Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
• <br /> • <br /> 0 85 <br /> . • . <br /> • . rk <br /> 01. _ <br /> . , • . - <br /> ' - - Kizer noted that he was concerned ' <br /> . . with the Special Use Permit being <br /> . • granted indefinitely; he would like <br /> some method for re-evaluation of the <br /> . . <br /> • • . historic use. He also expressed the <br /> •. . <br /> thought that when ownership changed, <br /> . . . . <br /> the new owner would have to apply <br /> • . <br /> for a new Special Use Permit. He <br /> • . <br /> . . <br /> - • <br /> •. . • felt the standards of evaluation <br /> . . - - <br /> . <br /> • <br /> • _ .• - ,' • should be very tight and ' he would . <br /> • • <br /> . - <br /> - like a time limit set on the Special <br /> • - . • <br /> . <br /> . .. Use Permit. <br /> . . <br /> •. . . <br /> _ . <br /> - <br /> • <br /> . • .•. . . ' . . • . . <br /> _ . . . . <br /> . . <br /> •. • . Walters inquired what the individual' . <br /> . . <br /> . •. owner would gain from this <br /> . . . <br /> .- - - • . . : designation. Kizer responded . that . <br /> •. the owner of these historical <br /> . . . <br /> - • '. . structures could get grants at <br /> . reasonable interest rates from the <br /> • <br /> • . • 'historical societies and from other <br /> • . • .• - - . . • places for restoration purposes. <br /> • . <br /> • - . There are also tax credits available • <br /> • . for the owners of these structures. <br /> , . • Walters also felt there should be a <br /> . • • review period. <br /> .. <br /> . <br /> . . <br /> • • . • . . .Wilson felt that the real point of <br /> • . • <br /> . <br /> . <br /> . - the historic structures . was being <br /> • • .. <br /> . <br /> • • . • missed. The basic reason is for the <br /> . <br /> . <br /> • • • • . . ..• . . preservation of heritage. . <br /> . . <br /> . . . <br /> • -:- .- - . - , . . _ <br /> Kizer responded that, . the ' review <br /> • . <br /> . - ' . . period would ensure that . the use <br /> • • . <br /> • . .. .. , would continue ' 'to maintain and <br /> • • <br /> • . • preserve the historic value of the . <br /> structure- • . <br /> . . <br /> . •• <br /> . . • - . . • <br /> .. -.' . . . <br /> . . <br /> • • - - •• There Was much* discussion about what <br /> • . . <br /> . . <br /> . •`..h- <br /> ''''. . • • constituted a structural change as•. . <br /> • • . - • •. well as possible change of uses when <br /> .•: . • - . . • there was a change of ownership. • • . <br /> • <br /> . . <br /> • Gordon inquired of the Board if they <br /> • <br /> • • • ' . . felt a need for a.: . list of the <br /> . historical guidelin6s. Collins <br /> . • <br /> • <br /> responded that staff could obtain a <br /> • copy of the federal guidelines. <br /> . . <br /> • - i)i0TION: Laszlo moved, seconded by Greenberg, <br /> . . to amend the standards of evaluation <br /> (b) to read as follows: - <br /> •. . <br /> . Proposed uses and facilities <br /> . . . <br /> . • , <br />