Browse
Search
Agenda - 08-04-1993 - III-H
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1993
>
Agenda - 08-04-1993
>
Agenda - 08-04-1993 - III-H
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/24/2017 2:36:59 PM
Creation date
1/24/2017 2:18:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
8/4/1993
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
III-H
Document Relationships
Minutes - 19930804
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\1990's\1993
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
7 <br /> zoning compliance permit does not establish a <br /> vested right to develop a project in the absence <br /> of an approved Site Specific Development Plan. <br /> In 1991 the Zoning Ordinance was amended to <br /> include provisions for vested rights . An <br /> applicant may request approval of a Site Specific <br /> Development Plan which would allow him or her to <br /> develop property according to the plan for a <br /> period of two to five years. Once a vested right <br /> is established, development of a project would <br /> not be affected by zoning changes concerning the <br /> type and intensity of the use. <br /> If a site plan is approved without being vested, <br /> the applicant is not entitled to develop the <br /> project should zoning regulations change <br /> subsequent to plan approval. Issuance of a <br /> zoning compliance permit does not extend a vested <br /> right. If a site plan approval is followed by a <br /> zoning permit and a building permit, then the <br /> project is vested, provided the building permit <br /> does not expire. <br /> The proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance <br /> would eliminate any question as to the viability <br /> of a project without approval of a Site Specific <br /> Development Plan. <br /> No one spoke for or against the proposal at the <br /> May 24 , 1993 public hearing. The item was <br /> referred to the Planning Board for a <br /> recommendation to be presented to the County <br /> Commissioners no sooner than August 4, 1993 . <br /> The Planning Staff recommends approval of the <br /> proposed text amendment. (A copy is an <br /> attachment to these minutes on pages . ) <br /> MOTION: Jobsis moved approval as recommended by the <br /> Planning Staff. Seconded by Eidenier. <br /> VOTE: Unanimous. <br /> (3 ) Impervious Surface Standards <br /> Presentation by Marvin Collins. <br /> The abstract information and proposed amendments <br /> are attachments to these minutes on pages . <br /> This amendment is to allow a landowner to satisfy <br /> the impervious surface standards by obtaining an <br /> easement on an adjoining piece of land and the <br /> recording of a conservation agreement. The <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.