Browse
Search
Agenda - 08-24-1987
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1980's
>
1987
>
Agenda - 08-24-1987
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/19/2016 8:31:32 AM
Creation date
10/4/2016 12:11:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
8/24/1987
Meeting Type
Public Hearing
Document Type
Agenda
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
289
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
3 <br /> procedure that can be applied uniformly throughout the County. It is <br /> preferable to have such a unified system applied rather than allowing <br /> exceptions for individual subdivisions and/or property owners. Once applied <br /> the numbers become more permanent. <br /> JOHN ROGERS of 210 Hideaway Drive concurred with his neighbors <br /> and asked about the feasibility of integrating the house numbers with the <br /> zip code, resulting in a nine digit number to indicate their position on the <br /> grid system. He felt such a system would satisfy the postal authorities, <br /> the emergency services, and the property owners. <br /> BILL HUTCHINS of Falls of New Hope Subdivision indicated there <br /> is not a consistent numbering system in place but that everyone chose their <br /> own number. He asked if the grid system sufficiently provided for infill. <br /> Chair Marshall indicated that the grid system provides sufficient space for <br /> growth and that numbers assigned would be permanent. <br /> WITH NO FURTHER COMMENTS, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br /> The staff was requested to provide more detailed information and <br /> a recommendation. <br /> 2 . LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS - LUP-1-87 CHANDLER CONCRETE COMPANY <br /> The Staff presentation was made by Planner Gene Bell. He stated <br /> that on October 10, 1985, Chandler Concrete Company was granted a secondary <br /> Land Use Plan amendment, Planned Development rezoning, and Class A Special <br /> Use Permit for 1.41 acres of land on Old NC Highway 10. The request was <br /> prompted by State-mandated requirements to contain runoff from the existing <br /> concrete plant. <br /> An adjoining property owner subsequently challenged Orange <br /> County's approval in court. On December 12, 1986, the court ruled that the <br /> Special Use Permit was invalid since the applicant did not meet the required <br /> two acre minimum lot size standard, and since evidence had not been <br /> presented which proved that the project would maintain the value of existing <br /> properties in the area. The affect of the court ruling was to place <br /> Chandler Concrete Company in violation of the Orange County Zoning <br /> Ordinance. <br /> To correct its nonconforming status, Chandler Concrete is <br /> requesting that the Ten Year Transition area and Commercial Industrial <br /> Activity node be expanded by an additional 0.59 acres which when combined <br /> with the 1.41 acres currently in the same designation, would meet the two- <br /> acre lot size requirement. If the proposed Land Use Plan amendment is <br /> approved, Chandler Concrete Company will submit a Planned Development <br /> application for the entire two acres. Current policy does not permit Land <br /> Use Plan amendment and Planned Development (or rezoning) applications to be <br /> handled concurrently. <br /> The procedures for amending the Land Use Plan states three <br /> reasons for which the Plan may be amended: <br /> (1) because of changed or changing conditions in a particular <br /> area or areas of the County; <br /> (2) to correct an error or an omission in the plan; or <br /> (3) in response to a change in land use policy. <br /> The Land Use Plan amendment application does not adequately <br /> address any of these reasons. <br /> Evaluation of a plan amendment also requires conformance with the <br /> locational criteria for the plan designation being requested as specified in <br /> Section 3.4 of the Land Use Plan. The criteria includes land slope, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.