SeptJoingSessionBOS by chrstphr

VIEWS: 16 PAGES: 18

									                                   MEMORANDUM


TO:           Frederick County Board of Supervisors
              Frederick County Planning Commission
              Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS)

FROM:         Susan K. Eddy, AICP, Senior Planner

DATE:         September 21, 2004

RE:           Septembe r 28th Joint Work Session – Rural Areas Study Discussion



A joint work session of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, Planning Commission and
Comprehensive Plans and Programs Subcommittee (CPPS) will take place on Tuesday,
September 28, 2004 at 12:00 p.m. in the Board of Supervisors Meeting Room. Please note
that lunch will be provided. The purpose of the work session is to discuss the draft policy
recommendations developed by the CPPS for the rural areas.

As you are aware a work session of the Board of Supervisors, Planning Commission and CPPS
concerning the rural areas study took place on August 31st . At that work session the
recommendations of the CPPS were presented and discussed. The Board of Supervisors had
concerns with some of the CPPS proposals and asked that the next public input phase be delayed
while the CPPS re-examined some of these issues.

Since the August work session, the CPPS, primarily through its rural areas study working group,
has been reviewing all of the comments made at the work session. The study group is now
submitting three land development options for consideration at the September 28th work session.
Comments received at the August work session on other topics, including the rural economy and
rural community centers, have been incorporated, although the proposals in these topic areas
remain largely unchanged.

Attached to this memo are the proposals of the CPPS, which now include the three land
development options. Please note that the substantive changes and additions from the version
presented at the August work session are in bold type. Also attached is a table showing the lot


                                               1
September 28, 2004 Joint Work Session – Rural Areas Study Discussion
September 21, 2004
Page 2


sizes in the RA (Rural Areas District) and notes of the CPPS working group meeting with the
health department.

After receiving direction from the Board of Supervisors, the CPPS and the Planning Department
staff will begin the second round of public consultation. This will involve presenting the draft
policies for the rural areas to all previously consulted stakeholders and to the public. The
stakeholder meetings and the five public meetings could take place in late October. Feedback
from these sessions will be evaluated by the CPPS. The CPPS will then refine the draft policies
and endorse an expanded version for consideration by the Planning Commission and Board of
Supervisors. Ultimately the policies will be incorporated into the Frederick County
Comprehensive Policy Plan.


SKE/bhd

Attachments




                                               2
(Substantive changes and additions from the version presented at the August work session are
in bold type.)

Rural Areas Study
CPPS Policy Recommendation

Overview:

Using the input gathered in recent months from the public, stakeholders, and the Board of
Supervisors and the Planning Commission, the Comprehensive Plans and Programs
Subcommittee (CPPS) has been formulating policies for the rural areas. In this phase of the
study, goals for the rural areas are being articulated and policies are being drafted to facilitate
attainment of these goals.

For several months, a rural areas study working group has been meeting weekly to study in depth
the development trends, problems and issues associated with the rural areas. The working group
developed a number of suggested policies for the rural areas and these were considered by the
full CPPS at its August 9th meeting.

The CPPS recommended policies were presented to the Board of Supervisors and Planning
Commission at a joint work session on Aug ust 31, 2004. The Board of Supervisors had
concerns with some of the CPPS proposals and asked that the next public input phase be
delayed while the CPPS further re-examined some of these issues.

Since the August work session, the CPPS, primarily throug h its rural areas study working
group, has been reviewing all of the comments made at the work session. The study group
is now submitting three land development options for consideration at the September 28th
work session. Comments received at the August work session on other topics, including the
rural economy and rural community centers, have been incorporated into this document,
although the proposals in these topic areas remain largely unchanged.

The major issues and recommendations are included below.

The Green Infrastructure Concept:

The Green Infrastructure concept is the framework around which the rural areas study will be
based. Green Infrastructure is defined as a contiguous network of open spaces and natural
resources. The Green Infrastructure of Frederick County is a diverse array of inter-connected
resources that gives the rural environment its scenic beauty and valued landscape.

At the core of the Green Infrastructure framework are “primary conservation resources” such as
flood plains, wetlands, steep slopes and riparian buffers. These features are already protected by
County ordinances.

The Green Infrastructure also incorporates other features of the landscape that are not currently
managed or protected by local ordinances, but are nevertheless valued by the community. These


                                                 3
features include forests, prime agricultural land, and parks, as well as scenic viewsheds. These
are referred to as “secondary conservation resources”. Secondary resources also include heritage
and cultural features such as historic buildings and battlefields, which, while not part of the green
network, are important to the rural character. Secondary conservation resources will need to be
considered when making decisions involving land development. Secondary conservation
resources will not have the same development restrictions as primary resources. The County
will seek to have new developments designed in such a way that secondary conservation
resources are placed in the conservation set-aside portion of the new developments.

