HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 11-21-2016 - Information Item Item F.1
229
PLANNING & INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT
Craig N. Benedict, AICP, Director
Administration 131 W. Margaret Lane
(919) 245-2575 Suite 201
(919) 644-3002 (FAX) ORANGE COUNTY P. O. Box 8181
www.orangecountync.gov NORTH CAROLINA Hillsborough, NC 27278
R a a rEX O-111
r • '` �r � .1. • I lm' A R LIB .�' .1. ∎+�� II "" �' jEY1 3 SniAl'��1.
r ±fix® �' � �� ��;IAA!111,1 r' •
MEMORANDUM
TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners
CC: Bonnie Hammersley, County Manager
Travis Myren, Deputy Manager
FROM: Craig N. Benedict, Planning & Inspections Director
DATE: November 11, 2016
SUBJECT: INFORMATION ITEM - Report on Strategic Growth/ Rural
Conservation Planning Technique (AKA Transfer of Development
Rights)
SPECIAL NOTE: NC Legislation since the research (mid-2000's) on this topic has
changed so this update is not intended to respond to the impacts of recent law
and case law. During the development of the county's multi-element Comprehensive
Plan in the early to mid-2000's, the necessary integration of various planning principles
and public service models became more evident. They had, over time become `siloed'
among departments.
The process of evaluation the future `master plan' of the county with all of the
associated supporting elements brought forward both compatible initiatives and in some
circumstances competing concepts. The basis of the plan began with a data element
which examined trends of demographic and socio-economic data and projected a future
that could be shaped by goal and objectives in the comprehensive plan.
The various elements (land use, economic development, housing, natural and cultural
systems, infrastructure, public services and transportation) would need to be balanced
and choreographed to maintain or bolster the quality of life appreciated by residents,
farms and businesses.
Inevitable growth would add pressures to our existing systems of farmland and
environmental preservation and our desire to accommodate new residents and
businesses in the appropriate place with supporting and efficient services. This
sustainable model was the model for the Comprehensive Plan.
Acknowledging the challenges ahead, various planning techniques were analyzed. One
`pressure release' concept that could address the push to preserve and the pull to grow
230
smart related strongly to what is nationally known as Transfer of Development Rights
(TDR). After much community and elected official input and staff/consultant research
about the topic, various options were explored for implementation, albeit with some
caution related to our legal authority.
The 2006 Phase II Report can be viewed at:
http://www.orangecountync.gov/departments/planning_and inspections/2006FinalTDR
ReportPhasell.pdf
The 2009 Phase III report is available for viewing at:
http://www.orangecountync.gov/departments/planning_and inspections/2009FinaITDR
Report.pdf.
The attachments to this information item explain the development of a program that was
retitled Strategic Growth/Rural Conservation to respect the uniqueness sought in
Orange County and within the limits of our legislative ability. Other states, in most
cases, have more legislative flexibility in this area of transferable development rights.
The goals of Strategic Growth/Rural Conservation taskforce were as follows:
1. Sustainably balance rural and urban areas;
2. Direct growth and development away from important natural and cultural
resources and towards areas more able to support municipal services and urban
densities;
3. Provide working farms with an alternative income potential; and
4. Link zoning densities to comprehensive plan goals and policies.
Taskforce members were chosen from the following general sectors, including, but not
limited to: local governments, advisory boards, banking and finance, private sector
community/neighborhood groups, utilities, developers, lawyers, agriculture, planning,
natural areas advocacy, real estate, and environmental protection.
The goals listed were pursued during a multi-year period. The outcomes of the taskforce
and consultant recommendations are noted in the attached power point.
Although the principles of Strategic Growth/Rural Conservation still remain as a logical
balance of interest, legislative authority began to diminish (varying opinions) in the early
2010's. The implementation was therefore muted with complementary yet separate
aspects: a very successful Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) by the public sector
with the extinguishment of development potential in agricultural/rural areas and the
promotion of increases in intensity (non-residential square footage) and density (units)
in appropriate urbanizing areas through pre-zoning.
