Browse
Search
Meeting 121495
OrangeCountyNC
>
BOCC Archives
>
Advisory Boards and Work Groups - Inactive
>
Stoney Creek Work Group
>
Meeting 121495
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/1/2018 5:18:46 PM
Creation date
8/1/2018 11:42:42 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
2. Include dis- incentives as well as incentives. For example, <br />conventional subdivision development will continue to be an <br />option for the property owner. However, if the community <br />through its endorsement of the plan has expressed a preference <br />for a certain type of development, e.g., cluster or <br />conservation, then these options should be easier to do. <br />Conventional development proposals should be considered at <br />public hearing to hear community concerns. This doesn't <br />prevent the person from doing conventional development, but <br />does act as a dis- incentive and may encourage him /her to <br />consider an option which has community support. <br />3. The acreage ranges for the three intensity levels should come <br />out of the Preliminary Design Subcommittee report and be <br />replaced with descriptions, i.e., lower intensity = most <br />restrictive, higher intensity = most permissive. <br />4. Finally: <br />• Fine -tune the intensity levels (description as well as <br />geographic extent) in the Conceptual Plan and recommend <br />specific Flexible Development options for each of them. For <br />example, there seemed to be general consensus on the part of <br />the subcommittee that the Estate, Cluster, and Conservation <br />options might be compatible with the Lower Intensity <br />Category. Time expired before the Subcommittee could <br />consider recommendations for the Intermediate and Higher <br />Intensity areas. The full Planning Group may wish to begin <br />discussions on this and refer the issue back to the <br />subcommittee if consensus cannot be reached. <br />• Explore opportunities for, and encourage changes to the tax <br />laws regarding farm and managed forest land. If a landowner <br />could sell farm and /or forest land and not be liable for <br />back taxes as long as the land stayed in the same use, it <br />would in many cases make it possible for the landowner to <br />raise needed cash without feeling forced to develop. <br />• Transferrable Development Rights (TDR) seems to offer the <br />means for achieving many desirable goals. The general <br />assembly should be lobbied strongly to pass legislation <br />allowing it. <br />Note: The recommendations section of this report was written <br />following the subcommittee meeting on December 6 and the <br />subcommittee did not have the opportunity to review it. Any <br />errors, omissions, or misinterpretation of subcommittee <br />members' views are my (Gene Bell) responsibility. <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.