements" instead of "of future agreements". Number 5 should be "of water" instead of "to water'. 183 184 Jay Bryan: Are there any other comments or revisions on pages 1 through 24? 185 186 Renee Price: The last line in this, it seems a little strange to me. It seems like an odd fit. 187 188 Craufurd Goodwin: The whole tone of the section is that the poor citizens of Orange County have to work in another 189 county. We've got to reduce that so we've got to bring in new jobs to Orange County, that we have to create new 190 jobs so they won't have to work in Durham County. For the 5,000 or so Duke employees who live in Orange County 191 this is nonsense. They aren't suffering from low wage inout-of-county employment. The policies being proposed in 192 this section, which are to bring in things like Buckhorn with low income jobs attached are likely. actually to make this 193 County less appealing to people living here now. It may be a tangled argument, but I think it's an important one in 194 the issue. 195 196 Renee Price: I don't know if I'm in agreement with that but its fine with me. 197 19$ Jay Bryan: It's not so far out of my comprehension that I would feel strongly one way or the other. 199 200 Renee Price: On page 10 of 24, I just suggest rewording this a little bit, looks like you want rehabilitation of 201 community development programs the way it reads. 202 203 Jay Bryan: Assist in the rehabilitation of affordable housing and in the development of community development 204 programs is that what it means? I see what you're saying, you can't rehabilitate a program. 205 206 Bernadette Pelissier: Put a comma. To make sure it's not modifying the community development programs. That 207 it's a separate issue. 208 209 Renee Price: But it's to assist in the rehabilitation of affordable housing and development of community development 210 programs? Or assist the programs? 211 _ _ __..__ _. _.. 212 Craufurd Goodwin: The ur ose it to sa that ou don't focus articular) on one 1 strate That the ob'ective is P p Y Y .p Y O 9Y• J 213 larger than the one(1) strategy. 214 215 Renee Price: I think it's just a matter of a comma here or there. 216 217 Jay Bryan: Modifying 218 219 Larry Wright: Promote community development Approved 10/1/08 2 g g 220 221 Consensus was to change "development" to "promote" 222 223 Renee Price: On page 15, I just think a little bit of wordsmithing could be used on number sixteen (16). Sounds a 224 little weak. I think what we were trying to say originally was more along the lines that "given that census the.numbers 225 are generally under counted...." 226 227 Craufurd Goodwin: That's not what this is saying. The census was nine (9) years ago and this is to remind you of 228 that date. 229. 230 Larry Wright: You could just say since these data were drawn from the 2000 census and you wouldn't have the 231 number in there. 232 233 Board was in consensus with change. 234 235 Renee Price: On page 23 of 24, you mention the City of Mebane, are we talking about the Mebane in Alamance or 236 the Mebane in Orange County, or all of Mebane? 237 238 Tom Altieri: The entity, government of Mebane. 239 240 Jay. Bryan: Let's go to the next page, 24. Are there any other changes or comments before we go to transportation? 241 Attachment K is the list that includes various ideas that have come up in our various meetings about things that. 242 should be done, could be done and its being proposed that those be attached as attachment K. 243 244 Craufurd Goodwin: Do we give any credibility to these? 245 246 Jay Bryan: That's the only thing I would worry about, is that if they are somehow attached, being an attachment, that 247 there is support for them. 248 249 Renee Price: Maybe this is where the idea comes that this should be part of the implementation phase. 250 251 Jay Bryan: No, not that Craufurd has raised it, and I raised the initial question about whether we're giving any weight 252 to it, it seems to me that Roger had though it would be nice to collect the ideas, but those seem to be things that 253 could be referred on to how the implementation is handled and be part of that process. l guess I would lean towards 254 that it not be included as an attachment. 255 256 Tom Altieri: In a few of Roger's presentations, he mentioned this big box where we would keep ideas and so forth, I 257 think I remembered one of the Planning Board members made reference that maybe this one of those items for the 25 8 big box. So, here's your big box. The question is whether to include it as an attachment and simply say it's not 259 included as part of the comprehensive plan although it would be under its cover or it can be something that staff and 260 advisory boards retain for future reference. 