Browse
Search
12.10.25 BOA Agenda Packet
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Board of Adjustment
>
Agendas
>
2025
>
12.10.25 BOA Agenda Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/4/2025 11:13:20 AM
Creation date
12/4/2025 10:52:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
12/10/2025
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
352
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
37 Draft <br /> 1 Kyle Myers: Yes, sir. I understand the assignment that this is seeking approval of a care facility. I just <br /> 2 wanted to understand the context of the exhibit that shows a 56,000 proposed site future <br /> 3 building. So, I thought it was appropriate to ask. <br /> 4 <br /> 5 Cy Stober: Mr. Chair. If I may? <br /> 6 <br /> 7 Leon Meyers: Please. <br /> 8 <br /> 9 Cy Stober: I'd like to provide some context regarding the proposed development footprint and the advice <br /> 10 or the claimed advice. But it is it is the feedback that I provided with to Dr. Dennis and for <br /> 11 clarity, the LIDO Article 2 requires any changes from a submitted and recorded special-use <br /> 12 permit to be abided by. If any modification of that special-use permit is made, there are minor <br /> 13 modifications, which are quite minor. I can detail them if necessary. They can be approved <br /> 14 by the planning director. All other modifications must be reviewed at a quasi-judicial <br /> 15 evidentiary hearing,such as we have tonight as a major modification to the special-use permit. <br /> 16 So,for the sake of both the applicant's time and future time,and interest as well as the county's <br /> 17 and public interest of the county to minimize staff time and reviewing a major modification, 1 <br /> 18 felt it prudent to provide that advice or guidance feedback to Dr. Dennis that it may be <br /> 19 worthwhile to include that footprint on the submitted site plan so that a future major <br /> 20 modification would not be necessary and that footprint could be developed upon provided all <br /> 21 other standards in the LIDO are abided by. <br /> 22 <br /> 23 Leon Meyers: All right. Related to the future, the proposed future building site, I think Beth, Beth asked <br /> 24 about the distance from that site to the north property line. It's not dimensioned on the site <br /> 25 plan. Would you be open to a condition that would put a minimum dimension on that? <br /> 26 <br /> 27 Nora Dennis: Oh yeah, of course. <br /> 28 <br /> 29 Leon Meyers: Okay. And, and if the proposed future building site went away completely would that be <br /> 30 something you would consider? <br /> 31 <br /> 32 Nora Dennis: Yes. <br /> 33 <br /> 34 Leon Meyers: All right. Where was, are there questions? <br /> 35 <br /> 36 Beth Bronson: There was a question about the gate being self-closing and self-latching. And there was, I'm <br /> 37 wondering if that was complete, that work was completed yet? <br /> 38 <br /> 39 Nora Dennis: It is scheduled for Monday. I tried really hard to get it done before today, but it's not, it's going <br /> 40 to be done on Monday. <br /> 41 <br /> 42 Beth Bronson: It is scheduled. <br /> 43 <br /> 44 Nora Dennis: Yeah. <br /> 45 <br /> 46 Beth Bronson: All right. And then the fencing on the site plan I see kind of stops at the garden. Do you have, <br /> 47 there's wire fence versus the deer fence those two different things? <br /> 48 <br /> 49 Nora Dennis: Yeah. <br /> 50 <br /> 37 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.