The rural areas study working group has articulated general features of the landscape that
warrant designation as secondary conservation resources and has drafted policies to promote
their retention. A precise list of secondary cons ervation resources, along with clear
definitions , will need to be drafted for inclusion in a future ordinance.

The study group was also asked to consider whether primary conservation features should
be subtracted from the calculation of a site’s overall allowable density. (For example,
should a 50 acre site with 30 acres of floodplain be allowed ten developable lots or four
developable lots?) The working group did not reach a consensus on this issue.


Land Development:

The subdivision of land will likely have the greatest single impact on the future of the rural areas.
Particular concern was expressed at public and stakeholder workshops for reducing the impact of
large, suburban style developments, preserving large tracts of agricultural and open la nd and
allowing farmers to sell off a few parcels in order to remain in business.

The CPPS proposed one land development option at the work session in August. This is
still the subcommittee’s preferred option. However, having heard the comments of the
members of the Board of Supervisors and members of the public, the CPPS is putting
forward three land development options for further consideration. A summary of these
options is contained in the attached table. Illustrations of the three options on a 100 acre
parcel and a 300 acre parcel are also attached.


1. REZONING OPTION

The land development option recommended by the CPPS has three elements:

   ?   By-right development for one or two new parcels (a minor subdivision);
       (This would require only subdivision approval, an administrative function carried
       out by staff)
   ?   By-right development for the creation of lots that are 25 acres or greater (in effect the
       creation of a small farm);
       (This would require only subdivision approval, an administrative function carried
       out by staff)


                                                  4
   ?   All other subdivisions would be considered major subdivisions and would require a
       rezoning to a new zoning category
       (This would be a legislative function of the Board of Supervisors with required
       public hearings. Following the rezoning, staff would administratively review the
       subdivision).

As highlighted above, the subdivision of land to create more than two new parcels would require
a rezoning to a new zoning district if the parcels created were less than 25 acres.

The new zoning category would allow a maximum gross density of one dwelling per five acres
for lots of up to 100 acres. Lots over 100 acres would be allowed a maximum gross density of
one dwelling per 25 acres, but only for that portion over 100 acres.
Thus,
            25 acres = 5 dwellings
            50 acres = 10 dwellings
            100 acres = 20 dwellings
            125 acres = 21 dwellings
            150 acres = 22 dwellings
            200 acres = 24 dwellings
            500 acres = 36 dwellings

All requests for rezonings to the new district would require the submission of a report analyzing
the impacts of the rezoning. Rezonings would only be granted in cases where the impacts of the
development, including the impact on roads and capital facilities, such as schools, were
mitigated. Typically rezonings are conditioned on off-site road improvements to mitigate
transportation impacts and proffers to mitigate the impact on County capital facilities.

Conservation design (explained in greater detail below) would be mandatory for major
subdivisions. A density bonus would be given if the open space set-aside was 70% or greater.
(The required minimum set-aside would be 60 %.) A density bonus would also be given if a
conservation easement was placed on the conservation set-aside. Each bonus equates to 10
percent of the allowable units.

       with only one of the two possible bonuses,
          25 acres = 5 dwellings
          50 acres = 11 dwellings
          100 acres = 22 dwellings
          125 acres = 23 dwellings
          150 acres = 24 dwellings
          200 acres = 26 dwellings
          500 acres = 39 dwellings

       with two bonuses:
          25 acres = 6 dwellings
          50 acres = 12 dwellings
          100 acres = 24 dwellings


                                               5
           125 acres = 25 dwellings
           150 acres = 26 dwellings
           200 acres = 28 dwellings
           500 acres = 43 dwellings

Other Features of the Zoning Option

?      Conservation Subdivision Design

Conservation subdivision design would be mandatory for all major subdivisions. Conservation
subdivision design describes residential development in which the natural features of the site are
maintained to the greatest extent possible. Conservation subdivision design promotes cluster
development, but differs from basic cluster design, such as the rural preservation lots in the
current Zoning Ordinance, in several important ways. It sets standards for the quality and
configuration of the open space to be preserved. It allows the County to exercise greater
influence on the design of new subdivisions. As the Green Infrastructure concept is the
framework for all rural area planning, open land in conservation subdivisions should include
primary and secondary conservation resources and should, wherever practicable, link into the
County’s Green Infrastructure Network.

The CPPS is proposing that 60% of the land in a conservation design subdivision be a
conservation set-side. Density bonuses (worth an extra 10% above the total number of
dwellings) would be given for a conservation set-aside greater than 70% and another bonus
would be given if a conservation easement was placed on the set-aside portion of the site.

?      State Roads

One new lot could directly access the existing secondary road system. Internal public road
access would be required for second and consecutive new lots.

?      Buffer requirements

Buffer standards would be increased to 300’ for road corridor buffers and 150’ for perimeter
buffers.

?      Density calculations

Development potential would be based on the parent tract of record at the time of the adoption of
an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance.

?      Minimum lot size

The CPPS is proposing a minimum lot size of two acres.




                                                6
?       Family Division Lots

Family division lots would continue to be allowed by-right. However, family division lots
would be limited to two for each parent tract of record as of the date of adoption of a new
ordinance, unless a waiver was granted.

?       Fees

Rezoning and subdivision fees, based on the cost to staff to review the application, could be
set.



2. BY-RIGHT OPTION

A second option now put forth for consideration by the CPPS is the by -right option. This
option was mentioned at the August 31st work session.

With the by-right option, all of the three elements (minor subdivision, large lots & major
subdivisions) put forth in the rezoning option would be included, except that the
subdivision of more than three lots with lots smaller than 25 acres (a major subdivision)
would also be by-right. Thus all subdivisions would be administratively approved by staff.
The Board of Supervisors would not be involved. No public hearings would be held. As
there would be no rezoning, the County would not be able to require off-site road
improvements to mitigate transportation impacts or seek proffers to mitigate the impacts
of development on County capital facilities.

The proposed density would be the same as in the zoning option; that is, a maximum gross
density of one dwelling per five acres for lots of up to 100 acres. Lots over 100 acres would
be allowed a maximum gross density of one dwelling per 25 acres.

Thus,
           25 acres = 5 dwellings
           50 acres = 10 dwellings
           100 acres = 20 dwellings
           125 acres = 21 dwellings
           150 acres = 22 dwellings
           200 acres = 24 dwellings
           500 acres = 36 dwellings

Conservation design would be mandatory for major subdivisions. The CPPS is proposing
that 60% of the land in a conservation design subdivision be a conservation set-side.
Density bonuses (worth an extra 10% above the total number of dwellings) would be given
for a conservation set-aside greater than 70% and another bonus would be given if a
conservation easement was placed on the set-aside portion of the site.



                                              7
       with only one of the two possible bonuses,
          25 acres = 5 dwellings
          50 acres = 11 dwellings
          100 acres = 22 dwellings
          125 acres = 23 dwellings
          150 acres = 24 dwellings
          200 acres = 26 dwellings
          500 acres = 39 dwellings

       with two bonuses:
          25 acres = 6 dwellings
          50 acres = 12 dwellings
          100 acres = 24 dwellings
          125 acres = 25 dwellings
          150 acres = 26 dwellings
          200 acres = 28 dwellings
          500 acres = 43 dwellings

Other Features of the By-right Option

?      Conservation Design Subdivision

Mandatory for major subdivisions

?      State Roads

One new lot could directly access the existing secondary road system. Internal public road
access would be required for second and consecutive new lots.

?      Buffer requirements

Buffer standards would be increased to 300’ for road corridor buffers and 150’ for
perimeter buffers.

?      Density calculations

Development potential would be based on the parent tract of record at the time of the
adoption of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance.

?      Minimum lot size

The CPPS is proposing a minimum lot size of two acres.

?      Family division lots



                                             8
Family division lots would continue to be allowed by-right. However, family division lots
would be limited to two for each parent tract of record as of the date of adoption of a new
ordinance, unless a waiver was granted.

?      Fees

Subdivision fees, based on the cost to staff to review the application, could be set.


3. TEN ACRE OPTION

A new, third option is also being put forth by the CPPS for consideration. This is the ten
acre option. With this option the, RA zoning district would be amended to change the
permitted residential density from one unit per five acres to one unit per ten acres. With
this option, the reduced density would apply equally to all property sizes. Thus small
parcels would have a lower density with this option than with options 1 or 2. Large parcels
would have a higher density with this option than with options 1 or 2.

