Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
_w <br /> "^ 86 <br /> Allison referred to testimony he had heard at the <br /> public hearing indicating automobile repair work <br /> was in progress in and since 1981. He indicated <br /> he felt it could not be considered a junkyard, <br /> but, rather auto repair/body shop. <br /> Katz expressed concern that the Board is <br /> attempting to apply a category to a situation <br /> that does not fall into any of the categories. <br /> He continued that he heard evidence that auto <br /> repair and body work was being done. He felt <br /> there was no way to determine whether there was <br /> more "junkyard activity" going on the repair <br /> work. <br /> Price expressed concern that the issue may be <br /> whether or not it is now a legitimate business, <br /> not what it has been for the years since 1981. <br /> Willis responded that the existence of business <br /> records are not used directly in the terms of <br /> identifying if something is a business and what <br /> the business is. If business records existed, <br /> that would be evidence to indicate there was a <br /> business. The absence of such records does not <br /> state that there was not a business. It simply <br /> does not give as much information to base <br /> findings on that there was a business. <br /> Waddell reminded the Board again that the item <br /> has been returned to the Board by a Judge asking <br /> for additional evidence supporting the contention <br /> that the use was one allowed in an EC-5 district <br /> in 1981. Waddell continued that there had been <br /> much history attached to this issue. <br /> Reid noted that he felt the information being <br /> presented was not sufficient to convince him <br /> that the business was not operating in 1981. <br /> Waddell emphasized again that a Judge was saying, <br /> "If you provide additional evidence, then I will <br /> not overturn it; however, if you don't, to my <br /> satisfaction, then it is overturned. " Waddell <br /> agreed that it was a difficult decision, but, in <br /> order to retain the EC-5 designation, additional <br /> evidence must be presented. <br /> Henry Wilson, applicant, stated that his business <br /> specializes in the rebuilding of transmissions <br /> and engines. No body work is done. He felt <br /> nothing has changed since 1981. He felt there was <br /> reasonable doubt and that the classification <br /> being applied is incorrect. He referred to an <br /> affidavit submitted by Russell Garrett. Willis <br /> responded that the affidavit indicated more hobby <br />