Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
c. Zoning ordinance Text Amendments <br />(1) Vesting of Property Rights <br />a. Article 22 - Definitions <br />(Site Specific Development Plan, Vested <br />Right) <br />b. Article 14.3.2 - Site Plan Review <br />c. Article 8.4.11 - Time Limits on <br />Special Uses <br />d. Article 8.8 - Regulations Governing <br />Individual Special Uses <br />e. Article 8.8.27 - Site Specific <br />Development Plans <br />(No further presentation was required on <br />Items 19b(2) and 19c(1).) <br />MOTION: Jobsis moved approval of the Planning Staff <br />recommendation for Items #9b(2) and #9c(1). <br />Seconded by Cantrell. <br />VOTE: Unanimous. <br />(2) Article 22 - Definitions <br />(Efficiency Apartment) <br />(No presentation was required.) <br />Eidenier asked about Commissioner Gordon's <br />concerns pertaining to consistency with other <br />ordinance provisions which address having more <br />than one mobile home on a single lot. Cameron <br />responded that there are several provisions which <br />may allow placement of a second mobile home on a <br />lot, the provisions serve different purposes, and <br />circumstances are not found by staff to be in <br />conflict. This is not regulated by the zoning <br />ordinance. <br />Eidenier noted that, if this amendment is <br />approved, property in a zoned township could <br />contain two mobile homes and property in an <br />unzoned township could only have one. Cameron <br />agreed this was the case unless policy was <br />changed. <br />Waddell asked if the owner of the efficiency <br />apartment must be the owner of the primary <br />dwelling. Cameron responded yes. Eidenier noted <br />that when the Ordinance Review Committee studied <br />this issue, the intent was to assure that better <br />maintenance care would be given to the efficiency <br />apartment if it is owned by the owner of the <br />primary residence. It could be in the nature of <br />