Minutes - 19890227 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

--- -- Moody recommended that the wording be made clear that this is for new parks only. The Low and Moderate Income Housing Task Force increased the acreage to 50 acres and -~"! it seems that this staff is working against that. Mobile Home Parks are an excellent way of providing low and medium cost housing. This amendment is fighting against it. It places more restrictions on private property. Roger Stephens, a park owner in Orange County, spoke in opposition to the amendment. A copy of his written comments are made a part of these minutes by reference and are located in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office. Joey Cockley, Durham resident and Orange County Mobile Home Park owner, requested clarification that this applied only to planned, new parks. He read and accepted that the one change was going to be from acres to units. However, when he read the proposed amendment it went a step beyond by requiring a 100 foot perimeter buffer which he opposes. He indicated that he perceived a double standard in the Gounty with little encouragement being given to the development of low income housing. Forrest Heath, a mobile home park owner, asked that it be spelled out in the Ordinance that this amendment applies to new parks only. He also feels that the County is setting double standards for mobile home parks. He indicated that he could develop a subdivision and expand it at a later date. However, with a mobile home park he would be required to create a park. The size of a subdivision is based on its merit, but mobile home parks are restricted arbitrarily. He asked that the Board consider letting the size of a mobile home park also be decided upon it merits. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED A motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Chairman Carey, to refer this item to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Commissioners no sooner than April 3, 1989. VOTE: UNANTMOUS e. Retail Trade (1) Art. 4.3 - Permitted Use Table - See also Item # D.3.b. No presentation was made. In summary this item is to receive public comment on proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendments combining sections of the Permitted use Table to eliminate duplication of text and to correct a typographical error in Section 5~3. QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OR PLANNTNG BOARD Commissioner Hartwell commented on the proposed change to EC-5 stating that this addition might suit not only the particular location that caused it to come to the Boards' attention, but could be compatible with other areas of the county that are Existing Commercial. This would be a wise thing for the Board to adopt. THERE WERE NO CITIZEN GOMMENTS. A motion was made by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Hartwell, to refer this item to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Commissioners no sooner than April 3, 1989. VOTE: UNANIMOUS.