Minority refers to persons classified as either African American, Asian or Pacific American, Native American. Between 1998 and 2030, approximately 13,629 persons of minority status are projected to reside in Orange County.

Hispanic or Latino is a broad term referring to people of Spanish speaking origin. It is an ethnic classification and not a racial class, therefore persons of Hispanic ethnicity can classify themselves as white or non-white. It is not known what percentage of the County’s Hispanic population classifies themselves as white or non-white.

During the next 32 years it is projected that 13,707 new Hispanic residents will call Orange County home. This will increase Orange County’s Hispanic population from an estimated 3,063 in 1998 to 16,770 in 2030. Given this increase, by 2030, 9% of all County residents will be Hispanic, this contrasts with the present, where 3% of the all residents are Hispanic.

Detailed demographic characteristics of the County’s Hispanic population are not currently known. At best, one can presume that the make-up of the County’s Hispanic population does not differ considerably from that of the make-up of the larger North Carolina Hispanic population. Based on anecdotal evidence from various new stories, the Hispanic community in North Carolina is extremely diverse, as noted in by the following comments attributed to Julio Cordoba of the North Carolina Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, in the 9/4/98 edition of the News & Observer.

"...a distinguishing factor of North Carolina’s Latino community is its diversity. Laborers work on farms in the country and at construction sites in the city, while the state’s universities and large companies such as IBM, Glaxo Wellcome, and Northern Telecom draw future and current engineers, chemists and computer designers. There is also a healthy ethnic mix of people from every country in Latin America and from Puerto Rico."

By 2030, Orange County’s child population will number 45,851 children (persons aged 0-17 years). This represents a doubling of the current (1997) children’s population figure of 22,912.

As the figure below shows the percent increase in the number of children is greater during the next three decades than during the previous 28 years.

One of the unfortunate consequences of projected increases in the child population is parallel growth in the incidence of children in poverty. Assuming continuation of the ten year trend, (1980 and 1990), by 2030 6.9% of children in the County will be living in poverty. This percentage is down from 1980 and 1990 (11.4% and 10.3%, respectively), but the actual number of children living in poverty will have increased from approximately 1,800 in 1980 and 1990, to over 2,850 in 2030.

Impacts refer to anticipated increases in residential and non residential acreage, housing and public services resulting from projected population and employment growth.

It is important to note again that the amount of land estimated to be developed was based on past trends. Impending new development in the Hillsborough area is not taken into account. The amount of land estimated to be currently developed was determined by the following method. Outside of municipal planning jurisdictions, developed land is defined as parcels 10 acres or less having a structure on them, plus a 10 acre developed envelope for each parcel greater than 10 acres having a structure on it. Within municipal planning jurisdictions a 2 acre, rather than 10 acre, cutoff was used.

Estimated acres needed for projected growth were calculated by multiplying the number of projected dwelling units by the average lot size for each area. For rural portions of the County average lot sizes were calculated using 1987-1994 permit data for major and minor subdivision activity. In municipal areas the average lot size was provided by town planning departments.

Aside from land consumption one of the more significant impacts, over the next 32 years, of population growth and demand for housing will be the continued rise in the cost of housing.

Estimations of future housing cost were developed based on best available data. It is important to note that these are provided as a point of reference. These projections have not taken into account future land availability or any policy or market changes that may alter the cost of housing. They are based on the assumption that future increases in County-wide housing cost will occur at the same annual rate of growth that occurred in the Chapel Hill housing market between 1988 and 1998. The decision to base projections the Chapel Hill market was dictated by the fact that figures documenting the character of the Orange county housing market do not presently exist.

Between 1988 and 1998 the price of owner occupied homes in Chapel Hill grew by an annual average of 2.07% . The cost of rental properties grew by a yearly average of 3.01%.

The average market value, in 2030, for an owner occupied home and rental property is outlined in the following figure.

