Browse
Search
Agenda - 09-03-1985
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1980's
>
1985
>
Agenda - 09-03-1985
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/6/2016 8:02:55 AM
Creation date
9/12/2016 12:24:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
9/3/1985
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
198
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
089 <br /> DRAFT 8-19-85 PS MITNUTES 4 <br /> ShenkLin stated that he felt approval of this <br /> subdivision would be creating a place for. <br /> accidents to take place . He feLt it was only a <br /> matter of time until a serious accident would <br /> take place . He wished to impress on the Board <br /> of Commissioners that this should not be <br /> approved without the road (Blue Jasper Lane) <br /> being moved to a safer position . He expressed <br /> concern with school bus -traffic .. He felt that <br /> the Letter from NCDOT stating sight distance as <br /> being Less than desirable was sufficient reason <br /> to deny approval . . <br /> Pearson asked if the Board was approving the <br /> plat or the merits of the subdivision . Collins <br /> responded the plat . Pearson continued noting <br /> that since the Board of Commissioners had <br /> approved the Preliminary - Plan the Planning <br /> Board must approve the final plat unless there <br /> was Something wrong with the plat . <br /> ShankLin stated that he felt if the Planning <br /> Board denied approval again , the Commissioners <br /> would take another Look and reconsider their <br /> decision . He noted he was for good <br /> development , but he did not see this -plan as <br /> good development . <br /> Greg Shepherd, representing the applicant , <br /> revievied the map and noted again that the <br /> applicant felt this was a good plan and that it <br /> was not possible or feasible to construct a new <br /> cul—de—sac or move the entranceway . Shepherd <br /> also addressed water quality . He noted that <br /> moving the road would cause doubLe—frontage <br /> Lots and wou Ld result in a road which crosses <br /> or pare LLe ts the creek <br /> Via Lters inquired who owns Lot 6A and the <br /> response was that Lot SA is an existing Lot . <br /> VOTE: 2 in favor. (Kizer and Pearson) <br /> 5 oppo'sod . (Shank Lin , Kramer, Best , PiLkay, <br /> Kramer , 'Ila L t e rs) . <br /> 1 abstention . (Yuhasz) . <br /> Shank Lin noted that he felt this should go to <br /> the Corsimissinner again with the suggestion that <br /> -the developer admit he made an error in <br /> judgment and come back with a plan which can <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.