HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrange County BOA Minutes 23 09 13 Signed Approved 10.18.2023
1 MINUTES
2 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
3 REGULAR MEETING/REGULAR MEETING/EVIDENTIARY HEARING
4 September 13, 2023
5
6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Leon Meyers, Chair Member
7 Nathan Robinson, Member
8 Beth Bronson, Member
9 Jeff Scott, Member
10 Greg Niemiroski, Member
11 Adam Beeman, Alternate (not voting)
12
13 MEMBERS EXCUSED: None
14
15 LIST OF APPLICANTS: Rebecca Sorenson
16 Keith Sorenson
17 Bobby Tucker
18 Gary Cullen
19 Hope Cullen
20 Jarvis Martin
21 Bobby Tucker
22 Ryan Moffitt
23
24 PUBLIC: John Pless
25
26 STAFF PRESENT: Cy Stober, Planning & Inspections Director
27 Patrick Mallett, Deputy Director, Development Services
28 Taylor Perschau, Current Planning &Zoning Supervisor
29 Sharon Swann, Administrative Support
30 James Bryan, Staff Attorney
31 Victoria Hudson, Environmental Health Director
32
33 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER
34
35 Leon Meyers called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
36
37 AGENDA ITEM 2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
38
39 Leon Meyers: Say when you're ready. We're ready to get started, I think.
40
41 Beth Bronson: I'm ready to get started if everybody's ready.
42
43 Leon Meyers: Are we good? All right, folks, I'll call the Board of Adjustment meeting to order. Staff or other, are there
44 any additions to the agenda that we don't have? Additions to the agenda?
45
46 Beth Bronson: Motion to approve.
47
48 Nathan Robinson: Second.
49
50
1
Approved 10.18.2023
1 AGENDA ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES—January 11, 2023
2
3 MOTION made by Beth Bronson to approve the January 11, 2023 minutes as presented. Seconded by Nathan
4 Robinson.
5 VOTE: Unanimous
6
7 AGENDA ITEM 4: PUBLIC CHARGE
8
9 Leon Meyers: I am going to read the public charge for both the public and the Board of Adjustment, and this is, bear
10 with me, it's important information. It'll just take a few minutes to get through. The Board of Adjustment pledges to the
11 citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board asks its citizens to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous
12 manner, both with the Board and with fellow citizens. At any time should any member of the Board or any citizen fail to
13 observe this public charge, I will ask the offending person to leave the meeting until that individual regains personal
14 control. Should decorum fail to be restored, the Chair, I will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine
15 commitment to this public charge is observed. All electronic devices should please be turned off or set to vibrate. The
16 Board of Adjustment is a quasi-judicial administrative body established in accordance with the provisions of local
17 regulations, the UDO, and State law to perform specified functions essential to the County's planning program. And
18 one of those is to consider special use permits like the one that's on the agenda tonight. Actions taken by the board are
19 based solely on competent, substantial, and material evidence presented during a previously scheduled and advertised
20 public hearing, like tonight's hearing, and the hearing has a specific item. As detailed within Section 2.12.2 of the
21 Unified Development Ordinance, the Board chair reserves the right to exclude evidence and testimony that is deemed:
22 'incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious' and therefore fails to reasonably address the issues before
23 the Board of Adjustment. While it should be noted there is no time limit on the presentation of evidence, the Chair asks
24 that the presentation of evidence be consistent with established policies and rules of procedure, and acceptable levels
25 of decorum to ensure a fair and equitable hearing for all parties. Anybody have any questions about the charge for the
26 board and the charge for the public? If not, I'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Is that right, Cy? Time to do
27 that?
28
29 Cy Stober: You may do that. We were not, there were a few slides before we get to findings of fact, but opening the
30 public hearing now would be, is absolutely at your discretion.
31
32 Leon Meyers: All right, good. Then we are in the public hearing.
33
34 5. CASES:
35 A. A-1-23—Evidentiary Hearing to review a Special Use Permit request submitted by The Nest at Hwy
36 54 West, LLC. proposing to develop Camp/Retreat Center(PIN: 9820-50-8290) located on NC 54 W,
37 southeast of intersection with Mebane Oaks Road, Mebane, NC within the Bingham Township of
38 Orange County
39
40 Cy Stober: So, before we get to the findings of fact and the staff findings regarding the special use permit tonight, I just
41 wanted to note where we are in the process and some establishment of foundations of what a special use permit is and
42 the deliberations of the Board of Adjustment this evening. So, regarding the special use permit generically, without
43 specifics, it has been reviewed by staff. A neighborhood meeting was held, and the Board of Adjustment is meeting
44 tonight to conduct an evidentiary hearing. Special use permits are identified in 160D-102 as a duty of a jurisdiction to
45 review in special use cases, specifically to authorize development or land uses in a particular zoning district upon
46 presentation of competent material and substantial evidence establishing compliance with one or more general
47 standards requiring that judgment and discretion be exercised, as well as compliance with specific standards. So, this
48 goes above and beyond the standards or the use-specific standards of the UDO and is reserved for special
49 consideration. In addition, the Board of Adjustment is charged by state law to consider special uses under a quasi-
50 judicial procedure, which is detailed in state law under 160D-406. Some special uses may be assigned to other bodies.
2
Approved 10.18.2023
1 The Board of Commissioners has discretion there. But quasi-judicial matters are generally reserved for the Board of
2 Adjustment. A quasi-judicial role is outlined here and is to receive evidence entered into the receive pertaining to the
3 case, hear testimony from parties with established legal standing, including staff, the applicant, and public that is
4 deemed to have standing, review the evidence and testimony, deliberate upon the materials, and make a determination
5 based upon the findings of fact and the testimony provided to the Board of Adjustment. The options available under the
6 Unified Development Ordinance of Orange County are to approve the special use permit, approve it with conditions that
7 are rational and tied to the use, or deny the special use permit. The quasi-judicial process is to establish the legal
8 standing, enter evidence into the record, consider the staff presentation and testimony, hear the applicant review of
9 evidence and testimony, hear any testimony from persons with legal standing, and then the Board of Adjustment may
10 ask questions and then deliberate, review the findings of fact, and decided. And, Mr. Chair, I have provided you with I
11 believe it's 2.7.7 of the Unified Development Ordinance which details the process in Orange County for consideration of
12 a special use permit. If you would like to, it may be helpful for the public to hear what those requirements are.
13
14 Cy Stober: You may do that. We were not, there were a few slides before we get to findings of fact, but opening the
15 public hearing now would be, is absolutely at your discretion.
16
17 Leon Meyers: All right, good. Then we are in the public hearing. I'm going to just quickly read through this section. And
18 this is, the Board of Adjustment is a little bit of an odd animal in that it's controlled both by state statute and by Unified
19 Development Ordinance, and this is the nature of BOA proceedings in the UDO. It says the review of special use
20 permit applications shall be conducted during evidentiary hearing. The review of a special use permit application is a
21 quasi-judicial process where the Board of Adjustment acts much like a panel of judges. This is not going to be a court-
22 level proceeding, but we do have to follow the rules. The Board hears factual evidence and sworn testimony presented
23 at an evidentiary hearing and then makes findings of fact supported by competent, substantial, and material evidence,
24 as Cy has described. The presiding officer of the hearing shall swear all parties intending to present evidence or
25 testimony during the evidentiary hearing. And we'll do that in just a few minutes. Presiding officer may take whatever
26 action is necessary to limit testimony to the presentation of new factual evidence that is material to the application to
27 ensure fair and orderly proceedings and to otherwise promote the efficient and effective gathering of evidence. Those
28 actions may include, and these are possible actions of the presiding officer, bar the testimony of odious hearsay
29 evidence, that is evidence that is not facts known by the person presenting testimony. Bar the presentation of non-
30 expert, it means that if you're testifying, you need to testify what you know yourself. Interrupt digression into immaterial
31 testimony, we're going to try to keep the process moving on its topic. Repetitive testimony, reasonably limiting the time
32 allowed each witness or cross-examination, and I hope there won't be need for that this evening. Providing for the
33 selection of spokespersons to represent groups of persons with common interests. Again, I don't think we have a need
34 for that tonight. Interrupting personal attacks and/or ordering and end to disorderly conduct, as the child said in the
35 beginning. Where the Board finds compliance with the general standards, specific rules governing the specific use, and
36 that the use complies with all required regulations and standards, the application must be approved unless the board
37 shall also find, in some specific manner, that the use will not maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general
38 welfare if located where proposed and developed and operated according to the plan as submitted. If opposing the
39 approval of the application on the grounds that the use will not promote the public health, safety, and general welfare,
40 shall have the burden of establishing by competent and material and substantial evidence that the application would
41 cause that conflict. I believe I covered all of that, Cy.
42
43 Cy Stober: Yes, sir.
44
45 Leon Meyers: Okay.
46
47 Cy Stober: One final matter before we go into standing and move into what I believe would be the appropriate time to
48 swear in and begin considering evidence, the visual system is not ideal tonight. We had a technical glitch. If anyone is
49 having any difficulty reviewing the material, please just notify staff, and we will do what we can to make sure that you,
3
Approved 10.18.2023
1 your package should be complete, but if you would like to see a screen, we can do what we can to adjust that for the
2 Board.
3
4 Leon Meyers: Okay. And for those who are watching it, I hope the monitor will allow you to follow the process. Okay,
5 those who intend to testify this evening, could you please come forward?
6
7 James Bryan: As they're gathering, after this, I'd recommend taking a roll call. I see that we've got quorum, but maybe
8 a little more than quorum, so whoever's not voting, the alternate, you could ask them to sit in the audience, free to go
9 home.
10
11 Leon Meyers: All right.
12
13 SWEARING OF THE TESTIMONY
14
15 Sharon Swann: Do you swear and affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and
16 nothing but the truth, to the best of your knowledge?
17
18 Public: I do.
19
20 Staff: I do.
21
22 Applicants: I do.
23
24 Leon Meyers: Thank you. Everybody may be seated. I'm going to go ahead and call the role, at James' request. Greg
25 Niemroski?
26
27 Greg Niemroski: Here.
28
29 Leon Meyers: Nathan Robinson?
30
31 Nathan Robinson: Present.
32
33 Leon Meyers: Jeff Scott?
34
35 Jeff Scott: Here.
36
37 Leon Meyers: Beth Bronson?
38
39 Beth Bronson: Here.
40
41 Leon Meyers: Leon Meyers and alternate Adam Beeman is here in the audience, but not participating in the hearing.
42 Okay, Pat, you're on.
43
44 Patrick Mallett: Okay, good evening, members of the board. My name is Patrick Mallett. I'm the Deputy Director of
45 Development Services. I'll be handling the staff portion of your evidentiary hearing tonight. And, oh, by the way, I'm
46 going to very, for the sake of time, quickly go through this. You can of course ask questions on the back end. Your
47 packet, as you've seen and have been delivered, contains some basic elements. You have an abstract for the case,
48 which is pages 3 through 5 of your agenda packets. You have Attachment 1, which is the staff report, pages 6 through
49 19. You have an Attachment 2, which is the applicant's application and all materials that they have submitted prior to
50 the meeting. That's page 20 through 103. Attachments 3 and 4, you have the neighborhood information meeting and
4
Approved 10.18.2023
1 notification materials, pages 107 through 153. Attachment 5, which is the staff comments in various shapes and forms
2 up unto this point for the case. And then at the end, you have Attachment 6, which is the findings of fact. Page 251 to
3 258. So, you have a large packet, 258 pages of material. What we're considering tonight is a special use permit
4 application for a camp and retreat center. This is the staff presentation and testimony and the findings of fact. As a
5 brief overview,just to orient you, the red star on the map indicates the site. It's along in Highway 54 West. It's just
6 below and near the Cane Creek Reservoir. It's located in the Bingham Township. It's within the Haw River unprotected
7 watershed. It's below the Cane Creek, so it's not in the Cane Creek watershed, and the applicant is The Nest Head in
8 Highway 54 West, LLC. The surrounding area, as you can see from the aerial map, is a collection of residential uses,
9 bona fide farms, both legal bona fide farms and just regular agricultural activity, and then of course the Cane Creek
10 Reservoir is largely agrarian in nature. I will call attention to the fact that immediately adjacent to this is the Pluck Farm
11 Brewery, Still String Brewery facility. Okay, so special use request, as I said, for a camp and retreat center. Both of
12 those uses require a special use permit. They're similar but different. The parcel size is approximately 20.03 acres.
