Meeting 012596 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Lee: Don °t recall reading anything specifying any difference based on how zoned. Basically said, if you have required amount of land set aside in open space and decide to set aside an additional acre, you get an additional unit, two acres you get two units, etc. Curtis: If you gave three acres and had four to the acre already, would you be allowed 12 units? Lee: Doubt if that is the case. Gene: If you had R -4 density already, you probably wouldn't be doing FDO. Elio: As one of the larger landowners, it is important that you see something desirable and valuable. Also, hope that some of the people currently developing land will see something desirable. Feel that in the long run, these options may enhance the value of people owning surrounding property and provide options to selling land to realize value from it. Curtis: Why does density bonus begin at 60 %? Elio: Can be debated; we are exploring now whether this proposal can be brought to the floor and be worked on. If this group can agree there is something good in this, can begin looking at details, i.e., 50 %, 60 %, 55 %, 45 %, etc. Curtis: Thinks density bonus should start lower, say 400. Elio: Are you somewhat comfortable with the idea? Curtis: Like FDO. Elio: So you would not oppose in principle the suggestion Lee has put on the table, the only question is the percentages? Curtis: Right. Elio: Can we leave it at that and move on; then come back? Lee: Yes, grab whatever consensus we have. Dan: Seems to be two issues frustrating Curtis as potential developer. One is density and the other is problems he mentioned earlier in taking 15 years to get through the approval process on a development. Maybe there is some way to streamline the approval process. This might be a more valuable incentive than just density alone. Lee: This is included in FDO. Do we have some general agreement on second paragraph, keeping in mind that numbers still need to be discussed? 4