261 262 Craufurd Goodwin: I think if it's to go in the plan even as an attachment, it should be reviewed by somebody like this. 263 It's some sort of weight given an idea if it appears here, it shouldn't be anything just off the wall. Could there be a 264 statement in the plan saying that the staff are maintaining a file of ideas so these don't become part of the public 265 record. 266 267 Bernadette Pelissier: The other option would be the way this is phrased. Its like these might have been considered 268 to go in the plan, but what these are really is implementation. The introduction should say, not that they're not 269 appropriate at this time, which is not the message we're trying to give. The real message is something to be passed 270 onto perhaps consider in the implementation phase.. Would that satisfy concerns, so that it doesn't get lost but yet 271 will make it clear. 272 300 Approved 10/1/08 273 Jay Bryan: I don't mind passing them on, I think its appropriate to pass it on as a part of what's come out of the 274 process and they would be passed on to the Commissioners as part of our process for them to consider and use 275 whatever why they feel is appropriate. 276 277 Renee Price: But you don't want it in the plan. 278 279 Craufurd Goodwin: I think it needs a much stronger disclaimer if that's the case that ideas have not been examined 280 by the Planning Board, no approval from the Planning Board, they are just ideas that people have thrown out. 281 282 Tom Altieri: Clarification, would it stay then in the document as an appendix or would it possibly accompany the 283 Planning Board's recommendation as an aftachment, with a disclaimer, just to say that these are additional ideas that 284 staff heard during the process that staff and advisory boards may use in the future. Something like that, so it's not 285 part of the comprehensive plan. 286 287 Board was in consensus not to include document in the Comprehensive Plan. 288 2$9 Jay Bryan: Let me go back to the Transportation piece. Let me try to proceed as quickly but as clearly as possible 290. on my thoughts about this. First of all I really appreciate all the work of the OUTBoard including Sam and Nancy. 291 We did work on the original goals and objectives with the OUTBoard in a series of meetings in a collaborative way to 292 come up with those but understood then there were some additional desire to look at them again and look at the 293 .section once Roger's draft was presented. In looking at them in general, I had some difficulty with the removal of a 294 number of the goals and objectives. Particularly ones that talked about the community, community character, the 295 environment, and so on were to be part of the value to be considered in transportation issues. I had on my mind a 296 number of comments and luckily took the time to look at the Alice Cordon's memorandum which I hope for the sake 297 of discussion tonight, that you all may have had a change to look at on page 85. In it she has proposed some 298 changes to some of the goals and some of the objectives. I hope I can take us through this at least from what I'm 299 concerned about and then share with you what I would see changing. Just going down them. 300 301 Larry Wright: Can we ask for staff recommendation first? 302 303 Jay Bryan: Sure, good idea. 304 305 Tom Altieri: Myself and of course Karen Lincoln have both reviewed the proposal from a technical standpoint and 306 actually feel that it is technically more accurate, the information that's contained in the OUTBoard's proposal than that 307 which was included in the draft comprehensive plan. Certainly that aspect.of it does definitely improve the document. 308 I felt that, based on what I heard from a couple of Planning Board members, pretty much what Jay just emphasized, 309 that during the rewrite somehow some of the overtones of environment and community character and scenic vistas, 310 and transportation that's sensitive to those things somehow that was maybe not emphasized or not completely 311 apparent in the proposal. I think that Alice Cordon's suggestion to bring back the original goal one(1)-pulls that back. 312 If the Planning Board were to accept the OUTBoard's proposal as is. One way to address some of the concerns that 313 were expressed would be to also include Alice Cordon's suggestion to bring back goal one (1). 314 315 Jay Bryan: So you've gone to the extent of saying bring back goal one (1) but you're'not making a comment on other 316 suggestions. 317 318 Tom Altieri: Correct, goal one (1) spoke more directly to some of the things I heard from Planning Board members 319 about the environment. 