AG 1997 09 15 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

those immediately surrounding it to the west and the east in terms of location. It is located on a major thoroughfare U.S. Highway 601. He said the more important question, however, is whether the proposed use is substantially different from those already permitted by the LDR zoning of this and surrounding properties. Mr. Marshall said it is the Staff's opinion that by limiting this 28 acre parcel to one use, or possibly two if a residence is built, the proposed use would be much less intensive than what is already permitted on the property under LDR zoning. Staff would recommend that the Commission better define the answers to those questions by inquiring them of the petitioner, and possibly if he would agree, to put conditions on this rezoning that would limit the size of the proposed building~ and reaffirm that it would not include retail activity. If the proposed use is as stated, non-retail, below 10,000 square feet and the only use (other than one residence) proposed for the property then staff would recommend approval. The Chair said the County is embroiled in a suit on the adjacent property, he asked Mr. Marshall to go back through the history of that rezoning again so the County would not wind up with a second suit. Mr. Marshall said Mr. Wilson who is sworn in, is one of the defendants along with the Board of Commissioners of Cabarrus County in a suit brought by a number of adjoining property owners, some of whom are here are also sworn to speak on this rezoning. Mr. Marshall said one of the plaintiffs in that particular case is Jack Garmon who is the current owner of this property before the Board this evening. Again, it has been heard by the Superior Court and the decision was entered that the property be reverted to the original zoning. The courts found that it was a case of spot zoning and agreed with the attorney for the plaintiffs to revert it to the Low Density Residential zoning. The Board of Commissioners have chosen to appeal that decision. Mr. Starnes said considering this has already been heard in Superior Court by the County Commissioners, what impact will this Board's decision have? Can it change anything? Mr. Marshall said the court decision was for an adjoining property to the south of this. This is a separate parcel. Mr. Moose asked Mr. Marshall why would this Board do that. Why not wait until we find out the outcome of the other and then decide what to do with this one? Mr. Marshall said that is a policy decision that this Board or the Board of Commissioners would need to make.