MESSAGE FROM SUPERVISOR KAUFFMAN January 22, 2001

[Re: Infill Development]

We need more tools than the State gives us to protect the integrity of our neighborhoods. Fed up with waiting for the State to give us enabling legislation, two years ago, I invited Supervisor Mendelsohn to join me in a bi-partisan initiative to get greater control of infill development. (That is, new homes built in established neighborhoods. Basically, all the development that we see in Lee District meets that description.)

We asked the Board of Supervisors to examine how the County approaches new residential development. After extensive County staff and Planning Commission review, public meetings, and comments, on January 22 the Board of Supervisors accepted the Planning Commission Recommendations Report for the Infill and Residential Development Study. A number of reforms are proposed to the current development process to make it more responsive to citizen concerns and better handle such issues as adequate buffering, environmental preservation, proper drainage controls, traffic congestion, and cut-through traffic.

I would like to share the comments that I made to the Board of Supervisors on January 22.

"The case has been strongly made by many that 'infill' is smart growth. However, just as 'sprawl' has become a popular term for the spread of new development, we must avoid what I'll call 'jamming." A new term I'll coin to refer to the real impacts of un-checked infill development on existing neighborhoods, public facilities, and tree cover.

This whole review began in response to a joint board matter from February 22, 1999, almost two years ago. Our concern then, and our concern now, remains adequate buffering, tree preservation, proper drainage controls, and tools to manage serious transportation issues tied to congestion and cut-through traffic.

The action being advanced today has been through an exhaustive public review. There have been some 20 public meetings since staff first pulled together an approach to the challenges we raised.

The action plan, which comes to us after detailed review by the Planning Commission, has enough real reforms to make area developers nervous. And that's a good thing. The 12 or more proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments this action will advance finally begin the process of making some antiquated aspects of our development process more responsive to the real concerns of today's County residents.

The range of amendments includes:

Revising development density criteria-to better recognize its real impact on things like our schools, affordable housing, and open space;

• Revising how we approach Planned Development Housing 9PDH) zones to better preserve streams, flood plains, environmentally sensitive areas along with the provision of adequate parking and logical housing mixes;

• Increasing community notice and public outreach on development proposals;

• Developing performance criteria for mandating traffic calming and cut-through protection measures;

• Modifying development requirements to mandate pedestrian walkways as a part of developments close to parks and other public facilities;

• Advancing recommendations of the Tree Preservation Task Force; and

• Improving erosion and sediment control requirements and their enforcement.

Where the Planning Commission recommendation falls short is in:

• Giving guidance to how development proposals are to be handled if we are forced by the State to allow cluster developments by right; and

• Updating our close to quarter century old transitional screening requirements to reflect the need to buffer established residential communities form new residential communities.

Supervisor Mendelsohn and I have moved to add these key missing items to the recommended actions. Also, as we all knew from the onset of the review, we still must await State action before we can ever realize the ability to better time the pace of development and mitigate its impact on our public roads and schools.

Is this set of recommendations perfect? No. But it is an overdue start and staff must do everything it can to quickly bring the priority action items back to us. It's been two years well spent to get us to this point but I don't know how much longer the public is willing to wait."