       Density with the ten acre option:
          25 acres = 2 dwellings
          50 acres = 5 dwellings
          100 acres = 10 dwellings
          125 acres = 12 dwellings
          150 acres = 15 dwellings
          200 acres = 20 dwellings
          500 acres = 50 dwellings

No rezoning would be required. No public hearing would take place. Subdivisions would
be approved administratively by staff. As there would be no rezoning, the County would
not be able to require off-site road improvements or seek proffers to mitigate the impacts
of development on County capital facilities.

Conservation design would be mandatory for major subdivisions (the creation of three or
more new lots). The CPPS is proposing that 60% of the land in a conservation design
subdivision be a conservation set-side. Density bonuses (worth an extra 10% above the
total number of dwellings) would be given for a conservation set-aside greater than 70%
and another bonus would be given if a conservation easement was placed on the set-aside
portion of the site.
       with only one of the two possible bonuses,
           25 acres = 2 dwellings
           50 acres = 5 dwellings
           100 acres = 11 dwellings
           125 acres = 13 dwellings
           150 acres = 16 dwellings
           200 acres = 22 dwellings
           500 acres = 55 dwellings


                                               9
       with two bonuses,
          25 acres = 3 dwellings
          50 acres = 6 dwellings
          100 acres = 12 dwellings
          125 acres = 15 dwellings
          150 acres = 18 dwellings
          200 acres = 24 dwellings
          500 acres = 60 dwellings

Other Features of the Ten Acre Option

?      Conservation design subdivision

Mandatory for major subdivisions

?      State Roads

One new lot could directly access the existing secondary road system. Internal public road
access would be required for second and consecutive new lots.

?      Buffer requirements

Buffer standards would be increased to 300’ for road corridor buffers and 150’ for
perimeter buffers.

?      Density calculations

Development potential would be based on the parent tract of record at the time of the
adoption of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance.

?      Minimum lot size

The CPPS is proposing a minimum lot size of two acres.

?      Family division lots

Family division lots would continue to be allowed by-right. However, family division lots
would be limited to two for each parent tract of record as of the date of adoption of a new
ordinance, unless a waiver was granted.

?      Fees

Subdivision fees, based on the cost to staff to review the application, could be set.




                                               10
The remainder of this paper is basically unchanged from that which was distributed for the
August 31st work session.

Conservation Easements

A recurrent theme in the public participation phase of the rural areas study was the wish of some
rural landowners not to develop their land. Often they want to keep a working farm or preserve a
family’s property to pass down to future generations. However, due to the changing agricultural
economy and personal circumstances, landowners often need to get value out of their land. In
order to preserve rural character and discourage further subdivision, the County should
encourage landowners to enter into conservation easements.

A conservation easement is a simple legal agreement between a landowner and a government
agency or a non-profit conservation organization that places permanent limits on the future
development of the property in order to protect the conservation value of the land. The easement
may also specifically protect natural, scenic or historic features of the property. Conservation
easements, while typically donated, can also be purchased by a government agency or a non-
profit conservation organization where funding is available.

The voluntary donation of a conservation easement is an excellent method of open space, natural
resource and heritage protection. The landowner who donates a conservation easement
permanently protects the land, while retaining ownership and enjoyment of the property. There
is no public access to conservation easement properties. In many cases the donation of a
conservation easement provides substantial federal, state and local tax advantages and estate
planning benefits to the landowner. The public benefits through the protection of important
natural and cultural resources and scenic vistas. In addition local taxpayers will never have to
pay for the expensive public services, such as schools, roads, police, etc., that a new residential
development would have demanded. Therefore, this County should commit itself to the
establishment of a conservation easement authority. This authority would have the power to
accept voluntary conservation easements. The County should also consider a conservation
easement purchase program. Funding for the purchase of these conservation easements could
come from grants and from tax-deductible cash donations to the authority.

Rural Economy:

The rural economy of the County plays a significant role in the life and livelihood of its
inhabitants. The County actively seeks a thriving rural economy. The rural areas are not scenic
backdrops for the urban areas. They provide jobs and a way of life worth preserving.

Agriculture

At the present time, agriculture is the basis for the rural economy. However, the role and extent
of agriculture is changing and the County must address these changes. Traditional large scale
farming operations are declining. Farm profits continue to decline. While Frederick County has
long been associated with the apple industry, apple growing is declining. The number of acres in




                                                11
apple trees declined 17% in the last five years. Countering the decline in acreage for orchards is
an increase in land in forage, principally hay.

While the County will continue to promote and protect agriculture, alternative markets and
alternative crops must be explored. In addition commercial alternatives to agriculture must be
examined for those unable to continue with traditional farming.

