My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
AG 1998 01 20
CabarrusCountyDocuments
>
Public Meetings
>
Agendas
>
BOC
>
1998
>
AG 1998 01 20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2002 6:03:50 PM
Creation date
11/27/2017 11:50:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting Minutes
Doc Type
Agenda
Meeting Minutes - Date
1/20/1998
Board
Board of Commissioners
Meeting Type
Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
370
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
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes <br />December 18~ 1997 <br /> <br />page 27 <br /> <br />Mr.' Starnes amended his Motion to deny Petition 97-19 as <br />submitted, seconded by Mr. Moose. The vote was 5 to 4 to deny <br />Petition 97-19. Mr. Moose,. Mr. Lane, Mr. Starnes, Mr. Dwiggins <br />and Mr. Drye in favor. Mr. Ritchie, Mr. Hill, Mr. Kiefer and Mr. <br />Hobbs opposed. <br /> <br />Mr. Marshall said Petition 97-19 will automatically go on to the <br />Commissioners meeting on January 20, 1998. <br /> <br />Mr. Marshall presented to the Board a three part subdivision text <br />amendment stating the County has adopted a local Sediment <br />Erosion Control program, so we are tying our subdivision, which <br />has previously been tied to the State program, we need to tie them <br />back to the local program instead. We have made it so the <br />development once a preliminary approval through this board then <br />has to get its sediment erosion control plan approved prior to any <br />construction. If they are in violations the sedimentation erosion <br />control plan then final approval cannot be approved on that <br />subdivision. The second issue, which was brought up by Senator <br />Hartsell, and that is there is a provision in current state law where <br />school sites has been specifically identified that you may require a <br />developer to reserve that site. The hard part is identifying <br />specifically those school sites. We are working with the schools in <br />doing just thaL Finally, the last part is a request from Frank Clifton <br />that actually came out of our task force for growth management. <br />That is the adequate pubhc facilities standards. This board in the <br />past has wanted to tie school facilities, in particular to development <br />approval. We have added a provision so the Board may do that. <br />Where school capacity does not exist, or is not planned and <br />programmed within the next two years, then the Board may use <br />that as a basis of denial. <br /> <br />The Chair opened the Public Hearing on Petition 97-06(S) <br /> <br />The Chair closed the Public Hearing on 97-06(S) <br /> <br />There being no further comments Mr. Dwiggins MOTIONED to <br />approve Petition 97-06(S), seconded by Mr. Starnes. The vote was <br />unanimous. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.