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
4� <br /> BINGHAM/SOUTHERN CHEERS RURAL CHARACTER MEETING <br /> GROUP COMMENTS - FROM FACILITATOR RECORD <br /> (With staff/facilitator notes) <br /> January 27, 1994 <br /> * - Indicates more than one person agreed with the comment <br /> # - Indicates majority (or unanimous agreement) with the comment <br /> • Concerns regarding the right to sell "lots of record" to <br /> anyone. <br /> • The amount of percable land determines which option to choose. <br /> This is especially true in the RCSC option. <br /> • Question: Would these open space options affect the current <br /> requirement to pay money for recreation or donate land to <br /> avoid open space? (This is currently up to the Recreation <br /> Department) . <br /> *• A recommendation was made to combine some incentives of the <br /> RCSC with the planning staff alternatives - e.g. five acre lot <br /> incentives. <br /> #• Two acre lots look good as a minimum to protect rural <br /> character. If you do this for one section of the county, you <br /> should do it for the entire county. <br /> • Open space options do not seem in keeping with rural <br /> character. If you develop a "hamlet" it would seem almost as <br /> congested as if you were in a town. <br /> *• How do we guarantee that package sewers will work? e.g. the <br /> Piney Mountain problem that occurred before county guidelines <br /> (no environmental management) . <br /> #• Many medium and large size land owners would do better with <br /> large-lot options because so much of the land will not perk or <br /> is in a floodplain. <br /> *• But, cluster development may work if you run city water and <br /> sewer and do not depend on private co-op systems. For <br /> instance, the Hogan Farm area will get water and sewer. But, <br /> a little north of there is land that will not perk, leaving <br /> the landowner dead in the water. They have invested in the <br /> land and cannot do anything with it. Take interstate <br /> corridors - two or three miles on each side water and sewer <br /> along corridors. <br /> • Agriculture is already endangered by taxes and tobacco is <br /> being threatened. The land is here, if you cannot do anything <br /> with it without spending a great deal of money, then the <br /> county should do a detailed survey of all the land and make <br /> recommendations as the best economic use of each piece. Spend <br /> money to put in water and sewer so the land can be put to its <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.