Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
9 81 ; <br /> Mr. Baton Lloyd presented aerial photographs taken of the site at <br /> various dates. The first three show no motor vehicles and the last two or <br /> three show that there were motor vehicles on the property. He submitted <br /> these photographs into the public record. <br /> MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Crowther, seconded by Chair Carey <br /> to refer the proposed Zoning Atlas amendment to the Planning Board for a <br /> recommendation to be returned to the Board of County Commissioners no sooner <br /> than August 3, 1995. <br /> VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> d) Z-5-95 Piedmont Quality Electric <br /> Planner Emily Cameron presented information as contained in the <br /> agenda abstract. In summary the property is located in Cedar Grove Township <br /> at the southeast corner of NC Highway 86 North and Walnut Grove Church Road. <br /> Adjacent land uses include a County-operated solid waste convenience center, <br /> a store zoned Neighborhood Commercial, residential and agricultural land. <br /> The County proposes to rezone one acre to Neighborhood Commercial to correct <br /> an error in the Zoning Atlas which was discovered by the Planning Staff on <br /> April 26. <br /> THERE WERE NO COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS <br /> A motion was made by Chair Carey, seconded by Commissioner Crowther to <br /> refer this proposed Zoning Atlas amendment to the Planning Board for a <br /> recommendation to be returned to the Board of County Commissioners no sooner <br /> than the next available Board of Commissioners meeting following the <br /> Planning Board recommendation. <br /> VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> 2. Amendments to the Orange County Zoning Ordinance <br /> a) Article 8.2 Special Uses <br /> Information on this item was presented by Planner Mary Willis. <br /> In summary the proposed amendment was initiated and drafted by the County <br /> Attorney after reviewing several recent appeals of Board of Adjustment <br /> decisions. The proposed amendment clarifies that the applicant bears the <br /> burden of proof to show that a proposed Special Use is in harmony with the <br /> surrounding area, and that those opposing approval of a Special Use have the <br /> burden of proof in establishing that the use does not satisfy approval <br /> requirements. <br /> THERE WERE NO COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS <br /> A motion was made by Chair Carey, seconded by Commissioner Crowther to <br /> refer the proposed amendment to the Planning Board for a recommendation to <br /> be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than August 3, 1995. <br /> VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />