Agenda - 10-05-2021; 8-a - Minutes

Browse Search

19 1 Craig Benedict said UDO changes should be base in the comprehensive plan, but some 2 UDO changes are achievable without starting anew with the comprehensive plan. 3 Commissioner Richards asked for clarification of the time periods of data used to create 4 the current comprehensive plan. 5 Craig Benedict said some of the trends were put together over several decades. He 6 said various departments are responsible for different elements of the plan, and there is much 7 better data available now than in 2008, when the last revision was done. 8 Chair Price said some of the older data was used to illustrate the immense growth in the 9 County over time. 10 The Board agreed by consensus to move forward on action items 1.1 and 1.3. 11 The Board reviewed the mid-term options. 12 Chair Price asked if there is consensus to discontinue the voluntary density bonus. 13 Commissioner Bedford said she agreed with the mid-term options, and wanted to give 14 staff flexibility to mix and match. 15 Commissioner Bedford supported the top three short-term action items, but also said to 16 empower staff to pursue the others too. She said the voluntary density bonuses seem 17 ineffective. 18 Chair Price said the Board would review the other short-term items not on Slide #10. 19 The Board decided by consensus to move forward on action items 2.1 and 2.3. 20 The Board also agreed by consensus to no longer pursue action item 2.2. 21 The Board reviewed the long-term options, and agreed by consensus to pursue 3.1 and 22 3.2. 23 The Board did not have consensus on action item 3.3. 24 Chair Price asked if staff could provide clarification of item 3.3. 25 Craig Benedict said the County has flexibility to reduce watershed protections since the 26 County exceeds State requirements in many areas. He said any reduction would be reviewed 27 by the State. 28 The Board did not have consensus to move forward on action item 3.3. 29 The Board agreed by consensus to move forward on action item 3.5. 30 Chair Price said action item 3.6 should be discussed among partners. 31 The Board did not have consensus to move forward with action items 3.6 and 3.7. 32 Commissioner Richards said it is difficult to make a decision on these items since the 33 Board does not have updated information in the form of a comprehensive plan. 34 Chair Price said for 3.3, the Board will wait and revisit it at a later time when staff can 35 come back with more information. She said 3.6 and 3.7 would require conversations with 36 partners. 37 Commissioner Hamilton said the existing comprehensive plan was prescient and 38 forward-looking. She said updating the plan would require understanding the tradeoffs and it 39 would impact several of the items in the long-term section. She said from her perspective, none 40 of these action items are completely off the table, but some may need to wait until the 41 comprehensive plan is completed. 42 Commissioner Greene agreed with Commissioner Hamilton. She said the long-term 43 goals require identifying the values that County residents have now. 44 Chair Price said the watershed protection item could have been worded a bit better, but 45 it is not seeking to back down on protecting the watershed. 46 Commissioner Greene said Orange County residents wanted to go beyond the State 47 requirements, and she expects many still do. 48 The Board reviewed the long-term items listed on Slide #10. Action items 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 49 and 3.5 action items were agreed upon by consensus. Action items 3.3, 3.6, and 3.7 will not be 50 pursued at this time. 51 The Board reviewed the action items on Slide #14