ORD-2003-141 Growth Management System - Amendments to Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances (2)

Browse Search

~v~1:~-~do~--l~1 VOTES UNANIMQUS ~ b. Growth Management Svstem -Amendments to Zonin€~ and ~bdivision Ordinances 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 fallow 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 (BOCG) 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) far 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 greaterthan 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 theAugust 25"' 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 ubdivision rules foreach 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 recomrnendafions 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-lotthreshold. If-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 sail( 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°6, then there is: a density'.bonus: Co'mmissioner' Jacobs aid that an affordable housing component. is not addressed'.,. He asked if there was some way to have a review to promote the thinking about affordable housing. Craig Benedict said that-he would work with he Manager about how affordable housing can enter the framework of review. Gommissioner-Jacobs asked-that this be: forwarded to-the Hi lsborough 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 Gommissioner Gordon,.seconded by Gommissioner Jacobs to close the public hearing... VOTE:. UANIMOUS A motion: was made byCommissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissione€ Halkiotis to accept :the Administration recommendation to approve the proposed Growth Management System amendments with the following specifications: