My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
AG 2002 08 19 (Regular)
CabarrusCountyDocuments
>
Public Meetings
>
Agendas
>
BOC
>
2002
>
AG 2002 08 19 (Regular)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/2/2006 5:01:40 PM
Creation date
11/27/2017 11:43:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting Minutes
Doc Type
Agenda
Meeting Minutes - Date
8/19/2002
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.
/
352
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 18f 1997 <br /> <br />Page 19. <br /> <br /> this is not the location. He said they urge the Planning Board to <br /> further evaluate the scope of this rezoning. The general use special <br /> district as proposed, has made no effort to comply with the <br /> Western Area Plan. The area plan identified major industrial <br /> development sites as being directly along 1-85, N.C. 73, U.S. 29,.and <br /> N.C. 49. The plan -fizrther states nonresidential growth sho ,uld be <br /> encouraged on those corridors' and discouraged in areas not in <br /> close proximity 'to the major roads, page 8. The plan noted that <br /> there was less agreement about King's Grant and SPeedway <br /> Boulevard but that.nonresidential was probably a good idea, page <br /> 9. As the plan looked at the impacts, of a then unopened airport; <br /> few PEople could agree on its impact or how the surrounding area <br /> should be developed. The plan did note however, and they think <br />".that ~this is very important, that a separate study should be <br /> conducted to evaluate the airport's effects on surrounding land <br /> uses, height restrictions, access to the terminal, and just better <br /> understand its use and operation, pages 10 and 24. The <br /> recommendation sections goes on to note that there are-potential <br /> areas of conflict, and in those areas, mixed use development should <br /> be strongly considered. The staff report looked, at the site that <br /> ended up being approved by the Planning Board as a. mixed, use <br /> development in which a high density special use rezoning was the <br /> · 'buffering between an industrial area. Such mixed use' <br /> development provides, 'quoting out of the Western Area Plan on <br /> page 12, ~'a method by which they may comply with the goals of <br /> the plan without strict adherence to the projected land use map." <br /> Mr. Newton said that is' rather important. He said when they' <br /> looked at this area plan, Mr. Marshall was the Senior Planner <br />authored the majority, in fact, all of the plan at the time he was the <br />director. They were looking'at what was happening in <br />Mecklenburg County where they were 'doing area plans that were <br />parcel specific. We decided not to do that but, had a difficulty in <br />ad-dressing how do We put to:gether-an area plan without being <br />.parcel specific.. This issue was added in saying that if you are <br />meeting the intent of the area plan, you do ~rot have to be parcel <br />specific.. Mixed use developments that integrate the components of <br />the recommendations provided that opportunity. It further states <br />as discussed Previously, potential conflict exists where the plan <br />indicates future employment and residential abutting. The <br />transition from vacant land to an employment area will include an <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.