What was not accomplished is the Strategic Growth/Rural Conservation self-sustaining
engine of the private sector paying and transferring development potential from
farmland and environmental areas to lands in urban areas to accomplish up-zoning with
associated conditions supporting other goals of the county. Admittedly, planning is a
balance of goals.
Attachment 1 231
For more information about Transfer of Development Rights and 0
the Orange County TDR Feasibility Study, please refer to the
following resources:
ORANGE COUNTY STAFF: CONSULTANT:
Glenn Bowles,AICP,Planner II J.Scott Lane,AICP
Orange County Planning Dept. The Louis Berger Group,Inc.
306F Revere Road 1513 Walnut Street,Suite 250
Hillsborough,NC 27278 Cary,North Carolina
(919)245-2575 919.467.3885x14
gbowles@co.orange.nc.us slane@louisberger.com
Internet Resources:
Melissa Bledsoe,Joe Covert,Matt
Freeman,William Jones,Autumn
Rierson,Introduction to Transferable
Development Rights, 1998.
(http://www.rivercenter.uga.edu/edu
cation/etowa h/documents/pdf/tdr.p
df)
Ricky Pruetz,Transfer of Development
Rights Update, 1999 American
Planning Association Conference
(http://www.asu.edu/caed/proceedi Transfer of
ngs99/PRUETZ/PRUETZ.HTM). Developm nl
Books: Rig s:
By for the most comprehensive research done on TDR programs is Feasibility Study
Ricky Pruetz's Saved By Development: Preserving Environmental
Areas, Farmland and Historic Landmarks With Transfer Of
Development Rights (1997). Although starting to become a bit Glenn Bowles,AICP,Planner II
dated, the 1999 update Mr. Pruetz provided at the APA Orange County Planning Department Orange County,Nort ar na
Conference (see Internet Resources,above) helps to freshen the 306F Revere Road
112 case studies that he presented in this book. The book is Hillsborough,NC 27278
available from the APA bookstore on-line at: TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FEASIBILITY STUDY
(http://www.planning.org/bookservice/).
232
2005 Project Schedule
ra sfer of pment ig J Feasibility Study: Overview
Orange County is conducting a feasibility study of creating a Transfer of finished, County Commissioners will decide whether to proceed with
Development Rights (TDR) program for its residents. A TDR allows developing a more detailed plan for creating a TDR program for
y landowners to sell the future rights of developing heir property while Orange County.
> w permitting others to build new development in areas that can best
on support growth.Those people wishing to sell the future rights to develop Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) programs work by creating a
O z° their property can continue to live, farnr, do any of the things that market for credits that are bought and sold by property owners and
ti they would otherwise do with their land. ew development is directed developers. The three main concepts that must be understood are
E away from farmland,water resource areas,important natural habitat sending areas,receiving areas,and TDR credits:
J o and other places that the County and its citizens would like to see
m
conserved. Landowners in the areas receiving additional development Sending Areas are those areas that the County would like to see
t can profit by the allowance of higher densities and hence more profit. protected and conserved in the future.This could be prime farmland,
o '
Important tax base revenues from the development accrue to open space, forests, water supply watersheds, wetlands, historic
H everyone in the County and allow the construction of more roads, places, or any other area that has important natural or man-made
Cie parks, schools, water/sewer features.TDR programs were initially started
N
C E facilities, and other public in New York to protect historic landmarks,
0 0
Q m infrastructure without raising but are now being used by over 100
a o O a taxes-and in places where the municipalities and counties across the
QQ new facilities are far less likely to country. Landowners in sending areas are
mc ° O o o cause the need for more Sen allowed to continue using their land for the
c > "' _o
aai a o 0 0 - infrastructure in the future. rea same uses as long as development density
C} N L) a Z ° is not increased; foregoing the ability to
y p p
-Water Supply Area t 'Q
0 m 0 o 0 Q 0 The County will appoint a $i s " increase density for development is
,., -Productive Farmland v
-0 a c c c E E citizens'Task Force to work with m : Existing compensated through the purchase of TDR
N g public services
IL O C,C y -Natural Resource
0- a a a o its consultants to explore various •Developed edits.
