Agenda - 07-01-1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

09E 13 Shanklin asked if the plan met the ordinance requirements. Smith responded it was an acceptable solution. MOTION: Pearson moved positive findings on 6.23e) and f) . Shanklin seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous MOTION: Pearson moved positive findings on all items under 6.24 on pages 096-099. Shanklin seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous. The Board addressed item 8.2.2 General Standards. Smith cautioned the Board that the letter of approval submitted by the opponents to the project was "heresay evidence" and that the applicant had opposed the letter and did not have the opportunity to cross examine the appraiser who had prepared it. MOTION: Pearson moved that noevidence was submitted which would indicate that general standards 1-3 under 8.2.2 have not been satisfied and, therefore, moved approval of the project with the conditions presented at public hearing. MOTION AMENDMENT: Pearson revised his motion to apply only to 8.2.2 1-3. Yuhasz seconded the motion. Kramer asked what precedents had been set with regards to considering letters of appraisal. He asked if these were judgement calls. Smith responded individuals can speak to the value of their own property and that it was a judgement call in considering appraisal. VOTE: In favor: (5) Yuhasz, Pearson, Shanklin, Kramer, Walters Opposed: (2) Pilkey, Gordon MOTION: Pearson, moved approval of the project with the attached conditions. Yuhasz seconded the motion. Smith addressed the differences between the applicant's proposal and the conditions regarding the standard of road and the construction of the nature trails. The applicant proposed a gravel-paved road and natural base nature trail but the recommended conditrions provide for NCDOT subdivision road pavement standards and an improved nature trail. MOTION AMENDMENT: Yuhasz moved to delete condition #12.