Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
2 <br /> PIN Owner Acreage Current <br /> Zoning <br /> District <br /> 9824465282 W H Wilson Family Investment Group LLC 4.6 AR <br /> 9824467162 HawfieIds Presbyterian Church Inc Mebane NC <br /> Presbyterian Church USA 1.35 AR <br /> 9824540748 1 Jane D Williams Trustee 56.481 AR <br /> WESTERN SECTION - Subtotal 117.34 Acres <br /> 9824744824 Fraudie C Hunter Jr 13.44 AR <br /> 9824961908 Byrd Family Limited Partnership 8.9 R-1 <br /> 9834058903 Margie S Lloyd 6.54 R-1 <br /> 9834059397 Byrd Family Limited Partnership 0.82 R-1 <br /> 9834069071 Byrd Family Limited Partnership 5.87 R-1 <br /> 9834073088 Byrd Family Limited Partnership 27.89 R-1 <br /> 9834152994 Margie S Lloyd 10.98 R-1 <br /> 9834173345 Eunice E Carden, et al 5.02 R-1 <br /> 9834257896 Charles Michael Bowman 3.81 R-1 <br /> 9834261132 Charles M Bowman 28.02 R-1 <br /> 9834351819 Piedmont Properties 1.9 R-1 <br /> 9834354830 Piedmont Properties 0.55 R-1 <br /> 9834354839 Piedmont Properties 0.58 R-1 <br /> 9834354937 Piedmont Properties 0.57 1 R-1 <br /> EASTERN SECTION (near Petro) - Subtotal 114.89 Acres <br /> GRAND TOTAL 232.23 ± <br /> Public Hearing <br /> The proposed Zoning Atlas Amendment was heard at the February 27, 2012 joint public hearing <br /> (see Attachment 4 for Minutes). Three members of the public people spoke on the proposed <br /> UDO amendments and one Planning Board member asked a question. The comments and <br /> staff response is summarized as follows: <br /> 1. A Planning Board member asked if the sole parcel on Rock Quarry Road proposed for <br /> rezoning would be considered spot zoning. The County Attorney responded that zoning <br /> changes that are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan are not considered spot zoning. <br /> 2. Two property owners stated they would prefer commercial or industrial rezoning and one of <br /> these property owners stated the rezoning should be more extensive ("all the way out to <br /> West Ten Road"). <br /> Staff Comment While the list of permitted uses for commercial and industrial zoning is more <br /> extensive than the permitted uses for O/l, permitted uses are only one component of the <br /> development regulations. The current Dimensional and Ratio Standards (zoning charts in <br /> Article 3 of the UDO) for the commercial and industrial zones are not conducive to allowing a <br /> site to be developed to a more urban intensity. Specifically, the maximum Floor Area Ratio <br /> is low and the Required Open Space Ratio is high for areas to be developed at more urban <br /> densities/intensities and served by water and sewer systems. These standards were <br /> changed for the 0/1 district in June 2011. Staff believes that until the standards are modified <br /> for the commercial and industrial districts, the 0/1 zoning district is the most appropriate <br /> district. Staff has proposed bringing forward changes to the ratios discussed for areas to be <br />