Browse
Search
Agenda - 03-24-1987
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1980's
>
1987
>
Agenda - 03-24-1987
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2016 3:54:21 PM
Creation date
9/27/2016 4:41:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
3/24/1987
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.
/
312
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
r <br /> q ` � <br /> 1 ti <br /> • <br /> 12 <br /> applicant fails to meet traffic generation criteria <br /> for the LC-1 Local Commercial zoning district. <br /> An optional recommendation for approval was presented <br /> at the public hearing. If approved, the Planning <br /> Department would enforce the provision of limiting the <br /> building use and/or size so as not to exceed 200 <br /> vehicular trips per day from the site. <br /> Jacobs asked if the applicant cound resubmit his <br /> application as a request for a special use permit. <br /> Collins responded it would be the same situation for a <br /> Special Use Permit and Rezoning. The same acreage and <br /> traffic limitations would apply for LC-1 and NC-2. <br /> The only difference would be that with additional <br /> traffic information, conditions of approval could be <br /> attached; including one which addressed concerns for <br /> turn lanes. <br /> Discussion followed on the method of projecting <br /> traffic generation and limiting building size. <br /> Collins noted that if the Board approved a rezoning to <br /> LC-1, the Planning Staff would enforce the provision <br /> for limiting the building size. <br /> MOTION: Pilkey moved approval of rezoning to LC-1. Seconded <br /> by Taylor. <br /> VOTE: 5 in favor. <br /> 4 opposed (Jacobs, Best, Hubbard, Margison - all <br /> indicated they would prefer the applicant to resubmit <br /> an application for a Planned Development which would <br /> require a Special Use Permit. This would allow for <br /> the concern with roads to be addressed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.