O O -Historic Resource
o(D m m U a TDR options and prepare a -Excess Capacity � A w
m m h h m h report on the feasibility of Receillh^eas arell lae.Mf IiU e
a O a
creating a TDR program in capacity to accommodate new
LEGEND FOR MEETINGS Orange County. The public will C00development. In order to buildjat higher
have two opportunities to learn densities than the current regulations allow,
=Task Force Mee ti about TDR and provide input a developer must purchase TDR credits
=Public Mee I�/qe sibility study. The obtained from a sending area landowner.
■ stu�should take 9-10 months This arrangement can allow transit and
to Lor lete.Once the stud is other non-automobile modes of travel to
P Y Landowners in Sending Areas receive financial compensation as they sell TDR
credits to developers,who in turn use the TDR credits to build at higher densities work better in these areas as well as foster
in Receiving Areas that can best accommodate new growth. revitalization.
Attachment 2 233
For more information about Transfer of Development Rights and
the Orange County TDR Feasibility Study, please refer to the
following resources:
ORANGE COUNTY STAFF: CONSULTANT:
Glenn Bowles,AICP,Planner II J.Scott Lane,AICP
Orange County Planning Dept. The Louis Berger Group,Inc.
306F Revere Road 1513 Walnut Street,Suite 250
Hillsborough,NC 27278 Cary,North Carolina
(919)245-2575 919.467.3885x14
gbowles @co.orange.nc.us slane @louisberger.com
What's On Our Website Now...
fi Technical Report #1 that includes
examples of other TDR i
p programs,
information about legal issues, O
economic issues, and related
matters
:a Maps
::Overview of TDR:How it Works
::Task Force meeting summaries
y www.co.orange.nc.us/planning
r
Other Internet Resources:
Melissa Bledsoe,Joe Covert,Matt = a
Freeman,William Jones,Autumn
Rierson,Introduction to Transferable Transfer of
Development Rights,1998.
(http://www.rivercenter.uga.edu/edu
cation/etowah/documents/pdf/tdr.p Develop _e�nt
df)
Ricky Pruetz,Transfer of Development R! h s:
Rights Update, 1999 American
Planning Association Conference Glenn Bowles,AICP,Planner 11 Feasibility Stu y
(http://www.asu.edu/caed/proceedi Orange County Planning Department
ngs99/PRUETZ/PRUETZ.HTM). 306F Revere Road
Hillsborough,NC 27278
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FEASIBILITY STUDY Orange County, N(!;
roli a
Newsletter#2(May,2006) !
234
SENDING AREA MODEL
n1for of �m�nt 1 FoC111bIII�I� S�UC�I�: U(JC�Qt.�
C
Orange County is conducting a feasibility study of creating Q,.Transfer of away from farmland,water resource areas,important natural habitats,
®3 d'< Development Rights (TDR) program for its residents. A TDR allows and other places that the County and its citizens would like to see
rl__1 4 landowners to sell the future rights of developing their pr6'pefty while conserved.Landowners in the areas receiving additional development
C of1 5 permitting others to build new development in areas that an best can profit by the allowance of higher densities and hence more profit.
1 Dt
i e 3 support growth.Those people wishing to sell theuture rights t&�dev lop °t Important tax base revenues from the development accrue to
E fM 7
8 t their property can continue to dive, farm, op!dd any of the things that everyone in the County and allow the construction of more roads,
s they would otherwise do with their land.New development is directed parks, schools, water/sewer facilities, and other public infrastructure
=10 without raising taxes-and in places where the
new facilities are far less likely to cause the need
low ECONOMIC MODELING SCENARIOS for more infrastructure in the future.
RECEIVING AREA MODEL Hypothetical '. Hypothetical
Receiving Areas. Sending Area The County has appointed a Citizens'Task Force
Scenario#1. to work with its consultants to explore various TDR
Nine separate ,; options and prepare a report on the feasibility of
potential This scenario
receiving areas simply suggests creating a TDR program in Orange County. The
were created that Sending Task Force has met five times, and has
using economic I Areas are those
0 I development places that are developed the following products:
V m and rural R X not included in
f ■ Reviewed a technical memorandum from
'n development , if i any Receiving
v J I I z"`r .,- nodes from the Area,resulting in the consulting team that has conducted
L-j 3' c;;•.., Comprehensive maximum preliminary ram research from
4 ;C y Plan. { _ coverage. _ P rY p eer program g
other states already using some form of TDR.