13 The zoning is AR. The surrounding zoning is entirely AR, and that's agricultural residential. Future land use map
14 designation. Land use calls for agricultural residential, and then resource protection. That resource protection area is
15 the items in green. In this case, it forms the southeastern border in green and roughly parallels the streams and then
16 juts into the property slightly. The two major elements of the request are the retreat element, which is indoor and
17 outdoor facilities to serve as retreats and special events. And I will let the applicant get into greater detail about what
18 those events are envisioned to be. It has some camp elements, which would include indoor and outdoor facilities to
19 service up to 50 campers at a time for seasonal events. This is a copy of the site plan. It's part of your packet. They're
20 proposing one entry point that's closer to the Pluck Farm-Steel String side of the frontage. Here you enter the property
21 traveling roughly parallel to the road. You pass by one of the retreat facilities building. Then you would go through
22 there's a bathhouse, some extra parking, a looped road that follows an old farm road through a collection of cabin
23 structures that are part of the camp element of the project. To renderings that are in addition to your packet, you will
24 see in your packet some black-and-white renderings. These were supplementals that were submitted to us last week,
25 so I believe the team will be entering that into the record as well. You have proposed conditions. I'll go into those in
26 detail later, but you've got 15 conditions that are submitted as Attachment 2, Exhibit E. Site plan elements: You've got
27 a collection of 22 cabins, a bathhouse, a pavilion, a community building, and a host caretaker-tenant space, 25 parking
28 spaces, accommodations for overflow parking, private well and septic systems, a 430-foot landscape buffer along the
29 northern property line. That's the northern property line that's common with the Pluck Farm to the north and sort of
30 facing towards the Cane Creek area. Got a lot of parking encroachments within the 75-foot buffer along Highway 54 as
31 shown, and they're providing above and beyond what would be the normal stream buffer. The state had asked for, for
32 wildlife protection, a 100-foot buffer, and they've honored and obligated that per as indicated in the plan. So, staff
33 analysis, as folks may recall, we don't make a determination, or we don't give a recommendation about the case. We're
34 here simply to present the record and then to draw ties to the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance and the
35 requirements and mechanics of a special use permit. It's up for you, the board, to decide whether that's valid or not so,
36 but nonetheless, we've reviewed the application extensively over the past few months, and we've determined that it's
37 consistent with Unified Development Ordinance Sections 2.5, 2.7, 5.3.2, 5.7.5, 5.18.4. We've also considered that
38 they've sufficient material evidence to support this middle requirement and the use standards listed in 2.2, 2.7, 5.3.2,
39 5.7.5, and 5.18.4 of the UDO. This is our analysis. It's not a recommendation. But staff finds that this, the special use,
40 the proposed special uses will maintain and promote public health, safety, welfare if located where developed and
41 operated according to the plan reflected in the Staff Report Attachment 1. Applicant submitted site plan and conditions,
42 Attachment 2, Exhibit B, C, and E, and staff comments in Attachment 5. Based on the materials provided, the staff
43 finds no potential injury to the value of contiguous property. As documented in the staff report, Attachment 1, staff finds
44 that the use will be in harmony with the area in which it is located, and the use in compliance with the plan. Physical
45 development of the county as embodied in these regulations or in the comprehensive plan, or portions thereof. So this
46 is our opinion and our ties to the comprehensive plan. I'm not going to read through all of this. You have copies of this,
47 but I'll just go over the highlights. And this is by no means an all-inclusive list. These elements that are listed in the
48 comprehensive plan are lengthy. You could easily derive at, or subtract, or add to this list. This isn't all inclusive, but
49 Comprehensive Planning Principal No. 2: sustainable growth and development, Comprehensive Planning Principle 4:
50 natural area resource protection, Comprehensive Planning Principle 5: preservation of rural land use pattern,
5
Approved 10.18.2023
1 Comprehensive Planning Principle 7: promotion of economic prosperity and diversity, Comprehensive Planning
2 Principle 8: preservation of community character, comprehensive plan relevant to the land use element goals, so this is
3 the land use elements in the Comprehensive Plan. Land Use Goal No. 1 is fiscally and environmentally responsible;
4 Land Use Goal No. 2, land uses that are appropriate onsite environmental conditions and features; Land Use Goal No.
5 3, a variety of land uses that are coordinated with a programming pattern that limits sprawl; Land Use Goal No. 6, land
6 use planning processes that are transparent, fair and efficient, and responsive. Okay, then we go to, so now we're at
7 the point where the applicant and their team will take over and do their presentation.
8
9 Leon Meyers: Board members, any questions?
10
11 Ryan Moffitt: Good evening, Chair Meyers, members of the board, my name is Ryan Moffitt. I'm a lawyer at the Vernon
12 Law Firm in Burlington. It's my pleasure to be here this evening representing The Nest at 54 West, LLC, the applicant
13 for this special use permit. I have with me this evening Keith and Rebecca Sorenson and Gary and Hope Cullen who
14 are the partners and principals of The Nest at 54 West and who have worked extremely hard over many years to date
15 to get us to what is still a beginning point but an important point in the progress of this project. I'm also joined by Mr.
16 Jarvis Martin, appraiser who conducted a market study on our behalf that's in your agenda packet. Bobby Tucker is our
17 engineer on the project who has worked extremely hard in getting us where we are today. So, I appreciate the Nest
18 team being here this evening. This is a special project in the sense that it came about because of a common thread
19 that our friends at The Nest shared and that you'll hear more about, and it led them to this property back in December of
20 2019 after a search for the right property to pursue a vision, and what that is, is this camp and retreat project that we're
21 pursuing today. Part of the vision, a big part of the vision, although this is going to be a camp and a retreat that's going
22 to be open to the public and hopefully serve, and will serve, the entire community. It's driven by a need and a desire to
23 serve the population that lives with intellectual and developmental disabilities. And so the way that this proposal has
24 come about has really come about with that mission in mind. Again, the hope is that folks from the committee,
25 community, folks from outside the community will avail themselves of the property, enjoy it, and that it will in turn do
26 some good to serve and educate folks on that special and important interest. The planning process for this has been
27 going on for almost a year in earnest, the Orange County planning process. We have spent hours with staff who have
28 been so gracious with their time. Mr. Stober, Mr. Mallett, Ms. Perschau, and Mr. Collie have been great to give us
29 feedback and guidance on bringing before you what we have today. It's undergone extensive review, and we think that
30 what we're presenting today is really going to be something that reflects well on Orange County and beyond. An
31 important part of getting us to where we are today has been community engagement. Obviously, that's a requirement
32 of the process, but it is a component of the process that we've taken extremely seriously, and that began with, of
33 course, the required neighborhood meeting. That took place at the Eddie Pub back in May of this year. We sent out
34 the required notices to property owners within 1,000 feet, and we brought more than just that. We had at least 26
35 attendees at that meeting, had robust conversation, had great feedback, and then after that meeting, continued to
36 communicate with folks that were introduced to the project at that meeting. We had a follow-up meeting in June of this
37 year with about 10 attendees and then continued to send a follow-up letter to all of those attendees and have had
38 informal conversation with folks along the way. It's been important because it's informed the conditions that we've
39 submitted with this request. Of course, the request is for the retreat center and camp. Those are the two special uses
40 subject to the requirements of UDO Sections 5.7.5 and 5.18.4, but they also come with the conditions that we have
41 proposed. I'm happy to read them into the record, but they are in your agenda packet. If you'd like for me to read 'em
42 into the record, I will, but otherwise, I'll keep it moving.
43
44 Leon Meyers: I would say if you wanted to highlight particular conditions? I know from Pat that there may be a
45 difference between the specific conditions that you're proposing this evening and the conditions that are in the agenda
46 package, so maybe we should be clearer about exactly which conditions we are going to attach to the special use
47 permit.
48
49 Ryan Moffitt: Well, I'll err on the side of caution, and I'll just read in the specific conditions that we are proposing.
50
6
Approved 10.18.2023
1 Leon Meyers: All right.
2
3 Ryan Moffitt: The first condition is one that was informed by our community dialogue, and that's that the community
4 building shall be used no earlier than 8 a.m. and no later at 8 p.m., except by overnight retreat groups, who may utilize
5 the community building with the presence of a Nest employee until 10 p.m. The second condition is that the property
6 shall observe quiet hours from 10 p.m. until 8 a.m., during which time there shall be no outdoor recreation, gathering,
7 socializing, entertainment, or activities producing noises exceeding 50 decibels as measured from the property
8 boundary line. That condition and that noise standard are informed by the noise limits contained in the Unified
9 Development Ordinance. Condition 3: A live-in onsite host responsible for the management and operation of the
10 property outside of normal business hours and during quiet hours may permanently occupy one of the dwelling units
11 shown on the site plan. That could be a cabin, that could be the loft that is conceptually proposed to be contained in
12 the community building. Condition 4: The boundaries of the property will be posted at four equidistant points along the
13 northern property line and at three equidistant points along the eastern property line. Signs posted at those points will
14 notify occupants of the property, that leaving the property and venturing onto adjoining property without the express
15 permission or invitation of the adjoining property owner may result in liability for trespassing or other claims involving the
16 unpermitted use and/or occupancy of the property of another. Condition 5: Overnight guests shall be provided with
17 and agree to abide by rules and regulations which shall include enforceable quiet hours set forth on Voluntary Condition
18 No. 1 herein above and shall prohibit overnight guests from accessing adjoining properties directly from the property
19 among other property and operation-specific rules and regulations. Condition 6: Property shall accommodate no more
20 than 50 overnight guests at any one time in the provided guest cabins, excluding exempt special events held on the
21 property. Condition 7: The existing farm road on the property shall be improved as displayed on the site plan.
22 Condition 8: Twenty-five regular parking spaces in designated areas for up to an additional 20 spaces of overflow
23 parking shall be provided as displayed on the site plan. Condition 9: The limits of land disturbance on the project shall
24 not exceed 4.31 acres, as provided on the site plan. Condition 10: In addition to observance of the required 65-foot
25 stream buffer, the property shall observe the voluntary 100-foot stream buffer, except where five parking spaces are
26 placed for cabin guest parking. And all existing natural buffer outside the limits of disturbance shall be disturbed,
27 provided that where any vegetation is removed from the natural buffer, the number of required new plantings to replace
28 the removed vegetation shall be increased by 50 percent. Condition 11: The southern boundary line of the property
29 fronting North Carolina Highway 54 shall be buffered with a 75-foot Type E landscaped buffer consisting of existing and
30 constructed buffer plantings, as provided on the site plan. Condition No. 12: A tree preservation area along the
31 property long fronting NC Highway 54 shall be provided, except where necessary to accommodate driveway access
32 and utilities, as displayed on the site plan. Condition 13: The eastern and northern boundary lines of the property shall
33 be buffered with a 30-foot Type B landscape buffer, except for a 430-foot segment of the northern boundary line buffer,
34 which shall be modified to preserve the existing farm road corridor and enhance with, A, a reduced buffer width with
35 higher density of evergreen understory trees and shrubs or, B, installation of the entire 30-foot Type B buffer from the
36 inside edge of the existing roadway, as the same is provided on the site plan. Lighting on the property shall, Condition
37 14: Lighting on the property shall be implemented in accordance with the site plan and shall be limited to two 30-foot
38 pole-top mounted shoebox LED lights for the community building parking areas and four 10-foot pole-top mounted
39 traditional LED lamps which shall be installed approximately equidistant from the community building parking area
40 along the access road to the camp guest parking area, as shown on the site plan. And finally, Condition 15: The
41 property shall be developed in accordance with the site plan, subject to the following minor modifications, in addition to
42 those specified by Section 2.7.14 of the Orange County UDO, allowed to be administratively approved by the planning
43 director. First point, adjustments of structures, driveways, parking areas, lighting, and well and septic features of no
44 more than a 10 percent change in ground coverage. And second point, no more than a 10-foot shift in location. Those
45 complete the conditions that we have attached to the request before you this evening. I'd also add as a point of
46 housekeeping, there you should have a packet of exhibits that we may reference, but in any event, would like to enter
47 into the record. Those are numbered exhibits lettered A through F, and Thursday exhibits include Exhibit A, the site
48 plan; Exhibit B, conceptual renderings of guest cabins; Exhibit C, a conceptual rendering of the community building;
49 Exhibit D, a conceptual rendering of the community pavilion; Exhibit E, a conceptual rendering of the bathhouse to
50 serve overnight guests; and Exhibit F, a copy of Mr. Martin's market study report. And I'll also add, referencing the
7
Approved 10.18.2023
1 renderings that are in the exhibits, Michael Spinello, another part of the team. He's not here this evening but worked
2 extremely hard to put those together for us and to give you, hopefully, a conceptual and not a formal idea of what the
3 vision for this use is.
4
5 Leon Meyers: Without objection then, Mr. Moffitt, these exhibits will be entered in the record.
6
7 Ryan Moffitt: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
8
9 James Bryan: Mr. Chair, if I could interrupt here. Going through the pack that I have, I have two documents that have
10 labels of Exhibit E on them, it looks like.
11
12 James Bryan: That is correct.
13
14 James Bryan: And then we got the proposed conditions.
15
16 Ryan Moffitt: Thanks for pointing that out, Mr. Bryan. To clarify, the rendering marked Exhibit E is what we would call
17 Applicant's Exhibit E for the evidentiary hearing. The additional document labeled Exhibit E is, that is Exhibit E to the
18 application package, and so that's just a copy of the proposed conditions that I just read into the record. I included that
19 in the packet so that everyone would have the most recent list of conditions. But it references Exhibit E as Exhibit E to
20 the application packet.
21
22 Leon Meyers: Let's call the conditions Exhibit E1 just for the purpose of clarity.
23
24 Ryan Moffitt: That works.
25
26 Leon Meyers: May I interrupt you for a minute, Mr. Moffitt. That was a mouthful. See if the Board has any questions
27 about Mr. Moffitt's presentation to this point, about the conditions.
28
29 Beth Bronson: The No. 15, one of the two, the adjustments of structures, driveways, and parking areas no more than 10
30 percent change in ground coverage. Is that for any ground coverage spread out through the entire facility, or 10
31 percent in parking, 10 percent in lighting, 10 percent in driveways?
32
33 Ryan Moffitt: That would be each component, each individual compartment. And the reason for that is because we are
34 so early on in.
35
36 Beth Bronson: Okay, yeah.
37
38 Ryan Moffitt: The process. Tweaks will yeah.
39
40 Beth Bronson: Okay, so just wanted to clarify for the record that the shift of 10 percent change in ground cover for
41 structures is separate from 10 percent change in driveways.
