South Boston News & Record
and Mecklenburg Sun
05/26/16 - 5:35 am
05/26/16 - 5:26 am
05/26/16 - 5:24 am
05/27/16 - 7:37 am
- More A&E
Halifax County Supes approve one business permit, nix another; appointments made
SoVaNow.com / October 04, 2012Halifax County supervisors on Monday night approved a conditional use permit allowing the operation of one new business in Halifax County, while denying a permit for a second proposed business.
The Board gave its unanimous approval to a request by Gary Chesbro for a conditional use permit to operate a fish-only taxidermy shop on the north side of Grubby Road, about 1.3 miles west of its intersection with Sinai Road in ED#3.
Chesbro told board members that he will conduct the business on an appointment basis only, and there will be no odor nor signage involved. He also does not expect to have more than one or two vehicles in the parking area at any given time.
“Only sportsmen will even know the business is there,” he assured the supervisors.
On the second application — recommended for denial by County Planners following a public hearing — the supervisors heeded the Planners’ advice, noting that it is their usual pattern to honor their recommendations.
Mary Mayberry had requested the permit to operate a tire and recovery service at 2170 Cedar Grove Road in ED-6. Pointing to the county’s high rate of unemployment, Mayberry and her husband told supervisors they expected to hire as many as 14 people in the business and provide a much needed service in the community.
They said they would provide quality and reliable products for their customers and would offer road service as well as on-site operations six days a week from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Several adjoining landowners spoke with a high regard for the Mayberrys and in favor of the operation including Mark Bailey, Owen and Mel Barksdale, Beth Bailey and Brad Moser. They also presented supervisors with a petition signed by some 80 residents supporting their request, of whom they noted 90 percent were nearby neighbors.
But ED-6 supervisor Wayne Conner, in whose district the business would be located, explained that it is hard for the board to go against the recommendation of its Planners. He said eight of his constituents had contacted him, expressing their opposition to the request as he moved for denial.
ED-1 Supervisor J. T. Davis suggested that the Mayberrys get in touch with their neighbors who may oppose the business and try to work out their differences and come back later with another request.
The third public hearing before the Board was approved on a unanimous vote after no one commented on the matter. It involved making a change to the County’s Erosion and Sediment Control ordinance to align it with changes recently made to the Code of Virginia.
In other business, supervisors heard from Leigh Cochram of the Southern Virginia Regional Alliance who presented them with a power point presentation on the agency’s work. The Alliance includes six areas including the counties of Halifax, Pittsylvania, Henry and Patrick and the cities of Danville and Martinsville.
Cochram said the mission is to work together to strengthen economic development opportunities and to fill our industrial parks and buildings. “We are working to raise our visibility and to get prospects to look at us,” she said, noting she worked on 32 projects last year.
Supervisors also named nine people to serve on the Community Criminal Justice Board including Christopher Salerno, James Halasz, Sheriff Fred Clark, Timothy Trent, Donald Burge, Brian H. Turpin, Fred Black, Michael J. Newman and Larry Clark.
CommentsI thought that the majority ruled in our society. If they had a petition, with 90% approval, why does the 10% get to shut them down.
Oh I forgot Halifax does not want any business that does not fit their IDA outline. What a joke
- By allpolitical2 on 10 / 04 / 12
CommentsI thought also 90percent would rule. Seems someone or several someone's on planning does not like these people. Not good for anyone in Halifax county.
- By William holland on 10 / 04 / 12
CommentsThat's the issue with P&Z boards. Their narrow definitions often conflict with what a landowner or surrounding landowners want.
Guy in my area had a singlewide trailer on his lot for years until he could afford to build a house, which was about time HC first got zoning. Another guy wanted to put a trailer on his lot until he could afford to build, and 1st guy used zoning to prevent it. Ironic...
P&Z told me I had to rezone my land near VIR from agricultural to commercial because I had built a "race shop". Not a race shop- basic electric, no permanent plumbing, no lift, simply large storage for my old cars and household overflow. "But you might do that later". No, but I might tear it all down and sell off the old cars and you not get a dime of extra tax money, which it what the rezone was all about.
I guess they think we're stupid.
- By powerhouse on 10 / 10 / 12
News & Record