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
5 <br /> decision. He added that since the time of the Court order he had talked <br /> with members of the community, explaining the necessity of the retention <br /> ponds and the benefit of the reclamation activity which would be continued. <br /> In order for the property on which the reclamation ponds are situated to be <br /> properly zoned, he must add to it an additional 0.59 acres of land to meet <br /> the minimum two acre requirement. <br /> The purpose of the request for an amendment to the Land Use Plan <br /> is to designate an 0.59 acre tract of land adjoining the concrete plant from <br /> Rural Residential to Ten-Year Transition/Commercial Industrial Activity <br /> Node. If the Land Use Plan is amended, he will apply for rezoning and a <br /> Special Use Permit to permit a retention and recycling facility critical to <br /> the operation of the concrete plant. The request does not constitute an <br /> extension of the commercial activity. <br /> Mr. Chandler reemphasized that his original request for a Land <br /> Use Plan amendment was solely to meet DEM requirements for the control of <br /> runoff. He noted that it was late in 1984 when it was discovered that the <br /> runoff was an environmental problem. He continued that when the Land Use <br /> Plan was adopted in 1981, the property line of the concrete plant was <br /> designated as the line separating Rural Residential from Commercial. Based <br /> on the use at that time, such designation was both natural and reasonable. <br /> Based on technological advances and on increased sensitivity to the <br /> environment, it has been determined that the runoff of surface water from <br /> the plant site is undesirable. The nature of the natural runoff is now <br /> believed by the Division of Environmental Management to be a hazard to <br /> public health, safety and welfare. Based on environmental standards when <br /> the Land Use Plan was adopted, no detrimental effect was recognized. He <br /> noted that the newly recognized hazard presents a changed condition which <br /> should be the basis for a secondary amendment to the Land Use Plan. The <br /> granting of a secondary amendment will carry out the intent and purpose of <br /> the Land Use Plan by enabling continued operation of the commercial business <br /> in the area clearly designated for commercial use in the original Land Use <br /> Plan. Although it would be possible to prevent man-made situations which <br /> create runoff into the stream, there is no remedy short of the proposed <br /> retention ponds which will prevent the natural runoff. He stated this was a <br /> changed condition over which he has no control. <br /> The Planning Staff has recommended that the application for <br /> redesignation of 0.59 acres from Rural Residential to Ten-Year Transition <br /> Area and Commercial Industrial Activity Node be denied. He indicated that <br /> his understanding of the basis of the recommendation was that he failed to <br /> adequately state the changed conditions on which he based his request for a <br /> secondary amendment and that an 0.59 acre tract does not, in Planning <br /> Staff's opinion, at this time meet certain location standards. He apologized <br /> if his explanation of the changed conditions was not sufficiently clear and <br /> noted that before today, he was not aware that the application was <br /> considered deficient on that basis. He asked that the comments he made at <br /> this public hearing regarding changed conditions be incorporated into the <br /> application to remove the deficiency. Regarding the location criteria, he <br /> noted the following: <br /> One of the areas which was deficient was the public service/utility <br /> area. The plant has access to public water. The property cannot be <br /> subdivided and sold. It should be deemed to have the same service <br /> availability as the present plant. The reclamation activity will lessen the <br /> water consumption because the plant can reduce the stress on the water <br /> system. He added that during the drought last year, his plant voluntarily <br /> switched from public water to a well system maintained for a backup water <br /> supply. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.