Browse
Search
Agenda - 02-15-2011 - 6a
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2011
>
Agenda - 02-15-2011
>
Agenda - 02-15-2011 - 6a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/14/2011 10:03:37 AM
Creation date
2/14/2011 10:03:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/15/2011
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6a
Document Relationships
Minutes 02-15-2011
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
92
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
DRAFT-NOT APPROVED YET ~ <br />1 o Rezoning Application <br />2 Only with approved SAP <br />3 Conditional Use Zoning <br />4 With Review Criteria <br />5 Public Review <br />6 <br />7 The Plan Adoption Timeline is incorporated by reference. The Small Area Plan could be <br />8 approved by the Board of County Commissioners by August 2007 and the Zoning Atlas Map <br />9 Amendment could be approved by the Board of County Commissioners by October 2007. <br />ZO Staff recommends the Board accept public comment on a Small Area Plan and then <br />11 forward comments to the Planning Board and the Economic Development Commission. <br />12 Chair Carey recognized the members of the task force. <br />13 Renee Price-Saunders asked for more speciftcity on the non-conforming use. Craig <br />14 Benedict said that presently this section of the County is agricultural-residential on the land use <br />15 map. Non-residential uses are not allowed in this part of the County. Since the speedway was <br />16 in existence at the time the zoning went into effect, it was given a legal non-conforming status. <br />17 In order for it to operate in a different status, the land use and zoning maps must be changed to <br />18 allow uses of this nature. <br />19 Commissioner Gordon asked about the differences between the original and <br />20 amended/revised document and Glen Bowles explained the differences. The changes were on <br />21 pages 31, 34-37. The spec city was taken out. The taskforce voted to make the changes. <br />22 Commissioner Gordon asked about the plan for the August public hearing. Craig Benedict <br />23 said that, concerning the conditional use rezoning planning device that Orange County does not <br />24 have, this will be brought forward for the August Quarterly Public Hearing. This can be used in a <br />25 lot of other cases throughout the County and not just this project. <br />26 Craig Benedict answered several clarifying questions of Commissioner Gordon. <br />27 Commissioner Gordon said that the hardest thing about economic development is to get it <br />28 in areas that will support it. <br />29 Commissioner Jacobs made reference to the very last page in the new package, page 51, <br />30 which was an appendix. This was pulled out by the task force. He said that these .might be the <br />31 kinds of requirements that anon-conforming use would have to meet when it applied for a <br />32 conditional use permit. He said that the specifics in the first packet became the appendix on <br />33 pages 51-52. <br />34 Jeff Schmitt said that he was present when the citizens brought their concerns to the <br />35 Board. He asked if this plan met the requests that some of the citizens had that would allow them <br />36 to proceed with the development of the small businesses. <br />37 Craig Benedict said that the business community has participated in every meeting, and <br />38 this creates a mechanism by which an expanded business or different uses can be pursued. The <br />39 neighborhood is concerned that some of the adverse impacts that exist now do not get worse. <br />40 The County is trying to strike a balance. The conditional use approval process would allow for <br />41 those concerns to come out through a public hearing process. <br />42 <br />43 Public Comment: <br />44 Karen Barrows thanked the County Commissioners and the Planning staff that worked <br />45 with the citizens. She said that there are a lot of conflicting interests in the area. A lot of the <br />46 neighbors are concerned about damage to their wells from the blasting of the quarry, etc. The <br />47 noise and increased traffic are also issues related to the quarry and the speedway. Some people <br />48 do not want any more development in the area. She agrees. She does understand that other <br />49 people have bought land with the intent to develop it, and those needs should be addressed also. <br />71 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.