Agenda - 05-23-2005-d3 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

3 result in an additional 130,000 dwelling units and an associated population of approximately 300,000 at build-out (all developable land exhausted), Planning Staffs recommendation to lower residential zoning density is based on the premise that natural resources and infrastructure are limited and that existing zoning density, which could allow 130,000 new dwelling units in rural Orange County, is not sustainable and would prohibit the county from reaching many of its goals. Furthermore, there is a point where the impact of growth on the environment, transportation network, and provision of public services has a significant negative impact on the quality of life, Attachment 2 is an attempt to illustrate how growth under each of the six density options will have a different impact on population, traffic, air and water quality, and loss of farmland, and that at some point growth reaches a quality of life threshold after which quality of life deteriorates. 2. Minimum Lot Size The proposed Residential Density zoning amendment implements policy options within the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element by protecting groundwater resources through an increase in Minimum Lot Size from 0.92 acres (40,000 sf) to 2 acres (87,120 sf). The proposed amendment is necessary to address identified growth challenges in the areas of sustainability, water and air quality, and groundwater recharge including more land area for normal residential activity without disturbing private infrastn~cture. Planning Staff's recommendation to increase Minimum Lot Size is based on a 1996 U.S, Geological Survey, Water-Resources Investigations Report completed for Orange County that suggests acounty-wide Minimum Lot Size of approximately 2 acres is necessary to ensure that private well groundwater withdrawal rates do not exceed the natural process of recharge, 3. Planning for the Future: Reaction to Changing Conditions Orange County has an opportunity to be proactive in its adoption of policies to address the changing conditions and development pressures that Planning predicts will result as neighboring jurisdictions (such as Chapel Hill and Carrboro) reach their projected build- out. Attachment 3 provides an illustration of three possible ways to form policies in response to changing conditions: 1) Proactive--Long Range, 2) Reactive Change, and 3) Desperate Response. In summary, Attachment 3 shows that the more proactive a governing body is in establishing policy choices, the greater their success in achieving goals. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with hearing an update on Planning Staffs ideas for Residential Zoning Density and Minimum Lot Size Text Amendments, RECAMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that the BOCC receive Staff's update as information. citmpithei ~ti~. I lunninc h~'U(f~1F ~pni Public llaniit,.'h1a~73'Zuning,lmcndm nl; .bsLUCt a=~liii do::