- 13
Z 7 Hypothetical Hypothetical ■ Discussed the characteristics of a good
�j?? ,a
w Sending Area Sending Area sending area, like the presence of
Scenario#2. Scenario#3 ,f
� t important natural resources, prime
p Smaller than the __ This Scenario farmlands,and public water supplies.
b area in Scenar o - e�elusively on
Lf� #t,this model ■ Discussed the characteristics of good
_ those parts of
focuses on those + receivin areas, such as having excess
parts of Orange Orange County g g
The two maps above indicate the relative that have the
p County facing roadway capacity, available water/sewer
\ merits of various lands within Orange County as development _ highest natural
suitable receiving/bottom)and sending areas pressures. resource value s. service,and other urban amenities,
^, (top).The stronger the color,the more criteria +. 5 is The Task ,Force also discussed ather
collaboratively designed by the Citizen's Task
vl that the land area met during the assessment.
Sending and receiving area criteria were __ _ ents of a hypothetical TDR program,
v _.
like legal issues, administration, and
Force and consultant and focused on " coordination with municipalities.
protecting natural resources(Sending Art_.) Taking the basic sending/receiving area models at left, the Task Force considered the development of various
IL and making development more cost-efficient sending(3)and receiving(1)scenarios to conduct an economic feasibility of a TDR program in Orange County.
(Receiving Areas).
0% ME NEF ME
I w - f ONE m
' r r
ON ON
.
Strategyg`rc -� - ; bean . � _ -
C,c�ns ati� ik btu .�.-No ' .
MIN m; NN NW-'N 0
JL
No 0% MEN 1
0 0 MOM -00
*mom AL-
ME
ME
ON
NO a r
MEME
r' Or - i� unty VMrrnin g fmr� mm - '
OR - wo ME I A
Transfer of Development
Rights (TDR)
Phased Study
I. Case Studies and Research
ll. Feasibility Study and Concept System
lll. Program Design and Implementation
Plan (not a zoning ordinance
amendment . . . yet.)
237
Transfer of Development Rights
(TDR) Goals
• Preserve the:
— Farm Economy
— Environmental Resources
— Cultural Resources
— Water Resources
— Rural Character
• Focused Public Services and Infrastructure
— Efficient
— Well-planned
— Location
Transfer of Development
Rights (TDR) Objective
Shift/Transfer Development Potential
from Preservation Areas (sending)
to Strategic Growth Areas (receiving)
What aspects of Development
Potential ?
• Dwelling Units
• Additional height or square footage
• Affordable housing
• Green Buildings
• Impervious Surface Allotments
• Nutrient Load Allowances
240
Zoning Authority
• Road Dedications — NCDOT
• Density Averaging — DWQ
• Development Agreements
• Impervious Area Sharing
• New Legislation
• Nutrient Sharing
241
Zoning Authority (cont. )
• Unified Development Ordinance — UDO
• Paired conservation easement with
upzoning
• Conditional Zoning Districts/Unique
Conditions
• Special Use or Overlay Districts
242
Zoning Authority (cont. )
• PDR (Purchase of Development Rights)
— Reduction in development
— No commensurate increase (tax base)
— Limited fiscal resources
• TDR (Transfer of Development Rights)
— Do not have Explicit Authority
— Nor Express Prohibition
243
How could we do TDR?
Create a Sending Area
• Reduces Development Potential
• Paper Zoning vs. Land Zoning
• Aspects
➢Residential Units
➢Impervious Area Allotments
➢Nutrient Trading Potential
• SGRC Recorded Certificate (Purchase)
➢Purchase by Developer
➢Purchase by Local Government?
244
How could we do TDR?
