Browse
Search
Agenda - 05-06-1991
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1991
>
Agenda - 05-06-1991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/8/2017 10:50:37 AM
Creation date
11/8/2017 10:39:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/6/1991
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.
/
478
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
M M N ff 7 63 <br />Committee's strategies be approved as a <br />complete package. <br />Cantrell stated that she was unwilling to approve <br />only a portion of the recommendations by the <br />committee. Boland agreed that the total package <br />should be recommended rather than just a portion. <br />Waddell stated that he felt that the Rural <br />Character Study Committee had made promises to <br />the citizens that if substantial changes were <br />made then it would be returned to the public <br />again. He indicated that approving only two of <br />the options meant very substantial changes and it <br />would be extremely unfair to the citizens of <br />Orange County to make such a recommendation. <br />Cantrell emphasized again her unwillingness to <br />recommend approval as recommended by Chapel Hill <br />Town Council. She asked if it is necessary to <br />have their approval. Burklin responded yes since <br />it is in the Rural Buffer area of the Joint <br />Planning Area. It requires approval of Chapel <br />Hill, Carrboro and Orange County. <br />Burklin asked Stancil about other possibilities. <br />Stancil reiterated the Board's options as noted <br />by Eidenier, adding a third option. (1) adopt <br />the portion that is being presented now; <br />(2) adopt this with an accompanying resolution <br />indicating the desire to see the remaining <br />options followed through on; and (3) fail to <br />adopt and encouraging reconsideration of the <br />entire package. Stancil noted that he felt the <br />package was developed so integrated and inter- <br />related that-it is difficult to get the same <br />effect on the rural character by just adopting <br />portions of the package. There would not be the <br />same sort of natural resource protection <br />strategies. Also, the options adopted by Chapel <br />Hill would provide 40% acres of open space which <br />could be use as agricultural land and, those used <br />to protect natural resources and visual <br />character. <br />Cantrell asked if it is known why Chapel Hill was <br />opposed to the remainder of the strategies. <br />Stancil stated that he felt providing public <br />sewer in the Rural Buffer was the real concern. <br />They were afraid that some day it would be opened <br />up to urban development if sewer lines or <br />alternative systems were to be available. He <br />continued that he felt that the main concern was <br />with monitoring and maintenance of the systems. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.