My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
AG 1994 08 15
CabarrusCountyDocuments
>
Public Meetings
>
Agendas
>
BOC
>
1994
>
AG 1994 08 15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2002 4:33:06 PM
Creation date
11/27/2017 11:58:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting Minutes
Doc Type
Agenda
Meeting Minutes - Date
8/15/1994
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.
/
81
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 />luly 21, 1994 <br /> <br />Page 17 <br /> <br />Mr. Marshall said he was not very clear with this. This was an issue where we <br />are going to certainly be getting rezoning requests. They have already started to <br />speed up now since the new zoning is in place and the transition period is over. <br />This was a use, that had it been proposed along with a dwelling, could have been <br />permitted as a rural home occupation. But because he will not be building the <br />dwelling until some point in the future, it comes before the board as a special <br />use. <br /> <br />The Chair said when the Midland Community got together and worked with the <br />staff on the area, one of the things that was specified was that Highway 601 <br />corridor toward the north to be reserved more as re~dential and have Highway <br />24-27 be reserved as commercial, as she recalls. <br /> <br />Mr. Marshall said that is correct. He said in the _larger sense that is how the <br />zoning pattern follows. But, that low density residential just as in the agricultural <br />open, to some extent have some mixed uses with them. <br /> <br />The Chair swore in Mr. Michael Downs, Zoning Administrator. <br /> <br />Mr. Downs said just to add as a reference, we talked about the buffering. He <br />said the minimum buffering that would be required with the 6 acre tract, in using <br />the chart in the ordinance, which would be buffer yard number 2, it would consist <br />of 54 feet. That is the minimum that is going to be required if the board so <br />chooses to add to that. There will be additional landscaping required in the front. <br />However, this would be on all 3 sides of adjoining property that had a different <br />zone. <br /> <br />The Chair closed the Public Hearing on Petition 94-03. <br /> <br />Mr. Smith said he has a concern as was stated that we have property that through <br />deliberation with the community, we came up with what was best suited for <br />residential. The board would be setting a precedence. He said he personally has <br />a very major concern with the people who have commercial property around the <br />county where businesses could be established, but they continue to try to <br />intersperse within the residential and keeps chopping it up, which does go against <br />the intent of the land use plan. Mr. Smith said basically what the board is doing <br />is subdividing this property. He said he concurs with Jonathan that ifa residence <br />was there, they could have a rural home occupation up to 2,000 square feet. We <br />have no assurance that there ever will be a residence there, not only that, but we <br />are going to subdivide the property, put a piece of property in back which is <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.