Browse
Search
Minutes - 19770228
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Minutes - Approved
>
1970's
>
1977
>
Minutes - 19770228
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/16/2013 11:18:21 AM
Creation date
8/13/2008 12:21:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/28/1977
Document Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
l~5 <br />that the agenda consisted of three rezoning requests, discussion con- <br />cerning amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance and discussion of the <br />extension of the Subdivision Ordinance County-wide. <br />He then turned the public hearing over to the Chairman of the <br />Planning Board, Charles Johnston. <br />Mr. Johnston asked that the rezoning request be considered first <br />and recognized Chris Edwards from the Planning Department. <br />Mr. Edwards stated that the first request was that of Lockridge, <br />which is an amendment to a Plan Unit Development plan. This section of <br />land was rezoned several years ago to plan unit development and at <br />the time the survey was. recorded, it was discovered that problems existed <br />in the survey. He presented to the Boards a modification of the plan <br />which will correct the problem in the survey. The revised plan shows a <br />reduction in the number of lots, as well as the location of some roads. <br />The Planning Board had previously reviewed the plan and recommended that <br />Class C roads be developed instead of public roads. This request will <br />be presented to the Planning Board on March 21st, .a long with a rezoning <br />request for property adjacent to this property. <br />Mike Calhoon, an agent from the Lockridge Community, spoke of how <br />the survey problem had occurred. He also spoke of the future plans for <br />the Lockridge Development. <br />Mr. Edwards stated that assuming the plan was .approved, it would go <br />through the same procedures as a subdivision plan. The Commissioners <br />and the Planning Board would see this plat at least three more times. <br />Chairman Johnson asked if there. were persons present who would like <br />to speak in favor of this request. No one came forth. <br />He asked if there were those present to speak in opposition to the. <br />request. No one came forth. <br />The second rezoning request was that of Wallace Gates to rezone an <br />approximate 40,000 square foot lot from residential to rural commercial. <br />This lot is located just inside of Bingham Township on the South side of <br />Hwy. 54. The area consist of single family dwellings and mobile homes. <br />When the zoning map was originally drawn for this area, a garage, <br />which did exist at that time failed to be zondd commercial. The matter <br />has been brought to the attention of the Berard of Adjustment and this <br />Board has asked that this oversight be corrected by rezoning this 40,000 <br />square foot lot from residential to rural commercial. The rezoning re- <br />quest would bring the structure into compliance for a permitted use. <br />Mr. Edwards informed the Board that the existing building did not <br />meet the set back requirements. <br />Commissioner Pinney stated that the reason it did not meet these <br />requirements was because Hwy. 54 had been recently widened. <br />Commissioner willhoit asked if access could be provided from SR #1944 <br />instead of Hwy. 54. <br />Mr. Edwards replied that the building faced Hwy. 54, which was the <br />major problem. <br />Dr. Bonar stated that the Board of Adjustment had initiated this. <br />requst since it was zoned residential as an oversight. Also, this <br />building was at one time a service station. <br />Chairman Johnston asked if there were those present to speak in <br />favor of this rezoning request. No one cam a forth. <br />He asked if there were opponents to the request. <br />Mr. J. R. Farlow stated that he was presen to speak in opposition to <br />the rezoning request. Mr. Farlow owns property directly in front of the <br />Gates property. He stated that if this one acre lot was rezoned, it <br />would appear to him that this would be spot zoning. Why would not a <br />property owner on the other side of the road be entitled to the same con- <br />sideration. He stated if there was a need in the planning operation of <br />the County to justify the creation of a commercial zone, this should be <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.