Browse
Search
Agenda - 03-15-1994-IX-B
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1994
>
Agenda - 03-15-94 Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 03-15-1994-IX-B
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2015 4:10:58 PM
Creation date
2/9/2015 4:10:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
3/15/1994
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
IX-B
Document Relationships
Minutes - 19940315
(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.
/
22
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
Economic Development Districts Proposal - Gordon Page 4 <br /> s <br /> 2_ Zoning Ordinance <br /> a. Change the proposed text so that public utilities including water and <br /> sewer are required, as in our current regulations. <br /> b. For major developments, prezone the two districts and use type Design <br /> Manual for standards, but have the responsibility for approval lie with <br /> the commissioners. <br /> Comment: There is a major judgmental component in the fuzzy <br /> standards. For projects with a large impact, that judgment should be <br /> exercised by the commissioners. Minor developments could still be <br /> approved by staff. <br /> c. To implement this approval process for major developments that are <br /> proposed to be permitted as uses by right: <br /> i. Define a development as minor if <br /> - floor area is less than 20,000 square feet .. and <br /> - area of disturbed land is less than 40,000 square feet <br /> Otherwise it would be a major development. <br /> ii. Approve projects using a special use permit that would <br /> indicate that the approval would be given if design standards <br /> are met. <br /> (Note: Another possibility would be to require site <br /> plan approval by the Planning Board for major developments.) <br /> Detain of the changes will be given elsewhere. <br /> Other Issues <br /> A. Monitoring of the Economic Development Districts <br /> I am pleased that the most recent Planning Board recommendation (p.5 of <br /> March 1 packet) includes monitoring of the EDDs and that the monitoring <br /> will include a fiscal impact (cost-benefit) analysis as well as a check to see <br /> whether the EDDs meet certain goals of the Strategic Plan. If the BOCC <br /> approves major developments, this would give us an even better feeling <br /> for how well the EDD process is working and whether changes are <br /> necessary. I also hope that any unaddressed issues raised in Section V of <br /> my February 11 memorandum will receive further consideration <br /> B_ Overall Criteria for Projects in All Economic Development <br /> Districts. In Section IV of my February 1 1 memorandum, I suggested <br /> that certain overall criteria be used for developments in the EDDs. We <br /> should do a more complete evaluation of this approach. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.