Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
37 Draft <br /> 1 taking something and moving it. In this case, that's a little bit of a one off. We had porta-potties <br /> 2 that were moved, and then they asked for this additional allowance that is not defined, and I looked <br /> 3 to the Patil's to verify this, but their thought was—because I asked these questions about the <br /> 4 septic system and everything, and their response was we'd rather come and ask and see if that's <br /> 5 possible, and then spend the money to go through the building permits and the septic permits and <br /> 6 so on and so forth. Again, it's up to the board to decide is there discretion in can that box move or <br /> 7 not, or that's up to you. <br /> 8 <br /> 9 Greg Niemiroski: Question for the applicant:from your testimony, if the health department does not approve, you still <br /> 10 would like to build the structure but for the other uses, if it's not approved as a septic? So, is this <br /> 11 Building A intended to be built whether there's restrooms or not? <br /> 12 <br /> 13 Vishwanath Patil: Yeah. So, and the idea is to have a toilet and a back room just mainly for the ladies players. They <br /> 14 don't have any changing room there, and they can't use the porta-potty for changing rooms. So, 1 <br /> 15 don't how could they get the permit to have a structure without the toilets. It'll be good to have. It <br /> 16 would be good to have a back-room kind of facility but not so huge obviously. They're they can at <br /> 17 least change. But again, it's totally depending on the problem. <br /> 18 <br /> 19 Leon Meyers: Other questions board movers? <br /> 20 <br /> 21 Beth Bronson: I mean, as far as thinking about what that means just because you have not done a perc test. You <br /> 22 were unaware of what a septic or a repair field may look like, — <br /> 23 <br /> 24 Vishwanath Patil: We have applied for the permit, yeah. A perc test. <br /> 25 <br /> 26 Beth Bronson: For the perc test? Yes. <br /> 27 <br /> 28 Vishwanath Patil: Yeah, perc test. <br /> 29 <br /> 30 Beth Bronson: Absolutely. But in the idea that I think, to your point of where could, where could Building A go that <br /> 31 would be allowable under this? If this was to be approved, what would be the limits with which, <br /> 32 given the existing buffers, which, because it's all residential, there aren't any, how close could it get <br /> 33 to the road? How close could it get to adjacent property? And I think that if we were to think about <br /> 34 this, it would need to have that clarification. Because 2000 square feet is a 100 by 20. <br /> 35 <br /> 36 Vishwanath Patil: It doesn't have to be 2000 square feet. It could be literally less than 1,000 square feet. It could be <br /> 37 just 100 square feet, right? As long as we have a facility there. <br /> 38 <br /> 39 Beth Bronson: I have to consider what the limits could be, right? Right, and to that point, it's very understandable <br /> 40 that if you've been having these games, and you have cultivated this community of playing cricket <br /> 41 and having teams that the natural progression of the growth does make sense, and so an <br /> 42 amendment to the existing SUP is understandable, and what you are asking for versus what is <br /> 43 already existing, that is, I think, what we're discussing here today. Again, the idea that you still <br /> 44 have to go through the process of permitting, I just want to make sure that you don't have to come <br /> 45 back here in 2 months or that we're not allowing too much leeway for that development, right? <br /> 46 <br /> 47 Vishwanath Patil: Absolutely yes. Very valid point. <br /> 48 <br /> 49 Leon Meyers: If you look at the proposed location, there is a setback from the road that would limit the potential <br /> 50 position of the building. There is a side yard setback off the, is that the west property line, and <br /> 37 <br />