Meeting 030496 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Lee: No, but not sure we can do much about it since it is contained in FDO. Bob: Nlav be land somewhere that is just too valuable to work under this process. Dan: How would we go about defining- land where it wouldn't work? Let: Add another color to map and provide additional definition. The problem is that that kind of thinking, has to be done in conjunction with thinking about issues like buildable: vs unbuildable land. Elio: Bob made a good point. If you have a good piece of land, there's no way you would want to go with FDO because you could get so much money for it. So more incentives for a piece of land like this would be helpful. Lee: Keep in mind too that for much of the land we are talking about to realize its potential value, a change in zoning is required; and we have said that is not a right that someone has, that it is the political process that one has to go through to make it happen. Bob: But nothing in this proposal keeps me from that right. Dan: Think it is a valid point that not all land is equal. Some is basically unbuildable. In order to say that some of this land that would otherwise had buildings on it that we want to see preserved because its in a vista or on a corner that's more valuable than that unbuildable land implicitly states that we can define those attributes about the more valuable land and unless we are going to tackle that issue in some timely manner before we run out of time to even have any influence with this, we're going to have to live with that premise the best that we can, the way it's written in the FDO. Don't know that we can tackle in any timely manner to get something out the door from this committee. Bob: Think some of the land that we ought to work hardest to preserve is land that's some of our unbuildable land and if a way to get that is to give a building somewhere else, then think it's a just and honest way to do it. If somebody owns that land they have a right to someday have water and sewer there probably. May be in our lifetime, may not, but that right is still out there. Lee: We have said as a group that they don't have a right to water and sewer. There is a process to go through. The point that that land can be used as an incentive to preserve that land, well that land is already preserved, it s not allowed to be built on. When person bought that land it was unbuildable. Bob: That's the way you look at open space. Some people see it differently. Lee: Understand, just presenting the other side. Not saying we need to resolve that. Dan: Some land is unbuildable due to truly being unbuildable. But some is unbuildable due to economics and that what Bob is referring to. Lee: All land that is unbuildable is unbuildable for economic reasons. Gene: Let's move to the two bullets under number 5. Brief overview of where bonus units can be used depending on amount of open space preserved. Elio: As we look at this we must remember that it is an option; we still have available what can be done under current development standards too. Two questions come to mind: Does this offer additional opportunity for somebody and are there other incentives that we could add to this to favor open space? Would urge everyone to see if we can add more incentives where possible.