HomeMy WebLinkAbout11.13.24 BOA Agenda Packet
PLANNING and INSPECTIONS
Cy Stober, AICP, Director | cstober@orangecountync.gov | 131 W. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278 | 919.245.2575
AGENDA
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (BOA)
WHITTED BUILDING
300 WEST TRYON STREET
HILLSBOROUGH, NC 27278
Wednesday, November 13, 2024
7:00 p.m.
No. Page(s) Agenda Item
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
3. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BOA MEMBER KYLE MYERS
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
September 11, 2024 Meeting Minutes
5. PUBLIC CHARGE
The Board of Adjustment pledges to the citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board
asks its citizens to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the
Board and with fellow citizens. At any time should any member of the Board or any citizen
fail to observe this public charge, the Chair will ask the offending person to leave the
meeting until that individual regains personal control. Should decorum fail to be restored,
the Chair will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to this public
charge is observed. All electronic devices such as cell phones, pagers, and computers
should please be turned off or set to silent/vibrate.
The Board of Adjustment is a quasi-judicial administrative body established in accordance
with the provisions of local regulations and State law to perform specified functions
essential to the County’s planning program. Action(s) taken by the board are based solely
on competent, substantial, and material evidence presented during a previously
scheduled and advertised public hearing on a specific item. As detailed within Section
2.12.2 of the UDO the Board chair reserves the right to exclude evidence and testimony
that is deemed: ‘incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious’ and therefore
fails to reasonably address the issues before the Board of Adjustment. While it should
be noted there is no time limit on the presentation of evidence, the Chair asks that the
presentation of evidence be consistent with established policies, rules of procedure, and
acceptable levels of decorum to ensure a fair and equitable hearing for all parties.
6. POTENTIAL BOA CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT
It is the duty of every Board member to avoid both conflicts of interest and appearances
of conflict. Board members having any conflicts of interest or appearances of conflict with
respect to matters before the Board should identify the conflict or appearance of conflict
and refrain from undue participation in the matter involved.
As a reminder, NC General Statute § 160D-109 establishes the following standard: A
member of any board exercising quasi-judicial functions pursuant to this Chapter shall not
participate in or vote on any quasi-judicial matter in a manner that would violate affected
person’s constitutional rights to an impartial decision maker. Impermissible violations of
due process include, but are not limited to, a member having a fixed opinion prior to
hearing the matter that is not susceptible to change, undisclosed ex parte
communications, a close familial, business, or other associational relationship with an
affected person, or a financial interest in the outcome of the matter.
7. CASES
A-6-24 - To review and hold a quasi-judicial evidentiary hearing for a Special
Use Permit request (Case Number SUP23-0011)
Request has been submitted by James Tilson and Canine Adventures. The
applicant has applied for a SUP to allow for the development of a Kennel
Class II facility. The site is located on Orange County PIN 9832-60-7469,
located off Monotropa Trail, Efland, NC, and lies within the Bingham
Township of Orange County.
8. BOA ANNUAL REPORT AND WORKPLAN
9. ADJOURNMENT
Draft
1
MINUTES 1 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 2
REGULAR MEETING 3
September 11, 2024 4
5
MEMBERS PRESENT: Leon Meyers, Chair, Member 6
Nathan Robinson, Member 7
Greg Niemiroski, Member 8
Holly Fraccaro, Alternate 9
10
MEMBERS EXCUSED: Jeff Scott, Member 11
Beth Bronson, Vice-chair, Member 12
13
LIST OF APPLICANTS: Nick Jeffries, Camp Chestnut Ridge 14
Neal Cagle, MX3 Construction LLC 15
David Cates, PE 16
17 PUBLIC: Jenn Sykes 18
Ron Geib 19
20
STAFF PRESENT: Patrick Mallett, Deputy Director, Development Services 21
Taylor Perschau, Current Planning Manager 22
James Bryan, Staff Attorney 23
Jack Moran, Planning Technician 24
25
AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER 26
27
Leon Meyers called the meeting to order at 7:06 PM 28
29
AGNEDA ITEM 2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA 30
31
Leon Meyers: All right, folks. Let's go ahead and get started. I'll call the meeting to order. Anything to change in 32
the agenda, Pat, and team? Pat, any changes on the agenda? 33
34
Patrick Mallett: No. I'm just giving you the statements of standing. 35
36
AGENDA ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES 37
38
Leon Meyers: All right. Good and the minutes. Board members, did you have a chance to look at minutes from 39
the July 24th meeting? So, a motion would be in order. 40
41
Nathan Robinson: Motion to approve. 42
43
Greg Niemiroski: Second. 44
45
Leon Meyers: All right. Any changes, corrections, discussion? All in favor, please say aye. 46
47
MOTION was made by Nathan Robinson. Seconded by Greg Niemiroski. 48
1
Draft
2
VOTE: Unanimous 1
2
Leon Meyers: The minutes are approved. 3
4
AGENDA ITEMS 4 & 5: PUBLIC CHARGE & POTENTIAL BOA CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT 5
6
Leon Meyers: Folks, bear with me while I read this public charge for the Board of Adjustment which pledges to the 7
citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board asks its citizens to conduct themselves in a 8
respectful, courteous manner, both with the Board and with fellow citizens. At any time should any 9
member of the Board or any citizen fail to observe this public charge, I'll ask the offending person to 10
leave the meeting until that individual regains personal control. Should decorum fail to be restored, 11
we'll recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge can be 12
observed. Please turn off phones and pagers. The Board of Adjustment is a quasi-judicial 13
administrative body established in accordance with local regulations of the UDO and State law to 14
perform specified functions essential to the County's planning program. Actions taken by the Board 15
are based solely on competent, substantial, and material evidence presented during a previously 16
scheduled and advertised public hearing on a specific item. As detailed within 2.12.2 of the UDO 17
the Board chair reserves the right to exclude evidence and testimony that is deemed incompetent, 18
irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious and therefore fails to reasonably address the issues 19
before the Board of Adjustment. I'll just mention also that the Board, for folks who have not already, 20
is going to ask folks who want to testify to establish standing before testifying. While it should be 21
noted there is no time limit on the presentation of evidence, I ask that the presentation of evidence 22
be consistent with established policies, rules of procedure, and acceptable levels of decorum to 23
ensure a fair and equitable hearing for all parties. This part of the charges about potential conflict of 24
interest, it's the duty of every Board member to avoid both conflicts of interest and appearances of 25
conflict. Board members having any conflicts of interest or appearances of conflict with respect to 26
matters before the Board should identify the conflict or appearance of conflict and refrain from undue 27
participation in the matter involved. As a reminder, General Statute 160.D.109 establishes the 28
following standard: A member of any Board exercising quasi-judicial functions pursuant to this 29
chapter shall not participate in or vote on any quasi-judicial matter in a manner that would violate 30
affected persons' constitutional rights to an impartial decision-maker, and permissible violations of 31
due process include, but are not limited to, a member having a fixed opinion prior to hearing the 32
matter that is not susceptible to change, undisclosed ex parte communications, a close familial 33
business or other associational relationship with an affected person, or a financial interest in the 34