42
43 Ryan Moffitt: Yes.
44
45 Beth Bronson: Different from 10 percent in parking areas?
46
47 Ryan Moffitt: Yes.
48
49 Beth Bronson: And there are only five parking areas at the proposed bathhouse, and that's also considered proposed
50 parking for the cabins?
8
Approved 10.18.2023
1
2 Ryan Moffitt: Yes.
3
4 Leon Meyers: Other questions? Condition 6 says excluding exempt special events held on the property, and this is
5 relative to the limit of 50 overnight guests. Can you describe the kind of special event that would be exempt from that
6 limitation?
7
8 Ryan Moffitt: There, as I understand the UDO, there is a special event permitting process that must be pursued through
9 the planning department in order to host events on any property that meet certain criteria, but there are also certain
10 criteria for events that would be exempt from that process. And that would include events being hosted by a not-for-
11 profit organization.
12
13 Leon Meyers: Okay. Everybody clear on that?
14
15 Beth Bronson: So, if you were to host a wedding with 100 applicants, you'd have to get a special event permit?
16
17 Ryan Moffitt: I'll defer to Mr. Stober on that.
18
19 Cy Stober: It's a good question. So, the Article 5 of the UDO, which is use standards and use-specific standards allows
20 for two different types of special events. One is a rural special event, and one is a special event for a non-profit's entity.
21 The special events for non, that was in the service of non-profits are exempt from all ordinance standards and are still
22 reviewed by county staff. We notify, as general practice, the sheriff and the emergency services departments and
23 NCDOT so they can coordinate with those entities, but they are exempt from our development standards. There are
24 some minimal standards associated with rural special events, but they don't get blanket exemption as the ones from
25 non-profits organizations do.
26
27 Beth Bronson: Okay.
28
29 Leon Meyers: That's helpful, thank you.
30
31 Beth Bronson: So, yes.
32
33 Leon Meyers: One other clarification. This is clear on the site plan. But the Condition 10 says, "In addition to the
34 observance of a 65-foot stream buffer, the property shall observe a voluntary 100-foot stream buffer." That means the
35 total buffer is 100 feet, not 165 feet, right?
36
37 Ryan Moffitt: That's correct.
38
39 Leon Meyers: Okay, thanks. I interrupted. Anybody have other questions on Mr. Moffitt's presentation to this point?
40
41 Jeff Scott: Oh, I'm sorry. I had a question about the parking. So, you've got, you know, you've got 25 regular plus 20
42 overflow parking. These are all just numbers that you guys have come up with based on your kind of currently design.
43 Is that correct? It's not based on any kind of limitation on parking, you know, within the agricultural residential, right?
44
45 Ryan Moffitt: Those are, those parking numbers are informed by the uses that we're proposing, not agricultural
46 residential.
47
48 Jeff Scott: Okay, so there's none.
49
50 Ryan Moffitt: Does that answer your question?
9
Approved 10.18.2023
1
2 Jeff Scott: It does, yeah, so there's no kind of parking requirement based on this use category. Is that right?
3
4 Ryan Moffitt: I believe there is a parking requirement, but we exceed, we are more than that requirement and Bobby
5 Tucker, do you know specifically?
6
7 Patrick Mallett: So, with this kind of land use, there are parking standards, and what we've determined is they have
8 provided adequate parking, certainly, for to support the intended, the camp element and the retreat element and
9 enough overflow parking to theoretically accommodate a reasonably sized special event. Would that, if you do the
10 math, those numbers of times four, that kind of takes you to an ultimate point on the total number of people that could
11 be accommodated at any one time. It of course does not account for; this land use has some oddities in the sense that
12 you have a camp. People come; they drop their persons off to stay at the camp; they don't necessarily stay there with a
13 vehicle. One of the other pieces to this that you probably should digest in your minds is the loop road that's following
14 the old farm road on the eastern side of the site plan where the cabins are is not really envisioned for vehicular use.
15 They've sort of contemplated we might, the reason to have the parking spaces just before you hit the stream buffer.
16 People Park there on many occasions, they may just walk to the cabins. There's not going to be cars,just for safety. If
17 you have kids circulating through the camp facility during camp time, you're not going to want cars, but you want to
18 have access back there in the event of an emergency, EMS, security reasons.
19
20 Leon Meyers: Okay, Pat, would you mind pulling that out on the site plan there on the monitor?
21
22 Beth Bronson: Yeah.
23
24 Leon Meyers: The area that you're referring to.
25
26 Patrick Mallett: Yeah.
27
28 Ryan Moffitt: Patrick, I need help getting that up on the monitor.
29
30 Patrick Mallett: Yes
31
32 Ryan Moffitt: This is the site plan file, and it's not, what you're looking at there is the PowerPoint where I just dropped
33 the site plan in.
34
35 Patrick Mallett: Let's do this.
36
37 Ryan Moffitt: But if we want to pull up the site plan file so that we can see.
38
39 Patrick Mallett: I'm not sure, I'm just going to walk over here and point.
40
41 Leon Meyers: Good. That'll work.
42
43 Patrick Mallett: So, you're coming into an entrance at that point. It's quite parenthetically been methodically evaluated
44 within NCDOT for safety, visibility access. You come in through the facility. This is sort of the retreat pavilion area,
45 bathhouse, parking here, overflow parking. You got through, and then this picks up on what is an old farm road, You
46 cross over a stream and tree protection area here. This is the cabin area, and they're labeled 1 I believe. Septic
47 systems will support those. These cabins don't even have bathrooms. There's a bathhouse, so it's a, it's a rustic camp
48 scenario.
49
50 Leon Meyers: And that's the loop road that you referred to that's not contemplated as a regular traffic—
10
Approved 10.18.2023
1
2 Patrick Mallett: Yes
3
4 Leon Meyers: Activity?
5
6 Patrick Mallett: The way these sorts of things work, you drop your kid off and say goodbye and leave.
7
8 Leon Meyers: Yeah.
9
10 Leon Meyers: Thank you. Let's see. Do any other have question?
11
12 Ryan Moffitt: I think it would be fair to envision folks looping through for a drop, you know, but not permanently parking.
13 Is that fair to say?
14
15 Ryan Moffitt: But we're not going to have people parking permanently at their cabins.
16
17 Rebecca Sorenson: No.
18
19 Ryan Moffitt: They are going to drop their things off. If they use the farm road to loop around, it'll be for a temporary
20 drop, and then they'll find a parking spot.
21
22 Beth Bronson: Back at the front?
23
24 Leon Meyers: Right.
25
26 Beth Bronson: Right here? Oh, within the five
27
28 Ryan Moffitt: Yeah.
29
30 Leon Meyers: Answer your question, Jeff?
31
32 Jeff Scott: It does, yeah. I had a few others if I can go.
33
34 Leon Meyers: Yeah, go ahead.
35
36 Jeff Scott: The proposed septic field areas, I would assume that, you know, I'm not a civil engineer, but is there any
37 requirement to have a repair field based on those, or the areas that you've got shown on this site plan, are those, does
38 that kind of include potential areas where that could be located, or is it, I'm just a little confused on the site plan as to
39 which ones kind of, like, where are you proposing the septic field will be versus what a repair field might be and if there
40 is a requirement based on this use intensity.
41
42 Beth Bronson: There are two. This, you can't, it's kind of cut off, but there is a second one.
43
44 Ryan Moffitt: You good to address that?
45
46 Jeff Scott: Yeah, I'm just.
47
48 Ryan Moffitt: Yeah.
49
50 Beth Bronson: It's a good sense.
11
Approved 10.18.2023
1
2 Leon Meyers: State your name as you come to the podium, please.
3
4 Bobby Tucker: Hey, good evening, my name is Bobby Tucker. I am the site engineer designer on here. So, there is,
5 we did a preliminary soils evaluation on this site originally, and there's really good soil, plenty of it. The areas that we
6 have delineated on the plan are very conservative, and they do include repair area; directly answer your question. But
7 the standard trench offset is 9 feet. We went with 11 foot to allow for blanking around trees and tree preservation. And
8 I've got a large safety factor on that to make sure we got plenty of area that's protected.
9
10 Jeff Scott: Good.
11
12 Leon Meyers: Yep.
13
14 Jeff Scott: And kind of a similar question along the same lines is the, you've got, like, your forest main that's connecting
15 to those fields, and that's running through the buffer. That is, I would assume that's meets county guidelines and it can
16 run that okay. The side drive, I know there's some notes here about, you know, fire protection and, you know, fire
17 apparatus drives. Does that, what was the kind of design for that in terms of, you know, what kind of vehicle. It looks
18 like there's, you know, an allowance for a 75,000-pound vehicle, and I'm not very familiar with the size and the weights
19 of, you know, firetrucks these days, but does that pretty much allow for a size truck that's, you know, in the event of an
20 emergency, would be able to get back there? Not necessarily like a pump truck, I guess, if I'm using the right
21 terminology.
22
23 Leon Meyers: Anybody have a response on that one?
24
25 Bobby Tucker: I got plenty. Yeah.
26
27 Leon Meyers: Just come to the podium if you would.
28
29 Bobby Tucker: I'm going to talk later the site plan, I mean, if you want to.
30
31 Jeff Scott: Yeah, I can, you know, we can hold these.
32
33 Leon Meyers: And if you'd rather. Cover that in your presentation later? It's fine to do that if you're okay with that, Jeff.
34
35 Jeff Scott: Yeah, that's totally fine.
36
37 Leon Meyers: All right.
38
39 Jeff Scott: Yeah.
40
41 Bobby Tucker: Yeah, if you want to save those site plans.
42
43 Ryan Moffitt: It might help, I'll, before I was just about to get to sort of an outline of how we were going to go about our,
44 our, presenting our case.
45
46 Leon Meyers: Good.
47
48 Ryan Moffitt: And so, what I'm going to do is, is have the Sorensons step up and say a brief statement, and then I'll
49 have a couple of questions perhaps for them. And then the Cullens will do the same and then Mr. Tucker and I will go
12
Approved 10.18.2023
1 through the, he'll present the site plan, and then I'll —and you all are free to interrupt and ask questions. You know that.
2 And we're happy to do so.
3
4 Leon Meyers: We haven't been bashful so far, right?
5
6 Ryan Moffitt: But and then we'll have Mr. Martin present his market study, and we'll wrap it up after that and public
7 comments. But we'll, that's sort of the order of how we propose to present our case to you.
8
9 Leon Meyers: Good.
10
11 Ryan Moffitt: So, Mr. Mallett went through our standards, and I think it's not engaging the screen. That's fine. I guess it
12 looks okay. Okay, so I'm going to first ask Rebecca Sorenson to come forward.
13
14 Leon Meyers: Believe she just stepped out of the room.
15
16 Ryan Moffitt: All right. Keith?
17
18 Keith Sorenson: I don't think she wanted me to speak first.
19
20 Ryan Moffitt: Okay.
21
22 Keith Sorenson: Mine's short.
23
24 Ryan Moffitt: That's okay.
25
26 Keith Sorenson:Okay.
27
28 Leon Meyers: Good.
29
30 Keith Sorenson: Hello, I'm Keith Sorenson. I'm, I guess I was supposed to say I was duly deposed or whatever that is.
31 My part in this is really she's supposed to go first and really do the comprehensive overview, so I'm going to just kind of
32 elaborate a little bit on why I'm doing this, why I want to do this. First and foremost is we live 5 minutes down the road
33 from here, so we're looking for a property in —well, Rebecca brought up the idea of this to me. And every day I was
34 driving by the property I kept, I just couldn't stop thinking about the idea. So, I am a coach for the Special Olympics. 1
35 coach for Orange County, and I coach cycling and basketball. But every weekend when I do that, it's literally the high
36 point of my week, and the population that—we also have a son with autism, and that's kind of how we were initially
37 connected there, but every week when I do that, I just leave there feeling so refreshed about our community and about
38 humanity. And I just really want other people to be able to experience that as well. And, in addition, I also see, for our
39 population with developmental disabilities that there is a need. There's a need for everything we're trying to do, but
40 even within the Special Olympics, I can see, like, how much the need exists within our community. So, you know, for
41 us, having this right down the road, we really care about our community, and she can probably elaborate a heck of a lot
42 more on that than I can, but we care about it. And this piece of land is beautiful. We care about preserving the integrity
43 of the land as well. And I'm just, I can't tell you how excited I am for the potential to be able to do this within our
44 community and have, you know, that right down the road from our house as something that can really both, in my
45 opinion, benefit people with and without disabilities.