If housing cost continues to increase at the rates identified above, it will remain cost prohibitive for residents and families earning at or below the mean per capita income to live here. The projected average per capita income for a resident in 2030 will be $41,068 (1998 dollars). This is in contrast to the estimated per capita income in 1998 of $28,223 (1998 dollars). If this resident chose to purchase an existing home for themselves and their family in Orange County in 2030, they would find that they would have to spend approximately 8 times their annual income. To purchase a new home the same resident would have to spend 12.4 times their annual income. US Housing and Urban Development Department guidelines define affordable housing as selling at 2.5 times annual income. Given the cost of a single family home, this resident may consider renting. Applying US HUD guidelines for affordable rental housing (30% of monthly income) a resident earning the average per capita income in 2030, could afford a to rent a property at $1026.59 per month.

If present trends continue rental properties will not be that inexpensive. In 2030, rental properties will be rented at 37% to 84% of the average monthly per capita income ($3442.31). For single or two person householders, spending more than 30% of their monthly income on housing may be acceptable, given that they do not have other significant expenses (child care, health, college loans, etc.). For households with such additional expenses, particularly those with children, spending more than 1/3 of their monthly income is certainly less desirable.

Limited data dictated that projections of future commercial acreage be calculated for Chapel Hill/Carrboro, Hillsborough and Mebane/Efland only. Projections were based on the assumption that future commercial land demand could be projected given knowledge of based on the ratio of current dwelling units to current square feet of commercial space, and future dwelling unit demand.

Given this assumption it is projected that approximately 3,077,218 square feet of new commercial/industrial space, or 1,569 acres will be constructed by 2030. It is important to note that this acreage does not account for commercial/industrial space that could be developed in the future as part of reuse or infill projects or changes in the ratio of non-residential to residential development. Required commercial/industrial space for Chapel Hill/Carrboro, Hillsborough and Mebane/Efland are listed in the figure below.

Resource limitations have precluded a quantitative assessment of the impact that proposed development will have on the quantity of natural areas that will be preserved in response to development pressure. In its place we offer a qualitative assessment of impacts, based on conversation with prominent conservation organizations and review of their plans.

The County’s three largest landholders of preserved open space: Duke Forest (4,739 acres), OWASA (3,017 acres), and the Eno River State Park (1,648) will likely see some changes in acreage preserved.

Duke Forest will likely sell off several of its parcels considered not to be of research or preservation value, and may purchase a few new properties especially where the potential exists for linking areas of the forest. The former are generally smaller and more isolated, totaling approximately 303 acres. However, one 162 acre parcel (the Korstian Division land just north of Chapel Hill) could have significance due to its location in the rural Buffer adjacent to a new Triangle Land Conservancy land preserve.

OWASA has plans to purchase another 1200 to 1300 acres in the Cane Creek watershed for water supply protection purposes.

The Eno River State Park is interested in expanding and acquiring more land adjacent to the Few’s Ford portion of the park, though there are currently no definitive plans. The Town of Hillsborough has received grant funding to preserve a corridor linking Eno River State Park to Occoneechee Mountain Park.

It is expected that the Triangle Land Conservancy will acquire ownership or easements protecting more open space in the County, though it is impossible to tell how many acres will be preserved by TLC in the year 2030. And Orange County will be implementing a Resource Acquisition Program that will have prioritized natural areas for preservation and will be actively pursuing voluntary acquisition of lands and/or development rights.

To meet the needs of the projected 178,740 persons of Orange County in 2030, national standards indicate that the four local governments should have at a minimum 1,300 acres of land devoted to residents’ recreational needs.

Currently, there are 560 acres countywide in 1998 (Chapel Hill - 400 acres, Carrboro 70 acres, Orange County 60 acres and Hillsborough 30 acres). In particular, hiking trails and additional parks would be needed based on current standards.

In terms of funding, Orange County and Carrboro have accumulated $425,000 and $473,000 respectively through "payments-in-lieu" through the development process. Questions have been raised, however, whether the current system of land acquisition is sufficient to meet needs. Part of the problem is that, some recreational facilities are developed privately, and are not open to the public. Also, small parcels of land that are donated for public use often end up being of use neither to the public nor to the development itself, since their size or location makes them difficult to use. Updates to this approach would be needed to provide any substantial funding mechanism for future needs.

