Browse
Search
Agenda - 02-03-2004-8j
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2004
>
Agenda - 02-03-2004
>
Agenda - 02-03-2004-8j
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/1/2008 10:35:15 PM
Creation date
8/29/2008 10:37:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/3/2004
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
8j
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20040203
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2004
ORD-2004-002 - Subdivision Regulations Amendment IV-B-3 Streets
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2000-2009\2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
25 DRAFT <br />1 Craig Benedict said that no, but farmers can write to the telecommunication companies 5 <br />2 or they can contact whomever they want to pursue towers on their properties <br />3 independently from the MTP. <br />4 <br />5 Noah Rannell asked about preferred sites are in order as listed and why a farmer's falls <br />6 in at number five. <br />8 Craiq Benedict said that the way that we are suggesting this now. Commissioner <br />9 Gordon asked why we want the agriculture below the commercial in the priority. <br />10 <br />11 Craig Benedict said that agriculture was considered as a part of the MTP plan and until <br />12 the County accepts the MTP farms fall out of the siting criteria. <br />13 <br />14 Commissioner Gordon asked why we are not doing MTP now. <br />15 <br />16 Craig Benedict said that using the MTP for a planning tool for information for does not <br />17 give them the ability to put a priority list in the MTP. He stated this could be done for the <br />18 February 2004 public hearing. <br />19 <br />20 Commissioner Jacobs asked if this went to public hearing in February would they lose <br />21 a whole year of applications. <br />22 <br />23 Craig Benedict stated that they would have to ask the County Attorney's office if there is <br />24 some vesting. <br />25 <br />26 Sean Borhanian said that there would not be vesting. <br />27 <br />28 A motion was made by Commissioner Barry Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner <br />29 Halkiotis to accept the Administration's recommendation to refer the proposed <br />30 amendments to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the <br />31 BOCC no sooner than January 26, 2004. <br />32 <br />33 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />34 <br />35 4. Text Amendments to the Orange County Subdivision Regulations <br />36 <br />37 Craig Benedict <br />38 <br />39 a. Amend Section IV-13-3 (Streets) to consider requiring bicycle facilities, sidewalks, <br />40 and common access points concurrent with development projects that abut or <br />41 adjoin roadways with approved access management plans. <br />42 <br />43 Craig Benedict said that these items both have to do with amendments to subdivision <br />44 regulations and you can have good regulations. They were able to do a study with Orange <br />45 Grove road plan that has universal applications. <br />46 <br />47 Commissioner Jacobs asked if this will apply on Orange Grove Road. <br />48
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.