My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BC 1995 06 19
CabarrusCountyDocuments
>
Public Meetings
>
Meeting Minutes
>
BOC
>
1995
>
BC 1995 06 19
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/30/2002 3:38:36 PM
Creation date
11/27/2017 1:08:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting Minutes
Doc Type
Minutes
Meeting Minutes - Date
6/19/1995
Board
Board of Commissioners
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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
456 <br /> <br />Proposed FY1996 Home and Community Care Block Grant Aging Funding Plan for Older <br />Adults <br /> <br /> UPON MOTION of Commissioner Fennel, seconded by Commissioner Olio-Mills <br />with Commissioners Fennel, Olio-Mills, and Niblock and Chairman Barnhart voting <br />for, the Board approved the proposed FY '96 Home and Community Care Block Grant <br />Aging Funding Plan and authorized the Chairman to sign the proposed Plan on <br />behalf of Gabarrus County. The proposed Plan included the following block grant <br />funding and required local match. <br /> <br />CABARRUS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF AGING <br /> Transportation <br /> Congregate Nutrition <br /> Supplemental <br /> In-Home (DOA) <br /> Housing/Home Improvement <br />CABARRUS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES: <br /> In-Home Services (CHORE) <br />L.I.F.E. CENTER: <br /> Adult Day Care <br />TOTAL ALLOCATION <br /> <br />Block Grant Required Local <br />Funding Match Gash <br /> <br />$ 88,187 $ 9,869 <br />$103,781 $11,531 <br />$ 10,000 $ 1,111 <br />$ 29,943 $ 3,327 <br />$ 7,068 $ 785 <br /> <br />$ 37,989 $ 4,221 <br /> <br />$ 63,034 $ 7,004 <br />$340,002 $37,848 <br /> <br />Proposed Midland Area Plan Addendum <br /> <br /> Mr. Gerald Newton, Planning and Development Area Manager, reported that <br />staff had met with residents of the Midland area to re-evaluate part of the <br />Midland Area Plan. A report of the staff's findings and recommendations was <br />included in the agenda. <br /> <br /> UPON MOTION of Commissioner Fennel, seconded by Commissioner Olio-Mills <br />with Commissioners Fennel, Olio-Mills, and Niblock and Chairman Barnhart voting <br />for, the Board moved to accept the following report from the Cabarrus County <br />Planning, Zoning and Building Inspection Department. The report included the <br />recommendations that there be no change in the area plan and that there be <br />further review of the existing commercial and industrial zoning along US 601 and <br />Highway 24/27 to address the issues of affordability and availability. <br /> <br />MIDLAND AREA PLAN ADDENDUM <br /> <br />Staff of the Cabarrus County Planning, Zoning and Building <br />Inspection Department held a public meeting on March 30, 1995, to <br />re-evaluate part of the Midland Area Plan. This meeting was held in <br />the Fellowship Hall of the Bethel United Methodist Church and was <br />intended to solicit information and comments from residents and <br />interested parties about the Cabarrus Station community. There were <br />between 80 and 100 people at the meeting. <br /> <br />The re-evaluation of part of the area plan was requested by the <br />Board of Commissioners. Statements were made at public hearings on <br />a rezoning petition that indicated some residents felt more <br />businesses should be allowed in the Cabarrus Station community. <br /> <br />The comments made at the public meeting on March 30th were on a <br />broad range of subjects and many people simply had questions. An <br />explanation was given by staff at the beginning of the meeting that <br />many businesses were allowed under the current zoning, and that <br />information prompted a number of questions. Questions were also <br />asked about the Muddy Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant construction <br />and what the initial service area for that treatment plant would be. <br />Other questions concerned zoning in general. <br /> <br />Comments about nonresidential uses were contradictory. More <br />attendees voiced support for permitting a greater number of <br />businesses, but there were still attendees who felt the current <br />zoning allowed enough businesses and some who felt it allowed too <br />many. Those who advocated more business cited affordability of <br />land, lack of availability of properly zoned land, the need to allow <br />residents to use land they already owned, and development of the tax <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.