Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
APPROVED 11/11/2013 <br />OC Board of Adjustment – 9/10/2013 Page 32 of 38 <br />were detailed in Articles 6 and 7. The document has been entered into record, Attachment I. The 1 <br />required ratios denoting how much recreational area is required is listed on the approved site plan 2 <br />and I am referencing the condition of the approved plat. 3 <br /> 4 <br />Geof Gledhill: I would offer this document into evidence. 5 <br /> 6 <br />Michael Buck: Where is the 15 acres of active recreation space? 7 <br /> 8 <br />Michael Harvey: We have indicated that when you look at what is provided on these plats, there 9 <br />is a total of 15.141 acres. There is 7 acres on Phase IIa as noted on the plat, there is the .292 10 <br />acres, Phase IV in the tot lot, the 5.4 acres reserved for the dedication of active recreation space 11 <br />in Phase IV, this is the grassy field, the 2.381 acres in the Braddock park multi-family portion of 12 <br />this project with the swimming, required parking for the swimming pool and other recreation 13 <br />amenities. 14 <br /> 15 <br />Michael Buck: Everything in the fifth column, you are counting as active recreation? 16 <br /> 17 <br />Michael Harvey: Yes. 18 <br /> 19 <br />Michael Buck: What is the definition of active recreation? 20 <br /> 21 <br />Geof Gledhill: With all due respect, Mr. Buck is cross examining. 22 <br /> 23 <br />Geof Gledhill: When Scotswood was considered and approved by Orange County in 1986 24 <br />leading to the May 20, 1986 SUP approval, were County Zoning regulations and subdivision 25 <br />regulations contained in the zoning ordinance and a separate subdivision regulation? 26 <br /> 27 <br />Michael Harvey: Yes. 28 <br /> 29 <br />Geof Gledhill: Are those documents in the record? 30 <br /> 31 <br />Michael Harvey: Yes. 32 <br /> 33 <br />Geof Gledhill: Explain the reason for the “1981” draft ordinance and the other zoning ordinance 34 <br />for the board so they understand why we have both of these in the record. 35 <br /> 36 <br />Michael Harvey: In addressing the appeal which first came to m y attention in 2012, and in looking 37 <br />at the file for the Scotswood planned development special use, I determined there was no copy of 38 <br />the ordinance that existed on the day this project was approved in the public record or in our files. 39 <br /> In order to try to determine what regulations were imposed at the time, we found a draft copy of 40 <br />the 81 ordinance and compared it to a copy of the ordinance that was in force and effect the day 41 <br />Mr. Buck submitted his appeal. We determined the language was consistent, there had not been 42 <br />major modification of Article 7 specifically dealing with the review and approval plan and approval 43 <br />of planned developments. We included both the draft and actual zoning ordinance in the record 44 <br />so this board was able to determine what regulations existed and verify that no major changes 45 <br />had occurred in the planned development regulations that would call what we are about to testify 46 <br />to into question. 47 <br /> 48 <br />Geof Gledhill: Specifically, with respect to the recreation requirements, are they the same? 49 <br /> 50 <br />Michael Harvey: Yes sir. 51