Browse
Search
Agenda - 08-18-2009 - 5a
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2009
>
Agenda - 08-18-2009
>
Agenda - 08-18-2009 - 5a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/14/2009 10:22:40 AM
Creation date
8/14/2009 10:22:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
8/18/2009
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
5a
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20090818
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
Approved 7/ 1 /09 <br />177 Judith Wegner: When it says a previously imposed condition on the project including phase requirements would it be worth <br />178 putting it in? <br />179 <br />180 Michael Harvey: My only concern is that it may not be referred to as phases so I kept it ambiguous because you may have a <br />181 condition that specifically states by x date you will do this. <br />182 <br />183 Brian Crawford: Master plan, the developer comes to you and says I need a 24 month extension to do it and 24 months comes <br />184 and x isn't done. Only one extension is granted so he is SOL. <br />185 <br />186 Michael Harvey: Yes. If it is not your fault the permit has not been issued, .then the County would need to take that under <br />187 consideration. <br />188 <br />189 Lany Wright: If this did happen, you said the County would work a variance sort of situation that would permit this for this <br />190 developer to; you understand what I am saying? <br />191 <br />192 Brian Crawford: Suppose it was not his fault but on the record, we only grant a 24 months extension but we allowed him to go 30 <br />193 months and we have not done anything official to say this is why we have allowed him to do it. I can see how that would corrupt <br />194 the process. <br />195 <br />196 Michael Harvey: I would like to think that if we are told to take a 24 month review time to review and issue the permit that staff <br />197 would recommend 27 or so months to allow the permit to actually be issued. In terms of a variance, I would say no because a <br />198 variance has a very specific meaning. Maybe a waiver. <br />199 <br />200 Larry Wright: There is a mechanism for a waiver? <br />201 <br />202 Michael Harvey: An exemption, potentially. <br />203 <br />204 Craig Benedict: It states one extension, if someone says 24 months and they screw up, I don't see that we can change. There <br />205 is no such thing as a variance or waiver but it makes sense what you are saying. We don't have a mechanism to be reasonable. <br />206 <br />207 Brian Crawford: That is where the problem would come in. <br />208 <br />209 Larry Wright: These people deal with them all the time. On the other hand, it could be like a school teacher who says you have <br />210 to draw the line somewhere. <br />211 <br />212 MorioN made by Mary Bobbitt-Cooke to approve the recommendation for the Zoning Ordinance Text amendment to Section <br />213 7.2.8 time limit on start of construction of planned development as presented by the Planning Board staff.. Seconded by Larry <br />214 Wright. <br />215 Vore: Unanimous <br />216 <br />217 Brian Crawford: We understand your mother is seriously ill and we are sorry to hear that. We appreciate your dedication for <br />218 coming here and doing this and having that weight on you. I hope she gets better. <br />219 <br />220 Michael Harvey: Thank you. <br />~D <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.