Forestry

Forest land accounts for approximately 56% of the total land in Frederick County. However,
Frederick County’s average annual timber harvest value ranks only 81st among the 98 counties in
Virginia. Despite its vast forests, Frederick County is not a major force in the Virginia timber
industry. Much more could be done to encourage forest management and increased timber
yields.

Equine Industry

Virginia is the 5th largest equine state in the U.S. The equine industry in Virginia is centered in
the Northern Region, which includes Frederick County, but is largely based in Loudoun and
Fauquier Counties. To date, Frederick County has not been a major force in the equine industry.
With the strength and growth of the equine industry in the northern region of Virginia and the
dominance of small, recreational facilities, Frederick County could take on a greater role in the
Virginia equine industry.

Tourism

Tourism is a growing industry in Virginia, expanding more than 47% from 1994 through 2002.
Frederick County’s share of the Virginia tourism industry is small but growing. Some forms of
tourism particularly lend themselves to rural areas. These include scenic drives, hiking, wildlife
observation, equestrian activities, mountain biking, camps and bed and breakfast
accommodations, to name just a few. The County could take a stronger lead in promoting
tourism and recreation activities in the rural areas.

Rural Diversification

The County should complement its continued support of agriculture with support for economic
diversification. Economic activity which is compatible with agriculture should be encouraged
and promoted. Any activity must be compatible in terms of scale, use and intensity with the
rural environment. Land based tourism and recreation particularly lend themselves to the rural
environment, but their very success is contingent on the maintenance of the rural character.

It is proposed that the County commit itself to the creation of a Rural Economy Task Force to
further study economic diversification. This task force should draw members from the local
farm community, local businesses, the Winchester Frederick County Economic Development
Commission, the Chamber of Commerce and others. The task force should examine in greater
detail the existing rural economy and explore alternatives to insure a vibrant rural economy.


                                                12
One early task force undertaking should be to provide input to the Planning Commission in a
review of ordinances to enable rural diversification. This would help the County to encourage,
not impede, appropriate rural economic development.

It is also recommended that the County create a dedicated economic development function,
either within the County government or in cooperation with surrounding counties or the
extension service that could provide a resource to encourage and facilitate new rural enterprises.
This person would work directly with rural landowners to explore both agriculture markets and
alternative economic activities.     This person could also guide property owners through
administrative processes.

The County should also make the rural economy a significant focus of the Winchester Frederick
County Economic Development Commission.

Rural Community Centers:

Rural community centers are small activity nodes or small centers of development in the rural
areas of Frederick County. The current Comprehensive Policy Plan identifies eleven Rural
Community Centers. These are:

               Gore                           Reynolds Store
               Gainesboro                     Round Hill
               Armel                          Shawneeland/North Mountain
               Star Tannery                   Whitacre/Cross Junction
               Albin                          Clearbrook/Brucetown
               Stephenson

The rural areas study working group examined the general roles of the eleven rural community
centers. The rural community centers have very different sizes and functions. It is
recommended that detailed studies of the rural community centers be undertaken to examine in
detail development patterns and trends and to formulate polices for their development. These
studies and any resulting policies should be developed with the close cooperation of the residents
of those areas. It is possible that two tiers of rural community centers may develop – 1) those
centers that function purely as a commercial crossroads, and 2) those centers that have a mix of
uses and function more as a village.

As these studies may take years to complete, an interim set of general policies for all of the rural
community centers is proposed. The proposed policies would allow for new commercial
development consistent in scale and intensity with the surrounding area. Possible small- scale
commercial uses could be a general store, a bank or a restaurant. In the areas of the rural
community centers covered by other plans, such as the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan,
commercial uses consistent with the uses in that plan would be appropriate. Governmental and
religious uses compatible with the area would be considered on a case-by-case basis.




                                                 13
Prior to the completion of a detailed study, increased residential development will not be
encouraged in any rural community center. Therefore the RA District residential standards will
continue to apply in the rural community centers.

Transportation:

In the past, development in the rural areas has rarely taken account of the capacity or condition
of the road network. The impact of development on the roads has only been mitigated when a
rezoning has occurred. Most residential development in the rural areas has been by-right and so
few road improvements have been made by developers. The County and the state are not in a
financial position to pay for costly road improvements; therefore, the working group believes
that developers should play a bigger part in mitigating the impacts of their development.

