Browse
Search
OCPB agenda 020117
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Planning Board
>
Agendas
>
2017
>
OCPB agenda 020117
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/14/2018 3:21:04 PM
Creation date
3/14/2018 3:18:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/1/2017
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Document Relationships
OCPB minutes 020117
(Message)
Path:
\Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active\Orange County Planning Board\Minutes\2017
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
73
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 />5 <br /> 217 <br />Tony Blake: And they apparently do make the distinction in here between manufacturing and assembling. 218 <br /> 219 <br />Lydia Wegman: So you’ve given us an example of the NAICS code here. 220 <br /> 221 <br />Michael Harvey: And we’re going to get into some of the specifics in a few minutes. 222 <br /> 223 <br />Lydia Wegman: Ok, that’s fine. Paul has a question I think. 224 <br /> 225 <br />Paul Guthrie: I just happened to read something on this particular page that you were talking about and that is streets, 226 <br />highways, and bridge construction, and then your explanation is obviously there. Many of the secondary roads in this State 227 <br />and in this County have never had formal right of way acquisition. In the 1930’s when the State took over the right of way 228 <br />system they just did it by Fiat and I know for a fact, at least 15 years ago when my parents were selling their property, there 229 <br />was no record of the State right of way across the property; how are you going to handle that in this rigid schedule of 230 <br />definitions. 231 <br /> 232 <br />Michael Harvey: I’m not. That’s a State problem. And I’m going to let it be a State problem. 233 <br /> 234 <br />Paul Guthrie: But it’s also a land owner’s problem. 235 <br /> 236 <br />Michael Harvey: Unfortunately, the County since we have no jurisdiction over the Department of Transportation there’s no 237 <br />reason, from my stand point at least, for us to get into the fight. We will regulate private road development through the 238 <br />subdivision process still and I would suggest… The subdivision road construction is going to be consistent with the ordinance, 239 <br />which means you need to show us your right of way. If you, as a developer on a private road, want to take it to the center line 240 <br />and deal with some of the ramifications of that then that’s your prerogative, we don’t recommend it. We have private roads out 241 <br />of there where the right of way is just that, it’s a right of way. And it’s been plated independently to A: Avoid impervious surface 242 <br />issues for the adjoining property owners and B: to get a clear title for the Home Owners Association about what they are 243 <br />maintaining. That is, unfortunately, the exception to the rule. In most modern subdivisions where a public road is proposed we 244 <br />look for dedication of the right of way. DOT, as you’ve pointed out, just has to establish a right of way, say it’s for X purpose 245 <br />and go through the condemnation process prescribed by State law, but doesn’t have to take end fee title to that land but it is a 246 <br />right of way that is defined for state purpose and state use. While clumsy, if that’s the way the State chooses to do business, 247 <br />God bless you. I don’t want the liability of having to get in that because we’ll lose every time and for the exact reasons that 248 <br />you’ve already brought up. That your parents went through some frustrations with their house. 249 <br /> 250 <br />Tony Blake: So an elevated water storage tank, in order to use that to charge or keep pressure in your sprinkler system in 251 <br />your building you would have to classify that as a utility? 252 <br /> 253 <br />Craig Benedict: Not if it’s an accessory use. 254 <br /> 255 <br />Tony Blake: Ok so that’s what Michael was trying to say? And I probably wasn’t hearing exactly that. 256 <br /> 257 <br />Lydia Wegman: So I’m wondering at this point, unless there are any other questions, it’d be helpful for Michael to go through 258 <br />some examples with us. 259 <br /> 260 <br />Michael Harvey continued reviewing abstract. 261 <br /> 262 <br />Craig Benedict: Let me just make one comment about the Economic Development District. There are two in Buckhorn, two in 263 <br />Eno, and five in Hillsborough. If by chance when we come up with the uses that are allowed in those nine districts in what we 264 <br />have in there now, if it happens that Economic Development Buckhorn one is the same as Economic Development Eno one is 265 <br />the same then we may suggest as a second step, “Let’s come up with ED-1 and get rid of the B and the E and all that stuff. 266 <br />But we’re going to have to go through this iteration because those zoning categories are on the ground and we’ll have to 267 <br />actually go through a zoning process to rename them the different areas. So just like you might remember some of those 268 <br />general or conventional districts we came up with. That new office-manufacturing district, that was a really good mix of uses. 269 <br />We can’t use that in our Economic Development zones right now. We’d love to use that in the other categories so we might 270 <br /> 12
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.