|
APPROVED 5/10/2010
<br />
<br />OC Board of Adjustment – 3/8/2010 Page 73 of 86
<br />1 2 3
<br />4
<br />5 6 7
<br />8
<br />9 10 11
<br />12
<br />13 14 15
<br />16
<br />17 18 19
<br />20
<br />21 22 23
<br />24
<br />25 26
<br />27
<br />28
<br />29 30
<br />31
<br />32
<br />33 34
<br />35
<br />36
<br />37 38
<br />39
<br />40
<br />41 42
<br />43
<br />44
<br />45 46
<br />47
<br />48
<br />49 50
<br />51
<br />52
<br />53 54
<br />should be aware of and maybe check into some more since I have not had the chance to do so. He believes that any kind of
<br />commercial development on New Hope Creek flood plain would be in violation of the Orange/Durham County Master Plan for
<br />New Hope Creek. No. It was a 1988/1989 Master Plan. Okay. The other key point I wanted to make was that to me it
<br />seems like the burden of proof is that the applicant has to show that it will maintain or enhance the property and from
<br />everything we have heard and the fact that I would have to disclose to anybody that I might want to sell the property to that
<br />this is a material fact, I don’t think there is any way that he could be meeting his burden of proof in this case. The final thing I
<br />wanted to mention as far as procedural things, I have also was told by someone on the Board of County Commissioners,
<br />actually asked to have a public hearing about reclassification from Class B to Class A. I don’t know the status of that but I
<br />think obviously that is an important enough issue and enough people are upset about this, I would like for you to take that
<br />fact into consideration as well. You can see I made a lot of points. I didn’t go kind of go point for point for things but I noticed
<br />the Southerlands and Bobby did also say this. I actually have also told Mr. Lonsway that I have heard dogs barking. It is the
<br />only conversation we had actually when I said “oh, yeah I have heard dogs barking from over there”, he said, “couldn’t be
<br />me, it is not me”. People have commented to him about it already. As far as the harmony of the neighborhood, we have
<br />talked about numbers and reports, I live there and I know Mr. Herman presented the fact that it is not a Governor’s Club
<br />house and all this traffic shouldn’t matter but it does, I live there. When I wake up at night and I am reading, I don’t hear
<br />traffic so I don’t think that I should have to hear a bunch of dogs because someone thinks there is a lot of traffic there
<br />already. What I would ask if you are considering approving this application, come out and sit on the porch with me for a little
<br />while and see what a peaceful area it is and then make the decision.
<br />
<br />Jeffrey Schmitt: Questions by counsel? Questions by the board?
<br />
<br />Christie Boros: My name is Christie Boros and I was also sworn in earlier. I am probably somewhere down stream, I think
<br />we are here so we are not immediately impacted by this and I really, first of all, that we have a civilized mechanism in place
<br />to deal with these kinds of disagreements and I appreciate the fact that you volunteer for this. I feel sorry for people like the
<br />Southerlands. They are facing a perceived diminishion in their home. On the other hand, I am a proponent of free enterprise
<br />and I appreciate Mr. Lonsway’s interest in this and I appreciate the steps he is taking to mitigate any untoward that are on
<br />surrounding properties. My concern is actually something completely different and it is that this particular type of application
<br />for a permit, it seems to be to affect public policy and the public policy was established many years ago and has been
<br />supported, the Carrboro of Alderman, Chapel Hill Town Council and the Board of County Commissioners when they
<br />established the rural buffer, those people were all elected representatives. Many of them campaigned, on large part, their
<br />ideals of these land preservation, that is how they came to be elected and it seems inappropriate for people who are
<br />appointed, and again, I appreciate that you are willing to put yourself through this but it seems inappropriate that people who
<br />don’t have a direct accountability towards the electorate would be making the decision that is going to impact public policy.
<br />Not just in this particular instance but in all the instances and they are going to be many, I am afraid, coming up of variances
<br />and rural buffer or Special Use Permits in the rural buffer. If you think about it, the rural buffer is a bucket full of water, the
<br />people who are elected can kick that bucket over anytime and they have to face the results, the consequences of that at the
<br />ballot box. Appointed people have the responsibility or the authority to poke little holes in it here and there and they don’t
<br />actually have to answer to anyone at the ballot box and in my opinion, that is not a good way to establish a public policy, or
<br />to modify public policy so all I would ask is that you’ all, I know that after this kind of meeting, you probably hate to hear me
<br />say this but I think decisions such as this that will impact public policy should be kicked back to the people who are
<br />accountable to the citizens. That is what I would ask you to do. After six hours, I hate to do that.
<br />
<br />Jeffrey Schmitt: Questions counsel? Board members?
<br />
<br />Nick Herman: You have heard extensive explanation of how this facility has been crafted. Designed to minimize any kind of
<br />impact that you otherwise would associate with a kennel or might be associated with a kennel so just pollution, such as
<br />noise, if it is a commercial establishment, additional traffic and the like. You have heard at great length, I think, I will say it in
<br />a kind of a conclusionary way how, in light of the design of this facility and in light of its scope, those are non-issues. It is not
<br />going to be noisy, it is not going be visually obtrusive, and it is not going to add any kind of appreciateable traffic. So there
<br />are no adverse kinds of impacts. That is the evidence from our side. What is interesting about this is there is no evidence
<br />from the other side to the contrary. Other folks haven’t come in here there is going to be a demonstrable traffic impact, that
<br />the acoustical engineer is wrong, that it is going to be noisy or there is going to be some kind of pollution. No one else has
<br />come in here to say anything to the contrary about those facts. Well meaning people have though, fears, about this. Fear, in
<br />large part, is the enemy of reason. You might not even be persuaded it you have enough fear regardless of what anybody
|