Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
A ()We'. <br /> Page 13 <br /> VOTE: Unanimous - <br /> MOTION: Shankiin moved a positive finding on 7.4. 1-3. <br /> Waiters seconded the motion. - <br /> Piikey. questioned 7.4.3. - Smith noted the <br /> statements at public hearing referred to timing of <br /> Installation of stormwater devices, not the devices. <br /> themselves. <br /> Plikey asked the classification of Miller . Road-, <br /> Smith responded it 1s a collector road. <br /> AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION: Consideration of each item separately, <br /> VOTE (7.4.1 ) : 6 in favor <br /> 2 opposed - Pilkey, - Margison <br /> VOTE (7.4.2) : 3 In favor - Shankiin, Walters, Yuhasz <br /> 5 opposed <br /> Motion fails <br /> VOTE (7.4.3) : 7 in favor __ <br /> 1 opposed - Best <br /> MOTION: Shanklin moved a positive finding on 7. 14.3 a) 1--5. <br /> Yuhasz seconded the motion. <br /> VOTE (7. 14 3a) 1 ) : 7 in favor - <br /> 2 opposed - Kramer, Pilkey <br /> VOTE (7 . 14 3a) 2-5) : Unanimous <br /> MOTION: Shankiin moved a positive finding on 7. 14.3 a) 6-7 <br /> and b) 1-3. Yuhasz seconded the motion. <br /> VOTE: Unanimous <br /> MOTION: Shanklin moved a positive finding on 7. 14.3 b) 4-5. <br /> Yuhasz seconded the motion. <br /> Margison asked if sidewalks were required on the <br /> main street. Shanklin cited statements by Don Cox <br /> requesting no sidewalks for drainage purposes. <br /> VOTE: Unanimous <br /> MOTION: Shanklin moved a positive finding on 5. 1 . 1 . <br /> Walters seconded the motion. <br /> Margison indicated she was opposed as the project <br /> is uneconomical . <br /> Smith cautioned the Board that specific findings <br /> must be based on evidence presented and not on <br /> one's personal concerns. <br /> VOTE: Unanimous. <br />