Browse
Search
Agenda - 04-03-2018 6-a - Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application – Triple Crown Farms
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2018
>
Agenda - 04-03-2018 Regular Meeting
>
Agenda - 04-03-2018 6-a - Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application – Triple Crown Farms
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/29/2018 3:52:28 PM
Creation date
3/29/2018 3:53:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
4/3/2018
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6-a
Document Relationships
Agenda - 04-03-2018 Regular Meeting
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2018\Agenda - 04-03-2018 Regular Meeting
Minutes 04-03-2018
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2018
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
93
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
PathokR.P�nUdt <br />Subject: RE: Triple Crown Farms, Orange County NC Final Plat Approval <br />I believe your summation is accurate. <br />| feel it necessary, however, tm summarize how vve got here from the information [ have available tome: <br />l. Pennoni submitted construction drawings to NC DOT for review to build the approved roadways, which per the County <br />approved subdivision application were to be constructed to public road standards. Said standards which are interpreted <br />and enforced bx the local NC DOT engineering division; <br />2. Pennoni also submitted required permit amdication(s) to: Orange County Erosion Control, US Army Corps of <br />Engineering, and Current Planning for authorization to commence earth disturbing activities. From my perspective all <br />approvals were given bvtheCuuntyvviththeunderstandinQnoadvvorkvvmu|dnmtconnnnenceunti|opprophateD0T <br />permits had been issued given the fact they were originally proposed, by the applicant as part of the subdivision <br />submittal, tobe built tn the applicable public road standard; <br />3. 'There are conflicting viewpoints from the various involved parties (Le. Pennoni and DOT staff) on what happened <br />next. All that is clear to me is that roadwork improvements were initiated without required DOT approval, without <br />required DOTpermits, and without required DOT inspections; <br />4. There are also, apparently based on what staff has heard from the various parties, conflicting view points of what should <br />and should not be allowed bymC DOT with respect to these roadways; <br />5. According to Pennoni and the applicant, addressing the issues created by the commencement of roadway construction <br />absent DOT approval and permitting would create an extreme impact to local waterways. Further i1 has been suggested <br />incorporating DOT required modifications to the roads at this point would negatively impact the previously issued Army <br />Corps. Permit; <br />MMEMONUM <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.