Browse
Search
Agenda - 06-04-1990
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1990
>
Agenda - 06-04-1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/1/2017 12:39:38 PM
Creation date
11/1/2017 12:29:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
6/4/1990
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
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.
/
394
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
'23 <br />JOHN CHARLTON, spoke in opposition to the rezoning. He indicated that his property <br />has increased in value due-to I -40. He mentioned that I -40 has made access to Chapel <br />Hill and RTP much easier <br />STEPEHN LEVINE urged the Board to vote against this request. <br />WAYNE RIGCINS• spoke in support of this rezoning request. He stated he believed <br />that the citizens property rights were being trampled on and that people who wanted this <br />area to stay rural needed to purchase the property. <br />LES BROWN stated that he sometimes travels to work past the American Stone Company <br />where a steady stream of 20 ton ,trucks issue out onto the highway and traffic drops to 5 <br />miles an hour. The same situation will potentially hold for New Hope Church Road. At <br />the end of that road there will soon be a school. Putting a commercial enterprise here <br />with slow moving trucks creates a great potential for disaster. <br />PHEAR3 stated that he understood the citizens who wanted to keep things the way <br />there were but it can't be done. He indicated that he agreed that.people who want to <br />keep this land as it is need to attempt to purchase it. However, they need to purchase <br />it at its fair market price not at a lower price caused by the zoning making it <br />unusable. He also indicated that he believed these were constitution rights and the <br />decision needed to be made on that basis. It was not something that should be decided <br />by majority vote. He also stated that the Planning Director and his staff told the <br />Commissioners that the zoning was not appropriate. <br />BETTY EIDENIER asked Mr. Phears to explain what he meant by "life of the property." <br />PHEARS indicated that what he meant was the life of a quarry was 30 to 50 years <br />depending how quickly the stone was sold. <br />A motion was made by Steve Halkiotis, seconded by John Hartwell, to.refer this <br />matter to the Planning Board for recommendation to be returned to the Board of <br />Commissioners no sooner than October 2, 1989. <br />VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />c. .Z -9 -89 Hartford Construction Company <br />The presentation was made by Emily Crudup. In summary this item was <br />presented to receive citizen comment on the proposed rezoning request submitted by <br />Hartford Construction Company. The property is question is located on the north side of <br />NC Highway 54 near White Cross, approximately 800 feet west of Oak Hollow Road, a new <br />public road. It is•known as part of lot 11J shown on Tax Map 30B in Bingham Township. <br />It is•also a portion of lot 10 in Oak Hollow Subdivision which was a major subdivision <br />approved in July of this year. The zoning designation requested is Local Commercial -1. <br />The maximum mount of land which may be zoned•LC -1 in any activity node is five (5) <br />acres. At present, there are 3.45.acres of LC -1 in the White Cross !rode. If the <br />proposed rezoning isy approved, . the total acreage of LC -1 will be 4.65. The <br />Comprehensive Plan states that the land use category of "Rural Communits.Activity Node - <br />Identifies rural crossroads communities throughout the County where small scale <br />commercial activities serving the community and surrounding areas are appropriate. The <br />applied zoning districts include: LC -1 and NC -2." Therefore, the proposed rezoning to <br />Local Commercial -1 would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. <br />QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE EOAPD OF COMI SSIONERS <br />CMMISSIONER HALKIOTIS asked if Lot 10 would be divided into two lots. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.