46
47 Rebecca Sorenson: Hi, I'm Rebecca Sorenson. I have a few thoughts I wrote down I wanted to share. I'm grateful and
48 nervous to be here and to finally arrive at this place. It's taken a lot of time and thoughtful work and very careful steps
49 forward to be here. I'm a member of The Nest at 54 West, a parent-owned land-holding company. I chaired the
50 Southeastern Social Care Collective, which is a local non-profit that leverages community culture and resources to
13
Approved 10.18.2023
1 create innovative social opportunities for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities. I am the co-founder of
2 Blossom Farm, a Chapel Hill-based flower farm and design studio that I co-operate with my oldest son, Ramey, who is
3 26 and has a diagnosis of autism. Our family built our home just outside of Saxapahaw in 2010. My house and my
4 son's house and our farm are located just 3 minutes from the project site on 54. My two teenagers were students at the
5 Haw Bridge School. My oldest is now a senior at Cedar Ridge. We regularly attend events at The Ballroom. We have
6 loves Saturdays in Saxapahaw for years. We are frequent fliers at the Sax General Store and have spent countless
7 hours kayaking and paddle boarding on the Haw River. When we moved here, I was told by my friend, who also
8 happens to be a local Orange County architect who designed our home, and her husband, who is a local Orange
9 County builder who built our home, that I was moving into the best-kept secret of all of North Carolina. I truly had no
10 idea just how great and how lucky we would be to land here. This is my home, and we have created community and
11 family here in a way that I never knew was possible. Our family launched Blossom Farm in the spring of 2016. It was
12 our desire to connect our son, Ramey, to nature, purposeful work, service, friendship, and to grow a system of natural
13 support. I never anticipated how it would grow into this life-changing microenterprise that has provided Ramey with a
14 vehicle to demonstrate the capability and the potential of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities to
15 contribute beautifully to the local economy. It has been a magnificent gift to watch his transformation over the past 7
16 years and to witness his ability to access meaningful work every day, connect with land, cultivate loveliness, and give
17 back to others, and how it's put him on a path of positive mental and physical health outcomes, not to mention
18 happiness and a level of independence we were once informed would never be attainable. I feel unbelievably lucky. 1
19 am also a graduate-level macro social worker. I'm a UNC alum. I study the intersections of culture, nature, and mental
20 and primary health outcomes for folks with intellectual and developmental disabilities. And while I am so grateful to be
21 given the opportunity to watch Ramey live into the benefits of that lifestyle, my desire is to create spaces where a
22 greater number of folks on the ability spectrum can enjoy a similar sense of belonging and joy. There are an estimated
23 2 '/2 million individuals with disabilities in North Carolina and approximately 13,000 individuals with disabilities in Orange
24 County. Adults with disabilities are 50 percent more likely to experience clinical loneliness and depression, 45 percent
25 more likely to struggle with obesity, and 30 percent more likely to have heart disease or diabetes. 90 percent of adults
26 with autism are unemployed, and 72 percent of case managers nationwide report difficulty in finding available direct
27 support providers, which is the paraprofessional workforce that facilitates active engagement for those with disabilities
28 in personal, vocational, and social environments. The very heart of our project seeks to provide a space for people of
29 all abilities to connect, experience ways to give and receive support, and access innovative opportunities that address
30 the social determinants of health. There is no other facility with a similar intention in Orange County. We believe that
31 by making the effort to build a more aware and inclusive community, using a creative and socially integrated business
32 model, our center will promote public health and improve the general welfare of our community's most vulnerable
33 populations in a way that could make our county a welcome and safe home for everyone. Thank you.
34
35 Ryan Moffitt: If it's okay, I'm going to ask a couple of questions of Ms. Sorenson to elaborate on, and one of those is if
36 you could please talk about the process for identifying this property and why you and your partners arrived at this
37 property?
38
39 Rebecca Sorenson: Well, I mean, largely, I live right down the road, and my kids go to, went to Haw Bridge School.
40 And I would drive by this property every day. And I would see the sign. And I had been talking with Hope for a long
41 time about this vision I had about, you know, creating a space where people with disabilities could come together and
42 feel a sense of acceptance and belonging, and we could just provide a fun, non-contrived atmosphere for members of
43 our community and people with disabilities to come together and be transformed by the gifts that we all have to share
44 with each other in this kind of space. And we kind of got some misinformation about the property and about how much
45 it costs, and we were like well, and it kind of, we finally just got a bug where we were like we're just going to find out
46 who owns this property, and we ended up tracking down Matt McKever and just having long conversations with Matt
47 about this what we want to do. This is what we're really interested in. He's like, yep, let's go for it. And we ended up
48 closing on the property in 2019. Matt came down. It was the day before Christmas Eve. We spent the entire day
49 drinking champagne and walking the property, and he showed us all the old spaces. We talked about all the old trees.
50 We learned about the spring house where his family used to keep milk and the cold water. It was a wonderful day. We
14
Approved 10.18.2023
1 have great pictures, and I just talked to Matt on Tuesday and told him we were coming to this Board of Adjustment
2 hearing, and he wished us good luck and still says that this, if he could have found any other people on the planet to
3 sell the property to, we win the prize. So that's kind of, and it's 3 minutes from my farm, so from my son's farm, so 1
4 love the fact that it's in my backyard, that it's a part of my community. Again, like, I am a macro-level social worker, so 1
5 like to think about big systems and how we can change policies and programs to incorporate a larger number of people,
6 especially people with disabilities, because that is my passion. And there are 1 in 39 individuals who have a diagnosis
7 of autism in our country. These are our brothers and sisters, our sons and daughters, our neighbors, and we need to
8 create spaces for them to feel welcome.
9
10 Ryan Moffitt: Gary?
11
12 Gary Cullen: Yeah. She's a tough act to follow, so lower your expectations. But I appreciate the opportunity to share
13 our vision.
14
15 Leon Meyers: Excuse me if you could just identify yourself.
16
17 Gary Cullen: Oh, I'm sorry.
18
19 Gary Cullen: Gary Cullen.
20
21 Leon Meyers: Good.
22
23 Gary Cullen: Duly sworn in. Thank you very much for the reminder.
24
25 Leon Meyers: All right.
26
27 Gary Cullen: But I do appreciate the opportunity to share our vision for creating a sustainable business in the
28 community that engages and employs people with disabilities. So, we see The Nest as the perfect environment to train
29 individuals in skills that are valuable to the community, skills such as cleaning, marketing, gardening, customer service,
30 administrative, as well as enabling a safe and welcoming environment for both interactions with the community for both
31 neurodiverse and neurotypical people. So, the reason I'm excited is I have two kids with disabilities, young adults,
32 males, down syndrome and then autism. And it allows me to bring my passion for those young men as well as my
33 passion for building businesses. So, my first career, 25 years of building marketing agencies. And started an agency,
34 built that for 25 years and had about 500 full-time employees, so I feel very confident about the ability to kind of build a
35 business, of building The Nest. More importantly, in the last 18 months, I've been spending time and bought a business
36 in Durham, a laundromat, and grew it from 4 employees to 13 people, a third of which have disabilities, and our revenue
37 has grown, and our customer service has grown. So that is the kind of anticipated response that we'd expect at The
38 Nest. And then lastly, a good friend of mine has a similar facility in Portland, Maine with the same construct. And he is
39 about 7 years ahead of our journey, so he has given me a working plan, both the dos and the don'ts, so I'm very happy
40 for his mentorship and his participation in the process. So, from a perspective of timing, what we're looking at here is
41 that we're planning on leveraging the next 6 months to kind of plan, build budget, the operating plan, and get the team
42 together, from which we will start building the cabins and the bathhouse into'24. We hope to have that open into '25.
43 Once we have a full-time operation team into '25, we'll open that facility and then turn our attention to building the, 1
44 prefer to call it a training facility, cause the bulk of the work that's going to be done is kind of training individuals into
45 those skills that we talked about happening at that main facility. And that will be operational hopefully by the end of'25.
46 So, ideally, that's how we envision it, and I'm excited to share that with everybody here tonight so you can not only
47 understand the personal passion for it but also the experience to kind of bring it to life.
48
49 Ryan Moffitt: Thanks, Gary. Can you talk about just a little bit, when this is fully operational, what you all envision, you
50 know, a day-to-day operation looking like?
15
Approved 10.18.2023
1
2 Gary Cullen: So, really, the main purpose and the concept of having cabins and community is to have short-term guests
3 to kind of fulfill the tasks. So, you think about kind of that experience of greeting somebody turning into actually turning
4 and cleaning the facilities to kind of making sure that the garden and the paths are well lit and kind of maintained. We
5 expect that we'll have training of individual disabilities who will be on site to greet those guests, and primarily, it'll be
6 weekend kind of usage as we kind of get up to speed and make sure that we have a good experience built for the
7 people that we're employing, as well as for the guests who are, obviously, paying their dollars, want to have a good
8 experience, so we kind of see how that would work.
9
10 Ryan Moffitt: What, as far as?
11
12 Leon Meyers: Excuse me. Mr. Moffitt, if you'd just come to the mic while you're speaking so you get picked up on the
13 record.
14
15 Ryan Moffitt: Oh, no problem. The other question is this is going to be available to the public for their own assembly
16 uses.
17
18 Gary Cullen: Yep.
19
20 Ryan Moffitt: And what sorts of things do you envision coming out of this.
21
22 Gary Cullen: Yeah, so we've talked a lot about this. We kind of, we want to invite people who don't have any
23 experience to interact with people with disabilities and kind of remove the stigma, so a lot of the things we're thinking
24 about is small pop-up, you know, not, small activities. So, we think about if we're teaching people culinary skills so if
25 you're a guest at the cabin you can have a packed lunch or a packed dinner. We may twice a month have a meal that
26 would invite 20 people to kind of experience with the servers are people with disabilities, the cooks have disabilities, et
27 cetera, and so forth. So, the majority of what we're envisioning, and again, a long process to get to the first step, which
28 is tonight, is that type of, everything we're thinking about kind of doing on property and kind of the intention is to make
29 sure that it supports the employment and the interaction. So that's, that's the essential vision.
30
31 Ryan Moffitt: Gary, thanks very much.
32
33 Leon Meyers: Okay.
34
35 Hope Cullen: Hi, my name is Hope Cullen, and I was sworn in, and I'll be very quick. Thank you so much for taking the
36 time for this important meeting, and I also wanted to publicly thank Rebecca for leading the charge and getting us to
37 this point. It's been a tremendous amount of work, and we would not be here with her. As a mom to four young adults,
38 two of whom live with significant intellectual disabilities, and has arisen from our own experience of shepherding them
39 into adulthood, only to find the lack of services, daily living supports, and community connections that they crave and
40 deserve. I am thrilled to be part of The Nest that will give my sons the opportunity to join their peers, neighbors, and
41 friends in meaningful work while allowing them to gain valuable skills they can utilize and share with others in Orange
42 County and beyond, so thank you for taking the time this evening.
43
44 Leon Meyers: Thank you.
45
46 Ryan Moffitt: Before we jump and thanks to all of you for all your work and dedication to this. It's, personally for me,
47 been a much different kind of project. I'm used to representing developers and builders and, you know, the, it's out of
48 the box, and it's been a lot of fun to do something a little different and to do it with the mission that the nest has
49 approached it from, and so before we jump back into some of the more technical conversation, I'll just say that what
50 you're going to, what this will look like is a service to the community that is going to allow the public to come in and
16
Approved 10.18.2023
1 integrate these folks. And they're going to get a fantastic opportunity out of it, and it's just going to elevate what's
2 already a fantastic place to be. I'm going to move to Bobby for the site plan, and we can dig into the technical parts of
3 this.
4
5 Nathan Robinson: Can I ask a question?
6
7 Ryan Moffitt: Yes, absolutely.
8
9 Nathan Robinson: Just to understand the pattern. So, you have the guest cabins, and then there would be people? Is
10 it the, in my former life, there was something called The Ark when I lived up somewhere. I that something similar?
11 Have you ever heard of The Ark?
12
13 Rebecca Sorenson: We're not The Ark.
14
15 Nathan Robinson: You're not The Ark.
16
17 Rebecca Sorenson: Yeah.
18
19 Nathan Robinson: Is that something similar as far as operational?
20
21 Rebecca Sorenson: The Ark is a Medicaid-contracted agency that provides staffing to individuals who have it's called
22 the North Carolina Innovations Waiver, and they have services through that waiver that pays for supports. No, basically,
23 what we want to do is we want to provide training programs that will train both the individual with a disability but will also
24 train the individuals who want to work with people with disabilities in a way that is creative and innovative, and we're
25 working with the community college to generate an industry credential so that people who graduate from our training
26 program can achieve a higher rate of pay so they will be interested in staying and serving the person with a disability.
27 There's, the turnover rate in the direct-support workforce right now is, it's borderline catastrophic.
28
29 Nathan Robinson: So, who stays in the cabins?
30
31 Rebecca Sorenson: People who come to camp are just people who come to camp.
32
33 Nathan Robinson: Okay.
34
35 Rebecca Sorenson: And so, part of what our training program is, is we're simultaneously training individuals with
36 disabilities to provide hospitality services. In there and to work on their individual goals while they're doing that. And
37 that might be something like following multi-step directions or having reciprocal conversations or greeting people
38 independently. Whatever their personal list of goals is, they will have a staff person that will facilitate them in achieving
39 those goals while they're also learning how to provide. Hospitality skills. The direct-support service provider will be
40 learning how to be a good direct-support service provider because we'll have a BCBA, a board-certified behavioral
41 analyst, in our training center who will help them understand how to take a task and use it to teach individual goals so
42 that they can come to their job and feel like they're successful at what they're being asked to do.
43
44 Nathan Robinson: Okay.
45
46 Rebecca Sorenson: That was a mouthful but.
47
48 Nathan Robinson: So, the camp, the campers are the people receiving the training?
49
50 Rebecca Sorenson: Nope, the campers are just campers.
17
Approved 10.18.2023
1
2 Nathan Robinson: So, campers would be campers for?
3
4 Rebecca Sorenson: Campers, anybody.
5
6 Nathan Robinson: For whatever reason that they're there.
7
8 Rebecca Sorenson: Maybe someone's coming to The Ballroom. They want to see a show. They want to spend the
9 night at the campground. They come to the campground.
10
11 Gary Cullen: Can I add one? So, I wouldn't call 'em campers. They're just anybody who wants to stay overnight in a
12 rural cabin experience.
13
14 Nathan Robinson: Okay.
15
16 Gary Cullen: With no kitchen, minimal electricity. So, you and your partner could come rent a cabin and have the
17 experience interacting with the people who work there who have the disability.