outcome of the matter. And I'll ask at this time if any Board members need to declare a conflict or a 35
potential conflict. 36
37
Holly Fraccaro: No. 38
39
Leon Meyers: Hearing none, the first case is A-4-24, the modification to the special use permit. 40
41
AGENDA ITEM 6: CASE: A-4-24 - To review Special Use Permit Modification (Case Number SUP24-0012) 42
Modification request to an approved Site Plan associated with an approved Camp/Retreat 43 Special Use Permit (SUP) (Case A-15-18). Request submitted by Camp Chestnut Ridge and 44
2
Draft
3
NC United Methodist Camp & Retreat Ministries, Inc. requesting to modify the approved site 1 plan to allow for a new location for seven (7) RV spaces from one side of the camp to another 2
and consolidate the equestrian facilities into one central area. All other aspects of the original 3
SUP remain in place and the site plan change does not increase the capacity or use of the 4
existing facility. 5
6
The site is located on Orange County PINs 9843-22-1289; 9843-13-7930; 9843-05-5036; and 7
9833-93-5222, and along Camp Chestnut Ridge Road, west side Chestnut Ridge Church Road, 8
and east of Mt. Willing Road and lies within the Cheeks Township. 9
10
Patrick Mallett: Good evening, Board members. I will be walking you through the first case and then Taylor will do 11
the second one. I'm going to just give you a summary and then walk through it because it's fairly 12
simple. What you're looking at with this agenda item involves Camp Chestnut Ridge. It's a camp 13
facility that's been operating since the 1950s, many decades in various forms and iterations. It's 14
actually had several special use permits over the years. About 6 years ago, in early January of 2019, 15
it had its last iteration which was basically a master plan for the vision for the camp retreat. It 16
proposed a lot of things that they were contemplating and are contemplating over the next 20 years. 17
Everything remains the same with the exception of one item which is stipulated in our UDO. If you 18
make a change in the location on your site plan, that site plan has to be re-reviewed, and the 19
proposed change considered by the Board and approve that site plan. They're not proposing any 20
changes of use, any modifications to the original conditions of approval. None of the special use 21
items. Just that one change on the layout sheet for the camp. And that change is to take seven 22
recreational vehicle RV spaces that were shown in one location closer to, what I call the lake, there 23
in the camp and then moving it to the other side, and then they are seeking to demolish several 24
barns, equestrian-like facilities and then consolidate it into one centralized equestrian facility. Like I 25
said, they're not revising any of their changes of the land use, increases in campers, students, hours 26
of operation, capacity, anything of that effect. So, everything else related to the original existing 27
current SUP would remain in effect. This is a site map. It gives you a general orientation to where 28
it is. It's generally southwest of here. This shows the existing properties for the camp proper. It's a 29
collection of different parcels all connecting to Camp Chestnut Ridge Road access to the main 30
campus. And this just shows you it's got AR zoning all around as far as the eye can see. The future 31
land-use map shows resource protection areas and then agricultural residential in the light green. 32
The resource protection areas, those, if you were to overlay stream buffers and other wooded areas, 33
that would match up. The proposed changes aren't within any of the resource protection areas, nor 34
would they be in the new locations. This one's hard to see. I'm just going to go through it, and then 35
I'll come back to a more visible version. But this is this Sheet C5, which is the layout sheet from the 36
McAdams site plan that was approved with the special-use permit. It shows a collection of, I believe, 37
32 separate buildings spread around the campus. Those include the dining hall, various cabins, and 38
other multi-use buildings throughout the camp. The modification, the area in blue, shows the change 39
in the RV location to the new location and the consolidated equestrian facility. This is a fairly more 40
detailed map, but it does show the transfer of their RVs from this location over to here, and then the 41
equestrian facility down in this location. David Cates, the engineer, is working on this project on 42
behalf of the camp. He is also working with them to complete the required permits with Neal Cagle, 43
the contractor, and they'll be doing the physical work. But this land disturbance is slightly over the 44
threshold and requires a storm water analysis. So, in conjunction to this request, they are processing 45
3
Draft
4
a land disturbance permit, erosion control elements, storm water for water quality, water quantity, 1
and doing those calculations that classifies as what we call low-impact design. It would not cause 2
any need for storm water control measures or storm water ponds or devices. The application and 3
the package, including previous materials is complete and consistent with the major sections of the 4
UDO, including the performance standards. Now we have testimony from the camp folks and 5
persons with legal standing. You want to get up first? Or wait, actually, we need to swear in folks, 6
don't we? 7
8
Leon Meyers: We do. Yes, please. Anyone who intends to testify this evening, can you please come forward to 9
be sworn. 10
11
Greg Niemiroski: Both cases? 12
13
Leon Meyers: I would say both cases, yeah. 14
15
SWEARING OF THE TESTIMONY 16
17
Jack Moran: Do you swear and/or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and 18
nothing but the truth? 19
20
Applicants: Yes. 21
22
Staff: Yes. 23
24
Public: Yes. 25
26
Patrick Mallett: I'll pull up an air photo. I'll go online and see if I can get it. Bear with me. It's in your packets. I'm 27
just trying to get a better version to look from. So, this is the portal, it has all of the materials that 28
were submitted with the original existing special use permit, plus the revised materials. Are you okay 29
with talking from the slide? 30
31
Nick Jeffries: Yes. 32
33
Leon Meyers: Before we start with the applicant's presentation, I think we'll go ahead and deal with standing for 34
the folks who have signed up here in case that person might have questions. Ms. Sykes, would you 35
come forward, please? 36
37
Jenn Sykes: Hi, my name is Jennifer Sykes. I'm here, our family owns the land to the north of the camp which is 38
in the SUP where the initial proposed RV location is. We are adjacent to that. We're here to learn, 39
understand what's there, hear more about the erosion control. Not sure if there will be a statement 40
since most of it's moving away from us, and I serve on the Hillsborough Board of Adjustment and 41
used to vice chair the Planning Board. 42
43
Leon Meyers: Okay, then that's convenient because you understand the concept the standing. 44
4
Draft
5
1
Jenn Sykes: Yeah. 2
3
Leon Meyers: Right. And the county attorneys have told us that as a Board, we should be receiving evidence only 4
from witnesses withstanding. So, our first job here is to determine how you have standing to testify 5
in this case. Could you give us the short version of that please? 6
7
Jenn Sykes: So, our, if you can see when I hover over here, I think it says that pin where my mouse is, we have 8
the adjacent property. In fact, my grandfather is the one who donated the land for Camp Chestnut 9
Ridge. We still own, in the family, the land around it. We have a forestry plan on that property, in 10
fact, and so, we're just trying to make sure what's being proposed doesn't have an adverse impact 11
on our adjacent property. 12
13
Leon Meyers: Then it sounds like you're thinking you would have standing via special damages. Is that right? 14
15
Jenn Sykes: Yeah, and so, Jackie Sykes is my mother sitting back there, but as the one who has some exposure 16
to this, I've been the one to review and asked to speak as her representative. 17
18
Leon Meyers: Okay and can you tell us what special damages you would suffer if this case were passed? 19
20
Jenn Sykes: With Pat, we're here to learn and make sure about it. One of the questions I specifically have is 21
given the original location and that they are mobile units, RVs, whether or not we can get some kind 22
