Browse
Search
Agenda - 08-24-1987
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1980's
>
1987
>
Agenda - 08-24-1987
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/19/2016 8:31:32 AM
Creation date
10/4/2016 12:11:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
8/24/1987
Meeting Type
Public Hearing
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.
/
289
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
subdivision applications received by the County during the suspended <br /> 18 <br /> period. Section IV-B-8-C would be amended by adding an effective date of <br /> March 24, 1987. <br /> THERE WERE NO COMMENTS AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br /> Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by <br /> Commissioner Halkiotis to refer this item to the Planning Board with a <br /> recommendation to be presented to the Board of Commissioners on October 5, <br /> 1987. <br /> VOTE: UNANIMOUS. <br /> b. Section V - Im rovements <br /> Greg Szymik explained that Section V identifies the forms of <br /> security that may be used to guarantee construction of re <br /> improvements in approved subdivisions. The amendment would delete cashras <br /> an acceptable form of security and add escrow agreements as a new form of <br /> security for required improvements. <br /> THERE WERE NO COMMENTS AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br /> Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell <br /> Commissioner Halkiotis to refer this item to the Planning Board nwith by <br /> a <br /> recommendation to be presented to the Board of Commissioners on October 5, <br /> 1987. <br /> VOTE: UNANIMOUS. <br /> c• <br /> Section IV-B-c-10 Section IV-B-3-C-8 - Mar inal Access Streets Amend Add New <br /> Drivewa s <br /> Greg Szymik explained that Section IV-B-3-c-8 of the Subdivision <br /> Regulations is proposed to be amended by specifying forms of common o <br /> restricted access to lots in new subdivisions along major streets. <br /> Section IV-B-3-c-10 would place restrictions on the number and location of <br /> driveways that will be allowed in new subdivisions. The amendments a <br /> intended to provide more control on the number and location of drive are <br /> along major roadways, reduce conflicts between through traffic and turning <br /> vehicles, and maintain the safety and traffic carrying capacity of major <br /> turning <br /> ]or <br /> items relating <br /> Barry Jacobs referred and page stated of the agenda and the three <br /> intersection addresses a Chapel Hill requirement,tt the the access road <br /> with a lower classification addresses conditionthatissoften put on <br /> subdivision during the approval process and the common drive is more of a <br /> definition. The proposed amendment IV-B-3-c-8 Access Restrictions base <br /> on traffic counts, precludes most of the roads in Orange Count d <br /> noted that a lesser number should be considered. y• Jacobs <br /> Szymik explained that the reason for using 5, 000 vehicles per <br /> day is that on a standard 2-lane highway that 5, 000 vehicles per da <br /> represents the volume of traffic which would represent traffic level "Cy <br /> which is the level of service that can be carried before problems occur. <br /> Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell by <br /> Commissioner Halkiotis to refer this item seconded on <br /> Amendment, Section V Improvements 5b Subdivision Regulation <br /> Amendment, <br /> recommendation to be presented to the Board ofe Commissioners oondOct ber 5a <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.