Agenda - 02-16-1993 - VII-A - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Attachment 4 53 Hunter's Position: Rural Character Study 2/4/93 I. Observation A. Planning Dept. analysis has shown that most of the Nov. '92 RCS development options were not economically feasible in most areas of the county. Most options worked in south-central 0. Cnty, but only with private roads. Very little worked in the rest of the county. Jan. 93 RCS options are similar but even less dense, so you county n w II beeun developable work either. If adopted, a majority of the (and thus un-saleable). The options don't work because of the increased lot size, lowered density and the percent of open space. B. The current Cluster (20% open space/100 lots per 100 acres) is rarely used now, so why would proposed 20% O.S./80 lots be viable? Proposal: All RCS development options must be economically feasible in all areas of the county. The lot/bonus ratio schedule should start with one-acre lot minimum and progresg,so that the lots allowed as a bonus for open space off-sets the cost of the open space. This can only be determined by economic analysis. In addition, all options should have incentives such as private roads and expedited review guaranteed. II. Observation Jan. 93 proposed options 50% O.S./110 lots through 70% O.S./130 lots may support water/sewer where water/sewer is already available (Hillsborough), but will not support the cost of extending water/sewer. Density is too low. Density with water/sewer is crucial to responsible growth management where appropriate and desireable along major transportation corridors. Proposal: The scale for high-density options must be sufficient for water/ sewer to be economically-feasible in geographically-appropriate areas. If these things aren't planned for now, they will be even harder to manage in the future. The commissioners need to take the lead to ensure that future high densities in appropriate places are not precluded by current planning (i.e. this rural character regulation).