Browse
Search
Agenda - 12-01-2008 - 4g
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2008
>
Agenda - 12-01-2008
>
Agenda - 12-01-2008 - 4g
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/23/2013 10:52:31 AM
Creation date
12/1/2008 4:33:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
12/1/2008
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
4g
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20081201
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
68
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
E <br />Approved 7/11/07 <br />Michelle Kempinski: I am asking about the distribution around the . lots around the property. Was it equal <br />distance? <br />Glenn Bowles: No. it was generally our best guess from a staff. <br />Michelle Kempinski: if we look at an actual border, what it would look like if was equal distance. <br />Glenn Bowles: it wouldn't change that. <br />Renee Price: Are you showing the parcels are the actual lots? <br />Glenn Bowles: Parcels. Some may be owned by the same person. <br />Renee Price: Some of this can be misleading. I own parts of two lots and one of one lot. <br />Glenn. Bowles:. You did not ask for the ownership pattern. You ask for lot sizes which is what we <br />provided. <br />Michelle Kempinski: The green areas are greater than 15% Slope? <br />Glenn Bowles: Those are primary open space. <br />Michelle Kempinski: Because of the slopes? <br />Glenn Bowles: Yes. Those are 25% <br />Michelle Kempinskl: So they are unbuildable? <br />Glenn Bowles: Yes. On page 38-40, there are questions listed that were asked of me with the <br />appropriate responses. We now have the answer to question number one. We have the response from <br />ri <br />Brian Ferrell. Essentially, at this level, the concept plan stage, you really don't have e autho ity to do much. <br />However, if this should go to a Class A Special Use Permit, there will be analysis made by a competent <br />engineer . which will addre . ss those types of issue. <br />Sandra Quinn: It stated there are no churches in the vicinity. There are churches In the area, for the <br />record. <br />Renee Price: If we go forward, is it possible to get information about ownership of the pa . rcels? Also, the <br />stub outs are going to private property? <br />Glenn Bowles: The private property development will provide an opportunity for connectivity. <br />Renee Price: This isn't vacant land. What was meant by primary open space? <br />Glenn Bowles: Open space that is not platted. <br />Michelle Kempinski: On page 39 of the responses where it is stated "the Planning staff recommends <br />approval of the Bramco Partners Subdivision Concept Plan with the 33-lot Conventional option". The <br />previous option was to be approved. <br />Jay Bryan: You are asking this to be amended to what? <br />Glenn Bowles: On page 33, it states that. <br />Renee Price: How will you define open space? <br />N <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.