Agenda - 11-25-1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND PLANNING BOARD QUARTERLY MEETING hUVEMBER 25, 1985 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in joint session with the Planning Board on November 25. 1985. 7:30 p.m. in Superior Courtroom, Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina. CONALfMkgagtaajammta Chair Don Willhoit. and Commissioners Shirley Marshall:1 Moses Carey, Norman Walker and Ben Lloyd. allAMATICEMMEML Geoffrey Gledhill. EIRREMBOSMIESERIEREMEL Chair Alice Gordon. and members Chris Best, Barry Jacobs, Steve Kizer, Peter Kramer, Frank Pearson, David Shanklin, Carl. Walkers and Steve Yuhasz. ETAIMMIXEMASEERIEnim Members Margaret Miller, Sharlene Pilkey. and Betty M. Margison. finVEggEWLL County Manager Kenneth R. Thomson, Planner Gene Bell, Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe. Director of Planning Marvin Collins and Planner Susan Smrth. a. PUBLIC HEARA.V ITEMS 1. WP-4415 VIC KNIGHT MURAL RESIDENTIAL TO COKKERMAL 'MAMMON ACTUITEMMEL pasmuctumma Planner Gene Bell presented for the receipt of public comments a proposed secondary amendment to the Land Use Plan for a 3.12 acre tract Owned by Gary Richardson and located on the east side of N.C. 86 approximately 1.2 miles south of 1-85. The proposed amendment would change the Land Use Plan designation of the property from Rural Residential to Ten Year Ttansition/Commercial-Industrial Transition Node. The applicant cites changed or changing conditions as the reason for the amendment. Various non- residential uses in the area are mentioned as justification for the reason for the amendment. The changing nature of this area was addressed in the "Central Orange Area Study" in 1983, the result being: (1) Redesignation of the node from Commercial Transition to Ocauercial-Industrial Transition, and (2) Expansion of the node (in accordance with the location criteria in section 3.4 of the Land Use Plan) to encompass the nonresidential land uses. Analysis of a Land Use Plan amendment requires that the requested designation be compatible with the applicable Locational Criteria in Section 3.4 of the Land Use Plan. The locational criterion for hydrology. flora & fauna, energy use and historic and cultural sites is compatible or consistent for the Ccauercial-Industrial Node. The location criteria for land slope is borderline. Calculations based on measurements taken from USGS topo maps indicate slope of slightly over 14%. The same soil conditions, public services/utilities. agriculture & forestry and population density exists in both the 10 and 2b year Transition Areas as for the Commercial-Industrial hbde. The propbsed amendment is not consistent or compatible with the transportation 4tem or the existing land use plan. The recommendation from the Planning Staff is that the Land Use Plan amendment application for redesignation from Rural Residential to 10 Year Transition/Commercial-Industrial Transition Node be denied because (1) the "CtilertirginnzrA:: adequately giVsts= nonresidential dde7eloedepmn Study" 1 criteria for the requested Land Use classification. COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OR PLANNING BOARD None.