Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
MINUTES 0 0 0,9 0 <br /> ORANGE COUNTY <br /> BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND PLANNING BOARD <br /> QUARTERLY MEETING <br /> NOVEMBER 25, 1985 <br /> The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in joint session with the <br /> Planning Board on November 25, 1985► 7:30 p.m. in Superior Courtroom► Orange <br /> County Courthouse► Hillsborough. North Carolina. <br /> COLS' COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Don Willhoit► and Commissioners <br /> Shirley Marshall. Moses Carey► Norman Walker and Ben Lloyd. <br /> COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill. <br /> PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Alice Gordon► and members Chris <br /> Best► Barry Jacobs► Steve Kizer► Peter Kramer► Frank Pearson► David Shanklin► <br /> Carl Walkers and Steve Yuhasz. <br /> PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Members Margaret Miller► Sharlene Pilkey► <br /> and Betty M. Margison. <br /> STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Kenneth R. Thompson► Planner Gene Bell► <br /> Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe► Director of Planning Marvin Collins and <br /> Planner Susan Smith. <br /> A. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS <br /> 1 LUP-4-85 VIC KNIGHT (RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL TRANSITION <br /> ACTIVITY NODE) <br /> PRESENTATION BY STAFF Planner Gene Bell presented for the receipt <br /> of public comments a proposed secondary amendment to the Land Use Plan for a <br /> 3.12 acre tract owned by Gary Richardson and located on the east side of N.C. <br /> 86 approximately 1.2 miles south of I-85. The proposed amendment would change <br /> the Land Use Plan designation of the property from Rural Residential to Ten <br /> Year Transition/Commercial-Industrial Transition Node. The applicant cites <br /> changed or changing conditions as the reason for the amendment. various non- <br /> residential uses in the area are mentioned as justification for the reason for <br /> the amendment. The changing nature of this area was addressed in the "Central <br /> Orange Area Study" in 1983► the result being: <br /> (1) Redesignation of the node from Commercial Transition to <br /> Commercial-Industrial Transition► and <br /> (2) Expansion of the node (in accordance with the location <br /> criteria in section 3.4 of the Land Use Plan) to encompass <br /> the nonresidential land uses. <br /> Analysis of a Land Use Plan amendment requires that the requested <br /> designation be compatible with the applicable Locational Criteria in Section <br /> 3.4 of the Land Use Plan. The locational criterion for hydrology► flora & <br /> fauna, energy use and historic and cultural sites is compatible or consistent <br /> for the Commercial-Industrial Node. The location criteria for land slope is <br /> borderline. Calculations based on measurements taken from USGS topo maps <br /> indicate slope of slightly over 14%. The same soil conditions► public <br /> services/utilities► agriculture & forestry and population density exists in <br /> both the 10 and 20 year Transition Areas as for the Commercial-Industrial <br /> Node. The proposed amendment is not consistent or compatible with the <br /> transportation system or the existing land use plan. <br /> The recommendation from the Planning Staff is that the Land Use <br /> Plan amendment application for redesignation from Rural Residential to 10 Year <br /> Transition/Commercial-Industrial Transition Node be denied because (1) the <br /> adopted "Central Orange Area Study" has adequately addressed nonresidential <br />