of condition in there to ensure that it won't trespass on the property, won't cause adverse pollution 23
on it and won't impact the forestry plan we have in place on it. 24
25
Leon Meyers: All right, for the purpose of standing, in order to establish standing, you would need to demonstrate 26
with competent materials and substantial evidence that you would suffer some damage to your 27
property if this case were passed. Do you have evidence? 28
29
Jenn Sykes: If it passes as it is proposed, we likely do not. However, we are here to listen in case this Board 30
attaches additional conditions on what is being proposed. 31
32
Leon Meyers: Good. Then, if what you intend to do is listen, I think that would be great. If you wanted to testify in 33
the case, then we'll need to establish standing, and in order to do that, you'll need to demonstrate 34
for us that you would suffer what's called in the statutes, “special damages.” Do you have evidence 35
for that, just for the purpose of standing? 36
37
Jenn Sykes: With the SUP, as it is currently written in the packet and what is proposed, we actually benefit, so 38
we are here to make sure that it works that way. 39
40
Leon Meyers: Then, it sounds like everything is good. You don't feel at this time you would need to testify? 41
42
Jenn Sykes: Not at this time, though we want to hear the debate to make sure the Board does not hand out other 43
conditions, other restrictions, that would impact our property. 44
5
Draft
6
1
Leon Meyers: So, at this time, you're not asserting standing for the purpose of testifying? Do I understand you 2
correctly? 3
4
Jenn Sykes: I would say at this point in time, that is correct. 5
6
Leon Meyers: Great. Thank you very much. All right, for the applicant. 7
8
Nick Jeffries: Good evening, Board. My name is Nick Jeffries. I am the director of Camp Chestnut Ridge. I've 9
been serving there for 19 years, and I'm here tonight to just see if you all have any questions, and 10
I'm here as a resource to you to help you understand what's going on. Patrick laid it out very well. 11
As he stated, it's fairly simple, but if you have any questions, I'm here for you. 12
13
Leon Meyers: Thank you. Next for the applicant. 14
15
Neal Cagle: Good evening, Board. My name is Neal Cagle, MX3 Construction LLC. I'm the applicant. Just pretty 16
much trying to process the paperwork for the camp and just assisting in moving the campsites from 17
one spot to the other just on paperwork, and that's pretty much it on that section. For the equestrian 18
center, I'm the actual builder for that one, and everything that's going there. The pervious surface 19
should stay about the same. We're consolidating two builds that are in one area. Right now, they're 20
separated. With the new plan, they're actually joined together, and that's pretty much all I have. 21
22
Leon Meyers: All right. Thank you, Mr. Cagle. 23
24
David Cates: Hello, I'm David Cates. I'm the engineer for the project, and I also served on the Hillsborough Board 25
of Adjustment, but that was 25-years ago or something. I can't even remember. So, I appreciate 26
what questions you all have, and so my role in the job so far has been mainly mapping, performing 27
or preparing the erosion control plan and performing the low-impact development analysis, which 28
I've already done to essentially illustrate that there is no negative impact on the environment because 29
of how low, essentially how much pervious area there is on the site compared to how much 30
impervious, and so, there's really no change in impervious, so it's a fairly straightforward calculation. 31
In the erosion control plan, we've already had a preliminary review by the county, and it's only around 32
the equestrian center. It's mainly silt fence and silt fence outlets in the vicinity of that, so it's nowhere 33
near any of the property lines. 34
35
Leon Meyers: Good. Board members, any questions for Mr. Cates? 36
37
Holly Fraccaro: No sir. 38
39
Leon Meyers: All right. Thank you. Anybody else here to testify for the applicant? Well, that was straightforward 40
and concise and efficient. Thank you, folks. 41
42
Patrick Mallett: The last thing that I would add is, like I said, they have a land disturbance permit that would be 43
required moving the RVs. There would be some light land disturbance for that to set up our spaces 44
6
Draft
7
for those, and then some electrical connections and permits that would be required, and then a 1
building permit, of course, demo permits for the demolished building barns and then a building permit 2
for the new equestrian facility. 3
4
Leon Meyers: But the only thing that is before the Board this evening is the changes to the special use permit. 5
6
Patrick Mallett: Just the change to the layout of two features that were previously identified on the approved plan. 7
8
Leon Meyers: Okay. Then, it's before the Board. Any discussion before we try to get to an action on this case? 9
The standards reviewed and evidence received are on Page 52, I can't tell if it's 52 or 54 in the 10
package, and then the findings of fact begin on Page 56. And if nobody has any questions or 11
discussion, the motion would be in order on the standards reviewed and evidence received, and the 12
motion would be to adopt the standards reviewed and evidence received. 13
14
Nathan Robinson: I make a motion to accept the standards and the evidence received. 15
16
Greg Niemiroski: Second. 17
18
Leon Meyers: Any discussion on the adoption of the standards? All in favor, please say aye. 19
20
MOTION made by Nathan Robinson. Seconded by Greg Niemiroski. 21
VOTE: Unanimous 22
23
Leon Meyers: None opposed. Next would be Findings of Fact beginning on Page 56. 24
25
James Bryan: Mr. Chair, if I may, just to clarify for the record, despite it being labeled as findings of fact, it's stylized 26
as the conclusions which is the appropriate step at this time. 27
28
Leon Meyers: The conclusions. 29
30
James Bryan: Yeah. 31
32
Leon Meyers: Got it. Then, the motion would adopt what begins on Page 56 as the conclusions. Is that right, 33
James? 34
35
James Bryan: Yeah. 36
37
Leon Meyers: Thank you. Do I hear a motion to that effect? 38
39
Holly Fraccaro: So moved. 40
41
Leon Meyers: And a second? 42
43
Greg Niemiroski: Second. 44
7
Draft
8
Leon Meyers: Any discussion on the conclusions and Findings of Fact? All in favor, please say aye. 1
2
MOTION made by Holly Fraccaro. Seconded by Greg Niemiroski. 3
4
VOTE: Unanimous. 5
6
Leon Meyers: None opposed. The Board adopts the conclusions. And the final action, correct me if I’m wrong 7
here, James, is to issue the special use permit, is that right? 8
9
James Bryan: Approve the modification. 10
11
Leon Meyers: Approve the modification. Do I hear a motion to that effect? 12
13
Holly Fraccaro: I move to approve the modification. 14
15
Nathan Robinson: Second. 16
17
Leon Meyers: Any discussion on that motion? Then, all in favor, please say aye. 18
19
MOTION by Holly Fraccaro. Seconded by Nathan Robinson. 20
21
VOTE: Unanimous. 22
23
Leon Meyers: None opposed? The changes are approved. Thank you, folks. 24
25
AGENDA ITEM 6 Continued: 26
CASE: A-5-24 - To review a Variance (Case Number BA24-0003) 27
Request submitted by Cynthia Ray Barlow. The applicant has applied for a variance from the 28
150-foot reservoir buffer to allow for the construction of a single-family home within 75 feet 29
from Lake Orange. 30 31
The site is located on Orange County PIN 9857-87-2156, has road frontage along Old Lake 32
Trail, and lies within the Cedar Grove Township of Orange County. 33
34
Taylor Perschau: Good evening, Board. I'm going to take 1 minute just to pull up the agenda online because you guys 35
are referencing pages, so if it becomes helpful for anyone in the audience later, I'm going to just 36
make it available to all of us. 37
38
Leon Meyers: All right. 39
40
Taylor Perschau: I am Taylor Perschau, Current Planning and Zoning Manager, and I'm just going to give you a quick 41
intro to the next item, which is Agenda Item 6-B. This case is a variance from a reservoir setback. 42
A little bit about the property itself. It is currently an unaddressed, undeveloped parcel on Old Lake 43
Trail, so the reservoir that we're talking about is going to be Lake Orange, and so, I'll put in a little bit 44
of the process about why this is coming before you, and then the applicant's representative, David 45
8
Draft
9