18
19 Nathan Robinson: Okay. Okay, so it's a place, it's kind of like glamping for people who are coming, and then the side
20 effect is that they're?
21
22 Gary Cullen: Right.
23
24 Nathan Robinson: People are being trained to serve them on some level.
25
26 Rebecca Sorenson: So, you're? Camping., but you're also providing and contributing to a social benefit.
27
28 Nathan Robinson: Right, right, right. Yeah.
29
30 Beth Bronson: I just wanted to make sure, I mean, we'll get to that in the market, but I can understand that confusion,
31 given the market analysis of two other campgrounds that are used much like the way Nathan, I think.
32
33 Nathan Robinson: That's what I thought.
34
35 Beth Bronson: Described.
36
37 Nathan Robinson: I thought they were staying there the night?
38
39 Beth Bronson: Yes.
40
41 Nathan Robinson: And then?
42
43 Rebecca Sorenson: Yeah, no.
44
45 Nathan Robinson: As I was. Listening to you, it didn't make sense.
46
47 Beth Bronson: What I would almost think of it is, is like a, it's a hospitality training like it's a working hotel or a working
48 camp, right? Or it's a working retreat center in that you know, an individual can get one camp, or one cabin, and then
49 there will be staff on site to facilitate all the utilities and manage the property.
50
18
Approved 10.18.2023
1 Nathan Robinson: So, the training, is the training center where they learn whatever they need to learn to serve the
2 people who are camping?
3
4 Rebecca Sorenson: Yes
5
6 Beth Bronson: Does that make that capacity?
7
8 Nathan Robinson: Okay.
9
10 Rebecca Sorenson: Yes.
11
12 Beth Bronson: A lot of hospitality programs, like Cornell has one and they run a hotel, and all their hotel, like,
13 employees are students who will graduate, and in that process? It's like part of an internship program, but my
14 understanding, I just want to make sure I'm understanding this clearly, Nest 54 is the non-profits that is going to be
15 okay.
16
17 Rebecca Sorenson: The Nest 54 West is a, is a for-profit land-holding company of which Gary, Hope, Keith, and myself
18 are owners. We're all, and we're all parents.
19
20 Beth Bronson: Okay.
21
22 Rebecca Sorenson: We lease the land to a non-profit.
23
24 Beth Bronson: So, you're going to lease the land to the non-profit?
25
26 Rebecca Sorenson: Yeah.
27
28 Beth Bronson: To conduct these types of acts, to conduct this training program that will also be part of the camp.
29
30 Rebecca Sorenson: Yes.
31
32 Beth Bronson: Okay. And the camp will be for profit? Or is it not that far yet?
33
34 Rebecca Sorenson: No.
35
36 Ryan Moffitt: It's, let me.
37
38 Rebecca Sorenson: Okay.
39
40 Ryan Moffitt: This is, this will operate like a business that you go and if, as Rebecca said, you're in Saxapahaw for a
41 show, it's, you can get a cabin for the night just like you could at a Holiday Inn, you know, off the interstate, but it's going
42 to be a rural, it's going to be a much more, it's a much nicer experience to be on this property in these cabins than that.
43 But it will be a business. The business will be operated by the non-profit. It will fund, the business will fund the non-
44 profit. But it will operate as a lodging operation, and it will have a community building that will be used for the training of
45 the employees on the property, but the community building will also be available to the public to groups to convene
46 there. The Nest will host or the non-profit will host events for its employees, but also for the public, and it will also make
47 the space available for public groups to use as well. So it's a space that the public can pay a fee to rent and do their
48 own education, cultural type programming as well.
49
50 Beth Bronson: And this would be separate from the non-profit that it's being leased to? Like how.
19
Approved 10.18.2023
1
2 Ryan Moffitt: They would pay the non-profit.
3
4 Beth Bronson: So, if you were, if you wanted to.
5
6 Ryan Moffitt: Yeah.
7
8 Beth Bronson: Rent out?
9
10 Ryan Moffitt: Yeah, the non-profit is.
11
12 Beth Bronson: The Nest, okay.
13
14 Ryan Moffitt: Operating the whole property.
15
16 Beth Bronson: Okay.
17
18 Ryan Moffitt: Yeah.
19
20 Beth Bronson: I just wanted to make sure I understand.
21
22 Ryan Moffitt: Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, it's good. I'm, this, I'm glad we're talking through this, but that's conceptually.
23
24 Leon Meyers: See, that's been helpful to me to understand how the concept is organized. So, is it correct to
25 understand there are three business entities; one is the property ownership entity, one is the non-profit whose major
26 activity is training individuals with disabilities, and then there is a for-profit hospitality business? Is that.
27
28 Ryan Moffitt: The non-profit is going to operate the hospitality operation to fund its program.
29
30 Leon Meyers: Okay.
31
32 Ryan Moffitt: To fund its non-profit activities. Right?
33
34 Leon Meyers: I don't know that that specific topic is relevant—
35
36 Ryan Moffitt: No. No, it's not germane.
37
38 Leon Meyers: To the application.
39
40 Ryan Moffitt: To what we're.
41
42 Leon Meyers: I think it's just helpful to, for board members to understand what the intention is.
43
44 Ryan Moffitt: Yes.
45
46 Nathan Robinson: Well, it's important to me because the conditions connect to the operations.
47
48 Ryan Moffitt: Right.
49
20
Approved 10.18.2023
1 Nathan Robinson: And so, if the operation, I just need to understand the operations. Like who's in the campground if
2 we're saying that you can only do it to 10:00 at night, for example. Is it a bunch of kids who are being trained, or is it
3 people who are going to UNC game? That's what I'm, that's what I was trying to get some clarity on.
4
5 Ryan Moffitt: It could be either, but those conditions will apply. Regardless.
6
7 Leon Meyers: Good. Any other questions?
8
9 Beth Bronson: Not at the moment, no.
10
11 Nathan Robinson: No.
12
13 Leon Meyers: Please continue, Mr. Moffatt
14
15 Ryan Moffitt: All right. Bobby?
16
17 Bobby Tucker: Hello again. I'm Bobby Tucker, site engineer from Chatham County. I would like to publicly thank
18 county staff first for their support in navigating all the nuances and complexities of the UDO and all the regulations you
19 got over here in Orange County. I'm a part of this project really because of my specialization in land-based projects.
20 And by land, it's more conservation development, eco-villages, providing consulting and support for farms and
21 landowners trying to develop broad-acre permaculture and regenerative ag systems, and overall, really supporting rural
22 businesses and landowners towards being economically viable while preserving the rural natural character of the land,
23 since that's a strong value of mine. So, part of the approach that I use in sort of all my land design projects follows
24 what's called sort of a keyline scale of permanence where we really, it's a decision tree on how we go about deciding
25 and designing all the elements in a process relative to their permanence in the landscape. And I'm going to kind of walk
26 down through that and how we sort applied it to this project. The first one would be climate, so not just understanding
27 the biosphere climate but really the human climate. What are the values of the stakeholders? What's their vision and
28 mission for the lands? You know, that's very important. Next is topography. So how are we working with the existing
29 Iandform while not having to do mass grading, mass clearing, et cetera. That then dictates sort how water flows, so
30 water's the next big one. I'll be protecting and preserving the existing water resources, and part of that, too, what are
31 good soils for water infiltration. And in this case, onsite waster water, you know, we're going to design around and
32 protect those soils, which in this case there's plenty of them, but not always. Then at that point, then we're often using
33 roads to increase the management and the flow path of water across the landscape. Roads are around a long time.
34 And then we go to trees, identifying priority specimens. A lot of it depends on, certainly, their health and vigor, but
35 these things are going to be around a long time if they're a healthy specimen. Now sometimes, though, that does mean
36 that we are taking two steps back, you know, and trying to maybe take down and thin out mature pioneer species so we
37 can allow our understory canopy to populate and take over, like we're doing here where you have a lot of matured,
38 aging-out pines that could be a liability to any future cabins. So, you know, we quickly work to develop a forestry
39 management plan, and I'm currently working with a specialty logger using draft horses to slowly take down strategic sort
40 pines initially for the thinning of the cabin area, and that's all being milled on sit, and it will be repurposed into the
41 structures. And I haven't even talked about structures yet, so this is where then, once we've sort of identified those
42 permanent elements, how are we, you know, positioning structures with respect to those other elements to reduce
43 maintenance, provide passive microclimate benefits and clustering them together to reduce overall infrastructure and
44 site impact. So just a few things here. You know, it's been called out that we have focused most of the site impact on
45 the old homestead, and there is often when you go back in time, older homesteads, there's a lot of wisdom, inherent
46 wisdom in where people have positioned homes and roads. They didn't have the amount of energy that we do now to
47 make mistakes, so you often want to sort of observe and replicate. Now that's where we've talked the parking, the
48 larger community building, and then the roads have followed pretty much the old farm roads except the one loop to cut
49 across. We have gone above and beyond, you know, with tree preservation. You know, this project, I mean, if you look
50 at the site plan and you look at where we've demarcated as open-space preservation, I mean, that's really kind of an
21
Approved 10.18.2023
1 understatement because the whole cabins, everything's going to get kind of tucked into the woods. I mean, there's
2 going to be no mass clearing, really, and so it's kind of be, almost continuous canopy. Like, yeah, we got to take down
3 and open some areas for the septic drain field but, you know the whole site's kind of going to stay forested, other than
4 where we're putting structures. You know, we've worked to really reduce and minimize lighting impacts. And back on
5 the road too is that, and this kind of follows one of the previous questions, where we are using putting fire suppression
6 sprinklers in these cabins in order to reduce the road width to 12 foot and not have to go and put a giant 12 foot, or 20-
7 foot road in there for emergency vehicle that may or may not, you know, ever be used. So, 12 foot is still too big for
8 what the site uses are going to be. I mean, we're not, they're not planning on having continuous, you know, vehicle
9 traffic to the cabins, but that's what the fire marshal was comfortable with as long as we were to sprinkler the home. So
10 that's an extra cost at the client for the sake of minimizing impact and preserving trees. And then I guess we would call
11 out the one variance, the main variance that we are asking or proposing would be that northern buffer where it's hard,
12 where the existing road is pushing right up against that property line to want to take down mature trees to try and plant
13 new vegetation in a gravel roadbed, so it's just kind of one of those things. Can we get by? The adjacent property
14 owners have not objected to that. I believe that is in writing. So other than that, we have really worked hard to abide by
15 both the regulations in the UDO and certainly outside input from the community. That's really all I've got to say, unless
16 there's any questions.
17
18 Leon Meyers: Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Tucker?
19
20 Nathan Robinson: So, I see that you have the 30 feet? Is it 30-foot setback at the north side of the property and then
21 the road goes through there? What do the, how is that?
22
23 Nathan Robinson: I presume you've made some plans for?
24
25 Bobby Tucker: 30 Vegetative buffers. There's a 50-foot structure setback. Which one are you referring to?
26
27 Nathan Robinson: And is there a road there, I mean, you can't have a buffer with on top of a road, right?
28
29 Bobby Tucker: Which, yeah, so in that area, we are encroaching in the 30-foot vegetated buffer.
30
31 Nathan Robinson: Right.
32
33 Bobby Tucker: And in lieu of that,we're going to increase the density of more of your understory shrub plantings there.
34 But, also, we'll offset and move the buffer onto the inside of the road as well to kind of meet the intent. And again, 1
35 mean, we've spaced these cabins out for privacy, you know, so there will be, you know, it's not like it's going to be
36 cleared out and there'll be a mass view. I mean, you know, there's going to be vegetation and plantings and allow
37 things to pop up, because once you start pulling those pines out, you know, you're going to see, poof, it'll be a real
38 dense.
39
40 Nathan Robinson: Right.
41
42 Bobby Tucker: Understory for a bit. What y'all looking for the.
43
44 Beth Bronson: Are you proposing to build on site or have those cabins delivered?
45
46 Bobby Tucker: Oh, the cabins will be constructed on site.
47
48 Beth Bronson: On site.
49
50 Bobby Tucker: Yeah, and I think pretty much entirely of wood they're milling there so
22
Approved 10.18.2023
1
2 Beth Bronson: Is that right? Okay.
3
4 Nathan Robinson: They're, you're using the onsite wood? You're milling and drying it now?
5
6 Bobby Tucker: Yeah. I mean it's; the logs are sitting there. I mean this right now is a forestry thin, like, a forestry health
7 thinning, right. And at this point until we get further another in design, we'll go out and we'll survey out and know where
8 all the cabins are going to be, and then we can make additional, we know where the road's going to be, and then we
9 can make additional decisions on what trees are going to go, but these pines are, you know, 80-plus years, and they're,
10 if you don't take 'em out, they're going to start dying and falling, going to be a liability.
11
12 Nathan Robinson: So is the design, is it all on. Is that kind of the design?
13
14 Bobby Tucker: That's a good point.
15
16 Nathan Robinson: Of the foundation?
17
18 Bobby Tucker: Yeah, these are going to be footers. So, it's raised up. So, another way to reduce root impact and
19 disturbance.
20
21 Nathan Robinson: And so, are they insulated and heated?
22
23 Bobby Tucker: No, you're roughing it.
24
25 Nathan Robinson: So, it's just electricity?
26
27 Bobby Tucker: Well, that, that 100 percent electricity, we, at one point it was a no but—
28
29 Gary Cullen: Oh, no, yes, we had decided that electricity was—well, we're still discussing it.
30
31 Bobby Tucker: Maybe, yeah, still in, to be discussed, but yeah.
32
33 Nathan Robinson: Okay. Were there any concerns about lighting? Is that I'm curious about two things: No. 1, the
34 electricity, but that just came up in my brain, but the other thing, did the owner to the north in the public, in the
35 community meetings, did he have conversations with you regarding how close the road is going up to his property line?
