Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Approved 4/22/2014 <br /> <br />OC Board of Adjustment – 11/11/2013 Page 39 of 123 <br /> 1 <br />Geof Gledhill: The effective date and the rezoning and the recording of the plat are the key to Hillsborough water 2 <br />supply being available. The county’s contention and it believes the evidence supports that is that the county at all 3 <br />times, particularly with respect to the recreation requirements and recommendations took the position that the 4 <br />1986 ordinance standards were the only ones that pertained and that everything else was recommendation were 5 <br />therefore ongoing negotiations that took place to try to meet as many of those recommended recreation 6 <br />standards, recommended recreation amenities as were possible. Does that answer your question? 7 <br /> 8 <br />Karen Barrows: To follow up on what Mr. Buck said, a lot of this is predicated on when the rezoning happened? 9 <br />In 1998? 10 <br /> 11 <br />Geof Gledhill: That is correct, that is when this property was rezoned to PDH in March 31, 1998 but the permit 12 <br />was approved in 1986 and by its terms the project shall be constructed in accordance with the site plan dated 13 <br />October 1985 and revised January 2, 1986. I am quoting from the special use permit so essentially what the 14 <br />special use permit does is relates back to the approval date in order to determine what the requirements are. 15 <br /> 16 <br />David Blankfard: Essentially it was grandfathered. 17 <br /> 18 <br />Mark Micol: You put a lot of emphasis on the shall versus recommended but in his testimony, he started his 19 <br />closing arguments, he talked a lot about county officials had used requirement in their correspondence until the 20 <br />year 2012 so why do you think that was? Why did the county use requirement when it says in the SUP 21 <br />recommended? 22 <br /> 23 <br />Geof Gledhill: Why didn’t the developer say, wait a minute, you can’t require that because the special use permit 24 <br />is only making recommendations. I think the answer to your question is that is the best way to get the best deal. 25 <br /> 26 <br />Mark Micol: On number 27 in the SUP it says the following recommendations apply but then it lists a minimum of 27 <br />seven acres. You said in your testimony that the seven acres was part of a ratio that if the developers are 28 <br />compelled based on the ordinance so why that would be listed under recommendation when that is part of the 29 <br />ordinance. 30 <br /> 31 <br />Geof Gledhill: The site plan ratio they used is .52 open space recreation. It is not divided between active and 32 <br />passive. The division between active and passive occurs only in the recommendations and I don’t think there is 33 <br />any question there is more than 15 acres of recreation area in this project. It may not be the quality that Mr. Buck 34 <br />would like or the community would like but nevertheless it is recreation. 35 <br /> 36 <br />Larry Wright: But he addressed slope and what is your counter to the slope. He doesn’t give grades but we 37 <br />listened quite a bit on a poor quality of recreation space so what is your take on that. 38 <br /> 39 <br />Geof Gledhill: I have three grandchildren, six, four and two and you let them play tag on a hill, they will love it. 40 <br /> 41 <br />Larry Wright: They will play in a parking lot too. 42 <br /> 43 <br />Geof Gledhill: They will and furthermore, this polygon Mr. Buck has used because he has been provided by the 44 <br />county planning staff ignores some of the significant portion of this recreation area that shows in the central of 45 <br />this project. 46 <br /> 47 <br />Larry Wright: And that is along the creek? 48