Acceptance of Rights at a Receiving Area
• Allows a Higher Development Intensity
— Beyond Base Zoning
• Residential or Economic Development
Uses
• Directed to the ` Right Place ' by Local
Government Action
245
TABLE
ESSENTIAL AND IMPORTANT A • PRESENT IN SUCCESSFUL TD PROGRAMS
(From Pruetz's and r # +9 JAPA Article, V117,3t r of 1 rl 7ts Vlork?�, Success Factors From Research
and Practice)
•, y- i.' ' h. (i '�''':14$"y- &'r'1'u4' S ..fir eRn"' Na'CYir. '` � y 1,207*.
Strong Promoiiin
......
,.: ,.»: Dense K 'w Certain
Simple
<.
Si a TDR
y, public
: f .t Incenves pc z
,.Y - € �k g � y x process
Bank
A
: _ to use P
faC1�1 `tton
mss g support
TDR {
_
-
Montgomery X X X X X X X
County, MD
New Jersey X X X X X X X X X
Pinelands, NJ
King County, X X X X X X X X X
WA
Calvert X X X X X X X X X
County, MD
Collier X X X X X X X X
County, FL
Boulder X X X X X X X X X
County, CO
Rather than adopt traditional TDR programs, several communities have adopted different
regulatory programs—ones that aim to accomplish similar goals as TDR programs, but that operate
much differently. Appendix 2 contains two examples from the state of Colorado; communities in
other states, including Florida, Massachusetts, and Washington, have also adopted these types of
alternative programs.
246
Ir
hill SGRC
ti
Program
4 Map
-A
Red — Strategic Growth
Ad
Green — Rural
4 Conservation Areas
247
King County, WA (TDR)
• Public Benefit Rating System
• Since 2000
— 141 ,400 acres of Rural and Resource lands have
been protected
— 2,284 potential dwellings can be shifted to
urban areas
— 50 developers
— 500 TDR' s bought and sold
— $6.75 million
. r. 0 ME I I : = r
MON ON 0 0 _f,
or
� r r.
L Y J ME
n ■
■ 7
ME 0 NO
J r • 1
0 NJ
0T7 r - • 7 � a�
■
01 MON
or ther Information contact Craig Benedict at
919 245 2585 or by email — cbenedict @co . orange . nc.
0
0
Clio
No r MIN
0 N
249
\n-
CASNAILL
Knop d
F L=A River ROB&Cr
I I-Ekgt Boundary
F, GIPIJWLM 14-DiqtBo�ndarV
C'.'tv E.dary
Ledge Cr Urban Aram
Little Rver
Beaverdar-Cr
N-Ew
Eno Rwr
Horse
f
C. S
b* Cr H-xeyr-uli Cr
U peer B al D-,
Figure 1. Uwatinn of the Falb Lake Wmtershed
Falls Lake Watershed — Source: Falls Lake Watershed Analysis Risk
Management Framework (WARMF) Development report, NCDWQ.
Estimated Nitrogen Loading in Stormwater 250
1
14
ZN 1
❑ 100% Forest
10 ❑ Orange County
❑ Durham County
0
❑ Typical Residential
■ Typical Commercial
4
2
0 r--F I
Current 40% Reduction
This graph shows estimated nitrogen loading calculated using current methodologies
pursuant to the Neu se River Basin stormwater rule. The graph shows current estimated
loading rates and the loading rate based on the proposed 40% reduction from the Falls
Lake rules. Each category is defined below.
251
Nitrogen Loading Nitrogen loading
(lbs/ac/yr) (lbs)
Orange County — Current 1 .46 1785905
Proposed Falls Lake Rules 2006 Baseline 2 .89 3545135
Difference or credit? 1 .43 1759229
Nitrogen Loading Nitrogen loading
(lbs/ac/yr)I (lbs)
Existing 5-acre commercial site 15.0 75
40% reduction 9.0 45
Difference 6.0 30
252
Hypothetical Application
of SGRC Concept
200-acre Sending Area parcel
determined to have a 100-dwelling unit
development potential . The owner,
through the TDR process , desires to
sell 90 of the possible 100 residential
units for transfer into a Receiving
Area.
