Browse
Search
Agenda - 02-27-2006-c1
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2006
>
Agenda - 02-27-2006
>
Agenda - 02-27-2006-c1
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/23/2013 8:40:23 AM
Creation date
8/29/2008 9:08:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/27/2006
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
c1
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20060227
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
60
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
DRAFT <br />355 Eddie Kirk: It would still go to Public Hearing. If you find there are problems with the inventory, you <br />356 can note that in your recommendation. <br />357 <br />358 Jay Bryan: Conley, Redf'oot and Zack has stated that the impacts on Stoney Creek would be minimized <br />359 due to Best Management Practices. Does the County have a set of Best Management Practices? <br />360 <br />361 Craig Benedict: The sedimentation and erosion control division does have a variety of practices that are <br />362 recommended. These will be monitored during the construction phase. <br />363 <br />364 Craufurd Goodwin: The nearest historic resources are shown to be in Hillsborough or Chapel Hill.. <br />365 Blackwood Farm, which the State purchased, is quite near. Is that not a historic resource? <br />366 <br />367 Robert Davis: We can check on that before the Public Hearing. <br />368 <br />369 Renee Price - Saunders: In the future, can you show the resolution as "draft"? This will help avoid <br />370 confusion by the public. <br />371 <br />372 Craig Benedict: Yes. <br />3'73 <br />374 Jay Bryan: We, as a Board, need to vote on the findings first, then the recommendations. Is there a <br />375 motion? <br />3'16 <br />377 MOTION by Ted T'riebel to accept the findings on page 23, Exhibit A, f'or the Special Use Permit. <br />378 <br />379 Robert Davis: As it is written, there is a negative finding on the biological inventory. <br />380 <br />381 T'ed'Triebel: Please change that to "yes" on letter f on p. 11. <br />382 <br />383 Seconded by Renee Price - Saunders. <br />384 <br />385 Renee Price- Saunders: On p. 15, item 2, fences are shown on the plan but not discussed. <br />386 <br />387 Mike Hammersley: Those fences are temporary silt or clearing -limit fences.. They are not permanent. <br />388 <br />389 VOTE: Unanimous <br />390 <br />391 Jay Bryan: Regarding the staff recommendations for the Special Use Permit conditions. Is there a motion? <br />392 <br />393 Renee Price - Saunders: The spelling of `Story' is incorrect. <br />394 <br />395 MOTION by Ted Triebel to recommend to BOCC f'or approval subject to the questions discussed. <br />396 Seconded by Renee Price - Saunders. <br />397 VOTE: Unanimous <br />398 <br />399 AGENDA ITEM #8: CONSIDERATION OF THE ORCHARD SUBDIVISION CONCEPT PLAN <br />400 Presenter: Glenn Bowles, Planner II <br />401 <br />402 Jay Bryan: Thanks, Glenn, for summarizing the changes. <br />403 <br />404 Glenn Bowles: 'Phis item was tabled last month, so that the applicant could make some adjustments to the <br />405 plan. Now, the development is 61.5 acres. The Tanaka tract is not included in the plan, and the other <br />56 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.