ORD-2003-141 Growth Management System - Amendments to Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances

Browse Search

VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. Growth M; <:±) G,� 1b- ;Fd©3-'l-'/ 1 C- -s' yz The Board considered closing the Public Hearing and making a decision on the proposed Growth Management Amendments to the County's Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, a proposal which would require major subdivisions of property to follow either the current process, a Planned Development process, or a Class A Special Use Permit process depending upon location, (which is a product of transition areas and water and sewer availability) and number of lots. The Planning Board, by majority vote (8 -1, See Draft Minutes, Attachment 8) on September 3, 2003, recommended that the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) approve the proposed Growth Management System amendments with the following specifications: a. The use of the attached map (Option 1 presented at the August 25th Joint Public Hearing) for designating Urban and Rural areas; and b. In the Rural Designation area, a Planned Development' zoning amendment requirement for all subdivisions containing 20 or more lots (versus - greater than 40 lots as proposed by Administration). The Administration recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the proposed Growth Management System amendments with the following specifications: a. The use of the attached Growth Management System Map (Option 1 presented at the August 25th Joint Public Hearing) for designating "Urban and Rural Designated areas; and b. In the Rural Designation area, a'Planned Development zoning amendment requirement for all subdivisions containing greater than 40 lots. Planning Director Craig Benedict gave a PowerPoint presentation. He gave the background of this item. He showed a map that differentiated two sections of the County — rural' and urban. The proposal is that there would be a different set of subdivision rules for each of the two sections. The proposed regulations would apply to subdivisions that have not yet been submitted for County Commissioner review. The regulations would also not apply to exempt subdivisions that are not regulated by the County Planning Department'. He explained the recommendations as stated above. He said that the reason Administration at this time did not recommend a 20 -lot versus the 40-lot standard is that the public hearing in August was advertised at the 40 -lot threshold. 1f the Board wants to do something different, the Administration recommends that the Board adopt the new standards tonight and the staff can bring back a different standard through a new public hearing process. Commissioner Jacobs said that there is a provision of a density bonus if you cluster a development. Craig Benedict said that if you provide more than the minimum amount of open space by clustering, more than 33 %, then there is a density bonus. Commissioner Jacobs said that an affordable housing component is not addressed. He asked K there was some way to have a review to promote the thinking about affordable housing. Craig Benedict said that he would work with the Manager about how affordable housing can enter the framework of review. Commissioner Jacobs asked that this be forwarded to the Hillsborough Town Board with an explanation that this is the standard that Orange County intends to hold. He would like to encourage Hillsborough to at least examine these criteria. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to close the public hearing. VOTE UANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to accept the Administration recommendation to approve the proposed Growth Management System amendments with the following specifications: