Browse
Search
Agenda - 02-22-1999 - 1a
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1999
>
Agenda - 02-22-1999
>
Agenda - 02-22-1999 - 1a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/7/2015 11:24:54 AM
Creation date
7/13/2009 3:58:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/22/1999
Meeting Type
Public Hearing
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
1a
Document Relationships
Minutes - 19990222
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\1990's\1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
190
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Jul 16 98 05:O6p PCDInc <br />(919)981 -65 79 02ti f -2 <br />Planned Community Development, -Inc. <br />6gaa Slade HMI had <br />Raleigh, N(z7615 <br />July 16, 1998 <br />Emily Cameron <br />Orange County Planning Department <br />306F Revere Road <br />Hillsborough, NC 27278 <br />Dear Emily: <br />In regards to the Lawrence Park subdivision application, there are two* items in your <br />follow -up comments that I wish to address in this letter. <br />The first is in reference to the signage for the project. It is my understanding, based on <br />discussion with you, that the 16 square foot limit is measured in the sign face proper, <br />and does not include any appurtenant structures such as walls or columns, pedestals or <br />other types of features that may be used in an entrance landscaping statement. If I am <br />correct in that understanding, then this sign requirement is satisfactory with us, and we <br />will attempt to provide a diagram of such signage in the near future.. <br />The second item is of considerably greater consequence. It was our original under- <br />standing that we were being requested to connect our internal street system to existing <br />Lori Drive in keeping with the county's desire to promote interconnectivity between <br />various neighborhoods. It is now my understanding that not only are we being required <br />to connect to Lori Drive, but we are being required to improve Lori Drive all the way to <br />its intersection with Lannie Drive. We have serious concern about this requirement for a <br />number of reasons. <br />1. We do not believe it is appropriate to require improvements off -site from the <br />Lawrence Park property which have no direct benefit to the community we are <br />developing. Traffic studies indicate that no more than 50/6 of our total traffic <br />would use Lori Drive for access. While we do not disagree with and, in fact, <br />support the general desire of the county to have interconnective streets <br />among neighborhoods, we believe that our obligation ends at our property <br />line. This is especially true where the connecting street is of such minor value <br />from a traffic distribution standpoint. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.