Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
37 <br /> cars. <br /> Scearbo stated that id- the terms of a <br /> specific placement of -an acre or 40,000 sq. <br /> ft. there was a previous case where there was <br /> a 200 ' x 200' zoning that was for some reason <br /> misplaced on the atlas and that was a case <br /> where it was rezoned to keep the same land <br /> area to match up with the activity. <br /> Hinkley stated that he had researched to see <br /> if there was a business listed and, according <br /> to Orange County Tax Office, Mr. Combs had <br /> not listed the .business or the tools or <br /> equipment and now they are investigating <br /> that. Mr. Combs also does not have a dealers <br /> license. Cantrell noted that this is not the <br /> question before the Planning Board. <br /> Reid stated that what he remembered was Kenny <br /> Martin's parents property which has changed <br /> configuration because of the purchase', of <br /> additional property. There was discussion <br /> that at one time the property was a <br /> partnership between Combs and Martin. <br /> i <br /> Jobsis asked for clarification of the EC-5 <br /> rezoning that Scearbo had mentioned. Scearbo <br /> noted that it was changed not to- increase the <br /> size of the lot but to change the shape of it <br /> to better fit the activity that was actually <br /> there. Jobsis asked then if that would be <br /> reasonable, if 40,000 sq. ft would be the <br /> recommendation, that it be superimposed over <br /> where the business activity actually is. <br /> Scearbo responded that she felt that is <br /> probably reasonable. I do not want to make a <br /> specific recommendation. But, the point is, <br /> that if 40,000 sq. ft area would have been <br /> zoned, then it would seem reasonable to <br /> assume that the area be worked out with the <br /> location of the business. <br /> Gledhill stated that he felt the Board should <br /> try to put the EC-5 designation where it <br /> would have been in 1981. <br /> Reid restated his finding that there was a <br /> _ business in 1981 and had it been known that <br /> Planning Staff would have recommended an EC-5 <br /> = designation at that time. It was also his <br /> finding that the area would have been a <br /> minimum of 40,000 sq. ft. and indicated the <br /> area on the map he felt it should include. <br />