As mentioned in the land development section, a rezoning element is recommended by the CPPS
for all rural subdivisions that add more than two new parcels that are smaller than 25 acres.
Through the rezoning process a developer would need to address the increase in traffic generated
as a result of the rezoning, the entrance locations, the changes in traffic patterns and the impact
on the capacity and efficiency of existing and planned roads. This is already a consideration for
rezonings in the UDA. In the rural areas, however, developers will also need to include a
consideration of other issues such as the movement of farm vehicles, the visual impact on a
scenic road, and the consequences of developing on rural rustic roads where a commitment has
been made by the County to restrict development. Rezonings would only be granted in cases
where the impacts of a development were mitigated.

Options 2 and 3 of the land development proposals are by-right developments. Therefore
the County would be unable to secure off-site road improvements to mitigate the
transportation impacts of a new development.

Relationship of the Rural Areas to the Urban Development Areas (UDA):

The rural area study is anchored by the current Comprehensive Policy Plan principle that most
development, including most residential development, should be directed to the Urban
Development Area (UDA). The UDA is the appropriate location for urban and suburban
development. Through its designation of the UDA boundary, the County commits itself to
providing services including utilities, improved roads and other urban facilities for this type of
development. The UDA is intended to contain land to accommodate the urban and suburban
development that will occur throughout the next decade. The County annually reviews its UDA
boundaries to insure adequate land is set aside for growth. There is, therefore, no compelling
reason to accommodate urban or suburban development in the rural areas.

A foundation for all rural areas study policies will therefore be that the rural areas should not
include urban and suburban development. The County should not provide services such as
utilities in the rural area that will encourage urban and suburban development. It is not cost
effective for the County to provide such services in the rural areas when the County is committed
to providing and funding services in the UDA where growth is clearly directed. It is proposed




                                                14
that the rural areas study clearly state that the extension of sewer and water lines into rural areas
outside of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA) is not appropriate.




                                                 15
16
Rural Areas Study
Land Development Options

                                    Option 1                                  Option 2                              Option 3
                                    Rezoning                                  By-right with Standards               10 acre

Major Subdivision (3+ new lots)     Rezoning required                         Allowed by-right with standards       Allowed by right with standards

   Board of Supervisor’s Role       BOS decides rezoning                      None                                  None
                                    Public process

   Staff Role                       Staff processes rezoning
                                    Administrative review by staff of         Administrative review by staff of     Administrative review by staff of
                                    subdivision                               subdivision                           subdivision

Minor Subdivisions (1-2 new lots)   Allowed by-right                          Allowed by-right                      Allowed by-right
   Process                          Administrative review by staff            Administrative review by staff        Administrative review by staff

Large lots                          25 acres or greater lots by-right         25 acres or greater lots by-right
   Process                          Administrative review by staff            Administrative review by staff

Density                             1 unit/5acres up to 100 acres             1 unit/5acres up to 100 acres         1 unit/10 acres
                                    1 unit/25 acres over 100 acres            1 unit/25 acres over 100 acres

Basis for Determining Density       Parent tract as of date of adoption       Parent tract as of date of adoption   Parent tract as of date of
                                    of revised ordinance                      of revised ordinance                  adoption of revised ordinance

Density Bonus                       10% bonus for larger set-aside            10% bonus for larger set-aside        10% bonus for larger set-aside
                                    10% bonus for conservation                10% bonus for conservation            10% bonus for conservation
                                    easement                                  easement                              easement

Family lots                         Up to 2 by-right, waiver required         Up to 2 by-right, waiver required     Up to 2 by-right, waiver required
                                    3 or more                                 3 or more                             3 or more

Minimum lot size                    2 acres (waiver for less)                 2 acres (waiver for less)             2 acres (waiver for less)


                                                                     - 17 -
                                 Option 1                                  Option 2                              Option 3
                                 Rezoning                                  By-right with Standards               10 acre

Green Infrastructure             Yes                                       Yes                                   Yes

Major Subdivisions - Mandatory   Yes, if lots are less than 25 acres       Yes, if lots are less than 25 acres   Yes
Conservation Subdivisions

Conservation set-aside           60%                                       60%                                   60%

Density credit for primary       Yet to be determined                      Yet to be determined                  Yet to be determined
resources

Road Corridor Buffer             300’                                      300’                                  300’

Perimeter Buffer                 150’                                      150’                                  150’

On-site public roads             Yes                                       Yes                                   Yes

Off-site road improvements       Yes                                       No                                    No

Proffers                         Yes                                       No                                    No

Fees                             To cover review costs                     To cover review costs                 To cover review costs

Impact on staff                  Additional staff review process           Same as at present                    Same as at present




                                                                  - 18 -

								
To top