My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/23/2001
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2001
>
10/23/2001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2020 4:53:33 PM
Creation date
9/25/2015 4:30:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC
Document Type
Migration
Meeting Date
10/23/2001
Archived Roll/Disk#
2547
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
145
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
RECOMMENDATION <br />Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the proposed amendment <br />ordinance allowing affidavits of exemption in agricultural areas subject to LDR Chapter 913 <br />requirements. <br />Planning Director Stan Boling reviewed the proposal and noted that this is a <br />correction to make all 3 options available for the creation of residential parcels in <br />agriculturally designated areas: (1) agricultural PD process; (2) platting process; or (3) <br />affidavit of exemption process. <br />Commissioner Stanbridge questioned whether the affidavit of exemption process <br />involving less than 50 lots requires that the lots have to be 5 acres each, and Director Boling <br />responded that is correct. That process has been in the Code for many years and is among <br />the options which were available for us before 1990. However, that process does not require <br />roads, sewers and drainage. <br />Commissioner Adams noted that some of these developments use the drainage <br />easements as roads, which are unpaved. <br />Director Boling added that road right-of-way must be dedicated. Each 5 -acre parcel <br />would have to have access either through a county or private right-of-way. <br />Chairman Ginn questioned whether this is currently allowed in the urban service area <br />and noted that, if so, it needs to be changed and she cannot support this. <br />Commissioner Stanbridge agreed that she also could not support this. <br />Director Boling added that there are no public hearing requirements, as with one-time <br />lot splits. Right-of-way requirements could be applied but there are no formal platting costs <br />and no paving requirements for the project itself. Several agricultural PDs were developed <br />last year and staff came away from those processes with the understanding that clustering <br />was the only problem concerning the Board. <br />OCTOBER 23, 2001 <br />-43. <br />K 2 ''' <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.