Browse
Search
Meeting 031496
OrangeCountyNC
>
BOCC Archives
>
Advisory Boards and Work Groups - Inactive
>
Stoney Creek Work Group
>
Meeting 031496
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/1/2018 4:56:11 PM
Creation date
8/1/2018 11:37:49 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
Bob Strayhorn: 200 foot setback? <br />Lee Rafalow: No 100 feet. Discussion on 200 feet came up where <br />there were shallow lots (about 200 feet deep) and there was desire <br />to provide design flexibility. <br />Bob Strayhorn: Agree, should think of some type of incentive. <br />Lee Rafalow: Curtis had question about length of conservation <br />easements. . He had real problem with perpetuity, thought there <br />should be some fixed time. <br />Meg McKean: Seems to be case of whether it is a lease or a sale. <br />Bob Strayhorn: In some areas of country you can agree not to do <br />anything on property, for say 25 years, and receive compensation. <br />Bob Hall: Thinks maximum tax advantage comes with perpetuity. <br />ANNOUNCEMENTS, GROUP COMMENTS <br />Bob Strayhorn: Informed group that he had been negotiating with <br />cellular company about possibly locating a tower on his property <br />and he wanted everyone to hear it directly from him rather than <br />reading about it in the paper or receiving a notice from Planning <br />Department. He said three sites were under consideration: <br />- wooded area behind hog houses; <br />- tract off NC 86 near old cemetery; and <br />- next to Camp New Hope on other side of church toward I -40. <br />He said putting tower on property would be a 25 year commitment and <br />would allow him to achieve income from land without developing it. <br />The group thanked him for sharing this information. <br />ADJOURNMENT: 10:10 PM. <br />Comments on open space following adjournment: <br />Bob Strayhorn: Thinks we should stay with minimum in FDO and <br />encourage folks to go further. <br />Lee Rafalow: Instead of a 50o requirement in yellow, maybe change <br />intensity of bonus in yellow so that at 330 open space you have to <br />have two acres for one unit instead of one acre for one unit. <br />Bob Strayhorn: Another way to look at it. What about density <br />bonuses for doing something we want that would allow transfers out <br />of the district, e.g., if person could have 75 units, but if he was <br />willing to do cluster or large lots maybe he could get bonus for <br />not doing whole thing. All we seem to be thinking about is density <br />bonuses, ought to be thinking about bonuses you can move. <br />12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.