Browse
Search
Meeting 111695
OrangeCountyNC
>
BOCC Archives
>
Advisory Boards and Work Groups - Inactive
>
Stoney Creek Work Group
>
Meeting 111695
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/1/2018 5:17:41 PM
Creation date
8/1/2018 11:42:13 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
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
z <br />Gene Bell reported that this will be presented to the Board of Commissioners in the <br />near future. This proposal is based on the Rural Character Strategies and the open - <br />space development concepts presented by Randall Arendt. This is a part of the <br />Albemarle /Pamlico Estuary Study in which Orange County is a participant. A Rural <br />Design Guidebook applying Randall Arendt's principles will be a product of the study <br />Bob Hall suggested that this work group could be briefed on this proposal. <br />Dan Teichman requested that copies of the Flexible Development Proposal be <br />distributed. <br />Clint Burklin volunteered to make copies of the proposal and bring them to the next <br />meeting. <br />MINUTES: The minutes were approved by consensus as corrected. <br />NEW MEMBER: Verla Insko announced that James Bumphus was appointed to this <br />committee by the Board of Commissioners <br />VISION COMMITTEE REPORT: The members of this committee are Trudy Cuffe, <br />Dean Zehnder, Curtis Bane, Judson Edeburn and David Yelton. Trudy Cuffe felt that <br />the process had worked and helped them stay focused on the overall vision. They <br />submitted two draft vision statements because they did not have time to meet again to <br />consolidate and agree on a final form. <br />Elio Soldi felt that the Vision Committee could be asked to meet again and come up <br />with a final vision statement. <br />Clint Burklin suggested discussing the draft and then requesting that the subcommittee <br />revise. He felt that protection of existing neighborhoods from incompatible land uses <br />was an important point. There needs to be definitions of the words compatible and <br />incompatible. <br />Trish Rafalow felt that the words "internally oriented, commercial and services <br />locations" were confusing. Commercial development was not a part of her vision. She <br />requested clarification. <br />David Yelton explained that the subcommittee was thinking of community stores which <br />served only the local area. They agreed that commercial activity which drew customers <br />from outside the area would not be acceptable. <br />Bob Strayhorn stated that local stores are a part of his community vision. <br />It was agreed that this is an area in which there is not group consensus and that further <br />discussion was necessary. <br />Lee Rafalow stated that he disagreed with the inclusion of all of the italicized comments <br />in the last paragraph. He concurred with all of the bulleted comments. He suggested <br />that the vision should not articulate that there will be dissent. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.