320 321 Jay Bryan: In a general way I feel like her revisions meet my concerns for the most part about the changes. I want 322 to make one (1) general comment about the use of the word that I really personally have trouble with and that's the 323 word corridor. I understand why it's used, but to me it gives weight to an idea that I don't necessarily know that I 324 support or that I understand the scope of it. I personally feel that roads are subject to change of course but 325 personally don't want to give any more weight to say expansion of roads, or widths, or lanes than any other value. 326 Whether that be neighborhoods, environment, community character, and so on. I understand that things do change 327 but I don't want to weight it one way or the other. Corridor implies that some of our roads be assumed to be carrying Approved 10/1/08 328 a certain amount of traffic that may or may not be true. I'll just say as an example of why I have this, I guess, bias. 329 Smith Level road in Carrboro which leads a fairly short distance from 54 to 15-501 was for years targeted by DOT to 330 be four (4) lanes and for years both Chapel Hill and Carrboro fought that identification. It still possibly subject to that 331 but it a road that might be considered a corridor or might then be viewed as possibly more that just a lovely country 332 road through some lovely farms that are there of a certain scope. It's probably picky to select that out but that word 333 appears in the newer objectives and it's not mentioned in the other ones. I think there are some natural corridors 334 certainly, and I am willing to say 54, 40, 85, Airport Rd, to me those are corridors, already existing corridors. But to 335 say that NC 57 or old 86 or new 86 are corridors is not something I want to say. It doesn't in fact say that, but the 336 implication is that those roads might become that. I am saying I think we can work on all the same issues without 337 making that kind of specific or possible identification. My other comments are that Alice made some 338 recommendations for some rewriting of the objectives in the goals which I think capture my concerns. She doesn't 339 make any other comments about any of the other objectives. I think, my feeling would be, is there a way to leave the 340 original objectives and add to them the newer ones that have been suggested in some way, so that we don't lose 341 either. Some might be viewed a duplicative but in fact, the newer ones that have been proposed are different than in 342 characterization. 343 344 Larry Wright: It's my understanding that the reason that they are different is that they took and complied 345 Durham/Chapel Hill and the DOT and a variety of others to revise into this document. It was a big study and it was a 346 committee action. That's my understanding, that's where this comes from, it wasn't just a stand alone contract. It 347 was a study and this resulted from that. There was a lot of work into this. Members of the OUTBoard felt like it was 348 redundant considering other areas of the comprehensive plan. They took it out in response to that and Alice put it in 349 because she says it balances the plan that other municipalities have in the state. She would like to see it back in. I 350 can see why she wants it, so it's more like everybody else's. 351 352 Jay Bryan: We may not be able to resolve this, we may just have to pass along our discussion to the full Board. Its 353 really so many changes given the original proposal, then the OUTBoard's revised suggestions, and Alice's on top of 354 that. It's fairly complex. Also we don't have everybody here. 355 356 Larry Wright: On page 51, I don't understand, they have more 357 358 Bernadette Pelissier: Back in the May public hearing, from our August 25~ packet on page 94 and 95, there is a 359 comment made by Holly Reid. She and I served on the Special Transit Advisory Committee which a joint effort of the 360 two (2) MPOs looking at a regional master transit plan and she had asked to put in an objective to say that Orange 361 County will implement the recommendations of the Special Transit Advisory Committee. That may be too 362 controversial to add in but at the very least, and maybe it was said elsewhere, on our copy of the comprehensive plan 363 on page 925, the transportation chapter, are there key documents? I think we should at least reference that report 364 and then we do have an objective which talks about regional planning. Then we've acknowledged the existence of 365 that report and I don't recall if we have talked about that before. 366 367 Jay Bryan: I think that's an excellent point. The report where is that? 368 369 Bernadette Pelissier: I guess I can look it up, I can send you the link to that report. There's a whole website. 370 371 Jay Bryan: Sothis is an actual report. She just talks about recommendations. 372 373 Bernadette Pelissier: There is a report with recommendations that is then going to be going to the MPOs. 374 375 Renee Price: The website is www.dchcmpo.org. In fact they're having a public hearing tonight on transportation. 