36
37 Bobby Tucker: This is Pluck Farm?
38
39 Beth Bronson: Mm hmm.
40
41 Bobby Tucker: No, no, they have not. They weren't even there. They've been very supportive of this project.
42
43 Nathan Robinson: Okay.
44
45 Bobby Tucker: Yeah.
46
47 Nathan Robinson: So, they're not requiring a consistent—so is there a requirement from the planning department for a
48 consistent setback with the boundary there?
49
23
Approved 10.18.2023
1 Cy Stober: Section 6.8 of the UDO allows for some impacts to the buffer with mitigation and that has, the staff review
2 has addressed that for that 430-foot stretch along the northern property line. If this were to be reviewed
3 administratively, we've found it to be sufficiently consistent with the ordinance requirements, but it is a deviation from
4 the general standard of 30 feet.
5
6 Nathan Robinson: Mm hmm. Okay, so that's when it says, "shall be modified to preserve the existing farm road," that's
7 the conversation that you were talking about right here?
8
9 Cy Stober: Yes, Mr. Robinson.
10
11 Nathan Robinson: Okay.
12
13 Bobby Tucker: And, I mean, when you, when you look at the, the proposed limits of disturbance, I mean, we are going
14 to far exceed the tree buffer on most of the property. Looking what's being preserved and where the active drain field is
15 probably going to be on the east side, you know, that's still going to be wooded. As well.
16
17 Beth Bronson: So, you're looking at the eastern drain field, not the center of the field?
18
19 Bobby Tucker: Yeah, that's sort of, I mean, at this point, we're kind of looking at tucking most of the active in the eastern
20 side, although, you know, there was maybe some discussion of creating kind of more of a grove and opening the center
21 area where you could put active. But, you know, it's sort of to be determined because we've not had the county been
22 out to verify the findings of the preliminary soils report, so we, I've just created enough area that should be adequate,
23 even if there are some areas that are thrown out for some reason, but in my experience—and I do a lot of onsite
24 wastewater design, I mean, we're should be fine.
25
26 Beth Bronson: And I could be confused about the process but NCDOT, as far as, like, your entrance and all of that has
27 approved the one entrance exit. There's no requirement for a second one?
28
29 Bobby Tucker: We were pushing for a second, and the fire marshal was pushing for two. DOT was not okay with the
30 existing entrance, which is where this hammerhead is shortened. Do you kind of see where it's.
31
32 Beth Bronson: At the top?
33
34 Bobby Tucker: Facing the road?
35
36 Beth Bronson: Yes.
37
38 Bobby Tucker: That's about where the existing entrance is now. But the site distance is not sufficient for them for what
39 they would prefer.
40
41 Beth Bronson: So, okay, so even if it was an entrance only or an exit only—
42
43 Bobby Tucker: Doesn't matter?
44
45 Beth Bronson: The site doesn't.
46
47 Bobby Tucker: For them, yeah.
48
49 Beth Bronson: Okay. Because of the bend in the road?
50
24
Approved 10.18.2023
1 Bobby Tucker: We've pushed for it and, I mean, it was less, it would have been nice to have two just from a traffic flow,
2 and the fire marshal is just saying if you've got emergency vehicles coming from two directions there wouldn't be any
3 blockages.
4
5 Beth Bronson: It's an interesting bend on 54 right before you get up—to that. So, basically, the main road frontage that
6 you have is, I mean, it looks like it's on a slight curve, but when you're on it, it's almost more of a slight curve because
7 you're rising in elevation. So, and that's the reason the DOT says only one?
8
9 Patrick Mallett: Absolutely, and so that item was brought out and, as was stated, the original intent was to have two
10 access points, but the realization is you can see on a plan in two dimensions, but the reality is those slight nuances.
11 NCDOT met with the applicants out there physically on the site and evaluated.
12
13 Beth Bronson: I assumed that that had.
14
15 Patrick Mallett: And the conclusion was this is the safest place to put the entrance.
16
17 Beth Bronson: Okay.
18
19 Patrick Mallett: And only one.
20
21 Beth Bronson: Only one.
22
23 Leon Meyers: Any other questions for Mr. Tucker? If not, we'll move on to the next part of Mr. Martin's presentation.
24 Cy?
25
26 Cy Stober: Not a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair, but I did want to identify that we do have one expert staff that is not in
27 the planning department, the Director of Environmental Health, Victoria Hudson, is also present this evening, and if
28 there are questions about wastewater or water use for this project, she in the audience and she is sworn in if there are
29 questions for staff on those matters.
30
31 Leon Meyers: Thank you.
32
33 Beth Bronson: Thank you.
34
35 Nathan Robinson: Beth,just for your information, on that packet we received, they don't know which page it is, and
36 there's like 200 to go through here, there is an email and there is a section there that was all from the department of
37 transportation, and that answers your question.
38
39 Beth Bronson: I apologize, yeah, I didn't have the packet in front of me.
40
41 Nathan Robinson: Yeah, I can't find it.
42
43 Beth Bronson: Look, when you guys were referring to the packet, I'm thinking about this, and I was like I know this is not
44 the one. I mean, I have the other packet, yes, confirmed.
45
46 Ryan Moffitt: Just to get this on the record and for, for Mr. Tucker. Mr. Tucker, do you concur with staffs assessment,
47 as they pointed out in the earlier portion of the record, that the site plan contains and satisfies the requirements of the
48 use-specific standards for the requested uses, camp and retreat center, that are set forth in Ordinance Sections 5.75
49 and 5.18.4?
50
25
Approved 10.18.2023
1 Bobby Tucker: Yes, I agree with that.
2
3 Ryan Moffitt: Thank you. Now I'll ask Mr. Jarvis Martin to come make a presentation on his market study.
4
5 Jarvis Martin: Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Chairman and Mademoiselle of the commission. I have been sworn in.
6 My name is Jarvis Martin. I'm a state-certified general residential appraiser, and I'm with the firm of Stewart, Martin,
7 and McCoy. We are a commercial and appraiser firm. I've had the privilege to work in this, the Greater Triangle Area,
8 since 1976, providing valuation and appraisal reports for a various number of clients. At the request of the client, I have
9 visited the site that's being discussed tonight, as well as driven through the general community, as well as reviewed the
10 proposed site plan that's been discussed here tonight in detail. My task was to get an understanding as to what is
11 being proposed on this site, was to try to find within our community other properties that had some of the similar
12 characteristics that this property would have in terms of use and functional utility, et cetera. I was able to locate two
13 properties. Chestnut Ridge Camp and Retreat Center, which is here in Orange County in Efland. This is a much bigger
14 facility in terms of landmass, over 360 acres, but it also has a range of outdoor activities as detailed in the report, and 1
15 won't through all the damn, which includes RV sites as well as campsites, bathhouses, farms, dining halls, provisions,
16 and this is a very active camp for youth that I can say that my granddaughter has attended this camp herself the past
17 two summers and had a great time, and they have a lot of outdoor activity for youth, as well as overnight
18 accommodation and after-school activities. The second camp and retreat that I found was Camp Kanata, which is over
19 in Wake County off Highway 98 outside of Wake Forest. It's, again, on a larger tract of land, 150 acres, with a lot of
20 outdoor activity, with lakes, cabins, amphitheater, horse riding, and outdoor sports. And it's a very active camp, you
21 know, during the summertime in school break and have, again, camping retreat and overnight facilities. What I did was
22 to look at the market activity surrounding these two facilities over the past 3 years, realizing that these facilities as the
23 subject is in somewhat of a rural area where you don't have a lot of congested home sales. But starting at the
24 campsites and then going out, I located sales on both property, both campsites within a mile radius to look at the
25 market activity over the past 3 years in terms of what properties sold for, what they were listed for, to look at what we
26 call a list price sale ratio, to look at the number of days that these properties were on the market. In the real estate
27 market, which many of you or some are homeowners, you know that the price, if homes are selling, for some reason,
28 close to a particular area for a large discount or staying longer on the market, that indicates that it is something in that
29 area that may be impacting the market. In this case with those homes located closest to the camp as compared to
30 homes that I went further away from the camp, there is no major difference between the days on market, list price,
31 sales ratios, in the two comparisons in my report. Based upon that, I also decided that I would look at the Pluck Farm
32 since that was a facility which is the most recent facility that I could see that had been developed in that immediate
33 neighborhood to see if I could do a similar study with it, but there is not enough market data based upon the same 3-
34 year period to draw any conclusions. The only point I want to point out about that facility, which adjoins the subject
35 property, that the activities that it has in terms of the patronage that is have far exceeds anything that would be going on
36 in the subject site. So, with, based upon these two market studies and the data that I generated from them in my
37 analysis, it is my opinion that this development in the community would have no adverse impact on the surrounding or
38 adjoining properties. Also, based upon that, that I feel that the construction of The Nest 54 West Retreat will be in
39 harmony with the overall neighborhood, that the proposed improvements would have no adverse impact on the demand
40 or value of the surrounding properties and that the marketability of these properties would not be impacted in a negative
41 manner. Based upon that data and my general knowledge of the real estate market here in the Triangle, it is my
42 recommendation that you approve the special use permit. And I'm open for any questions based upon what I have
43 presented.
44
45 Leon Meyers: Thank you, Mr. Martin. Questions for Mr. Martin, board members? On a thorough report, thank you.
46
47 Ryan Moffitt: One question that I would just pose. Of course, the standard that we are speaking to this evening is that
48 there won't be an adverse impact or that the proposed use for the special use permit will maintain or enhance the value
49 of adjoining properties. Mr. Martin has testified that it will not have an adverse impact on contiguous properties. Mr.
26
Approved 10.18.2023
1 Martin, would your assessment and conclusion hold for properties beyond just those that are contiguous to this
2 property?
3
4 Jarvis Martin: Yes, sir.
5
6 Ryan Moffitt: Okay. That's the only additional question I had. Thank you.
7
8 Beth Bronson: I have one I'm sorry. I have one question for you, one follow-up question. I mean, in the market studies,
9 you have the, you have homes in nearby of matching ones but, and I guess is this market analysis in reference to home
10 prices only, residential only?
11
12 Jarvis Martin: What I looked at was generally if there's going to be an impact, it would show up in single-family
13 residential homes. If you're talking about the sale of land and those things, I did not explore if that would have any
14 impact.
15
16 Beth Bronson: Thank you.
17
18 Leon Meyers: All right. Thank you, sir. Mr. Moffitt?
19
20 Ryan Moffitt: Thank you, Mr. Martin, I appreciate your help with that. That concludes the witnesses that the applicant
21 has, the witness testimony, and so I'll just take a moment to conclude our presentation before we take public comment,
22 and just to say that, again, reiterate thanks to staff for all the time that they have spent with us in reviewing and
23 reviewing and reviewing and giving feedback, and to my clients and their team for all their hard work. Staff has
24 acknowledged to you, and you've seen the site plan and the additional exhibits in the agenda packet which establish
25 affirmative evidence of the standard requirements for the requested special uses. Those are the requirements set forth
26 in Orange County LIDO Sections 2.5 and 2.7, which pertain to the application standards. And then the standards in
27 Section 5.75 and 5.18.14, which are the use-specific standards. Those are set forth in the site plan that's been
28 submitted and that's included in your agenda packet. Beyond those standards, you've heard testimonial evidence this
29 evening to the three additional requirements: that the use will maintain or promote the public healthy, safety, and
30 general welfare if it's located where it's proposed and developed and operated according to the plan that's been
31 submitted. You've heard evidence from Rebecca Sorenson about the benefit that the plan and the project will provide
32 to a community that's in need and those that are facing intellectual and developmental disabilities. Not only that, but
33 this is also a new business to the community, a new small business to the community that's in a neighborhood that has
34 a need, that has a demand, that's a vibrant rural neighborhood that welcomes a lot of activity and that folks like the
35 Sorenson's call their neighborhood. I till serve that community as a small business. This testimony in and of itself, in
36 addition to the testimony of Mr. Sorenson and Mr. and Ms. Cullen, speak to that element of the maintenance and
37 promotion of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The second requirement that the proposed use will
38 maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property. You've heard testimony and evidence about the history of this
39 property, about the uses of the other properties in the area. You've heard testimony about the way in which this
40 property will be used, the low-impact approach to its development. These are all methods that the applicant has taken
41 to preserve the character of this area and to respect the contiguous uses and the character of adjoining properties.
42 You've, importantly, heard Mr. Martin's very thorough market analysis that he conducted in light of this proposed use
43 that found conclusively that the proposed uses will not have an adverse effect and therefore may at least maintain the
44 values of contiguous property. The evidence is there for you to conclude that that element has been met. And, finally,
45 that the location and character of the use will be in harmony with the area in which it's to be located and that it's in
46 compliance with Orange County's planning policies and comprehensive land use plan. Again, I'm reiterating what I just
47 said, but the character of this area, the rural character of this area, this neighborhood, and not only the county's
48 planning for this area but the residents of this area and their desires play a big part in the low-impact approach to this
49 plan and the priority that was made of ensuring that it remained harmonious with adjoining uses. I would just conclude
50 by saying thank you all for spending a long evening with us hearing our presentation and allowing us to lay this out for
27
Approved 10.18.2023
1 you. We would respectfully request your approval of the special use permit before you based on the evidence that
2 you've heard that meets each of the requirements necessary to grant the special use permit. We remain available to
3 answer questions and, again, can't express our thanks to you enough.
