Browse
Search
Draft report - Vision Committee 1995
OrangeCountyNC
>
BOCC Archives
>
Advisory Boards and Work Groups - Inactive
>
Stoney Creek Work Group
>
Draft report - Vision Committee 1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/1/2018 11:46:03 AM
Creation date
8/1/2018 11:35:54 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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
Planning Board, and a final decision made by the County <br />Commissioners. He also shared one other idea with the group, an <br />open house prior to the hearing. He reminded everyone that the <br />process had begun in February or early March with an open house. <br />He said it might be worth having an open house once the group had <br />proceeded further with its work and actually had something tangible <br />to show; he thought that it might be good to let people know what <br />was going on and that it was not a "done deal" at that stage and <br />that they could convey comments to staff or to their <br />representatives, either at- large, neighborhood, or agency. <br />Verla Insko said it would be a good idea for to have a future <br />discussion about how to do that (the open house). <br />Lee Rafalow asked that the minutes for this meeting show that the <br />revised students' report still contained the same errors regarding <br />projected impacts of their proposed plans. <br />2. MINUTES - No action. <br />3. FOLLOW -UP ON QUESTIONS FROM AUGUST 17 - Gene Bell distributed <br />a memo from Mary Willis' "Soil Suitability in Stoney Creek Area," <br />which is included as Attachment 1 to these minutes. <br />4. REVIEW OF RURAL CHARACTER PLAN ALTERNATIVES AND LISTING OF <br />DESIRABLE FEATURES - After brief introductory comments by Gene Bell <br />and Verla Insko, the group was asked to list desirable features of <br />the Rural Character Plan alternative presented on May 18. the <br />following features were identified: <br />1. Incentives, sliding scale with density bonuses <br />2. Allows alternatives for water and sewer <br />3. Flexible options for land owners <br />4. Based on voluntary options <br />5. Some options without density bonuses <br />6. Responsive to land form /character -- - - --- - <br />7. Applied to whole county <br />8. Encourages exceeding minimum standards <br />9. Promotes (allows) variety of housing <br />10. Unpredictability (within guidelines) <br />11. Incorporates natural features <br />12. Goal to preserve rural character <br />13. Five one -acre lots per lot of record <br />14. Allowing agriculture in open space <br />15. Addresses affordable housing <br />16. Reinforces urban growth boundaries <br />17. Possibility of open space <br />18. Cooperation between owners /planners /boards <br />19. Allows for internally oriented commercial <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.