Browse
Search
Agenda - 03-01-1994 - VII-A
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1994
>
Agenda - 03-01-94 Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 03-01-1994 - VII-A
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2015 11:56:54 AM
Creation date
2/9/2015 10:53:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
3/1/1994
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
VII-A
Document Relationships
Minutes - 19940301
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\1990's\1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
72
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
45 <br /> rcin:s tc Pcnaer - Gcrdcn <br /> Population Density <br /> Cam Ind - 'Located in areas with moderate to high population densities.' <br /> EC Dev - 'Located in areas with, or olannea ter moderate to high <br /> Population densities. <br /> C. Comments/Questions/Recommendeti off s <br /> I. Why wars these changes made in the existing land use pion? <br /> It would have been helpful if such changes had been highlighted. <br /> 2. Note that the 140/01d Q8 proposed nods is in the Hfllaborough <br /> Cooperative Planning tone. it is also close to the Rural Huffer, a part of <br /> the Joint Planning Area with Chapel Hill and Carrboro. <br /> 3. It appears that no useful purposs is served by edding a new land <br /> use plan category. We should continue to use the existing land use plan <br /> category, 'commercial-industrial transition activity node.' <br /> 4. The 140/01d 56 node has more unaddressed issues then the other <br /> two nodes. <br /> 11. Design Manuel <br /> It appears that the Design Manual has sections where fuzzy standards are <br /> utilized. For example, consider sections 3.1 'Architectual Design' and 3.2 <br /> 'Landscape Design" (found in the version of the manual i have, which may <br /> or may not be the latest vision): <br /> A. 'Fuzzy• standards <br /> It is hero to know whet 11 aacpeeted of a developer, given the way the <br /> manual is written; For example, in section 3.1 concerning 'compatibility <br /> with neighbors' we encounter this sentence: <br /> 'Unless this we overriding concsms or poorly deftned aspects, <br /> a maw building must reflect the architectural character of <br /> surrounding buildings in the following weys:o to list follows) <br /> An U401141e in section 3.2 concerning "pr9servetion of existing features• is <br /> found in the following sentence: <br /> i <br /> 'Wheraver possible, access to views are to be preserved for <br /> adjacent property owners and passing motorists.' <br /> Also In section 3.2 is this guideline for landscaping pw*Ing areas: <br /> "Whore practical, lowering the grade of the parking lot from <br /> existing street elevations may aid In obscuring views of <br /> automobiles while przmoting views of architectural elements <br /> Of tPo structures beyond.' <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.