376 377 Craufurd Goodwin: I read it, it seems a big improvement. 378 379 Jay Bryan: Except the word corridor. The rewrites of the text I'm fine with, the things I have the problems with are 380 the goals and objectives. 381 382 Craufurd Goodwin: And that will betaken care of with Alice's proposals: 301 302 Approved 10/1/08 383 384 Jay Bryan: Pretty much. 385 386 Renee Price: The problem that I have is, we've told other advisory boards and members of the public that you can't 387 change the goals, and although I'm not against the changes, it's a matter of procedure and fairness. I didn't know 388 they, member of the OUTBoard, were actually going to change the wording of the'goals. We had already said for the 389 most part, this is what it is for now, forward. 390 391 Jay Bryan: What had happened was in April, Sam and Nancy presented us with a 3 or 4 page document at the end 392 of a meeting that had a series of ideas about transportation that was a sort of a model. It was an outline, we didn't 393 have time to thoroughly review and discuss it and what Roger ditl was attach it as an appendix and that's when the 394 OUTBoard said they were really not satisfied and it was handed back to them and to say if you're not satisfied then 395 reformat it as best you can in the way this was originally written and that's where they came back with these. 396 397 Jay Bryan: My thought was to pass along our discussion to the Commission about it and let them make this decision. 398 Really in fairness, again we don't have everybody. 399 400 Larry Wright: I was told by an OUTBoard member that air quality is not in the purview of transportation, that's what 401 the OUTBoard decided. Its air quality and there is more to it than transportation. It was rational. 402 403 Jay Bryan: I appreciate you saying that, we're not that far apart in our thinking about it. Although, you've helped me 404 understand that really just focusing on what was purely transportation: The problem is that none of this is purely one 405 thing or another, we have these links, in that pieces of land use policy do cross over in those objectives into other 406 areas such as the environment and soon. They may be narrowing it, but they've still got it in part of the qualities. I 407 don't know the answer, I think there's something in between that can address their desire to have it more streamlined 408 but address the values that come about in transportation issues. They do affect community character, environment, 409 neighborhoods, and so on. 410 411 Bernadette Pelissier: My overall general comment was there are good things here and I appreciate the work that 412 they did but I also see that it's taken out a lot of the flavor. I realize this whole thing to work with regional goals and 413 objectives, well that gets taken out and everything becomes Orange County centric and very some of what is in here 414 I would say is actually more related to the implementation phase. It's so specific. The objectives we have are more 415 generic and give a certain flavor that I think got lost. I'm not sure I like all the changes at this phase and that it 416 belongs for later. 417 418 Larry Wright: I agree, they want to develop regulations or ordinances, the spirit of this is that they want of some sort 419 connectivity. I think it's a noble statement, I don't know why it's said this way but what they really would like is some 420 sort of design to determine what communities would be connecting and which would be permitted to have cul-de- 421 .sacs to keep everything to keep from eking out on major highways. 422 423 Jay Bryan: If you look on page 81 line 9, it was stricken. That's what I meant, my concerns are more than what Alice 424 addressed. My concerns continue with the other changes to the original objectives. 425 426 Tom Altieri: What I would like to have tonight, I don't have to have it, but what I'd like to have from the five (5) of you 427 is your recommendation for the entire plan, including what you would like to do with the transportation element. Then 428 find out what impact if any the lack of quorum has on the process. My feeling, I think, the commissioners at their 429 discretion can take it as a valid recommendation or choose to send it back to the Planning Board and have it 430 readdressed with a quorum: One proposed solution to the transportation element, you could choose to include all of 431 the text revisions to the body of the text in your recommendation and not address any of the proposed changes to the 432 goals and objectives at this time. You can simply state that you were uncomfortable with doing that. 433 434 Jay Bryan: I think that's a fair idea, what I would want is that the minutes about this particular discussion, that they 435 