Cates, will speak on behalf of the property owner, Cynthia Barlow. So, this item is coming before 1
you based on Section 2.10 which gives you all, as the Board of Adjustment, the authority to modify 2
or vary regulations when the strict application of those regulations would cause an unnecessary 3
hardship. So, as we think about this case, as you all think about this case, Attachment 4 is going to 4
be the place where you find those specific hardships outlined that you are determining whether any 5
hardship is met, and the applicant is proposing to evidence that those hardships are being met. So, 6
they're, again, applying for a variance from the 150-foot reservoir buffer to allow for the construction 7
of a single-family home. The modification is requesting a reduction of 75 feet from that 150-foot 8
buffer. The buffer is outlined in Section 6.13.4.C, minimum buffer widths for watershed protection 9
overlay districts. This property is in the Upper Eno Critical Watershed Overlay, and, again, the 10
reservoir is Lake Orange reservoir, so it has its own unique buffer in this instance. The existing 11
parcel was created as part of a 1992 subdivision action. The subdivision predated the 1994 zoning 12
ordinance in which that 150-foot buffer was implemented, and another piece to be aware of, which 13
I'm sure the applicant will address, is that there's a stream buffer on site as well. This is the property 14
itself today. It has Lake Orange to the west, to the east it has frontage on a private road, Old Lake 15
Trail, which then runs into Deer Run, and this is the visual of that 150-foot buffer. So, for this 16
reservoir, the buffer is pulling from the 615-foot elevation mark which is the yellow line running the 17
coast of Lake Orange. These are the two visuals that the variance is being requested from. The 18
next slide was actually put together by the applicant, and at this point, I'm actually going to hand it 19
over, unless you have any specific process questions before you are ready for the applicant. 20
21
Leon Meyers: Any questions for Taylor on the staff presentation? 22
23
Holly Fraccaro: No. 24
25
Leon Meyers: If not, the next thing we're going to handle, Taylor, is we have a, is it Mr. Geib, Ron? Right, let's be 26
sure that we handle Mr. Geib's standing. 27
28
Taylor Perschau: Sure. 29
30
Leon Meyers: So, if he has questions of the applicant, assuming he establishes standing, we'll have that all in 31
place. Mr. Geib, could you come forward, please? 32
33
Ron Geib: Yeah. 34
35
Leon Meyers: Tell me your last name. I may not be reading it correctly. 36
37
Ron Geib: It's Geib. 38
39
Leon Meyers: Geib. 40
41
Ron Geib: Yep. Thank you all, and this is not my job, so like I said, I'm going to try to follow the rules of the 42
way you need to. 43
44
9
Draft
10
Leon Meyers: Yeah, not my job either but we're doing the best we can. 1
2
Ron Geib: If standing is special damages, that will affect our property, which is the adjacent property to the 3
proposed variance, so that's the standing I'm trying to establish. 4
5
Leon Meyers: In order to establish special damages, you would need to demonstrate with competent, material, and 6
substantial evidence that if this variance is granted you would suffer a specific damage. 7
8
Ron Geib: So, I have the perspective of it, and first of all, we want to be a good neighbor, and so that being 9
established, we want to try to allow Ms. Barlow to do what she needs to do on that. The problem 10
with Lake Orange in general is there are a lot of exceptions to the 150-foot setback all around that 11
lake, and so there's some people that are right on it, there's some people that are required to be 12
back. We intend to build a house on the adjacent lot, and we don't have a stream, so we're probably 13
not going to get a variance to be any closer to the lake. That being said, we have a house existing 14
already to the left of our property that is inside the 150 feet that blocks the view of the lake of our lot, 15
and now, we're having a proposed house getting put on this side skewed to our property line within 16
that. 17
18
Leon Meyers: Mr. Geib, excuse me for interrupting. What we need to deal with right now is not your direct testimony 19
on the case but evidence that would demonstrate that you would suffer special damages. 20
21
Ron Geib: I don't know what evidence you would need, but it certainly affects the property value of our lot, so 22
the standing is affecting the property value. I have no appraisal or anything that would demonstrate 23
what that is, but like I said, we can express what our perspective is on it. 24
25
Leon Meyers: And the Board is required to consider competent, material, and substantial evidence. So, with all 26
due respect to your opinion on the value, unless you have a background to establish real property 27
values, it doesn't demonstrate special damages. 28
29
Ron Geib: Okay, but your decision will affect the property value of our property, if you grant the variance. So, 30
that is, to us, standing. 31
32
Leon Meyers: Well, right now, that would fall in the category of your opinion, and I certainly respect your opinion. 33
But the county attorney has sent us down a road where we've got to establish special damages using 34
competent, material, and substantial evidence, which is something more than a layperson's opinion. 35
36
Ron Geib: With that being the case, then maybe more time would be requested on our behalf so that we can 37
compile it. We got a notice a week and a half ago, 2 weeks ago, about this hearing, and so not being 38
familiar with the process and needing to have certain things to have standing, we don't have those 39
tonight, but it does affect that. So, I don't want to just let it go if there can be a move to a later date 40
so we can establish those things, then that would be something we would be interested in doing. 41
42
Leon Meyers: That would be up to the Board members. If the Board wants to, and James, correct me if I'm wrong 43
here, I assume the Board has the latitude to move this case to a later meeting. 44
10
Draft
11
James Bryan: Yes. 1
2
Leon Meyers: If it decided to do that, there is a fairness issue to consider on both sides here, of course. Let's see 3
what the Board has to say about the possibility of postponing the case. 4
5
Nathan Robinson: So, when was notification made? I'm trying to see. 6
7
Ron Geib: I received a letter. I don't have the exact date, but it's been within 2 weeks that I received a letter 8
that there would be a hearing on this. 9
10
Leon Meyers: It looks like the mailing was the 28th, is that right? 11
12
Taylor Perschau: That's correct. The ordinance requires that the mailings be sent no less than 10 no more than 24 13
days before the hearing, so they were sent August 28th. 14
15
Ron Geib: And in that letter, it didn't state what we would need to demonstrate standing. It told us about the 16
hearing and that, if we had questions, we could call or come to the hearing, and so that's why I'm 17
here, but we didn't know we were going to have to have some kind of expert appraisal to have 18
standing. 19
20
Leon Meyers: I understand. If the Board wanted to consider postponing the case, then I would say a motion would 21
be in order, and then we are going to want to hear from the applicant on that before we make a 22
decision. Do I hear a motion to postpone the case? 23
24
Nathan Robinson: I think it's fair. I make a motion to postpone the case. It's only been 2 weeks, and with a holiday in 25
the middle. 26
27
Leon Meyers: And do I hear a second to that motion? 28
29
MOTION made by Nathan Robinson. Motion fails due to lack of a second. 30
31
Leon Meyers: Motion fails for lack of a second. I'm sorry, Mr. Geib. Thank you for being here. And the presentation 32
for the applicant. 33
34
James Bryan: Mr. Chair, if we can, we're probably going to need this recorded, so we'll probably need him at the 35
microphone. 36
37
Taylor Perschau: We just want it recorded for transcription. 38
39
Leon Meyers: We can see over the monitor if you stand by the mic, I think. 40
41
Holly Fraccaro: We also just received printed copies. 42
43
David Cates: I have one thing that you don't have that's pertinent to this site. 44
11
Draft
12
Taylor Perschau: Can you speak into the mic. Sorry. You have to speak in the mic. 1
2
David Cates: Oh, gotcha. 3
4
Leon Meyers: Thank you. 5
6
David Cates: As Taylor stated, this property was subdivided 2 years before the zoning of the 150-foot reservoir 7
