Tourism corridor overlay takes shape

The third time might be the charm for a tourism corridor overlay district because two citizens have collaborated to reach a common ground, and develop a plan that could appeal to the conservation community as well as the building and development sector.
There have been a number of attempts to implement the overlay district, beginning in 2004. But the proposed ordinance, which would establish specific design guidelines for structures on some of the county’s major arteries, failed to make into the county’s building code. In 2004, and later in 2006, the proposed tourism corridor overlay district failed to gain the support of the Orange County Board of Supervisors.
Now, local businessman Ken Dotson and the Piedmont Environmental Council’s Dan Holmes worked in partnership to develop suggestions for an ordinance that might just be satisfactory to the business and conservation communities. Dotson and Holmes presented their report at a Sept. 9 Orange County Board of Supervisors meeting.
The two men, in response to a request from District 2 Supervisor Zack Burkett, toured communities in which similar ordinances had been implemented-as well as towns and counties that perhaps suffered from unchecked development. They reviewed similar ordinances from other localities and spent long hours discussing the potential virtues and drawbacks of a tourism corridor overlay district.
Dotson and Holmes said that in order to form a more perfect ordinance, the business community would need to feel as though there was a measure of certainty within the process-that establishing a business within the district would not involve unforeseeable delays and unreasonable costs. The ordinance should not create so great an expense in order to comply, that small business owners were priced out of the market. Lastly, there was concern about existing businesses along the corridor. Dotson and Holmes suggested businesses already located in the district be offered leniency when determining the point of compliance. Alternately, those pre-established businesses could be grandfathered from the ordinance.
What the conservation community hoped to see, Dotson and Holmes’ report said, was attractive development which would “mimic or capture the nature of the area in which it is proposed.“ And, the report said, development in the overlay district would protect open space and scenic beauty.
In previous attempts to create a tourism corridor overlay district, key sticking points for the business sector had been the structure and authority of a design review committee and potential complexity and strict conditions created by the ordinance, Holmes explained.
“The major issue is the design review committee. I don’t think the majority of this heartburn arose from the ordinance itself when it was proposed four years ago. The primary concern was always the implementation of, and the willingness of the design review committee to be flexible,“ Holmes explained to supervisors. “Open discussion and flexibility, he added, would be necessary for the business and development community to be comfortable with the idea of an overlay.“
Dotson and Holmes recommended a five-member design review committee, comprised of planning commission members representing each of the county’s districts. Further, a non-voting professional architect or landscape architect could provide assistance to review committee members.
Homes said he and Dotson were not in total agreement about precisely which of Orange County’s roads would be included in the ordinance. The two discussed implementation of the district on Routes 3, 522, 20, 231, 33, and 15. Ultimately, Routes 3 and 15 were chosen to be included in a pilot project.
Aspects which should be addressed in the ordinance’s design guidelines, according to Dotson and Holmes’ recommendations are architecture, lighting, parking and landscaping. And, the two agreed, businesses which intend to locate within the district should be offered incentives such as a credit toward landscaping when existing vegetation on a site can be preserved. Applicants could be considered for reduced fees for utilizing low impact design, or for locating development within a smaller area, creating density rather than sprawl.
With their homework finished and suggestions for a draft ordinance prepared, Holmes and Dotson said they were ready to discuss, in detail, their suggestions for the ordinance.
“This is not a catch-all, win-all,“ Dotson said, “but we’re trying to do the best we can.“
But the next step in creating a draft ordinance, Holmes said, would be to meet with county officials to further refine the suggestions. 
Last week’s presentation was for informational purposes only; the board took no action.