Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
0 <br />60 commercial operation in existence in the 70s, we just say there was a commercial operation prior the initial zoning of the <br />61 township in 1994. With respect to moving the commercial operation, as this Board is already aware, we're dealing with a similar <br />62 problem about the commercial use of residentially zoned property now, which is something that is prohibited by zoning <br />63 ordinance. If we require Mr. Helgevold to move his operation to the rear of the property that would mean that the entrance and <br />64 the main drive access to the commercial land use would be on residentially zoned property.. That's not consistent with the zoning <br />65 ordinance and is currently not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In our estimation the best and most prudent course of <br />66 action is to amend the existing ordinance so it reflects what was supposed to exist on the ground, what was identified as existing <br />67 ' on the ground, with the zoning atlas and correct the problem. We have recommended that this Board, after deliberation, approve <br />68 rezoning petition and through attachment two approve the Statement of Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and with <br />69 attachment three approve the resolution of rezoning petition of approval and forward your recommendation back to the County <br />70 Commissioners. I'll answer any question you may have at this time. <br />71 <br />72 Jeff Schmitt: How long has this existing operation been in effect that's there currenty? <br />73 <br />74 Michael Harvey: We have documentation that staff completed inspections in 1998, 2001, and 2003 and identified that the <br />75 operation was in existence at that time. There is testimony saying that the landscape operaflon was in existence prior to the <br />76 comprehensive zoning of the township back in 1994 so it's been a continuous operation at least since 1994, we have done <br />77 inspections to prove that it has been a continuous operation. <br />78 <br />79 Jeff Schmitt: Is it the same property owner? <br />80 <br />81 Michael Harvey: Yes. <br />82 <br />83 Jeff Schmitt: So he's had this since the 70s. <br />84 <br />85 Michael Harvey: No, he's had it since 1994. He purchased the property in 1991. He began the business in 1993. <br />8b There was no zoning of this property until 1994. He purchased it and began the business prior to our zoning of the township. <br />87 <br />88 Mary Bobbitt-Cooke: Does he own all the land outlined in red? <br />89 <br />90 Michael Harvey: Looking to attachment one, yes he does. He also owns the property to the west which shows the residential <br />91 house. <br />92 <br />93 Larry Wright: Do buffers apply to this. <br />94 <br />95 Michael Harvey: In most normal circumstances, the direct answer to your question is yes buffers do apply. The problem in this <br />96 case is since this area was technically already zoned EC-5, what was there is there. By moving the zoning designation, he <br />97 actually brings the rear of his property in further compliance with existing buffer regulations because that whole area is going to <br />98 be left in a natural state. Has to be buffered. Mr. Helgevold has already been working with staff to work on buffering issues on <br />99 the front of the property running along Phelps Road and around an existing mulch pile. It's something we're going to be pursuing <br />100. with him but the problem Mr. Helgevold is going to have is that technically he can't do anything until we resolve the zoning issue. <br />101 <br />102 Larry Wright: Right, I was just wondering if the buffers were there. It wouldn't leave him much room to do much. <br />103 <br />104 Michael Harvey: It doesn't but he is going to be establishing some buffers to address some concerns his neighbors have <br />105 expressed at the Quarterly Public Hearing but he voluntarily suggest some buffering to address some of our concerns. <br />106 <br />107 Larry Wright: So the County would work with him on that? <br />108 <br />109 Michael Harvey: Yes, the County is not going to get the 100 ft. buffer normally required for this type of development. We're not <br />110 going to try to oppose it on him but we are going to require buffering. <br />111 <br />112 MOTION made by Mary Bobbitt-Cooke to approve rezoning consistent with staffs recommendation as detailed on page 24 and 25 <br />113 of the abstract including recommending approval of attachment two and attachment three, the Statement of Consistency and the <br />114 Statement of rezoning approval. Seconded by Larry Wright. <br />115 Vole: Unanimous <br />116 <br />117 Michael Harvey: The applicant is here, I just wanted to make the Board knew they were here. <br />118 <br />2 <br />