buffer, and it's pretty clear that they were not created with that in mind. This was overlaid after the 8
fact, and that's obvious when you start looking at the layout of some of these lots, especially the lots 9
that happen to have a stream beside them. Mrs. Barlow, her dad was actually one of the farmers 10
who, I don't know if he gave the land, I don't know how the land transferred to the lake, but anyway, 11
Mr. Ray was one of the five farmers that participated in helping to create the lake, and this is to be 12
her retirement home. I wanted to, if you look at this layout, there are many things going on here, 13
and as Taylor talked about, we have the buffer for the reservoir, we have the stream buffer, we have 14
a 20-foot side yard setback, a 40-foot front yard setback, and then one of the more critical things is 15
there's a 300-foot setback for the septic, and when you put all those things together, it leaves it 16
extremely, extremely tight. I wanted to, in the process of preparing for this, I went to the closest 17
property to the north of this that has a house built on it because I wanted to get a sample size septic 18
field, and it was very interesting. I handed out this particular property to the north, which is 4718 Old 19
Lake Trail. It was very interesting because it's got a stream beside it, and it's got a 75-foot reduced 20
buffer which you can see because of the stream and the septic. That's about all you have left for the 21
buildable area for a house and a driveway, and the driveway's kinda critical as you'll see. Here is 22
that septic field from that particular one. I'm going to have to step away from the mic, but I'll be back. 23
So, here's Old Lake Drive. Now, here is the septic. This is the septic line here, 300-foot line here. 24
You can see that the width of this, it's as wide as the area where the driveway is. So, if you turned 25
it that way, the driveway, you couldn't get to the house because you can't put a driveway over a 26
septic field, and if you put it the other way, it would have to go the long way, and then that's what 27
pushes the house into the reservoir buffer. There are two items that we can't really display at the 28
time, and that's the actual shape. This is assuming that we could pick the exact shape of the septic 29
field, but we can't. Anybody that's built a house that has a septic field, you know we don't determine 30
the exact shape of the septic field. That's determined by the county or by a soil scientist. So, we 31
don't necessarily get to pick and choose. We kind of have to work with the soils. So, you need room 32
in order to have that flexibility, and we have no room. We have less than no room, and the shape of 33
it, again, it isn't necessarily going to be this shape. I guarantee you it won't be this shape; it'll be 34
some shape, but anyway, the 4718 Old Lake Trail, to me, is kind of a great example of what it took 35
in order for that to be a buildable area with the constraints that are shown here. I think that's all I 36
have for now. 37
38
Leon Meyers: Board members, questions for Mr. Cates? 39
40
Greg Niemiroski: What is the proposed, I didn't find it in the packet, but the proposed actual building setback, or is 41
there a dimension for that? Did I miss it? 42
David Cates: The building setbacks are 40 feet on the front and 20 feet on the side. I didn't list the one in the rear 43
because it's superseded by the reservoir and also the side yard setback is superseded by the stream 44
12
Draft
13
buffer, and you can't put a septic field in a stream buffer. So, it's everywhere we turn on this lot, 1
similar to 4718. 2
3
Leon Meyers: Any other questions for Mr. Cates? 4
5
David Cates: I did want to add one other thing. The house is like 2,086 square feet heated on the first level, and 6
like 469. So, it's not like it's huge, we're not asking for a huge house. I feel like this is a reasonable, 7
similar-sized house to the others in the area. If it were a 6,000-square-foot house, I could understand 8
that may be a little disingenuous, but this is a somewhat standard-size house. 9
10
Leon Meyers: I have a couple questions about the handout here, but first, the adjacent or nearby lot that you 11
mentioned from which you took the septic field. Do you have a map of that site to show? I believe 12
you set that up as a comparison. 13
14
David Cates: There is a map. 15
16
Holly Fraccaro: I don't think that's what we received. 17
18
Nathan Robinson: I'm so confused. I don't know what this is, and I don't know how it relates to this. 19
20
David Cates: That's the map. 21
22
Nathan Robinson: It's the map of? 23
24
David Cates: 4718. 25
26
Nathan Robinson: What does 4718 mean? 27
28
David Cates: 4718 is the address. 29
30
Nathan Robinson: 4718 is the address, and where is it located in relation to the property? 31
32
David Cates: It is two parcels north. 33
34
Nathan Robinson: It's two parcels north or one parcel north? 35
36
David Cates: The parcel north directly adjacent is vacant. 37
38
Greg Niemiroski: It's that one. 39
40
Holly Fraccaro: It's this one. 41
42
Leon Meyers: So, the evidence that you handed to us a few minutes ago is the improvement permit for 4715, is 43
that right? 44
13
Draft
14
David Cates: I think it's 4718. 1
2
Nathan Robinson: I'm looking at the Orange County GIS map right now, and when I look at the Orange County GIS 3
map, the thing you just showed me was this lot up here with a house on it, but this is showing a 4
septic lot on the house below or a septic, is the septic system for this property located on this 5
property? When I'm looking at the shape, the shape of this matches the bottom shape and it's down 6
there. If I hold it just like this, that matches the bottom shape, and this shows proposed building 7
envelope on the property that's on the south of that thing that's flashing. 8
9
David Cates: Yeah, you're right. 10
11
Nathan Robinson: I don't think this is an adequately prepared presentation. 12
13
David Cates: Well, can I withdraw that one? 14
15
Nathan Robinson: I don't know. Then what are you going to propose? 16
17
David Cates: Well, I had this, I have the one that I presented. 18
19
Nathan Robinson: So, if you withdraw it then I think you need to start over because I don't understand what you're 20
talking about. 21
22
David Cates: I do see what you're saying. 23
24
Leon Meyers: Taylor's going to fuss at us if you're not standing at the mic. 25
26
Nathan Robinson: I think in light of this, can I resurrect my motion to postpone this to a later date? 27
28
Leon Meyers: You're welcome to enter that motion again. 29
30
Nathan Robinson: I'd like to enter a motion to postpone this to a later date. I don't feel like this presentation is accurately 31
prepared. The presentation we were given wasn't accurate, so I'd like to postpone this to a later 32
date so that you can get properly prepared. 33
34
Leon Meyers: Do I hear a second to that motion? 35
36
Greg Niemiroski: Second. 37
38
Leon Meyers: Okay. Then as part of the discussion, can we tell Mr. Cates what he needs to bring back? That 39
would be more helpful than the current presentation. 40
41
Greg Niemiroski: I think what I heard you say was that you wanted to give an example of a septic system that would 42
be similar to the septic system proposed on this lot. Is that true? 43
44
14
Draft
15
Leon Meyers: And I would just say if you were to prepare a site plan for this lot that shows a house, the driveway 1
and a septic system that is part of an improvement permit, based on the site plan that you prepare, 2
then, that would give me enough information to consider a variance on it. I don't know about other 3
Board members, but those are the things that I would like to see is a dimension site plan. 4
5
Nathan Robinson: A dimension site plan for this lot? 6
7
Leon Meyers: For the subject lot. 8
9
Nathan Robinson: Okay. 10
11
David Cates: That is a dimension site plan. 12
13
Leon Meyers: I see the house on here, but does it tell me how far it is from the lake? 14
15
David Cates: It shows the 150-foot buffer, and it shows that it's adjacent to that buffer. 16
17
Nathan Robinson: Where is the 150-foot setback, is that in the green line? 18
19
David Cates: That is the hatch line that was provided by the county's zoning report. That's how their zoning reports 20
come out. 21
22
Nathan Robinson: So, is it this blue hatch line here? I think the fact we're asking about it and we don't understand, so 23
