Browse
Search
APB agenda 032101
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Agricultural Preservation Board
>
Agendas
>
2001
>
APB agenda 032101
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/10/2018 2:04:29 PM
Creation date
5/10/2018 2:03:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
3/21/2001
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Page 2 9 <br />around the country to see what might apply here. There is no one size fits all <br />solution." Farmland protection has been and continues to be most effective <br />where an assortment of different preservation tools are available. Money is <br />certainly a big piece of the puzzle. <br />Cohn complemented - Orange County on its efforts to promote the importance of <br />agriculture, and said that he uses our county as his example when he travels <br />around the southeast. "I was impressed with the turnout, farmers, <br />commissioners, school board members, etc., at the recent Agricultural Summit <br />and getting everyone involved is what will make it work." <br />Cohn shared a series of publications done by AFT from around the country, <br />particularly those related to cost of community services studies. "We go into a <br />county take a snapshot of a given year and time and look at the cost of providing <br />services to different classifications of land use, usually residential, industrial, and <br />farmland. In most cases industrial land generally comes out the best because it <br />provides a high level of taxation. Residential comes out the worse due to <br />schools, water, sewer. Farmland comes out as a net gain to the county. <br />Although it doesn't bring in enormous revenue even at cost use taxation it costs <br />the county almost nothing in services. Cohn mentioned hearing a speaker last <br />month, who said, "it's cheaper for us to buy development rights from farmers now <br />than to pay for services on sprawling development." <br />Ranells asked how much a study of this type costs. Cohn said that it depends <br />on several things such as how the data is set up within the county and whether <br />the county can provide the manpower to do the study. AFT sometimes trains <br />interns to do the work. Goodwin noted that Orange County is doing a study on <br />the cost of services verses tax dollars. AFT is working on a methodology to <br />combine cost of service information with twenty -year growth projections so that <br />you could look at a map of the county and see how an area might be built out <br />over a certain period. Tate asked how long it takes to complete a study like this. <br />Cohn said a couple of months, once everything is in place. <br />The APB agreed that it is important to convince the general population that <br />preserving farmland is important. Tate said that a lot of people think that 100 <br />acres with 100 houses on it is more valuable than 100 acres of open land. <br />People don't realize the cost of services for those 100 houses. Morrow noted <br />that the study needs to say you need to have this kind of density within this <br />number of miles of the existing services -- sewer, water, and so on, to justify <br />development based on this tax revenue and this cost of providing services. It <br />leads you to growth policies for clustered higher development rather than spread <br />out development. <br />Cohn suggested that the APB assess the county to see what its needs really are. <br />For example, how much agriculture is going on in the county, what is the value of <br />Draft 2/21/2001 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.