Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
.. <br />Discussion ensued as to what the comprehensive plan really is. <br />Chairman Garrett asked the Planning Board to make recommendations <br />to the Commissioners regarding the County Development Plan. <br />The Planning Director spoke of the characteristic of an AR-1 <br />Planning District. He then referred to Page 1 of the proposed Zoning <br />Amendments. <br />Discussion ensued :concerning Section 1: Flood Hazard District: <br />Subsection 1.1 Definitions: 3). <br />The word "area" shall be included on the second line of this <br />section ~o read or other body of inland water, which area has, etc. <br />Page 2 - The Planning Director pointed out several deletions and <br />changes that had been made on this page. <br />Subsection d): Delete the words rivers and op nds on the second <br />line of subsecf.ion d) . <br />Subsection 1.2: Add the word information on line five which <br />shall read "must present appropriate soils information hydrologic data," <br />etc. <br />Subsection 1.3: Add the words including necessary fences to number <br />1 on line. three which shall read "and related uses including necessary <br />fences." <br />Subsection 1.3: Change Laws, to Lawns and delete the word parking. <br />The use to be changed from (P) to (C). This is number 3 under sub- <br />section 1.3. <br />Subsection 1.3: Number 6, change the work circuses to feastivals <br />Discussion ensued concerning Subsection 1.2 which states that "A person <br />wishing to contest the location of the boundaries must present appropri- <br />ate soil information and rzydrologic information indicating the precise <br />limit of the lOp ye.sr flood to the Bcard of Adjustment." <br />B. B. Olive suggested that this Subsection be changed to read: <br />"The Orange County zoning Officer will designate the exact location of <br />the district boundaries w11en necessary and the basis on which such loca- <br />tion eras determined. A person wishing to contest the location of the <br />boundaries may take exception to such basis or may have the opportunity <br />to present appropriate soil information and hydrologic date, etc." <br />Further discussion ensued concerning some measures to b~: taken in <br />these amendments to stipulate a potential dam site on the Eno River. <br />On Page 3 of the proposed Amendments, the Planning Director pointed <br />out changes in the section "Conservation Setback District." On line six <br />change the word rivers to water ways which shall read'' which are a part <br />of the water ways and their environs=;" etc. <br />Discussion continued concerning Subsection 1.1 Definition and <br />Delineation. This section was left as it was until after the scheduled <br />public hearing of August 31, 1976. <br />The Board agreed to go ahead with the scheduled public hearing <br />with the proposed amendments as they are, since no changes of any <br />substance had been made. The Commissioners stated that particular <br />rivers and streams should be designated as being affected by these <br />amendments. <br />The Board reviewed briefly other areas of the amendments and the <br />adjourned to meet again on.August 31, 1976. <br />~i~-~ '~- <br />Flora R. Garrett, Chairman <br />Betty June Hayes, Clerk <br />