nothing labels that. 24
25
Holly Fraccaro: I think having the dimensions are included on all of this and then in the example that you were 26
providing of another property, if that's how, if I'm following, with all of the dimensions laid out to show 27
that another builder has, or another home has been built with the variance not meeting the current 28
stated- 29
30
Leon Meyers: If I could just suggest it, if you were willing to go ahead and obtain an improvement permit from the 31
Environment Health Department, based on a site plan that you prepare then there wouldn't be any 32
comparing to adjacent lots that we don't know whether the soil is the same, we don't know whether 33
the load is the same, all of those things. 34
35
David Cates: All right, and I apologize for the confusion. I went to the Environment Health web site, clicked on 36
that property which had this address, but then it had this map. 37
38
Leon Meyers: Yeah, and that can happen sometimes. 39
40
David Cates: So, I apologize for that. That was unintentional. I do appreciate what you're saying. Obviously, that 41
will not happen again. 42
43
15
Draft
16
Leon Meyers: So, for Nathan's motion, we are saying a dimension site plan, the house to scale showing the 1
dimensions to all of the pertinent setbacks. 2
3
Nathan Robinson: And that be labeled, this is a standalone document. I don't know what the blue lines are, and I need 4
a standalone document that tells me what I'm looking at. 5
6
Leon Meyers: Labeled setbacks and the essential elements. And then, are we saying we want to see an 7
improvement permit or? 8
9
Nathan Robinson: An improvement for the subject property? 10
11
Leon Meyers: Yes. 12
13
Nathan Robinson: Can you get us an improvement permit before it's zoned, or before this. Is there a chicken and egg 14
thing? 15
16
Leon Meyers: Not to my knowledge. 17
18
Greg Niemiroski: I think it's possible. 19
20
Leon Meyers: Bryan, save me if we're wandering in bad territory here. 21
22
James Bryan: No, I think you all are just fine. 23
24
Leon Meyers: Okay. 25
26
Patrick Mallett: I do want to point out a time frame reality. 27
28
Leon Meyers: All right. 29
30
Patrick Mallett: These kinds of variance requests are processed by the planning department. We can work with the 31
Board on a Board schedule. You're talking about an improvement permit, a perc test that's run by a 32
separate department and they are behind. Highly unlikely that they would have the ability to submit 33
that application and get that reviewed and approved by your next meeting. It may be two meetings 34
before that could happen. I’m not saying if that's a good or bad thing. I'm just pointing out it wouldn't 35
work for him to come back. 36
37
Leon Meyers: I understand. 38
39
Patrick Mallett: They’re going to have to wait. I will also point out a fairly well-known belief in the health department 40
that they have their different standards that they apply. This 300-foot septic setback is outside the 41
norm for them, so there may be a longer review period with the health department. 42
43
16
Draft
17
Leon Meyers: So, you're suggesting maybe improvement permit is not a reasonable condition for the next hearing 1
of this case? 2
3
Patrick Mallett: I'm indifferent. I mean, I think that's one way you could do it. Or show suitable soils that's prepared 4
by a competent person that can evidence an approvable system to support a footprint in a bedroom 5
set that demonstrates the hardship. 6
7
Leon Meyers: Or we can ask the applicant to come back with a proposal for a drain field that we all know we have 8
to have and issue the variance on the condition that the applicant is going to have to have an 9
improvement permit and a CA anyway. So, maybe we just strike the improvement permit on this 10
and hear your motion. 11
12
Nathan Robinson: I just want a clearer presentation than what is being proposed. 13
14
Leon Meyers: A dimension site plan with all of the essential elements labeled? 15
16
Nathan Robinson: Right, and then the back up to demonstrate why we should approve it, according to the standards 17
and what we are required to answer. 18
19
Leon Meyers: Okay, then that is the motion. Any discussion on that motion? 20
21
Nathan Robinson: He has a question. Is he able to enter a question at this point? 22
23
Leon Meyers: Yes sir. 24
25
David Cates: Just for clarity, you're not requiring an improvement permit at this time? 26
27
Leon Meyers: Correct. Obviously, going forward, this project is going to require an improvement permit and a CA, 28
and it would be in your interest, I would say, to be pretty sure that what you're proposing is going to 29
work. 30
31
David Cates: Right, that was kind of what I was leading to is many times, people, in the interest of time, they are 32
allowed to hire a soil scientist to get a proposed septic field, which normally is accepted because 33
these are people with PhDs in soil science. Is that pretty close? 34
35
Leon Meyers: Yeah. 36
37
David Cates: I'm assuming that might be, while it's not an improvement permit, it is really, really close to – 38
39
Greg Niemiroski: I think it would be very beneficial because, essentially, you can apply for this and it does not work. 40
And so all of this could be a moot point. 41
42
Leon Meyers: A soil science report would be persuasive for me just speaking for myself. Any other discussion on 43
the motion or any other comments or questions of Mr. Cates? 44
17
Draft
18
Patrick Mallett: If I might add one other complexity and item of flare to consideration. If we're going down this road 1
and juxtaposing this theoretical septic system, the health department also has standards and 2
setbacks for wells. I'm not saying that a well permit is necessary, but they have spatial relationships 3
that are above and beyond the Planning Department's. It might be worth at least contemplating a 4
theoretical well just to show because I think on all parties, what we're looking for is what is the net 5
buildable area and where is it and how is it, and so that might be helpful. 6
7
Leon Meyers: And which one of the several dozen possible permutations would you like to present, right? 8
9
Patrick Mallett: Yeah. 10
11
David Cates: Yeah, well, and with no pun intended – I did mention the well at the beginning as being one of those 12
factors that we don't necessarily know that. Again, it has a 50-foot buffer to the well and the well 13
and septic have their own buffers 50-foot from the building, so it is another piece of the puzzle that 14
would have to be identified. Normally, it's sort of the last piece because it can sort of go around. It's 15
more easily placeable in some respects. 16
17
Leon Meyers: I was just saying in support of Nathan’s motion where, on this kind of variance, I think the Board 18
would normally expect to see what we’d asked for in the motion. 19
20
David Cates: Yeah. 21
22
Leon Meyers: Any other discussion or questions on the motion, Nathan's motion to postpone to the next meeting, 23
is that right? 24
25
Nathan Robinson: To postpone to a later time. Whenever he's ready to present it. 26
27
Leon Meyers: All right. 28
29
James Bryan: Just for clarification, you guys do have to continue to a date specific to comply with state statutes for 30
notice. 31
32
Nathan Robinson: So, a postponement for 2 months' time, so meeting after that based on the input from Pat? A 33
continuance, is it really a continuance? 34
35
James Bryan: Yes. 36
37
Nathan Robinson: Because we have the option to approve it or deny it or continue it, is that our three choices? 38
39
James Bryan: So, you can continue the hearing. The permit application can be approved or denied, so you could 40
say tonight, we're going to decide it on the merits. You haven't met your burden of proof, denied, 41
and then that carries all the weight, it can't be reapplied for or you could say look, there's been 42
members of the public that wanted time to seek counsel, it looks like the applicant themselves wasn't 43
clear on what is being asked for, so we're going to continue the hearing to another meeting, and all 44
18
Draft
19
of this is consistent with due process, and you have to be considering all the factors. So, what's a 1
reasonable amount of time to procure whatever you want and then you can also take into account 2
your own schedule. We meet once a month. We don't want to schedule this for December and have 3
