Minutes - 19921201 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

144 Callie Warner stated that the choice is between staying within the current zoning and do cluster open Space Developments and save portions of the rural character while addressing the needs or go to a category which will wring in higher density and water and sewer. She feels that this plan has been presented to the public as a great alternative to the one house per acre development and a statement as to what can be done in Orange Cou:-;ty. She thinks it is something that has generated a lot of concern. She introduced Randall Arendt who has had 20 years of experience in rural planning with emphasis on blending, conservation and development. He is co-author of Dealing With Chan. Randall Arendt stated that he thinks the University Station plan represents a tremendous amount of site analysis and thought and represents the work of a lot of people but the logic is based on the wrong premise and that no matter how good the analysis is, from then on it is flawed. He addressed the three areas of density, sewer service and open space. Mr. Arendt stated that offering 67% density bonus and extending sewer lines to protect open space is like building a highway to relieve traffic congestion. The solutions cause growth. He stated that density bonuses have been seen for a long time as a way of encouraging developers to do better site design, but maybe the solution is to write design standards in the ordinances so that better design is part of the package the developers normally do and density bonuses are then not necessary. He made reference to a planning document called "Rural Orange Buildout Analysis" dated January, 1992. That document indicates that in the rural area in 1990, there were less than 20,000 people. The buildout of rural Orange when the unbuildable areas are deleted is 130,000 without any density bonuses. He showed some slides of Farmview which is a development on 430 acres in an area with 1 acre zoning located within easy commuting distance of ?hiladelphia. Of this 430 acres, 130 were wet woods. This left 300 acres for -300 lots. The developer asked that he be allowed to build these 300 homes on 150 acres leaving 150 acres of farmland w1.ich he donated to the local land trust. This ended up to be the fastest selling development in this area. Not only are density bonuses necessary but so are public sewer line extensions. One alternative is land treatment of reclaimed wastewater land application. This would avoid the need for expensive sewer connections. A publicly financed sewer line encourages growth. Mr. Arendt's third point is the definition of open space. He-recommends clustering on 50% of the buildable land to reserve the other half as permanent open space. He doesn't count unbuildable wetlands or floodplains or "steep slopes, power line easements,-' road rights-of-way, storm retention basins or parking lots as contributing toward open space requirements. But he feels that in this very creative University Station plan, one of the creative aspects is how much of these power line easements and retention basins and golf courses could be counted as open space. A highly developed intensively managed active recreational plan should definitely count toward open space, but should not count for any more than half of the required open space. He noted that except for the golf course and the 30 acre recreational park, almost all the 60% open space consists of unbuildable areas as noted above. He recommends a balanced approach to open space which would include pastures, meadows and overgrown forests which is not.preserved in this plan. The plan is workable but this imbalance of the open Space Area needs to be addressed. He feels this could be done by (1) scaling back the proposal, (2) redesigning the proposal to a -rue neo-traditional village, or (3) legitimizing his request for a hugh 67% density bonus by preserving 500 acres of developable land elsewhere in the University Station neighborhood. To increase the acreage of neutral lands