Browse
Search
ORD-2000-007 Amendments to the Orange County Subdivision Regulations Section II Definitions
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Ordinances
>
Ordinance 2000-2009
>
2000
>
ORD-2000-007 Amendments to the Orange County Subdivision Regulations Section II Definitions
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/6/2015 12:06:27 PM
Creation date
12/10/2012 4:24:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/28/2000
Meeting Type
Public Hearing
Document Type
Ordinance
Agenda Item
2c
Document Relationships
Agenda - 02-28-2000 - C2
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2000's\2000\Agenda - 02-28-2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
sensitive areas. He asked why traffic impact studies were not proposed for some of the minor local roads. <br /> Planner Karen Lincoln said that some major subdivisions may access omajor local road and not <br /> a minor local road. <br /> Commissioner Jacobs would like the staff to look at doing traffic impact studies for minor local <br /> roads. Hm suggested taking out"n 'or"ond'uotaa 'ng°|ooa|"roado. <br /> Commissioner Gordon said that this amendment is a big improvement from the 1981 plan. <br /> Lynn HoItcamp said that she appreciates the comments made about the minor local roads <br /> needing tm have traffic impact statements. She questioned the statement about Cheeks Township being <br /> attracted by economic development. <br /> Craig Benedict said that instead of talking about a particular township we could talk about the <br /> EDOeingeneral. <br /> Lynn Hodoonmp,asked about miles and ifbim road miles or radial miles(straight line miles)and <br /> Craig Benedict said that it would be the centerline road miles. <br /> Bob Strayhorn said that on some roads there are no new subdivisions, however,the traffic has <br /> increased from areas further away. <br /> Craig Benedict said that the staff would be getting additional information from DOT and models <br /> that will hopefully indicate the background traffic that is not directly related to the subdivisions. <br /> Lynn HoItcamp asked about historic roads and if this would be a designation. <br /> Craig Benedict said that the historic roads would be part of an overlay of the comprehensive <br /> Commissioner Jacobs said that the state of North Carolina has a presumption that every <br /> unpaved, rural road in the state will be paved to a width that DOT will accept. There is also a branch of DOT <br /> that reviews road impacts on historic properties. It has,from time to time, ruled that the widening of the road <br /> to DOT standards would destroy a historic characteristic,and therefore it should not be widened. He said <br />� <br /> Craig Benedict said that the historic issue is descriptive part that would b handled b <br /> overlays, but he does not see any problem with adding the issue of historic right-of-ways and not having the <br /> need to widen to the DOT standard. <br /> 2.Section IV—Required Minimum Design Standards <br /> (a) Section IV-13-3 Roads <br /> Craig Benedict said that he had covered everything in his presentation. <br /> MOTION <br /> A motion was made by Commissioner Brown,seconded by Commissioner Gordon to refer the proposed <br /> amendments to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no <br /> sooner than May 3, 2000. <br /> VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> D. ADJOURNMENT <br /> With no further items to discuss,the meeting was adjourned. The next meeting will be held on <br /> February 29 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. <br /> Moses Carey, Jr., Chair <br /> Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.