Browse
Search
Agenda - 03-01-1994-X-C
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1994
>
Agenda - 03-01-94 Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 03-01-1994-X-C
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2015 11:18:03 AM
Creation date
2/9/2015 11:17:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
3/1/1994
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
X-C
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.
/
48
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
39 <br /> Group B <br /> • A maximum of fifty percent of a nitrification field can be set <br /> aside as open space, unless the design guidelines change this. <br /> Fifty percent of a golf course can count as open space. The <br /> justification for this is that if a person can farm an open <br /> space for income than a golf course should also count towards <br /> open space. <br /> • A counter-point was raised regarding the preservation of <br /> agriculture and separating farming value from development <br /> value. <br /> • Transfer of development rights is being considered by a <br /> separate group from the RCSC. <br /> • Apparent inconsistencies in the treatment of water and sewer - <br /> "yellow areas" are candidates for RCSC, but it seems that <br /> these plans allow for the extension of water and sewer into <br /> areas large enough. The staff recently issued a report <br /> equating water and sewer to urban development. <br /> *• A clustering plan that calls for water and sewer probably will <br /> not happen because you need the town and the County to make it <br /> happen. <br /> • Community sewer systems provide a cap on the size of <br /> development. <br /> *• Current cluster development would possibly allow for <br /> urban/town size growth. <br /> • We do need places near towns for density because if we don't, <br /> development will be scattered all over - e.g. the Hogan Farm <br /> development is probably good for everyone. <br /> *• Five acre lots are necessary to preserve rural character. It <br /> should be made easier for a rural person to do small <br /> developments. <br /> #• No one likes the one acre lots. All support the five 1- <br /> acre lot RCSC - "lots on record" - describing "family" option. <br /> *• The staff's alternative yield plan is a positive option. <br /> We do not want to exceed the county's carrying capacity.. <br /> • Question: Can five 1-acre "lot of record" be done again later? <br /> Answer: No. Question: Is there a limit to this? Answer: Yes, <br /> the total limit is a minimum of five acres per lot of record <br /> or five 2-acres per lot of record. <br /> • For a yield plan, how would do you define "severe restraints?" <br /> Is just a characterization term for low level development <br /> allowed? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.