Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
developed independently from one another consistent with applicable standards including the Table of Permitted 223 <br />Land Uses contained in Section 5.2. 224 <br /> 225 <br />Perdita Holtz: Franklin Garland has put his hand up for a second time; it will be up to the Board whether you want to 226 <br />allow additional comments from Mr. Garland. 227 <br /> 228 <br />David Blankfard: I don’t think we need to hear anything else from Mr. Garland on this agenda item. 229 <br /> 230 <br />Gerald Scarlett: I’m Gerald Scarlett again from West Scarlett Mountain Road. I just have a quick question. I think I 231 <br />know the answer but I want to make sure. Item 9 on the agenda, the only thing that is doing is reverting the zoning 232 <br />for the property on the east side of Old 86 back to its previous zoning before the development for Settler’s Point, is 233 <br />that correct? 234 <br /> 235 <br />Michael Harvey: You are correct sir. 236 <br /> 237 <br />Gerald Scarlett: Thank you. 238 <br /> 239 <br />Randy Marshall: Ready to make a motion if that’s the desire of the Planning Board. 240 <br /> 241 <br />David Blankfard: Yes 242 <br /> 243 MOTION by Randy Marshall this would be an ordinance amending the Orange County Zoning Atlas as established in 244 <br />Section 1.2 of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance and whereas the proposed rezoning consists of 245 <br />the eight property owners and whereas the proposal has been found to be consistent with the 2030 Orange County 246 <br />Comprehensive Plan and whereas the requirement of Section 2.8 of the UDO have been deemed complete and 247 <br />whereas the Board has found that the proposed zoning atlas amendment to be reasonably necessary to promote the 248 <br />public health, safety, and general welfare, we recommend that the Board of County Commissioners rezone the areas 249 <br />described above and depicted on the attached maps. 250 <br /> 251 <br />Michael Harvey: Chair Blankfard, this is Michael Harvey, can I ask for a clarification. Randy so your motion is that 252 <br />you make a recommendation to approve the Statement of Consistency as contained in attachment 3 and the 253 <br />proposed ordinance, which you have just summarized as contained in attachment 4 to the County Commissioners, is 254 <br />that correct? 255 <br /> 256 <br />Randy Marshall: My presumption was we had already approved the attachment 3 by our earlier vote and I was 257 <br />recommending approval of attachment 4. 258 <br /> 259 <br />Michael Harvey: No sir, this is a different item, so it’s both items. 260 <br /> 261 <br />Randy well then I recommend both 3 and 4. 262 <br /> 263 <br />MOTION by Randy Marshall to recommend approval of the Statement of Consistency and the ordinance amending 264 <br />the Orange County Zoning Atlas. Seconded by Hunter Spitzer. 265 266 <br />ROLLCALL VOTE: 267 <br />Carrie Fletcher: Yes 268 <br />Adam Beeman: Yes 269 <br />Hunter Spitzer: Yes 270 <br />Melissa Poole: Yes 271 <br />Randy Marshall: Yes 272 <br />Kim Piracci: Yes 273 <br />Susan Hunter: Yes 274 <br />Alexandra Allman: Yes 275 <br />David Blankfard: Yes 276 <br />Patricia Roberts: Yes 277 278 <br />9