Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
23 <br />55 Paul Guthrie: What is the ownership pattern? Are there a lot of owners, one owner? <br />56 <br />57 Tom Altieri: I don't have that specific information tonight. <br />58 <br />59 Paul Guthrie: Is there any development on it at all. <br />60 <br />61 Michael Harvey: Single family residents on those lots and one of the parcels is part of a larger farm. The Hare <br />62 Krishna part of their temple is on the other side of Dimmocks Mill Road there is a mish mash of existing land uses in <br />63 that general area. <br />64 <br />65 Pete Hallenbeck: In my opinion at this point, fairly well developed. Most lots have something on them. <br />66 <br />67 Tony Blake: One more question, that phantom line seems to bisect a bunch of lots, does that mean that the lots <br />68 have two land use and zoning classifications? <br />69 <br />70 Tom Altieri: One base land use classification and correct, two different zoning classifications. <br />71 <br />72 Tony Blake: This would serve to bring them in line and make them consistent across the lot. <br />73 <br />74 Tom Altieri: That's not part of this amendment. If it is something that this Board wanted to recommend to the County <br />75 Commissioners it would require another public hearing and notification and then we could consider that. <br />76 <br />77 Tony Blake: I don't think it's worth it. <br />78 <br />79 Craig Benedict: One other thing, this upgraded consistency statement, just something that we can use for future <br />80 reference. With this consistency statement, you see us referring to previous planning studies. One case was the <br />81 Hillsborough Interlocal Agreement another planning construct was the water and sewer boundary agreement was <br />82 another layer of the planning. As we proceed with these rezonings in the future, you'll see us continue to use the <br />83 value of our small area planning processes to show consistency. The law has come back around to support what we <br />84 have been doing in the past by having multiple reasons for changing zoning. Some places around the state would <br />85 say, just because, so this is a way of incorporating our prior planning and give a good consistency statement. <br />86 <br />87 Pete Hallenbeck: So to put this concept of the consistency statement into perspective, if we're talking about taking <br />88 some parcel there and zoning it for some gigantic store or office complex that would be a consistency problem <br />89 instead we're wrestling with AR versus R -1. <br />90 <br />91 Paul Guthrie: Has there been any commentary from any of these parties that have an ownership interest on this <br />92 particular activity? <br />93 <br />94 Tom Altieri: Very little. They all have received first class mail notification and the information. We had one citizen <br />95 that attended the public hearing that spoke to me after the meeting that just wanted more information. I provide him <br />96 the information, more detail on his zoning and the permitted uses and Margaret Hauth's contact information with the <br />97 Town if he had any interest in how the zoning may have played out had his property stayed within the Town's <br />98 jurisdiction. We did have a lot of interest back in January of this year when the Town was looking at both <br />99 relinquishing and expanding its ETJ, that involved another 200 or so properties and we did have about 50+ people <br />100 show up at that meeting. All but two were there because they owned property within the areas where the Town was <br />101 considering expansion. I think a lot of the people dropped off and there has only been a few phone calls, 3 or 4. <br />102 <br />103 MOTION by Bryant Warren to recommend to the BOCC approval of the rezoning amendment. Seconded by Buddy <br />104 Hartley. <br />105 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />106 <br />107 MOTION by Bryant Warren to approve the consistency statement. Seconded by Tony Blake <br />108 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />2 <br />