you ruin our holidays if you're not ready, so whatever you want to do. 4
5
Leon Meyers: Mr. Cates? 6
7
David Cates: Yes, I guess one way would be to continue it to the next meeting and if for some reason we are not 8
prepared, we could ask for a continuance to the next meeting. 9
10
Leon Meyers: Yeah, so just to, if I may, Mr. Chair, I would not recommend that. I would assume that part of your 11
calculus for due process is the cost involved of getting everybody here. If somebody else hires an 12
attorney to represent them, to have the attorney show up just for a continuance is a lot of money, so 13
I would urge you to err on the side of caution. Especially, as you know, we don't meet every month, 14
so to come solely for that. 15
16
David Cates: I see, I understand what you're saying. 17
18
Leon Meyers: Okay. 19
20
Patrick Mallett: I think we will have a meeting next month though. 21
22
Leon Meyers: Mr. Cates, do you think roughly a month will give you enough time to prepare? 23
24
Nathan Robinson: There's no way you can get a soil scientist and an IP in one month. I mean, yes there's a way, but I 25
don't think it's going to happen. 26
27
David Cates: The only thing we're missing is the soil scientist. We can definitely generate a map, with dimensions 28
very quickly. 29
30
Nathan Robinson: I'm also, part of my motion, I'm also sensitive to the reality that we did have someone who didn't feel 31
they were given time to have standing, and I think, in fairness, I'm not opposed to the presentation. 32
I'm not opposed, if it's valid, it's valid, but in fairness to make sure that there's adequate time, if I 33
could ask – I forgot your name – is one month enough time for you to prepare what you need to 34
prepare? 35
36
Ron Geib: So not knowing process, when I need standing, I'm assuming you mean a lawyer. 37
38
Nathan Robinson: A lawyer or an appraiser 39
40
Ron Geib: Once I figure that piece out, then I got to figure out who to get and so it may be a month. I don't 41
know. I can't say. 42
43
19
Draft
20
Nathan Robinson: I'm in the construction industry and I know 1 month to get a soil scientist and a report is not a long 1
time. And so, my motion would be 2 months' time, to continue for 2 months' time. 2
3
Leon Meyers: So, this case will be heard in November? 4
5
Nathan Robinson: I'm okay with that if you guys are okay with that. 6
7
Leon Meyers: Okay, so the motion is to continue the case to the regularly scheduled November meeting, requesting 8
a dimension site plan with all of the essential elements and the map labeled. Did we get it all? 9
10
Nathan Robinson: I think so. 11
12
Leon Meyers: Any other discussion on the motion? All in favor, please say aye. 13
14
MOTION made by Nathan Robinson. Seconded by Greg Niemiroski. 15
16
VOTE: Unanimous 17
18
Leon Meyers: None opposed? Thank you, Mr. Cates, we'll see you in November. 19
20
David Cates: Okay, thank you. 21
22
James Bryan: Mr. Chair, I forgot to ask, can we add something to the agenda? 23
24
Leon Meyers: Well, certainly. 25
26
James Bryan: Just an update for litigation. We had an appeal of this Board's decision in the Arter case. 27
28
Leon Meyers: Tell me what was that case about. 29
30
James Bryan: That was a variance. It was the road was right next to the other parcel and they had the horse farm 31
and there is an ambiguity in the UDO, so the staff determination, because the text did not align with 32
the table, was that the text controls, they don't have to comply with the table, so there was litigation 33
for years and it was just resolved last month by the state supreme court upholding all prior decisions, 34
the courts, this Board and staffs' determination. 35
36
Leon Meyers: Okay. 37
38
James Bryan: I just wanted to give you all an update on that. 39
40
Nathan Robinson: What did we determine on that? Did we determine that that road should stay? 41
42
Patrick Mallett: It was a subdivision. 43
44
20
Draft
21
Nathan Robinson: And we approved it. We approved the subdivision, right? 1
2
James Bryan: The actual subdivision, I think, was an amended straight up decision. It was Michael Harvey's 3
determination that there didn't have to be the buffer. 4
5
Nathan Robinson: Oh, yeah. 6
7
James Bryan: Because the buffer was only mentioned in the table. 8
9
Patrick Mallett: The adjacent owner appealed that and then appealed it and then kept going, took it all the way to 10
the bitter end. 11
12
Leon Meyers: Wow. 13
14
Patrick Mallett: The base argument was over, in our buffer chart, it references active farm uses and whether she 15
was, in fact, a farm and whether it should be applied or not applied, and the ultimate conclusion was 16
that they agreed with the county, it should not have been applied. She did not qualify for that buffer, 17
case closed. 18
19
James Bryan: And UDO is set to be amended by the Board of County Commissioners, I think, next month, to 20
resolve that as well. 21
22
Leon Meyers: Just that one matter? 23
24
James Bryan: Well, it's combined into the whole section on landscaping. There were other fixes that needed to be 25
done anyway, so this one just kind of got lumped in with that. 26
27
Leon Meyers: Gotcha. Pat, you said likely a meeting next month? 28
29
Taylor Perschau: It's not confirmed but potentially an SUP application. 30
31
Patrick Mallett: Potentially. This gentleman has been working on it for quite some time and I think he's close enough, 32
I'm going to need to confirm that, and then we also have a known special use permit that is in 33
refinement for TLC for Brumley Park. And then I fielded a phone call from a lady today, similar to the 34
other variance at Lake Orange, an existing A-frame house that is apparently the other only A-frame 35
house on the lake. She was sort of scoping out how that was done. I referred her to that previous 36
case to prepare. 37
38
Leon Meyers: And I see we have a note from Ms. May saying that Andrew Kyle Myers is likely to be appointed on 39
the 17th as an alternate, so we'd be back to all our regular members and two alternates. 40
41
Patrick Mallett: That's right. 42
43
Nathan Robinson: Did Beth step off? 44
21
Draft
22
Leon Meyers: I'm sorry. 1
2
Nathan Robinson: Beth stepped off? 3
4
Leon Meyers: No, Beth is still on, but Adam is off, and this person replaces Adam's alternate seat with Ms. Fraccaro. 5
6
Nathan Robinson: Okay. 7
8
Patrick Mallett: What they do after the summer roll off, roll on of the cycle was appoint boards, they receive the 9
applications, the staff, not us, the clerk makes recommendations to the Board. They brief the Board 10
on the applicants. The Board gives input, picks people to sit in chairs or not and then they take an 11
official action, which will happen on the 17th, so in a week, but they've already indicated this is the 12
person we want to fill that seat. We'll make it official on the 17th. 13
14
Leon Meyers: If there's no other business, we're adjourned. 15
16
AGENDA ITEM 7: ADJOURNMENT 17
The meeting was adjourned at 8:11 p.m. 18
19
20
21
22
_________________________________________ 23
LEON MEYERS, CHAIR 24
25
22
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
EVIDENTIARY HEARING
AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 13, 2024
Action Agenda
Item No. A-6-24
SUBJECT: Special Use Permit request proposing “Kennel, Class II” use at PIN 9832-60-
7469, an unaddressed parcel off Monotropa Trail, Bingham Township
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections
ATTACHMENTS: INFORMATION CONTACT:
1. Application Package, including Site Plan
and Supplemental Materials
2. Staff Report
3. Neighborhood Information Meeting
Materials
4. Notification Materials and Certification
5. Project Correspondence and
Development Advisory Committee
Comments
6. Findings of Fact
Taylor Perschau Current Planning and Zoning
Manager, 919-245-2597
Cy Stober, Planning and Inspections Director
919-245-2592
PURPOSE: To hold a quasi-judicial evidentiary hearing, receive sworn testimony and evidence,
and take action on a Special Use Permit 23-0011 (hereafter “SUP”) application proposing a
“Kennel, Class II” use on a +/- 32.4-acre parcel (PIN 9832-60-7469) located off Monotropa Trail,
Efland, NC, within the Bingham Township, in accordance with the following Unified Development
Ordinance provisions:
• Section 2.7: Special Use Permits;
• Section 5.2: Table of Permitted Uses;
• Section 5.3.2: Application of Use Standards – Special Uses; and
• Section 5.6.8: Kennels (Class II).