Hypothetical A of 53
Concept
20-acre Receiving Area site, zoned R-1 , with a 16-unit
residential development potential. The owner/developer
purchases the conservation easement from the Sending Area
owner to increase the development density from 1 du/acre to 8
du/acre.
Bonus Incentives
25% TDR/Development Baseline Incentive * 90 x 0.25 = 22 units
15% Affordable Housing Bonus** 90x0.15 = 13 units
10% Smart Growth Principles Bonus** 90 x 0.10 = 9 units
Total Possible Incentive Bonuses 44 units
Existing development potential 16 units
Transferred development 90 units
Total development density 150 units
On 20 acres = 7.5 units/acre
* Determination Based on Land Holding Capacity
** Draft Bonus Incentive Percentages
The Potential for DR an
f.
TDRminspired Pro rams i .,
Orange
f
Craig
t�ti4
akn,ing Director
April 27, 2011
. .ti
' ,5 k••'R`'a ;* `Gam-.
255
Orange County's Past and
Current Research Efforts
1. Case studies and research
ll. Feasibility study and concept system
111• Program design and implementation
plan (not a zoning ordinance
amendment. . . yet.)
256
r
Possible
- Sendin g &
- s
Receiving
Areas
Red : Strategic
� yJa
Growth Green :
i Conservation
1
257
TOR- Inspired Programs
Rather than adopt traditional TOR programs
several communities have adopted different
regulatory programs ones that aim to accomplish
similar goals as TOR programs
but that operate much differently
-Pr uetz and Stanridge 2009
258
Potential for TOR-Ins ired Programs p
that Improve Water Quality
4-
c�awet KIQbY I
Knep Ot
FWt River Reeds Cr Legend
D 11-Yg IUr,uPbrl
i pm.Al L J 14-D .BAIM
Lie Cr UitAln Ai011
~ Little River � I
#, BeiverdamCr
s.rr.•. New Light Cr
Eno Rwr
XWAli:C I aWY,2 1' -1 1
Horse 0-
Creek
I
1 Lillie Lick Q
vs zs
! µ6Y Lids Cr HonwyouttCr
UpperBarton Cr
Figure 1.Location or flu:Falls Lak c Watersh ed
Source: Falls Lake Watershed Analysis Risk Management Framework Development report,
NCDWQ.
259
How Might Sending Areas Work
in Orange County?
• Credits that could be transferred
• Residential Units
• Impervious Area Allotments
• Nutrient Trading Potential
• Recorded certificate of credit transfer
• Purchase by Developer
• Purchase by Local Government?
260
How Might Receiving Areas Work?
• Accepta nce of credits in receiving areas
• Residential or commercial uses
• Directed to the "right place" by local
government action
261
Hypothetical Transaction
• 200-acre sending area parcel
• 100-dwelling unit development potential
• Owner desires to sell 90 of the 100
residential units for tra nsfer into a receiving
area
262
Hypothetical Transaction Cont .
• 20-acre receiving area site
• Zoned R- 1 , with a 16-unit residential
development potential
• Developer purchases the transfer
credits to increase the development
density from 1 du/acre to 8 du/acre
263
Hypothetical Transaction Cont.
Bonus Incentives
25% TOR/Development Baseline Incentive 15% 90 x 0.25 =22 units
Affordable Housing Bonus** 90 x 0.15 =13 units
10% Smart Growth Principles Bonus** 90X0.10 = 9 units
Total Possible Incentive Bonuses 44 units
Existing development potential 16 units
Transferred development 90 units
Total development density On 20 acres 150 units
* Determination Based on Land Holding Capacity 7.5 units/acre
** Draft Bonus Incentive Percentages
■ R • • Y
simEME
WE _ r
■ .
Triangle Luild ConservVn� •0 Ick
Gonservati�n u
" •
im ■ r •7 . 1L
October 23 , 266 � • I
_ M-
0 MEN
ME
• • - • 1 •
ME
M 0 0 MJL
1 � . .
_ • _
■ r
i
1 1 Mme■ 1 I :eMq••
r ;17 I 'm N I�k
ME
■
NEE t
ange Coun"Iy Strategic,Growth and Resovrce
ME
s ' • r, % Conservation SGRC Program ■
• Presenter: GlAn Bowles
ME
• _ ■ a • MEN
ON MM 9 AM&L.
