Laserfiche WebLink
505 <br /> <br /> Section 4. This Resolution shall become effective upon its adoption and <br />a certified copy hereof shall be forwarded to the North Carolina Secretary of <br />Revenue. <br /> <br />Adopted this 7th day of August, 1986. <br /> <br /> Chairman Lentz announced that the regular meeting of the Board scheduled <br />for 9:30 A.M. on Monday, September 1, 1986, would be held at 9:30 A.M. on <br />Tuesday, September 2, 1986, because of the Labor Day holiday. <br /> Chairman Lentz opened the public hearing for the naming of an unnamed <br />road to Snow Crest Drive and asked if anyone were present who wished to speak <br />for or against this road name change. <br /> Ms. Dinah Miller spoke in support of the naming of the road. She also <br />asked that the condition of the road be improved. <br /> No one else spoke in regard to the road name and the public hearing was <br />closed. <br /> UPON MOTION of Commissioner Payne, seconded by Commissioner Hamby and <br />unanimously carried, the Board approved the naming of the unnamed road, FY <br />86-87 02, as Snow Crest Drive. The road begins at Gray Bark Road and ends at <br />Robert Wright's and Boyce Polk's house for a distance of 2,600 feet. <br /> Chairman Lentz requested that Mr. Michael Byrd, member of the Planning <br />staff, provide information to the residents of Snow Crest Drive regarding the <br />requirements and procedures for adding the road to the State road system for <br />maintenance. <br /> UPON MOTION of Commissioner Hamby, seconded by Commissioner Payne and <br />unanimously carried, the Board removed Petition 86-15 by Jack and Fannie Mae <br />Parrish from the table for discussion. <br /> UPON MOTION of Commissioner Hamby, seconded by Commissioner Barnhardt and <br />unanimously carried, the Board approved Petition 86-15 by Jack and Fannie Mae <br />Parrish to rezone property off Poplar Tent Road, Map/PIN 5610(01)-19-3089, <br />from R-15 to C-1. <br /> Mr. F. A. Rankin, Jr., Chairman of the Cabarrus County Planning Board, <br />presented each of the proposed Zoning Atlas amendments as approved by the <br />Planning Board. Mr. Phillip Kingsland, member of the Planning staff, reviewed <br />the location of the areas proposed for rezoning. Public input was received <br />regarding each proposed amendment prior to action by Board of Commissioners. <br /> <br />(1) <br /> <br />Petition 86-18. Mrs. B. A. Artz, off Nathan Avenue and Buffalo Street, <br />township 4, Map/PIN 5604(20)-92-5398. Wishes to rezone from R-9 to <br />RMF-7. The Planning Board voted 3-1 to deny this petition. <br /> <br /> Mr. Jim Haney, resident of the area, spoke against the proposed rezoning <br />and stated he had a petition signed by 30 residents who were also opposed to <br />the rezoning. He stated there were presently three trailer parks in the area <br />and in his opinion the neighborhood did not need additional multi-family <br />zoning. <br /> Mr. Gary Dunnmon spoke in support of the rezoning. He stated he was <br />buying the property for development or resale and that the best economic use <br />for the tract of land is a mobile home subdivision with emphasis on double- <br />wide mobile homes. Mr. Dunnmon stated that the placement of mobile home units <br />on the property would not have as great an environmental impact as the con- <br />struction of permanent structures. He explained that the number of mobile <br />home units would be based upon the availability of water and sewer services <br />and that a high density mobile home park would not be possible unless a <br />private sewer treatment plant is installed. <br /> Mrs. Pearl Wagstaff and Mr. Donald E. Wagstaff, Sr., owners of an adja- <br />cent mobile home park, spoke in opposition to the requested rezoning. Mrs. <br />Wagstaff expressed concern regarding such items as population density, impact <br />on schools, lack of water and sewer service to the area, and the location of a <br />portion of the property in the floodplain. In conclusion, Mrs. Wagstaff. <br />stated that the RMF-7 zone would not be conducive to the R-9 single family <br />residences in the community. <br /> There was no one else present to speak for or against the rezoning, and <br />Chairman Lentz closed the public hearing. <br /> It was noted that the Planning Department had recommended denial of <br />Petition 86-18 and had presented the following findings: <br /> <br />(1) Not conducive to existing residential development. <br />(2) Zone requires public water and sewer. <br /> <br /> <br />