9_4_24 Planning Board Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 12.4.24 cover the additional area, which is pretty extensive. So, we're not there yet, we'll see how that 383 goes. I had mentioned that the information that you've received tonight, our commissioners have 384 seen, and so we know that there are varied opinions, even on our Board of County 385 Commissioners about the alternatives in general and growth and so forth. But they have asked us 386 to test the policies, and so that's what we're doing. 387 388 Whitney Watson: One follow-up question about the upcoming community engagement meetings. Both of these are 389 on the western side of Orange County. The decision was made not to hold an engagement 390 meeting in the eastern portion of Orange County? 391 392 Tom Altieri: I don't know that it was a conscious decision to avoid a particular area. There happened to be 393 meeting facilities in these areas, and they're areas where we feel like there's going to be local 394 interest, as there have been people, for example your last planning board meeting, where we had 395 quite a number of people with familiarity with the area around White Cross and in the Dollar 396 General that proceeded it. We have a third engagement window, and we'll look into moving these 397 around, but when we find what works, we may have a tendency to go back. That's one thing, 398 meeting with a few of the community leaders, that I've heard, which is, "Are you coming out here 399 to see us once and then you're gone, or are you going to come back, Tom?" So that's a 400 consideration as well, but really not a deliberate attempt to avoid any particular areas. We started, 401 very early on, looking at census maps and demographics and trying to see where concentrations 402 of populations were and how that aligned with where we have meeting spaces. I wish we had 403 more meeting spaces, but we'll work with what we have. And we have noticed, again, we meet in 404 county facilities and just invite people to come. That hasn't seemed to work, so we're trying to 405 meet out in some different areas with partnering hosts. 406 407 Whitney Watson: Okay. Thank you. 408 409 Adam Beeman: Statler? 410 411 Statler Gilfillen: As an architect who's done a lot of planning, there seem to be three standards. There are four 412 standards that I've developed, but there are three of them that are most common in the zoning, 413 typically. One would be the isolated housing to the suburban development. The second would be 414 the duplex to the row housing. The third would be the apartment to the high rise, each relying 415 upon a density. The fourth one that is very difficult, often, in American zoning is based on a 416 European village concept, which is kind of a mixture of a lot of things. If I'm reading what you're 417 saying, what you're trying to promote here is actually might allow that European model to come in 418 where you can have a clustered village, fairly tight density, mixed types of uses from tiny 419 apartment to duplexes to single family, all within a clustered area, with open land guaranteed to be 420 left around it. Am I right that this would be promoting that more? 421 422 Tom Altieri: I would say yes that concept is what we want to collect feedback on. Promoting, per se, not 423 necessarily promoting any of the alternatives, but presenting them to collect input and feedback to 424 guide the development of the draft plan. 425 426 Statler Gilfillen: Perhaps I can talk to you later about that. I may have some things that can be helpful. 427 428 Tom Altieri: Certainly. 429 430 Cy Stober: Well, on that point, I just want to make clear that the most constructive input you can have is 431 commenting on the scenarios themselves, as planning board members, and providing that input 432 on what you think either formally as a planning board member or as a member of, as a resident of 433 the county. That's the most constructive way to guide this process. Please. 434 435 Charity Kirk: I have some tangential questions, because it seems like this is all about how we want to develop 436 and grow the county, which is a little bit against the rural buffer idea and keeping things in the 437