4
5 Leon Meyers: Thank you, Mr. Moffitt.
6
7 Patrick Mallett: So, Chair, I think we have one person that signed up that wishes to speak and is stating that they have
8 established legal sufficiency to speak, so it's up to the Board's discretion who they want to allow to speak and establish
9 that fact.
10
11 Leon Meyers: Mr. Pless, I believe. Mr. Pless, have you been sworn?
12
13 John Pless: Yes, sir, I have.
14
15 Leon Meyers: All right. Would you like to come forward? Just identify yourself when you come to the microphone,
16 please.
17
18 John Pless: Yes, thank you, Chair Meyers, members of the Board of Adjustment, and county staff, and also The Nest,
19 LLC, and et. al. My name is John Pless. I'm a property owner in Bingham Township. I am speaking to you tonight,
20 regrettably, in opposition to the project as proposed. I say regrettably because I have attended a previous meeting in 1
21 believe it was May. And I do believe that the intentions of the applicants are honorable, and I do expect that they are
22 trying to do a good thing in our area. I do have several reservations which I wish to bring to the Board's attention. First
23 and foremost, I'd like you to look at Exhibit B which they handed you tonight, and you can go to either Page 5 or 11 in
24 that document. And you'll see a rending of the cabins, you know, either the single cabin or the double cabin, and you'll
25 see an absence of a toilet. You'll see no such thing. Now, you do see that you do have a septic field adjacent to this
26 area, but you don't see a toilet. You do, however, see a fireplace, and you see a straight flue going straight up through
27 the roof. I understand that planning staff has a wastewater person who has a question about this. I hope that you will
28 speak to that staff member before you render a decision on this. Personally, I live on the other side of Highway 54.
29 And I'm, so although you, although water qualities of primary importance because this is adjacent to the reservoir. And
30 that makes this, the bar for this is much higher. I think, I don't know if, I've been a resident of the county for—well, I've
31 been living in the area since the 1970s, and the sacrifice that people in Bingham Township made to let the reservoir
32 come in, the number of people who lost land and home sites was appreciable, and the cost to the county was
33 remarkable and very high. And I think that we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that the county forefathers, at that time,
34 planned to have excellent water quality for Chapel Hill, for Carrboro, for surrounding areas, and really, we need to think
35 always about water quality. I've seen in the last couple of years an erosion of possibilities. A trail that wants to come
36 through the reservoir, and hikers' people, the Mountains to Sea Trail had tried to do that. And there are other entities
37 who are just—we're seeing an erosion, and it is led, basically, by commercial interests. If you go to the corner where
38 this property at Bevin Oaks Road and Highway 54, you have the Bingham School. It's an older establishment, was
39 there before I got here. Got nothing to say about it. Next to it you have a brewery which is registered for tax purposes
40 in the county as a farm. That's a farm. And then you have this proposed development which, while admirable in its
41 goals, I think fails to meet the safety standards. If we have a fire in that area, even with a sprinkler system, which has
42 been added since the neighborhood information meeting—no? There is no sprinkler system in the—
43
44 Bobby Tucker: No, it was there originally.
45
46 John Pless: It was there. Okay. All right, fine. Well, I stand corrected. I didn't know that there was a sprinkler system.
47 That's good for the people inside those cabins, but it won't help people that are outside when sparks go up through a
48 straight flue and get out into the and cause a fire immediately adjacent to your reservoir. If that were to happen, it
49 would be catastrophic. I'd like to ask if the board has asked for an opinion from OWASA staff on this project at all.
50
28
Approved 10.18.2023
1 Leon Meyers: We have materials from OWASA in the agenda package. Yes, sir.
2
3 John Pless: Fine, good. I'm glad to hear that. Then I'm late on that issue. The lack of a comprehensive plan to
4 address fire suppression is a concern. You're going to put 20 wood-burning stoves. You can see these in your
5 renderings, right? You see the little flames in there and the straight flue. That's a source of ignition. That could be a
6 real problem. You're going to have people, as the applicant's attorney had said, that will be there. They'll be there for
7 non-profits purposes, but they'll also be there, like as he phrased, as like going to a Holiday Inn. They'll be coming from
8 the brewery. A lot of people don't handle wood fireplaces much anymore. They put in too much wood. A lot of things
9 can go wrong. And owning a forest in that immediate neighborhood, I'm very fearful for that. And I think that we should
10 be very fearful that if the forest around the reservoir were to become engulfed that it would be catastrophic for the whole
11 county. I don't want to take too much more of your time. Exhibit E that the staff brought up, I'm sorry, that the applicant
12 brought up. The boundaries of the property will be posting signage along the northern property line at equidistant
13 points and three along the eastern property line, which is the OWASA property line. There are none on the south,
14 which is Highway 54. 1 own property across Highway 54 at Am King Creek. I'm the first private landowner on both
15 sides of the creek. I think that there will be, could be trespass and incursion, and I would like to ask that there be
16 signage on the south side of the property as well to inform them they are leaving the property of The Nest and the same
17 rights and regulations that are on the north and the east. I think that's an oversight, and I'd like to see that be corrected.
18 But otherwise, I wish to leave you with a quote. This is a commercial development. This is a high-density development
19 with over 50 people, possibly. It is a for-profit business, which if you grant the special use permit, that special use
20 permit could convey to a new owner that's a high bar. And I wish to just say that nothing begets commercial
21 development more than commercial development. I'm listening to this deliberative body because I own property there.
22 And if it's the intention that you drive out that way and you see something like White Cross and little dots of everything
23 everywhere, then so be it, then that will be the way I will have to go, and I will make my own deliberative decisions
24 based on what I do with my property. But as more commercial development comes, the pressure falls on people such
25 as myself who has, I have both a farm and a forestry present-use permits, and that puts pressure on us. So, we might
26 break it up into, I might put big giant houses on King Creek. Anyway, I have taken too much of your time, and I want to
27 thank you. I want to thank staff. Good night.
28
29 Leon Meyers: Thank you, Mr. Pless.
30
31 Beth Bronson: Thank you.
32
33 Leon Meyers: Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak to this special use permit on tonight's
34 agenda? Then I will close the public hearing. Maybe I'd better wait to hear what Pat is about to say.
35
36 Patrick Mallett: Procedurally, you close the public hearing, and then I would draw your attention to Attachment 6, the
37 findings of fact. That's essentially a guide towards your findings, your action. You're going to deliberate. I would use
38 that as your guide. And as I stated in the staff presentation, you have, and as articulated by the applicants, Section
39 5.3.2, the written findings that they've provided and entered evidence. You would consider that, of course. And then
40 you would consider the specific findings and standards listed right under that. And then turning to in Attachment 6, you
41 have the items which, again, we don't render a decision, but we do take the facts and sort of tick off as staff. It's our
42 professional consideration that they've met those standards. The items in green on the first page, or the second page
43 rather, of the findings of fact determine completeness, and that's an easy bar to determine that they've met those
44 because they are discrete. So, you would decide as a board on that. Then you would go through and look at the
45 requirements regarding waste disposal, safety, vehicular access, the items in pink. And then you would look at the
46 specific standards as set forth with the camp and retreat facility set in 5.7.5, 5.18.4, for both the site plan and the
47 standards of evaluation, whether they have met those. And then you would look, finally, at the specific standards that
48 apply to essentially all special use permits, the last three standards that are set forth in UDO Section 5.3.2, A2,A, B,
49 and C. And my understanding is, from discussions with legal staff, you can make your determination, but just reference
50 those as your guide.
29
Approved 10.18.2023
1
2 Leon Meyers: Okay.
3
4 Patrick Mallett: For the final determination.
5
6 Leon Meyers: I may have been hasty
7
8 Patrick Mallett: We also want to, I guess, accept in total or in adjustment the conditions as proposed. So—
9
10 Leon Meyers: Thank you.
11
12 Patrick Mallett: That's it.
13
14 Leon Meyers: Thank you. I may have been hasty closing the public hearing. I see Mr. Martin is itching to have another
15 comment. Please come to the podium.
16
17 Ryan Moffitt: Just quickly to make a clarifying point. I think I said this earlier on about the renderings that are provided
18 in the exhibits are conceptual only.
19
20 Leon Meyers: Right.
21
22 Ryan Moffitt: Those do not represent exactly what's going to be in the project, and the fireplace is not there and not part
23 of the conversation at this point.
24
25 Leon Meyers: Think that's, you made that point before, but thank you for clarifying. Pat?
26
27 Patrick Mallett: If I could just add to that. So, what you have here is a consideration for the zoning compliance, the
28 zoning element of a development request. This is the beginning of a theoretical process. If it were approved, you have
29 driveway permits, land disturbance permits, building permits, whole litany of other permits that would apply, including
30 well and septic. I just want to point that out. This isn't a one-step process.
31
32 Nathan Robinson: May I ask one question before it's closed?
33
34 Leon Meyers: Sure.
35
36 Nathan Robinson: Did you say Linda Pulley is here?
37
38 Beth Bronson: From water?
39
40 Nathan Robinson: Yes.
41
42 Beth Bronson: Is that what you're asking?
43
44 Nathan Robinson: Yes, for the septic concerns.
45
46 Leon Meyers: Victoria?
47
48 Nathan Robinson: I'm sorry, Victoria Hudson. I'm sorry. I apologize.
49
50 Leon Meyers: Victoria, have you been sworn?
30
Approved 10.18.2023
1
2 Victoria Hudson: Yes, sir, I have.
3
4 Leon Meyers: Good. Thank you. If you'd just identify yourself as you come forward, please.
5
6 Victoria Hudson: My name is Victoria Hudson. I serve as the Director of Environmental Health.
7
8 Nathan Robinson: Victoria, will you, and I did read through the packet here, and I saw that it was, I saw the soil borings,
9 and it showed it was good for the equivalent of five bedrooms. Regarding the concern about the water quality in
10 adjacent properties, how would you respond to that?
11
12 Victoria Hudson: First I think there might be some misinformation.
13
14 Nathan Robinson: Okay.
15
16 Victoria Hudson: We haven't evaluated it. We've just recently received our first part of the application for 2,265 gallons
17 per day, which is like four or five houses. So, we've just now received that. It's been assigned out. Mr. Tucker has a
18 lovely proposal. The soil scientist that was used is a highly reputable company. And we have every reason to believe
19 that it should be able to be designed and installed the way it is supposed to be, according to both the administrative
20 codes of North Carolina and the local rules for Orange County wastewater. And how that affects the groundwater, is
21 that the question?
22
23 Nathan Robinson: I don't know if he was concerned about groundwater or surface water to the reservoir. It sounded
24 like he was more concerned about reservoir water.
25
26 Victoria Hudson: Surface water concerns us all, always.
27
28 Nathan Robinson: Of course.
29
30 Victoria Hudson: This would be horrible in any kind of capacity.
31
32 Nathan Robinson: Sure.
33
34 Victoria Hudson: But the point that, from what I've seen from the proposal, Mr. Tucker's diagnose, along with AWT's soil
35 work, ensures that there is enough early. He said something a little bit earlier like saying we're not sure what the
36 design's going to be, but we gave ourselves plenty of room. And you've already asked the question earlier, sir, about
37 the repair area. They must have 100 percent of the repair area, without any reduction in the linear length of it. So, yes,
38 this won't be permitted by Orange County if they can't meet those standards.
39
40 Nathan Robinson: So, you feel comfortable with the engineer's proposal based on what you see from the—
41
42 Victoria Hudson: I feel comfortable proceeding with the proposal. No permits will be issued at this time.
43
44 Nathan Robinson: Sure. Sure. Got it. No more questions.
45
46 Beth Bronson: Do we need to ask questions to the applicants before we close public hearing?
47
48 Leon Meyers: And I'm sorry, I thought we'd covered those, but yes, we do need to do that. If you have more questions
49 for the applicant. Thank you.
50
31
Approved 10.18.2023
1 Beth Bronson: Thank you. And I guess this is, could be engineer or conceptual related, but I didn't see any indication of
2 a fence, any indication of, besides the signage on the northeast and the southeast side, having signage, or not just
3 having signage, no fencing at all. Nothing, no delineation between property barriers, I guess. Is that correct?
4
5 Ryan Moffitt: I can be corrected, but in all the conversations we've had, that hasn't been contemplated, and based on
6 my understanding, that's because we want to leave as much of what's there as undisturbed as possible. And, you
7 know, so we don't have to clear to put fence in. We're not, we'd rather not clear to put fence in.
8
9 Bobby Tucker: Chain-link fence OWASA.
10
11 Ryan Moffitt: OWASA is fenced along
12
13 Beth Bronson: OWASA does have fencing?
14
15 Ryan Moffitt: Yeah.
16
17 Beth Bronson: Existing already?
18
19 Ryan Moffitt: Yeah.
20
21 Beth Bronson: And they have no trespassing, I'm sure.
22
23 Ryan Moffitt: Yeah.
24
25 Beth Bronson: Or entranceways. But, yeah, there's no talk of extending a fence down to that corner where OWASA,
26 Pluck Farm, and your property conjoin? Like in that area, I guess, would be my only concern of safety wise of having,
27 you know, if you're going to have people coming and staying there, you know, one night at a time, versus people who
28 know the property very well, you know, wanting to make sure that, I guess, safety, safety wise that you don't have
29 people wandering around into the reservoir or wandering back and forth between the business and the camp. So I just
30 didn't know if that had been discussed or not or if, like, insurance on either, like, considered.