265
SGRC Goals and Objectives
• Preserve the farm economy.
• Protect drinking water resources.
• Preserve environmental and cultural resources.
• Preserve the character of rural Orange County-
• Avoid excess public costs to provide water, sewer,
and education services.
• Objective — Direct growth and development
activities away from important natural and cultural
resources b Y shifting those activities to areas more
able to accommodate them.
266
TDR Program Development Timeline
• June 2004 — BOCC authorizes an RFQ to develop a TDR
program.
• September 2004 — Consultant interviews.
• November 2004 — The Louis Berger Group & UNC
Charlotte Urban Institute selected.
• June 2005 -- BOCC appoints TDR Task Force.
• June 2006 — BOCC receives Feasibility Study report and
affirms Task Force recommendation that the program
continue.
• December 2006 — Formal notice to proceed with Phase III
267
SGRC Study Three Phases
1 . Background Research and Data Gathering
2 . Feasibility Study and Concept Plan
3 . Program Design and Implementation Plan
First Two (2) Phases complete — June 2006
Third Phase term extended until
Comprehensive Plan is adopted.
268
Sending Areas — Strategic Rural Areas
• Properties with the following characteristics :
— Not already protected by easement,
— Not already developed to its max. density,
— More than fifty (50) acres in size,
— National Historic Register site,
— In a Critical Area Water Supply watershed,
— Within 150' of a lake, river or perennial stream,
— Adjacent to an already protected property, or
— Not in Strategic Growth Areas.
Growth Management System 269
Urban and Rural Designated Areas
Urban Designated-Property located within Transition Areas(10yr,20yr,and EDD)
in Water/Sewer Boundary Agreement Service Areas
Rural Designated-Property not located in Urban Designated areas
i9
Rural N
W f F
Rural
Urbanizing
rbanizing
? 70A
u r �
Legend
City Limits
ETJ
Urban Designated
\ Rural Buffer
15
- Rural Designated
501 Rural Designated
L 15
Orange County Planning and Inspections Department
GIS Map Prepared by Miriam Coleman August 02,2004
Projection_State Plane
501 Datum. North American 1983
Map Adopted by BOCC 1115103
270
Receiving Areas (Strategic Growth Areas)
• Economic Development Districts,
• Urban Transition Areas, and
• Rural Community Nodes, that are not:
— National Historic Register sites,
— Already protected as open space, or
— In a Critical Area Water Supply.
271
Important Design Program Issues
• Strictly Voluntary
• For now, only County-to-County Transfers,
• County will not Maintain a "Bank,"
• Call it Something Else (strategic Growth and
Resource Conservation — a.k.a. TDR),
• Use Existing Enabled Ordinances,
- Zoning, Conditional Zoning, Development
Agreements
272
Relationship to Other Programs
• Minor changes to Zoning Text,
• Small Area Plan within the Comprehensive Plan
• Conditional Use Zoning
• Lands Legacy Program
Differs in that the present program severs and
extinguishes development rights at the time of easement
recording and
— Provides anon-government revenue stream for rural
preservation.
Er
M NEE 0 OEM
0% 1 0
M
N ■ 1 '
■ 7
No ON ■ 0 0 ■
ME,
1
■
M ON 0
• , � �1 0 L
r 7
■ • . F ! . -
• 1 J �• ti
. . _ . - . ME
ME
ME ION
M - _ r . . ■
r
ME 1 � ■ ■
ME■ • ME —
MEN ■
■ ■ in, ■ •
MEN 1 0 ME
0 ME ■
• •■ • ■ ■T f■ � ■ ■
' • •
■
ONE
"For more inTormation cgntact Glenn Bowle,$ at
(1` 9) 245 2577 or gbowleskco.oran e.nc.us or
0 ME visit our website at co.oraUge.nc.us/planning/TDR
MEN
•
■Moor • ■ ■ ■
■ ■ ■MEN
• ME
�
0 NJ L
■ ' ■