have access to our particular discussion about the transportation piece. Rather than just worded vaguely. I think it 436 would be better if they read what we've said to capture the main issues that were talked about. Would that be 437 acceptable to everybody that if we are generally finished, to decide whether or not the five (5) of us would feel Approved 10/1/08 3 0 3 438 comfortable passing along our support for the plan with the table of changes that we've reviewed tonight to the 439 Commissioners with the added statement that we've considered the new recommendation of the OUTBoard 440 regarding the transportation element and we were unable to reach any consensus, we had discussions that's 441 reflected in the minutes and we would ask them to read those minutes to understand our thoughts about them. 442 443 Craufurd Goodwin: Haven't we reached more of a consensus? 444 445 Jay Bryan: About transportation? 446 447 Craufurd Goodwin: Aren't we agreed that the first part is an improvement? Tom thinks it's an improvement, I 448 certainly did. It seems to me that, I guess Tom's suggestion is that we simply punt on the new goals and objectives 449 saying this is not an appropriate time to revise these. 450 451 Tom Altieri: Based on what I've heard tonight, that's one option that you have. 452 453 Jay Bryan: That's certainly right, ok. A motion? 454 455 Craufurd Goodwin: Can we do that with five (5) people? 456 457 Jay Bryan: Well, we're here, you all have been here the whole time and I think we should at least have the 458 opportunity for us to vote on a motion if you make that, Craufurd. Are there any other comments about the 459 comprehensive plan or anything else that people want to make. I understand you had a good discussion about 460 Bernadette's suggestions about sustainability and that's been included. I heard about community building that you 461 have support and as consideration, I appreciate. Do you have a motion Craufurd? 462 463 MOTION made by Craufurd Goodwin to approve the plan as it is being presented to us and revised, including the 464 transportation board's proposal with the exception that we do not approve the changes to the goals and objectives. 465 Seconded by Bernadette Pelissier 466 467 VOTE: Unanimous 468 469 Jay Bryan: We have the draft statement to the public record. Is there a motion to support the language? 470 471 MOTION made by Renee Price to accept the Planning Board statement for the public record review of the public 472 hearing comments on the draft comprehensive plan. Seconded by Larry Wright. 473 474 VOTE: Unanimous 475 476 Planning Board's Statement for the Public Record -Review of Public Hearing Comments on 477 the Draft Comprehensive Plan: 478 479 At the August 25, 2008 Public Hearing on the draft Comprehensive Plan, the Planning Board 480 learned that there was some confusion in the community that the Planning Board may not have 481. received and reviewed all of the public comments submitted on the draft Comprehensive Plan. For 482 the purpose of the public record, let it be made clear that the Planning Board has received all 483 public comments that have been submitted on the draft Plan and all comments have received 484 thorough and equal consideration by the Board during its review process. The Planning Board 485 attended public hearings in May and August to hear public comments, reviewed all written public 486 comments submitted, and held meetings on July 9~", August 6~!, September 3rd, and September 487 10~ to discuss comments and develop proposed revisions. for further consideration by the Board of 488 County Commissioners. 489 490 304 Approved 10/1/08 491 MOTION made byJay Bryan to move that the. Board express its tremendous appreciation to you Tom and other staff 492 but particularly to you as you demonstrated tonight, 'and through this whole process, as being knowledgeable, 493 effective, supportive, good humored, patient, a real key core, and instrumental to how we've gotten here. Seconded 494 by Renee Price 495 496 VOTE: Unanimous 497 498 AGENDA ITEM 4: ADJOURNMENT 499 500 MOTION made to adjourn by Renee Price. Seconded by Larry Wright 501 502 VOTE: Unanimous '503 Jay Bryan, Chair "Box" of Ideas (IVot to be part of Comprehensive Plan) S05 Attachment 10 During the Comprehensive Plan Update Process (2006-2008), Planning Staff made general notes of ideas that were communicated at public meetings and hearings. Following is a list of ideas that are not proposed by the Planning Board for inclusion in the adopted Comprehensive Plan but may be helpful for the County to retain for future reference. The majority of these ideas were beyond the scope or intent of the 2006-2008 Comprehensive Plan Update and related to implementation. _ ~. . Genepal ideas _, ;3 ,;; lfi~~~a # _ ~ ~ - 1 Extend water and sewer toall of the Economic Develo ment Distracts. :..:. 