My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
AG 1995 06 19
CabarrusCountyDocuments
>
Public Meetings
>
Agendas
>
BOC
>
1995
>
AG 1995 06 19
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2002 4:36:40 PM
Creation date
11/27/2017 11:57:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting Minutes
Doc Type
Agenda
Meeting Minutes - Date
6/19/1995
Board
Board of Commissioners
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
156
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
MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />TO: <br /> <br />FROM: <br /> <br />Cabarrus County Board of Commissioners <br /> <br />Jonathan Marshall, AICP and Sue G. Russell, AICP <br /> <br />DATE: <br /> <br />SUBJECT: <br /> <br />May 8, 1995 <br /> <br />Review of Cabarrus Station Area of T/~ Midland Area Plan <br /> <br />At your direction, we held a public meeting in the Cabarrus Station community <br />to re-evaluate part of the Midland Area Plan. The Commissioner's request, as we <br />understood it, was that we reconsider how, and what type, businesses are <br />permitted in the area in light of comments made at public hearings held on a <br />rezoning in that area. <br /> <br />The meeting was held on March 30, 1995, at 7:00 p.m. in the Fellowship Hall of <br />Bethel United Methodist Church. There were between 80 and 100 attendees and <br />we have since received more than 20 letters. <br /> <br />The discussion at the meeting centered on residents' goals for the future of their <br />community. A great deal of time was spent explaining what type of uses are <br />permitted in the MDR and LDR zoning districts that cover this area. There was <br />no clear consensus in the comments made at the meet4ng. Many people felt the <br />area is best suited for the rural residential development that characterizes it <br />today and that businesses, if allowed, should be small scale or home based. <br />Others felt a need to permit more commercial and industrial throughout the <br />area. The need for more nonresidential land was tied to the need to increase the <br />tax base to help pay for the Muddy Creek waste water treatment plant, the <br />prohibitive cost of nonresidential land on N.C. 24/27 and U.S. 601, to allow <br />residents to start businesses on proper~ they already own, and the basic belief <br />that property owners should ultimately decide what they want to do with their <br />own property. <br /> <br />The letters we received after the meeting clearly have a consensus. All of those <br />letters were from residents whose goals for the area are that it remain rural <br />residential and that intensive businesses and industries be located only on the <br />major thoroughfares like N.C. 24/27 and U.S. 601. There was also a clear theme <br />to the letters that residents rely on future land use plans and on zoning to give <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.