Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b) <br />The use will maintain or <br />enhance the value of <br />contiguous property (unless <br />the use is a public <br />necessity, in which case <br />the use need not maintain <br />or enhance the value of <br />contiguous property). <br />Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (c) <br />The location and character <br />of the use, if developed <br />according to the plan <br />submitted, will be in <br />harmony with the area in <br />which it is to be located and <br />the use is in compliance <br />with the plan for the <br />physical development of <br />the County as embodied in <br />these regulations or in the <br />Comprehensive Plan, or <br />portion thereof, adopted by <br />the Board of County <br />Commissioners. <br />Based on evidence <br />presented at the <br />November 21, 2011 public <br />hearing and the January <br />4, 2012 Planning Board <br />meeting, specifically a <br />letter composed by Ms. <br />JoEllen Mason, a local <br />realtor, providing an <br />analysis of the projecYs <br />economic impact and that <br />the proposed addition(s) <br />will not have a negative <br />impact on adjacent <br />property value. <br />Further the Board made <br />this determination based <br />on a lack of evidence <br />submitted into the record <br />indicating that the <br />applicant had not met <br />their burden of proof. <br />Based on evidence <br />presented at the <br />November 21, 2011 public <br />hearing and the January <br />12, 2012 Planning Board <br />meeting, the applicant's <br />narrative denoting <br />compliance with the <br />Comprehensive Plan <br />Further the Board made <br />this determination based <br />on a lack of evidence <br />submitted into the record <br />indicating that the <br />applicant had not met <br />their burden of proof. <br />Will <br />Is <br />Will <br />Not <br />Not <br />70 <br />Is <br />