Based on the expected population growth by the year 2030, school enrollment will increase by:

• 6,520 elementary students;
• 2,740 middle school students;
• 2,800 high school students.

If current trends hold true (same ratio of students in public schools, same public school structure, continuation of current trends, student population and capacity standards), the above increase in enrollment would translate into the following new schools needed by 2030.

Senior Facilities

According to the Orange County Department on Aging, the elderly can be classified into three functional classifications: Well, Disabled, or Institutionalized. As of today the overwhelming majority (79%) are well, 16% are disabled and 5% are institutionalized.

Assuming that these proportions stay the same in the future, it is projected that the majority of tomorrow’s senior population will demand preventative, rather than supportive or protective, services. As the name suggests, preventative services prevent the early breakdown of functional capacity, whereas supportive and protective services provide direct care services for the elderly (for a list of services classified under each functional type see Profile pg. 33).

At present there is approximately 1 licensed day care facility in Orange County for every 94 children. Given an additional 6223 children, 66 facilities would need to be built during the next 31 years to provide child care services at the current ratio.

As of 1996, there were 246 full time officers serving Orange County. Between today and 2030 an additional 152 officers will be needed to maintain 1996 service levels. Commensurate with this increase in officers is the need for a joint training facility for all Orange County officers. Such a facility would need to contain a firing range, classroom and driver training area.

Developing projections of the number of persons impacted by disability or illness is difficult, without a clear understanding of possible advancements in health treatment and technology. At best we are able to provide a qualitative assessment of how population growth may impact upon the provision of health and related services.

Given the projected population Orange County residents would produce 2,824,616 tons of municipal solid waste if the County’s waste reduction and diversion goals are met. If these goals are not met 3,850,337 tons of municipal solid waste will be produced during the next 30 years. The total tonnage estimates translates to a per person per day waste total of 1.9 to 3 pounds.

If reduction or diversion strategies are implemented, waste generated in the next 30 years would require a landfill .9 times the size of the Orange Regional Landfill, which has a capacity of 4.75 million cubic yards. If goals are not met then a landfill 1.2 times larger than the Orange Regional Landfill would be needed.

Extrapolation of the 10 year trend in daily vehicle miles traveled (VMT) between 1987-1997, reveals that Orange County daily VMT will increase from 3,113,800 in 1997 to 7,867,650 in 2030. This translates to an increase in daily Orange County VMT from 35 miles per driver per day in 1997 to 45 miles per driver per day, by 2030.

These projected increases in daily VMT will occur given population increase and continuation of: 1) low gas prices; 2) regional land use patterns; 3) the commuting patterns of county drivers and 4) transportation infrastructure provision.

Low gas prices provide an incentive for drivers to make multiple, short trips that they would not ordinarily make, but do so given the reduced fuel costs. In general larger distances between residential development and commercial/office space increases auto dependency. As Orange County residents live further and further from shopping and work they will rely on automobiles for transportation, in the absence of other travel choices. One result of the spatial mismatch between residential and commercial/office development, is that drivers are encouraged to drive for longer distances with fewer passengers.

The current transportation infrastructure provides few options, other than driving, for persons who commute long distances (>15 miles from point of origin). Chapel Hill Transit provides and will continue to service the needs of Chapel Hill and Carrboro residents and UNC students within these towns. The Triangle Transit Authority provides limited bus service between Chapel Hill, Raleigh and Durham. TTA is conducting preliminary analysis for a regional rail station to be developed in Chapel Hill. Bicycle commuting is and will continue to be a viable alternative for in-town commuting. Bicycle commuting between towns and/or suburbs will be difficult unless current thoroughfares are equipped with proper measures to facilitate bicycle traffic.

Diversification of the County’s transportation network will be needed to serve seniors, the disabled and low income residents whose physical, and or economic limitations prevent them from driving.