Browse
Search
ORD-2013-041 Ordinance denying OC Zoning Atlas Amendment - Keizer Rezoning of 2.7 Acre Parcel - 3604 Southern Drive. See ORD-2013-40 for correct Ord.
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Ordinances
>
Ordinance 2010-2019
>
2013
>
ORD-2013-041 Ordinance denying OC Zoning Atlas Amendment - Keizer Rezoning of 2.7 Acre Parcel - 3604 Southern Drive. See ORD-2013-40 for correct Ord.
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/13/2016 2:06:53 PM
Creation date
11/6/2013 3:55:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
11/5/2013
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Ordinance
Agenda Item
6a
Document Relationships
Agenda - 11-05-2013 - 6a
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2013\Agenda - 11-05-2013 - Regular Mtg.
Minutes 11-05-2013
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2013
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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
18 <br /> 1 Michael Harvey said the map does not designate zoning; it designates land use <br /> 2 category. He said this category is meant to encourage retail and manufacturing, however there <br /> 3 is underlying rural residential zoning in the area. He said this rural/residential zoning is not <br /> 4 invalidated, and it is still protected in the UDO. He noted that future use and focus for this area <br /> 5 will be additional non-residential application of land use. <br /> 6 <br /> 7 Commissioner Dorosin asked for clarification on the zoning of this area. He said the <br /> 8 designations and zoning are confusing. <br /> 9 <br /> 10 Michael Harvey said, as the comprehensive plan points out, certain areas of the County <br /> 11 have been identified as targets to encourage specific types of land use. <br /> 12 <br /> 13 Commissioner Dorosin said a plan has been developed to encourage certain land use, <br /> 14 but this did not include zoning changes to encourage that development. <br /> 15 <br /> 16 Michael Harvey said this is correct;these areas were not pre-zoned. <br /> 17 <br /> 18 Commissioner Dorosin asked if the plan is to re-zone these areas, or if this will happen <br /> 19 in a piecemeal fashion like the Board is seeing tonight. <br /> 20 <br /> 21 Michael Harvey said the plan is that this will happen as the market demands it. <br /> 22 <br /> 23 Commissioner Dorosin said he is just trying to understand the context. <br /> 24 <br /> 25 Frank Clifton said there is an assumption by some landowners that re-zoning means <br /> 26 values and property taxes will go up. He said this is not necessarily true. <br /> 27 <br /> 28 Commissioner Dorosin said this map is misleading for a person who is not well versed in <br /> 29 this issue. <br /> 30 <br /> 31 Frank Clifton said the map Commissioner Dorosin is referring to is a planning map for <br /> 32 future use, versus a zoning map of current designations. <br /> 33 <br /> 34 Planning Board member Johnny Randall arrived at 7.37. <br /> 35 <br /> 36 Commissioner Rich asked how the zoning change will affect the protected watershed <br /> 37 area. <br /> 38 <br /> 39 Michael Harvey said the overlay will not be altered. He said Ronald Keizer and his <br /> 40 business will be held to the same standards regarding impervious surface limits and stream <br /> 41 buffer protections. <br /> 42 <br /> 43 Commissioner Price said the packet did not seem to indicate any major changes in the <br /> 44 business activity on the property. <br /> 45 <br /> 46 Michael Harvey said there will be no major changes on this request. He noted the <br /> 47 second item is a different request for a different issue. <br /> 48 <br /> 49 Chair Jacobs said he would like to follow up on Commissioner Dorosin's question. He <br /> 50 said one difference between this economic development district and the Hillsborough one is that <br /> 51 the others have fewer and larger parcels. He noted that this area is full of smaller residential <br /> 52 lots. This makes it challenging to do a blanket re-zoning. <br /> 53 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.