Browse
Search
Agenda - 11-22-1999 - 1
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1999
>
Agenda - 11-22-1999
>
Agenda - 11-22-1999 - 1
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/23/2008 11:29:45 AM
Creation date
9/23/2008 11:29:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
11/22/1999
Meeting Type
Work Session
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
1
Document Relationships
Minutes - 19991122
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\1990's\1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
!5 <br />4 <br />the Council may not want to include this standard flexibility. If the Council wishes, it may adopt <br />this definition with the words "but not limited to" deleted. <br />2. A Council member asked what type of landscape b would be reauir~ on the Grggt~e <br />tact if used a Solid W Management Facility`? And what would a 100' ys a 500' vs a <br />1.000 `buffer look like. -' <br />Sta,,~" Comment: We attach a map of the Greene Tract that shows how much land would be <br />available for use if a 100 foot or a Z00 foot perimeter buffer were required. A 500 foot perimeter <br />buffer would prole'bit development of the 60 acre portion of the Crreene Tract. The text <br />amendment proposes a 100 foot buffer requirement. <br />3. A Council membez asked how truck routes to a solid waste manaaemonr facility would be <br />decided. <br />Staf~Comment: The routing of trucks to a future solid waste management. facility would not be <br />an operational decision. We believe that trucks would come from all types of routes to a facility <br />of this nature. <br />RECOMMENDATIONS <br />Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board met on October 5, 1999 and voted 8-0 to <br />recommend the amendment with adoption of Ordinance B. Please refer to ~ the attached <br />Summary of Planning Board Action. - <br />We note that Ordinance B includes language defining a Solid Waste Management Facility that <br />was provided to the Planning Board on October 5 by the Solid Waste staff it was brought to our <br />attention that the language of Ordinance B is not identical with language in the Interlocal <br />Agreemen. The Manager's recommendation, Ordinance A, betty reflects the language of the <br />Interlocal Agreement. <br />Upon further study, we have also concluded that the range of possible uses in this proposed new. <br />district should' include a broader rangy than simply "Solid Waste Management Facility." <br />Accordingly, Ordinance A provides the broader range of uses ~ and is the Manager's <br />recommendation. <br />14lanager's Recommendation: We recommend adoption of the attached Ordinance A as an <br />amendment to the Development Ordinance <br />ATTACHMENTS <br />1. Ordinances A and B (p. 5) . <br />2. Map of Greene Tract, with possible buffer options (p. 12) <br />3. October 18 Memorandum and its related attachments (begin new p. i ) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.