31
32 Rebecca Sorenson: A little bit, but I guess. I did go over and meet with Johnny and the crew over at OWASA and the
33 conversation that came up was that we could talk more about fencing as we get further along in development. He also
34 said that the largest population of trespassers that come into the Cane Creek Reservoir are not people from Pluck Farm
35 or, they're all, like, people who live there who always are, like, oh, but I live here. And he's like, yes, but it's still a
36 private reservoir. And so, a fence on our property at that, in that conversation, isn't going to keep people who live on
37 the other side of it out of Cane Creek Reservoir. So, it's something that we want to think about. Because of the
38 population that we're serving, we want to make sure that there is, like, a parameter that's maybe visual for them to see.
39 We just haven't gotten that far into the conversation yet.
40
41 Beth Bronson: Agreed.
42
43 Beth Bronson: And, yeah, and I agree, you know, not disturbing, you know, the existing foliage might help with having a
44 natural fenced in area.
45
46 Rebecca Sorenson: That's what we would love to see.
47
48 Beth Bronson: But if you are going those 400 feet right there encroaching in that 30-foot setback, you are going to come
49 up against a way to go directly from one property to the next. That's just a consideration I was thinking about.
50
32
Approved 10.18.2023
1 Rebecca Sorenson: Right.
2
3 Beth Bronson: Does that make sense?
4
5 Nathan Robinson: I'm not sure I understand what your concern is.
6
7 Beth Bronson: Not putting fencing up when you are, if you are already going to be encroaching on that 30-foot setback,
8 and the idea is to have a natural barrier with the existing landscape.
9
10 Nathan Robinson: I believe they said they will create the buffer that would otherwise be required in the 30 foot?
11
12 Beth Bronson: That was considered sufficient.
13
14 Nathan Robinson: On the development side of the road. Yeah.
15
16 Beth Bronson: Okay.
17
18 Ryan Moffitt: Just that was Rebecca Sorenson for the stenographer.
19
20 Leon Meyers: Okay. I apologize for cutting off anybody who had questions. Any other questions for staff or applicant?
21 Now we'll close the public hearing. And so, the matter is before the Board. Let's see. We're 2 hours in here. Would
22 you folks like to take a break?
23
24 Beth Bronson: Just a 5-minute break?
25
26 Leon Meyers: 5-minute break? How about that? Okay. We're back at 9:15. How about that?
27
28 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BREAKS FOR 5 MINUTES
29
30 Leon Meyers: Okay, Board members. Discussion, comments?
31
32 Beth Bronson: I mean, I guess my only point of discussion is that it has been reviewed by staff, and they are not making
33 a recommendation, but they have determined that it meets the qualifications of use for a camp under Section, what is it,
34 5.7.5 and as a retreat under 5.18.4. And I guess just that checklist, being within the packet, obviously, does anybody
35 have any comments or concerns based on that assessment of the camp and retreat, based on what we've heard in the
36 fact finding?
37
38 Nathan Robinson: It's my observation, and Pat, you got, your team did really good job of filling out all the line items on
39 the checklist, so well done. On both the general and of the specific standards, so. I guess my only, my only question
40 is, I don't know if we can even ask Pat this at point. Can we, once we close the public hearing, can we ask questions to
41 staff while we're making the decision, or are we precludes, you know,just ourselves,just the board now at this point?
42
43 James Bryan: I would recommend that you reopen the hearing.
44
45 Nathan Robinson: Okay.
46
47 Other Speaker: And that's generally fine. There's generally not going to be any objection to that if you haven't allowed
48 people to leave. Nobody's asked to leave, so you could reopen it, ask any questions.
49
50 Leon Meyers: So, without objection then, the public hearing is open again.
33
Approved 10.18.2023
1
2 Nathan Robinson: Well, I don't necessarily want to open the public hearing, sorry. But it's more of a procedural thing. 1
3 think, you know, we have the items in green, it looks like, that we must approve in terms of motions, and I think Pat was
4 saying that, you know, we could roll this motion into one motion potentially instead of three. And then I think there were
5 the, you know, do we need to go through each one of these items, you know, forms and fees and all that kind of stuff
6 and just say, you know, staff has approved it because they've received these items, and we must approve the fact that
7 we've seen them.
8
9 Patrick Mallett: It's entirely up to you.
10
11 Nathan Robinson: Okay.
12
13 Patrick Mallett: Previous decisions with previous boards have gone methodically through each line item. We've had
14 board decisions that have taken the components in green as a complete, yes, we agree, and then go to the items of
15 pink, the specific standards. Yes, we agree or disagree. And then the final specific standards, those three with does or
16 does not. But my understanding is that you, from a legal standpoint, you could just make that decision en masse with
17 all the findings. It's entirely up to you. I think the important thing is to register in that you are making your findings and
18 making a vote on that.
19
20 Leon Meyers: Right.
21
22 Patrick Mallett:And making your determination. We just, we're simply not making a recommendation. You make your
23 own findings, your own determination as you see fit.
24
25 Leon Meyers: Anything before we close the hearing again? Any other questions for staff or any other reason to keep
26 the hearing open?
27
28 Beth Bronson: I guess I just have a question about the onsite residents. — I'm struggling because a lot of this is
29 conceptual and it's not, in a word, as opposed to a master plan development conditional zoning request, this being the
30 special use permit.
31
32 Leon Meyers: Right.
33
34 Beth Bronson: And retaining the agricultural residential as a business. I guess, what am I trying to say. Will it be a
35 residence, or will it be a, you know, like will that live-in, or you said it was a direct support supervisor, or maybe not
36 direct support supervisor, but who will live in the property, I guess, as like a steward —
37
38 Leon Meyers: Believe that's actually in.
39
40 Beth Bronson: Or manager.
41
42 Leon Meyers: The conditions, right? If, and the conditions are part of the proposal so
43
44 Beth Bronson: Could be.
45
46 Leon Meyers: Mr. Moffitt, if you'd like to address that directly?
47
48 Ryan Moffitt: It is in the conditions. It's at the option of the applicant whether they want to have a permanent person. It
49 allows a permanent live-in. It doesn't require one.
50
34
Approved 10.18.2023
1 Leon Meyers: Right.
2
3 Ryan Moffitt: But that would be an employee of the operation that would be occupying.
4
5 Beth Bronson: It may permanently occupy.
6
7 Ryan Moffitt: Right.
8
9 Beth Bronson: So, it is not a given that it's going to occupy.
10
11 Ryan Moffitt: That's right.
12
13 Beth Bronson: So, there will be times when it is not occupied at all?
14
15 Ryan Moffitt: Possibly.
16
17 Patrick Mallett: My understanding is that the intent—and you can affirm this, of course, is that there is some sort of
18 management of the facility on site so that things are properly managed and controlled so they don't, theoretically go off
19 the charts. Is that?
20
21 Leon Meyers: On that specific question, there may or may not be a resident manager?
22
23 Ryan Moffitt: Right.
24
25 Patrick Mallett: Yeah.
26
27 Ryan Moffitt: Yes.
28
29 Beth Bronson: So, yeah, the condition is that they may permanently reside, versus creating a condition where we would
30 require somebody to occupy.
31
32 Ryan Moffitt: Right, it is not a requirement.
33
34 Beth Bronson: As of right now, mm hmm.
35
36 Leon Meyers: All right. Other questions before we come back to the board? Then without objection I'll close the public
37 hearing again. That's three times, I think. Sorry about that. And, board members, discussion on the case or the
38 findings or are we at a point where somebody might consider making a motion?
39
40 Nathan Robinson: Can I make a first motion based on the green? And what I'm making on the green is based on
41 UDO's 2.2 extended down to all the 2.7s on Page, I don't know, the Pages aren't numbers, but on Attachment No. 6
42 where we have the green form starting with proper forms, fees paid, all the way down through signs posting. It seems
43 like the staff is. I guess I must explain why I must make a motion. The motion I make is that because, based on the
44 staff check marks that these requirements are met, then I make a motion that the requirements necessary to grant the
45 approval of the special use permit. I guess I was feeling like we should do it one box at a time. That's what I was
46 thinking about. I was, so my intention was to make a motion, I don't know how to word it properly, to accept one box at
47 a time. I was wondering if that would be an approach that would be acceptable to you all.
48
35
Approved 10.18.2023
1 Leon Meyers: Yeah, I think Pat was saying if you wanted to, you could make a motion to affirm that the board has found
2 the application in compliance with the requirements listed on everything up to the last pink sheet, which is a separate
3 matter, as I understand it. Is that right, James?
4
5 James Bryan: Sorry, I don't mean to complicate it anymore.
6
7 Leon Meyers: Okay.
8
9 James Bryan: But I would say that there needs to be four separate determinations by this board. One about the
10 findings of fact. And the findings of fact are just the supporting evidence. And there's been no controversy here, so
11 tonight is a good one for this, you could say, you know, finding of facts. Another one is based on the findings of facts,
12 have all the standards been met, and that would be the next column where staff says yes and Board of Adjustment
13 tonight, do you agree and say yes. And then another one, a third decision is whether to place conditions. Again, these
14 are all proposed by the applicant. There hasn't been any modification of them other than what's been in E1, so that
15 should be straightforward. And then the last one is to approve or deny the SUP. Now within it, within the findings of
16 fact and whether the standards have been met, you can break'em up by the color blocks, or you could do them all as
17 one. You could do it line by line. It's up to the board's discretion.
18
19 Leon Meyers: We would have a motion finding that the evidence presented is— help me here, I'm sorry. I should have.
20
21 Nathan Robinson: The standards are met, in the finding of facts, the standards are met. Is that what you're saying?
22
23 James Bryan: You might frame it as there's a motion to have a finding of fact as demonstrated in Attachment 6 by the
24 supported evidence. And what I would take that to mean is that your findings of fact are these, what's shown, as all the
25 evidence that's been submitted in the application and sometimes in the testimony. So that would be, that's enough for
26 the reviewing court later to say: What did you base your decision on? We based our decision on the application and
27 what we heard tonight.
28
29 Leon Meyers: The application, which includes the conditions, matter of fact, right?
30
31 James Bryan: It does.
32
33 Leon Meyers: Right. So, Nathan, are you comfortable with that motion?
34
35 Nathan Robinson: I'm 100 percent comfortable with that motion.
36
37 Leon Meyers: There is a motion that the Board finds the facts listed in Attachment 6, these I guess it would be the first
38 four pages of Attachment 6. Do I hear a second to that motion?
39
40 Jeff Scott: Second.
41
42 Leon Meyers: Any discussion on that motion? All in favor please say aye.
43
44 Board Members: Aye.
45
46 Leon Meyers: And opposed?
47
48 Beth Bronson: Nay.
49
50 Leon Meyers: The motion passes.
36
Approved 10.18.2023
1
2 Beth Bronson: I would say I oppose that motion.
3
4 Leon Meyers: I'm sorry, you voted against the motion?
5
6 Beth Bronson: Correct.
7
8 Leon Meyers: Okay. All right. So, then it is four in favor and one opposed.
9
10 Beth Bronson: Against, yes.
11
12 Leon Meyers: All right. Then next, James, is the specific standards, is that right?
13
14 Beth Bronson: I think I might have jumped ahead of myself as far as if we're just doing the application components.
15
16 Leon Meyers: The motion, as I understand it is that the Board finds in favor of the facts on the first four pages of
17 Attachment 6.
18
19 Beth Bronson: Yeah, as far as the specific standards related to waste disposal safety and vehicle access, I would be
20 opposed, so I guess that it would stand.
21
22 Leon Meyers: So, you voted against that motion. I understand. Okay. And a second motion would cover the specific
23 standards, James? Is that correct?
24
25 James Bryan: You can do that, yep.
26
27 Leon Meyers: Okay. And do I hear a motion that the Board finds that the application in compliance with the facts listed
28 in the specific standards on the final two pages of Attachment 6?
29
30 Nathan Robinson: I make that motion.
31
32 Leon Meyers: And second? Anybody?
33
34 Jeff Scott: I'll second.
35
36 Leon Meyers: All right. Any discussion on the compliance with the specific standards? All in favor, please say aye.
37
38 Board Members: Aye.
39
40 Leon Meyers: Any opposed? Then that motion carries. And then, finally, the motion would be to grant the special use
41 permit—help me here, James—based on the findings of fact in the first two motions. Is that right?
42
43 James Bryan: Based on the findings of facts, the standards being met by those findings of facts and dependent upon
44 the conditions of with E1.
45
46 Nathan Robinson: So, should we make, yeah, so we, yeah, because you said we must make a motion on those
47 conditions as well. And so, you want to nail those together with the determination.
48
49 James Bryan: The motion has to be clear that you're making those four, but you could mash 'em up all you want, or
50 you could separate them out as you want. But at the end of the day, there must be a motion that says those four things.
37
Approved 10.18.2023
1
2 Nathan Robinson: Okay.
3
4 James Bryan: But you can mash them.
5
6 Nathan Robinson: Sure. Let's just do one separate for these conditions because I think these are important.
7
8 Leon Meyers: Yeah, they are a part of the application, but as James says, it really ought to be clear that the conditions
9 are a part of what the Board is approving.
10
11 MOTION made by Nathan Robinson to grant the Special Use Permit. Seconded by Greg Niemiroski.
12 VOTE: Unanimous
13
14 Leon Meyers: The Board has granted the Special Use Permit. Good luck to you, folks.
15
16 AGENDA ITEM 6: ADJOURNMENT
17
18 The meeting was adjourned at 7:56 p.m.
19
20
21 LEON MEYE ,CHAIR
22 20 October 2023
38