|
As Sussex County Council continues to approve developments, Councilman Vance Phillips says the county should be receiving revenue from those projects to help preserve open space.
Phillips introduced an ordinance earlier this year which has been nicknamed the “density for dollars” ordinance, because it will charge developers between $15,000 and $20,000 per unit over the density allowed by the county land-use plan.
The ordinance also increases the buffer required in higher-density projects, from 30 feet to 75 feet, while mandating developers have 40 percent open space.
The goal of the ordinance is to increase revenue to the county, which will help pay to preserve open space.
While Phillips, Council President Dale Dukes and Councilman Finley Jones consider the ordinance a step forward, Councilman George Cole and Councilman Lynn Rogers had some doubts.
“I feel this is a good document, but it needs some tweaking,” said Rogers during the Tuesday, July 31 council meeting. “I’d like to wait a week or so.”
Rogers did not get his wish and the ordinance was passed 3 to 1, with Cole opposing it and Rogers not voting.
“Higher density is appropriate in some areas, but I’d like to not see it in the environmentally sensitive district,” said Rogers. “I’d also like to see a better definition of open space.”
A motion was passed to amend part of the ordinance to keep the definition of open space consistent with the definition to be passed as part of the county land-use plan. Consultants from Urban Research and Development Corporation are currently working on an update of the land-use plan. The consultants met with the council and county planners during the night of Tuesday, July 31, in Georgetown.
“We are currently approving this type of development in the environmentally sensitive district,” said Phillips. “This will make it harder for developers because they will have to pay a lot of money. They will have to step up with hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars.”
Those dollars will be put to use through the Sussex County Land Trust, a nonprofit organization dedicated to land preservation. The land trust works with the county and recommends land purchases.
Cole said his concern is that the land purchased for preservation will be nowhere near the land being developed.
“The Sussex County Land Trust is looking for a revenue source because the developers haven’t ponied up like they said they would,” said Cole. “The land trust started out with good intentions, but when you look at who’s sitting on the board … Phillips, [Rogers], Hudson, Schell, a farmer, a banker and poor Dennis Forney whom I hope has been duped.”
Cole said he could see the benefits of the ordinance, but that it is still too vague and will end up not working, like many other county ordinances.
“I have to defend the land trust,” said Rogers. “They manage themselves. The idea of councilmen sitting on the land trust is that money from this body goes to that body. I’ve noticed at the meetings that Forney runs a tight ship.”
Phillips recommended an amendment to the ordinance that would limit where the purchased land for preservation could be located. The amendment, which was passed, requires that the preserved land be in the same watershed as the development that paid for it.
“The rural area is all single-family homes and then we come in with this,” said Cole, about the fact that the ordinance could create townhouses and condominiums in formerly agricultural areas. “We can do all this through impact fees.”
Phillips said the ordinance could generate more revenue than impact fees. He said the county needs to stop giving density away for free. A recently approved project in the environmentally sensitive district could have raised about $300,000 for the county to preserve land, but instead it was passed without revenue and without the open space that would have been required through this ordinance.
“The Malone project was in the environmentally sensitive district and the developers only provided 13 percent open space,” said Phillips. “If it had come in under this ordinance it would have been required to have 40 percent open space…and the county would have received revenue. Mr. Cole voted to approve five of the last seven applications in the environmentally sensitive district. This ordinance will create new restrictions and a new revenue stream.”
Contact Rachel Swick at: rswick@capegazette.com
|
