Agenda - 11-27-1995 - C-6 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

FOREWORD Since December of 1993, a series of meetings, work group sessions, and/or public hearings has been held for the purpose of finalizing a set of rural character/open space preservation strategies. These meetings are summarized below: • December, 1993 - At a work session involving the governing boards of Orange County and Hillsborough, agreement is reached to establish the University Station Planning Group. • January, 1994 - Meetings are held in the northern, central, and southern portions of the county to present alternative rural character preservation strategies. • January-April, 1994 - The University Station Planning Group completes its work and presents its recommendations to the Hoard of Commissioners. • May, 19% -A proposal to creme an Open Space Development Area Land Use Plan category is presented at public hearing. The proposal also includes its application to the University Station property. • May, 1994 -A proposal to create an Open Space Development zoning district category is presented at public hearing. • June, 19% -A proposal to rezone the remaining portion of the county to require two-acre minimum lot sizes is presented at public hearing. Citizen comment is also requested on the desirability of clustering, mandatory open space requirements, and density bonuses. 0 September, 1994-October, 1995 -The Planning Board reviews all materials/evidence received,including the Rural Character Study Committee recommendations (January, 1993), and prepares recommendation. The Planning Staff has reviewed the material produced and/or received, including comments provided by citizens through township meetings and public hearings.While a variety of approaches and options exist;the three basic approaches which have been recommended to date include: • The Rural Character Study Committee ; • The "Status Quo"; and • A "Cluster Option" incorporating a mandatory 50% open space requa ment and density limits based on the carrying capacity of the soils. In an effort to focus the discussion and"balance" the many interests expressed to date, the Planning Staff has prepared this proposal which consists of two parts. The first section contains "Goals and Action Strategies" (as recommended by the Rural Character Study Committee). The second section contains a"Flexible Development" option which contains the following provi4 ms: • The existing on -&cre minimum lot size requirement would be retained.. • The provision of open space would be optional,however,a developer would be required to submit two concept plans-one for a conventional subdivision and another for a "flmble" or open space subdivision. • If a Flexible Development option is chosen, at least one-third(33%)of the Ind within a subdivision must be preserved as open space which may be preserved through: O An "estate lot" approach where all land is subdivided into lots four (4) acres or greater in size, building limits(50 96)are established for each lot, and the open space outside such limits is preserved through restrictive covenants and/or conservation easements; or Foreword 1