Agenda - 10-05-94-IX-C - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

SEP-15-1994 10 39 FROM ORANGE CTY COMMISSIONERS TO PU4NINING P.02/OS 22 1 District category. In addition to the Land Use Plan boundaries, several 2 properties were split by either the "zoning district" boundary or by a 3 "development area" boundary identified in the Economic Development 4 Districts Design Manual. The owners requested that adjustments be made 5 in the Primary and Secondary Development Area designations to include all 6 of their property. Also, when the Board of Commissioners approved the 7 Economic Development Districts proposals, the issue of the approval for s each proposal was discussed. The proposals for how to approve the 9 Special Use Permits, Site Plans, Subdivision, and Planned Development 10 were presented. 11 12 QUESTIONS AND/OR CODaiawrs PROM MEMBERS OP TEE BOARD OF COMMISSIONIRB AND 13 PLANNING BOARD 14 15 Commissioner Gordon stated that her understanding was that these 16 proposals were not intended to remove oversight of large projects from 17 the Board of Commissioners. She felt it was important for elected 18 officials to have that oversight. 19 20 QUESTIONS OR`,COMMENTS PROM CITIZENS 21 22 Bill Clayton, an Orange County citizen, stated that he was in favor 23 of zoning. However, he requested that this area remain in residential 24 zoning. 25 26 R.L. Clayton, an Orange County resident, spoke in opposition to this 27 rezoning. She requested that it remain residential and all future 28 landowners be alerted to the fact that it will remain residential. She 29 feels that rezoning this land will devalue her investment. 30 31 Frankie Baker, an Orange County resident and mobile home park owner, 32 requested that his entire property be zoned either residential or 33 commercial. He felt that it would place a financial burden on him to 34 have part of it zoned commercial and the remainder zoned residential. 35 36 Chair Waddell suggested that Mr. Baker meet with Mr. Collins to 37 clarify his concerns and to submit further comments in writing. 38 39 R.L. Clayton requested clarification on the 100 foot buffer and the 40 30' D.O.T. buffer. Mr. Collins indicated that if the property owner 41 would suffer a hardship with the 100' foot buffer they have the right to 42 use the Planned Development Process as long as the intent of this 43 district is not. abandoned. 44 45 Commissioner Willhoit indicated that the most significant effect on 46 the land occurs when it is zoned and during the subdivision approval 47 process and with the permitted uses that are allowed. The individual 48 specific development proposals should be directed by the design manual 49 and the design standards. It should not make any difference if staff or 50 the Board of Commissioners are interpreting it. The outcome should be 51 the same. When 500 acres are developed, either by a series of small 52 steps or by a large step, the outcome would then be as prescribed. The 53 developers have stated that the length of time necessary for the process 54 is an important factor in the cost of the process. They have requested