Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
153 <br /> APPROVED WITH AMENDMENT 2.7.24 <br /> 1223 <br /> 1224 Beth Bronson: You absolutely are. Yes. I guess that's what I mean about these discussions about the <br /> 1225 roadways, easement, and things like that, as well as the site plan itself effecting future business. I think we <br /> 1226 were just getting very speculative about some of this. It's just that I'm thinking about it as what you have now <br /> 1227 moving into it, and huge component of the education and your opportunity to be more of a community leader in <br /> 1228 that area because there are a ton of arborists. <br /> 1229 <br /> 1230 Craig Nishimoto: On that, on that recreational stuff, we think it's absurd that people are into rock climbing in <br /> 1231 Chapel Hill. Why? There's not rocks. There's a lot of trees. We think it's absurd that when you go into REI, <br /> 1232 there's a rock climbing section but no tree climbing section. We want everyone, when they go camping with <br /> 1233 their kids, to bring tree climbing gear. We can teach them to do that. So, that's kind of the vision. We're at the <br /> 1234 cutting edge. <br /> 1235 <br /> 1236 Beth Bronson: For the 100 foot setback, the moving it to 40 feet, is this on the southern border? <br /> 1237 <br /> 1238 Craig Nishimoto: Yes. <br /> 1239 <br /> 1240 Beth Bronson: Okay, of the Superfund site? <br /> 1241 <br /> 1242 Craig Nishimoto: There are no neighbors there. <br /> 1243 <br /> 1244 Beth Bronson: No. It says it's zoned as residential. <br /> 1245 <br /> 1246 Craig Nishimoto: Well, wait a minute. Let me correct that. Because if you look at the site plan, there's a <br /> 1247 place where it's probably within 100 feet on the Duke Forest side too. So yeah. You're right. The Duke Forest <br /> 1248 is zoned Rural Buffer, and we might be incurred within that 100 feet. It's just not residential. It never will be. <br /> 1249 <br /> 1250 Ashley Moncado: I can pull the conditions up. Those were the five that were provided in your packet, and <br /> 1251 I'm not sure if we're looking at adding a sixth or we would be revising Condition Number 5? <br /> 1252 <br /> 1253 Melissa Poole: The letter was the sixth. <br /> 1254 <br /> 1255 Ashley Moncado: There was the potential to have the BOCC considering an addition of six or that the letter <br /> 1256 is a response to five. <br /> 1257 <br /> 1258 Cy Stober: Correct. Ashley is correct. The letter would replace Number 5. <br /> 1259 <br /> 1260 Melissa Poole: So, we've got five. This is a procedural question because when you throw all these at us, <br /> 1261 we get mixed up when we've got to make a motion. So, are we doing Attachment 6, the Statement of <br /> 1262 Consistency, do we have to do all these individually, or can we put them all together? <br /> 1263 <br /> 1264 Cy Stober: In the statement? <br /> 1265 <br /> 1266 Melissa Poole: In the motion. <br />