NS Contract - Strategic Growth Rural Conservation Consultant Implementation Update Amendment

Browse Search

2 .~ BOCC INPUT ` The BOCC considered the TDR program and administrative design options at their May 24, 2007 session and asked that the topic proceed with additional attorney input on the residential to non-residential conversion. At the August 27, 2007 BOCC work session, the Proposed Strategic Growth and Rural Conservation Program was further discussed. Under this Program, the County would designate "Growth Areas" and "Conservation Areas" in its land use planning jurisdiction. Conservation Area property owners could sell a conservation easement on their property to Growth Area property owners. Growth Area property owners could then transfer the easement to the County in exchange for permission to develop those areas more intensely, within specific guidelines to minimize impacts of the increased development. The consultant's handout is summarized as The proposed Growth Areas include properties outside of municipal jurisdictions that are: 1. In Economic Development Districts as zoned by Orange County, or 2. In "urban transition areas" in either the Hillsborough Strategic Plan or the Efland-Mebane Small Area Plan, or 3. In "rural community nodes" in the Orange County Land Use Element Excluded from Growth Areas are properties that are either already protected as open space or historic or environmentally-sensitive Proposed Conservation Areas include properties outside of municipal jurisdictions that are not in a designated Growth Area. Within the Conservation Areas, properties eligible to participate are not already protected by a conservation easement and not already developed to their maximum • density by zoning. Conservation Area properties must also be at least one of the following: 1. Adjacent to an already protected property, or 2. Fifty (50) acres or larger, or 3. Historic or environmentally-sensitive. Several questions were posed at this meeting. The answers to those questions are addressed in the matrix found in Attachment 1. The Commissioners agreed that the next step in this process would be to bring back a report to address all the decisions, as well as the answers to the questions. Further, the SGRC program would not be brought forward to public hearing at this point. WORK GROUP AND PLANNING BOARD INPUT On October 1, 2007, a contract outlined .implementation advisory group met and informally voted to extend the contract work (to next spring) to allow more time to understand the implementation proposal. On October 3, 2007, the Planning Board called into question the need to continue the program until the Comprehensive Plan work is complete (Planning Board approved minutes are attached including an approved Resolution provided on page 7 of this abstract) The Planning Board has a good amount of Comprehensive Plan organizational and content responsibility in the coming six months. A meeting with the Planning Board in late winter or spring may assist in Planning Board • identification of work load and priorities.