Browse
Search
Agenda - 01-03-1989
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1980's
>
1989
>
Agenda - 01-03-1989
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2017 9:22:30 AM
Creation date
3/10/2017 8:51:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
1/3/1989
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.
/
348
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
• <br /> , • - . <br /> • • , CHESHIRE 6 PARKER • <br /> ATTORNEYS AT LAsx, • <br /> 100 14.*CHI'RTON STRE LT <br /> • <br /> F.0.BoX Ig:No <br /> D_MICKAEL PARKER HILLSBOROUGH.N.C.27278 H. H. "--..N.AHAv. .:- <br /> R.ICK st:TLER. Lt-t 1. S CHESH;rm. r:RE:,. <br /> ARL CODE OM 73:2 F141 <br /> • <br /> October 18, 1988 <br /> Mr. Geoffrey E. Gledhill <br /> Coleman, Bernholz, Dickerson, <br /> Bernholz, Gledhill & Hargrave • <br /> PO Drawer 1529 . <br /> 129 E. Tryon Street <br /> Hillsborough, NC 27278 <br /> Dear Geoff: <br /> Re: Piedmont EMC Zoning Ordinance Amendment <br /> I want to again thank you for the efforts of not only <br /> yourself, but John Link, Marvin Collins and Mary Scearbo for the <br /> proposed ordinance. amendment on behalf of Piedmont Electric. We <br /> have reviewed this at some length and feel that it is very <br /> reasonable and something that will allow for our plans not only <br /> in the immediate future, but for several years down the road. I <br /> did call Mary Scearbo on, Monday, October 17th, with one suggested <br /> change, that being in Section 6.16.18 (h) , that the geometric area <br /> be expanded to 12,000 square. feet. The existing substations we <br /> have do not exceed 8,000 square feet, however, we would like to <br /> have some flexibility since down the road we can foresee the <br /> necessity for going up to approximately i acre. I hope this will <br /> not be a problem. . <br /> I• . <br /> would also like to clarify Section_6..16.18 (d) ; I believe-- -- <br /> I understand the purpose of the minimum width of 20 feet for an <br /> access easement to provide for what amounts to an exception to <br /> the subdivision ordinance. it might be prudent to change the <br /> wording of that section to read as follows: • <br /> . . _ <br /> -- Access easements extending from an approved private- <br /> , • <br /> • road or 'public road to the facility shall be a minimum <br /> . . . width of twenty (20) feet, rather than the required <br /> •-• minimum width of fifty (50) feet under the Oranae <br /> • <br /> . . <br /> County Subdivision Regulations " -- • • . • <br /> . . „ <br /> . _ - - • . . _ . <br /> have added the words public road to include that accession . <br /> %, _.where-the access easement might extend directly from the public <br /> highways.„...: .I .have added the phrase at the end to clarify what I <br /> -• believe was the intent of the Planning Department. I might also <br /> ask you if, in fact, that is their intent, whether or not we need <br /> to make some amendment to the subdivision regulations to provide <br /> for that in those townships that are not zoned. From a practical <br /> • <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.