Browse
Search
Agenda - 08-01-1989
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1980's
>
1989
>
Agenda - 08-01-1989
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2017 5:05:14 PM
Creation date
3/10/2017 4:35:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
8/1/1989
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.
/
495
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 /> E 18 1 41 <br /> since no sewage lines encroach on the right- <br /> of-way and minimum density requirements would <br /> be met when 4 of the 6 lots are developed. <br /> (5) A portion (approximately 30,000 square feet) <br /> of the open space is preserved adjacent to the <br /> New Hope Improvement Association for potential <br /> recreational/overflow parking use. <br /> (6) All lots have direct access to common open <br /> space. <br /> Each of the features listed above directly <br /> reflects the intent of the cluster provisions as <br /> described in the Subdivision Regulations. <br /> • Crudup noted changes on the Subdivision Approval <br /> Permit: <br /> D. 1 - should read - . . .width of 50' on each <br /> side. . . <br /> E. 2 - should read - . . .to be reserved. . . <br /> rather than dedicated. <br /> These items will be included in the <br /> restrictive covenants. <br /> The Planning Staff recommends approval of the <br /> 1 variation on the preliminary plan for Homewood <br /> Subdivision with a public road built to State <br /> standards and the conditions listed in the <br /> Subdivision Approval Permit (copy an attachment to <br /> these minutes on pages ) . This variation <br /> was agreed upon by the developer and Staff during <br /> consultation after Planning Board review of the <br /> concept plan. <br /> MOTION: Best moved approval as recommended by the Planning <br /> Staff. Seconded by Eddleman. <br /> Lewis asked why the developer wanted a private <br /> road, yet was willing to build it to State <br /> standards. Crudup noted that the entire right-of- <br /> way would not have to be cleared if the road <br /> remained private. Lewis continued that private <br /> roads such as this would help maintain rural . <br /> • character. <br /> VOTE: 8 in favor. <br /> 1 opposed (Lewis - preferred private road) . <br /> • 1 abstained (Yuhasz-due to professional conflict <br /> of interest) . <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.