Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Bob: Don't know enough about where it has been applied to speak to it. Feel that when the vote for PDR for <br />farmland preservation was being discussed, there were a lot of people who would not have opposed PDR if they had <br />a lease option. <br />y[eg: Concerned by time limit. Seems that person who is buying is buying permanent development right. <br />Lee: Two ways to think about. One is in line with net present value analysis of money. What you get now is a lot <br />of value in that you've preserved X acres and you pay a small amount for it, but the return on that investment is very <br />high. That's an argument in favor of it. An argument against it is that in this area there is a buildout that is going to <br />occur and last maybe 50 years. As an owner of land can decide that going to be doing development in 20 years <br />regardless of what's happening around him. In light of fact he knows he won't be developing, he can sell that <br />development right for a temporary period of time and still do exactly Nvhat he was going to do, thus increasing the <br />net buildout in the area without any long term consequences. <br />Dan: To Curtis. Are you in favor of another option besides perpetuity? <br />Curtis: Yes, but don't like perpetuity. <br />Meg: Uncomfortable with trying to assign a rate. We are not letting the market determine how much value you <br />would get. <br />Elio: Let's look at from another point -of -view. We're trying to preserve rural character, let's not debate 10 %. <br />Suppose sufficient people adopt this option and the fact that there is some open land there may create a new view of <br />that land. It is more valuable because it is open. That would be an incentive for that person to keep it open. We <br />tend to look at options at how it affects us from our point -of -view, rather than does it have the potential to achieve <br />our goals of preservation of value and preservation of rural character. There are things here (in proposal) he doesn't <br />like, but if he thinks they contribute to the goals he will be for them. <br />Meg: Afraid ratio business may make it not used by people who would like to use it and no open space is saved. <br />Ratio we set will determine attractiveness. <br />Elio: Any option that doesn't burden us, require government, change taxes, that is free; if it has a chance to find one <br />customer and save land , then it is an incentive. <br />Verla: Suggestions on how it should read? <br />Bob: Two dilemmas. If we set it like it is and people don't use it, say we're ,missing something. And if set it and <br />people start using it, we say we're giving too much away. <br />Dan: You get open space preserved, but want to make it usable to the extent that when 20 years comes up, that <br />person makes the right decision again. <br />Dean: If we keep adding clauses to basic FDO, isn't there a risk of end document becoming so complicated that <br />everyone throws up their hands in disgust? <br />Verla: Another issue seems to be people saying if they're going to do that in Stoney Creek, I want to be able to do <br />it in my area too. <br />Dan: Not sure it is cause for concern, if things we are adding are incentives, then people will be using for good <br />reasons. <br />Dean: Ultimately our work has to go to public hearing and if document is too complex, there is concern may not be <br />implemented. <br />12 <br />