2.. Apply flexlble..copas and..planning :pr,.ocess:to allow for changmg.,technologies.....;: , 3 Devise tax incentives to encourage neighborhood integration. . Amend the regulatory process In order to expedite the'~eview and approval of residential eluster_development 4 ~ . 'forms ~fhroughout tfie County, including tine' Rural 5 Remove "Stony Creek Basin Zoning" from Land 6 , : Irnplement.map changes recomrnehdetl n.SmaC 7 Remove the designation of the 7-Mde Creek Wa g . Implement,Transfer.;of'De~elopment Rights (Tpl ,.. ..::~' .: al Area through a text and map amendment .: ,. , : , fnr:ar~h'iavlf5rl DbIECtIV2S.:': ; , ' .: ..:.. .. .: g Create a separate review process for commerciauinaus>:na~ ~~ u~G~ta ~~ ~ ~~u~ ~~y ~ _..:. Provld.e.flexibility m;,buildirg codes.to allow co h'ousingoptloris, such;as In Law Suites.; '::~ ~ ,10: Expedite the development approval process for projects that commit to providing workforce and special needs 11 housing ;'12 ;: Promote~neghbo,'rhood tlesign for;new:neighbechoodswhirh encourages socialirteraction :... 13 Retrofit existing developments to add mixed uses, such as schools. _ ~ .: -:. 14 Formulate ax ncehtves to encourage, mmimal;;use of;woodin corstruction; Up zone areas most suitable for intensive development (part of larger TDR program) (8-15 du/ac for bus, 20-30 I~ 15 du/ac rail). ' 16 Iriiplement:inciusionary zohing requirements ingrowth areaswith,;3,;criterra phce, sg ft; number':of bedrooms.;;;: ::: 17 Provide flexibility in building and zonin to allow for more intense development at rural cross-roads. g ., , . 18 : Iriiplemerit Form -Based Codes 1 g Allow designers to participate in the development review process '::.: y~. :. Zp _ Implement :building-designstandards:!that~maintain,comrr-unit c .:arac er ~ ~:;. .. . 21 Review prohibitions on Water/Sewer in watershed critical areas. .. rce for the commurnty: '.: 23 24 25 26 27 2$: 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 ;, Community.ovvnership of farmland tq,ehcourage,traihmg,future.farmers;:an as::a:reso .. ....... ;. Minimize taxes on agricultural land so farmers can afford to maintain land for farming. ttarnS' :: Invest ih. public infrastructureao.ehable;com'pact andaustainable.aand usepa Improve services for Latinos/Hispanics and other non-English speaking pop Rrovide public sector Infrastructure: investmentsao stimulate :compact, develc Allow innovative wastewater treatment options Create a .policy that.encouragessrhool: recteational :facilities to be opeh,to t Create neighborhood schools either thru new development or converting ex Develop.specific plahs:ahd recomhaeridatiohsfor solGtions to the issues`rai Neighborhood Association and the_Coalltion to End Envirohmehtal Racism.. Formulate tax incentives to encourage water conservation. Create a committee to address childhood .public health,and safety issues .. Create a Child Advocacy Center through cooperation with state and local a Site a landfill in Orange, County:.. ' . ' Provide safe walking and biking routes within 1.5 miles of all schools for ch residents after hours. Design. narrow lower speed grid-like. road networks that mihirriize fuel usag Install adequate lighting and shoulders to existing roads to improve safety. ~,~,~ ,.,-„~~,~,~i~~ t~ C:h~irtnn Street. 9ublic,(e.g. tennis ig structures. by the Rogers=Eta during maxim hours and . ciitirtsl.. 1 of 2 9/22/08 .a.~ 4 ~ ~ General, Ede2~s 39 Create a fully functional sidewalk network in Orange County. 40. Plan and ..implement bicycle friendly develop. ments. 41 Research methods to solicit greater representation from Northern Orange residents. Develop a mechanism for aligning the county's capital budgeting and public finance capacity with the goals and 42 objectives of the Comprehensive Plan Update, ._:..,,. Increase opportunities for residents from different parts of the county and different backgrounds to work 43 together. 44 Createmore all-county shared events, such as an..Qrange Gouilty Fair, art, drama and music festivals. 45 Publish an Orange County community handbook/calendar. :'46 $uppoi't.,the Hinman Rights and ,Relations Gommissiori and its'ctarge to build community...,. Have all jurisdictions within Orange County approve a set of ordinances that would specify how community 47 building would be integrated. Support and commit to the participation of elected and appointed officials iri programs, that reinforce the shared community building framework, explore community building principles, and provide opportunities to develop 48 community building skills, 49 Convert power sources for essential services to 'off the grid' and non-CO2 emitting. 50 Change the 20 Year safe yield for Lake Orange to 1.0 .mgd. 51 Change the storage amount (useable) for Lake Orange to 409 mad. 9/22/08 2 of 2