My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1/8/1975
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1970's
>
1975
>
1/8/1975
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/3/2024 10:03:35 AM
Creation date
6/2/2015 3:50:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/08/1975
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
185
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
_81975 - <br />AT THE DECEMBER 18TH, 1974 MEETING THE BOARD AGREED TO <br />CONTINUE A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED SUBDIVISION REGULATION <br />ORDINANCE UNTIL TODAY. <br />PRESENT FOR THIS DICUSSION WAS MARVIN CARTER, AND DANA <br />HOWARD, SURVEYORS; VAL BRENNAN, PLANNING DIRECTOR AND ROBERT <br />BERG, ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR. <br />PAGE 3 - "MOBILE HOME SUBDIVISION" <br />COMMISSIONER WODTKE DISCUSSED THIS --PARAGRAPH AND EXPRESSED <br />SOME CONCERN FOR THE PERSON WHO DOES RENT FOR A ONE YEAR PERIOD OF TIME/ <br />NOT BEING COVERED. THIS SECTION TALKS ABOU 'IN EXCESS OF ONE YEAR: <br />HE QUESTIONED IF THIS WAS THE INTENT, AND WOULD IT POSE A PROBLEM. <br />MARVIN CARTER STATED THAT ON A RENTAL SITUATION THEY WOULD <br />NOT BE PLATTING; THIS PARAGRAPH REFERS TO A RECORDED PLATTED SUBDIVISIOD <br />PAGE 4 AND 5 - <br />COMMISSIONER WODTKE QUESTIONED THE SIX DIFFERENT TYPES OF <br />STREETS AND WIDTHS REQUIRED AND IF THIS POSES ANY PROBLEMS; SUCH AS <br />UNDER STREET - <br />PRIVATE STREETS - <br />SECONDARY STREETS - <br />40 FOOT WIDTH IS REQUIRED; <br />50 --FOOT " <br />60 FOOT rr rr <br />MARGINAL ACCESS STREETS - 40 FOOT " <br />RESIDENTIAL STREETS - 50 FOOT " <br />COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER STATED THAT IN GENERAL, HE FELT IT <br />WAS DESCRIBED WELL ENOUGH, IT IS TO DEFINE VARIOUS RIGHT-OF-WAYS IN <br />-A DEVELOPMENT. <br />MR. BRENNAN STATED THAT THIS INFORMATION IS BASED ON AMOUNT <br />OF TRAFFIC ON A PARTICULAR STREET IN A PARTICULAR SUBDIVISION. <br />PAGE 5 - "SUBDIVISION REVIEW COMMITTEE" <br />COMMISSIONER WODTKE QUESTIONED IF THE BURDEN SHOULD BE ON <br />THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO APPOINT A PERSON TO SERVE ON THE SUBDIVISIOI <br />REVIEW COMMITTEE OR SHOULD IT BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COMMISSIONERI <br />TO APPOINT THE PERSON AS RECOMMENDED BY THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR. <br />THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR STATED THAT ONE OF THE MAIN POINTS <br />OF THIS ORDINANCE IS TO TRY AND EXPEDITE THE MOVEMENT OF A DEVELOPMENT <br />THROUGH/SO THAT BY THE TIME IT IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE COUNTY COMMISSIONE, <br />IT HAS THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE VARIOUS PEOPLE. IT WAS HIS UNDER- <br />STANDING THAT IF SOME PARTICULAR SUBDIVISION HAD SOMETHING <br />r <br />rr <br />-38- <br />BO <br />21 r4,1460 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.