Browse
Search
Agenda - 02-18-1986
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1980's
>
1986
>
Agenda - 02-18-1986
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/6/2016 11:26:00 AM
Creation date
9/20/2016 10:34:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/18/1986
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
274
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
08 <br /> oECEIVET <br /> COMPELLIN - -e <br /> S REASONS FOR DENIAL OF SCOTSWOOD: <br /> 1) WATER RESOURCES ARE STILL UNCONVINCING. Until a policy decision <br /> has been made,on the water resources of Orange Co. and the ties it has with <br /> new development, growth of this magnitude cannot be justified. The <br /> developer has not addressed this problem adequately or offered solutions. <br /> 2) RECREATION AREA IS SMALL (revised down to 5 acres active). A Planned <br /> Development should promote a sense of community, and a recreation area, <br /> both active and passive, plays an important role in bringing community <br /> members together. The developer apparently does not feel the need to <br /> highlight a sense of community togetherness. <br /> 3) ADVERSE TRAFFIC IMPACTS ARE TOO GREAT. <br /> a) all turning lanes should be built initially. <br /> b) curb and gutter should be provided on all streets. There is going to be <br /> on-street parking (parking overflow) which requires a curb. PLUS, curb and <br /> gutter should have been addressed in the statements made by the Erosion <br /> Control Officer. <br /> 4) THE PLANNED PD-GC4 IS REDUNDANT FOR THE AREA. A grocery store and <br /> drug store aren't necessary in an area that already has both within 2 miles <br /> of the proposed site. <br /> 5) THE SCHOOLS IN THE AREA ARE ALREADY OPERATING AT CAPACITY. <br /> There is no commitment from the developer to help alleviate the <br /> overcrowding that would occur. <br /> 6) THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIO IS TOO HIGH (9.1%). Cluster housing <br /> would seem appropriate in places to reduce the amount of roadway as well <br /> as fewer dwellings. The commercial area is obviously standard fare, with no <br /> attempt to provide lesser amounts of impervious surfaces or innovative <br /> landscaping. <br /> 7) PROBLEMS INVOLVING SOIL EROSION DURING THE PROJECTS BUILDING <br /> PHASES HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED ADEQUATELY. <br /> S) THE DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE WILLING TO BE VOLUNTARILY ANNEXED. <br /> A f L i <br /> I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.