BACKGROUND: On August 12, 2024, a SUP application (Attachment 1) was received to utilize
the property to operate a “Kennel, Class II” use (Land Use #62M, in Section 5.2: Table of
Permitted Uses of the UDO) located on a +/-32.4-acre parcel off Monotropa Trail, Efland, NC. As
detailed within the application, the proposed operations would include dog runs, training areas,
and overnight care on the property. The Staff Report in (Attachment 2) contains additional
information, maps, and staff analysis.
Basic Review Process: A SUP application requires submission of a site plan and other
documents, in accordance with Section 2.7.3 of the UDO:
• FIRST ACTION – Staff Review/Analysis Begins.
23
STAFF COMMENT: An analysis of the application was made by qualified
representatives of the County and other agencies or officials.
• SECOND ACTION – Applicant holds a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM).
STAFF COMMENT: The NIM was held on September 26, 2024, at 7:00 p.m., as
a virtual meeting on Google Meet. Summary meeting materials are contained in
Attachment 3.
• THIRD ACTION – Development Advisory Committee Review/Analysis Begins
STAFF COMMENT: The Orange County Development Advisory Committee
(DAC) met on September 19, 2024, to review this application. The DAC has no
objections to the approval of the Special Use Permit so long as the items in the
attached departmental memos (Attachment 5) are addressed.
• FOURTH ACTION – The Board of Adjustment holds a quasi-judicial hearing, hears
factual evidence and sworn testimony presented at an evidentiary hearing, and then
makes a determination with findings of fact supported by competent, substantial, and
material evidence.
STAFF COMMENT: The evidentiary hearing is anticipated to be held on November
13, 2024.
A formal application is required as part of a SUP request and has been submitted (Attachment
1). Approval of the application is part of the SUP process and shall include making appropriate
findings of fact stating that the Board concludes all applicable standards have been met.
Public Notification(s): In accordance with UDO Section 2.7.6 , notices of the Evidentiary Hearing
were mailed via first class mail to all adjacent property owners of the subject parcel. These notices
were mailed on October 29, 2024, 15 days before the meeting. Staff also posted the property
with signs on October 29, 2024, 15 days before the meeting. See Attachment 4 for the notification
materials details.
Planning Director’s Comments: The Planning Director has determined the application satisfies
established submittal requirements, and there is sufficient documentation demonstrating general
compliance with established development standards as detailed in Section 5.6.8 of the UDO.
Staff does not make a formal recommendation on the approval of the application or on the
compliance of the project with the general standards in Section 5.3.2(A)(2). The Board of
Adjustment must determine if:
(a) The use will maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare, if
located where proposed and developed and operated according to the plan as
submitted;
(b) The use will maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property (unless the use is a
public necessity, in which case the use need not maintain or enhance the value of
contiguous property); and
(c) The location and character of the use, if developed according to the plan submitted, will
be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and the use is in compliance
with the plan for the physical development of the County as embodied in these
24
regulations or in the Comprehensive Plan, or portion thereof, adopted by the Board of
County Commissioners.
In addition, the Board shall make findings certifying that the application is compliant with the
following specific standards:
(1)Specific standards for the submission of SUP applications as outlined within
Section(s) 2.2 and 2.7 of the UDO.
(2)UDO Section 5.3.2(B) relating to the method and adequacy of the provision of:
a.Sewage disposal facilities, solid waste, and water;
b.Police, fire, and rescue squad protection;
c.Vehicular access to the site and traffic conditions around the site; and
d.Other use specific standards as set forth.
(3)Specific regulations governing the development of the “Kennel, Class II” use, as set
forth in Section 5.6.8 of the UDO.
Per Section 2.7.11(A) of the UDO, the Board of Adjustment may impose reasonable conditions
upon approval of a Special Use as will afford protection of the public health, safety, and general
welfare, ensure that substantial justice is done, and equitable treatment provided.
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Orange County Planning and Inspections Department
Special Use Permit Application
Applicant: Canine Adventure LLC
Property: Orange County Parcel 9832-60-7469
Zoning: A/R Agricultural/Residential
SUP23-0011
Exhibit B
Narrative of Proposed Land Use
Overview
The proposed business is a canine exercise, training, and overnight care service called Canine
Adventure. Our mission statement is to provide dogs in our care with safety, affection, clean
water, healthy food, a comfortable and energy-efficient shelter, regular outdoor exercise, and the
experience of being in nature with canine and human companions. With a focus on quality of
care, we will keep to a limited capacity averaging fewer than 10 dogs per day and feature a
fenced play area around our canine shelter, which we are calling the Dog Den. Canine
Adventure will be a service-based business that offers three main services to local dog owners:
Adventure Walks, Day Camp, and Stay Camp. We are submitting this Special Use Permit
application in hopes of allowing more than five dogs per night.
Proposed Land Use
We are seeking a Special Use Permit to operate a Class II Kennel in Orange County’s
Residential/Agricultural zoning district, as is required by the County’s Table of Permitted Uses.
Services
Adventure Walks are two-hour leashed hikes conducted in public parks that provide exercise,
socialization, and group training. Dogs will be picked up from their homes and taken to a local
park for a hike, after which they will be driven back home. Clients will be provided with excellent
photos of their dog enjoying themselves and will return home to a tired, happy dog. Day Camp
includes the Adventure Walk service and additional off-leash play time and socialization in a
fenced area on our property before being driven home later in the day. Stay Camp, in addition to
Day Camp services, includes meals and overnight care in our Dog Den. Canine Adventure will
use all of our resources to provide shelter, water, food, exercise, training, affection, and fun.
Many clients will prefer our services over that of competitors because of our ability to provide
their dog the perfect blend of experiencing nature with the comfortable familiarity of a loving
home. While in public, all dogs will remain on leash. During their time on our property, all dogs
will be under the close supervision of a certified trainer with well over a decade of experience
and a sincere passion for canine care. All of this will allow Canine Adventure to offer a unique,
superior service.
36
Outdoor Space and Conservation
In addition to having all of their physical and emotional needs met, we strive to offer dogs the
opportunity to play and hike in natural settings. At Canine Adventure, we will seek to provide all
of the above and to do so in alignment with Orange County’s Comprehensive Plan goals of
conservation and responsible recreational use of outdoor spaces. By day, our large fenced play
field and wooded trails will offer ample opportunities for dogs to socialize, connect with nature,
and release their energy in a safe, healthy environment. At night, we will offer the comfort of our
Dog Den, meeting passive solar standards, built with ultra-efficient technology, and powered by
the sun to optimize energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We believe in a
sustainable future, and our green shelters reflect our philosophy of conservation and harmony
with nature.
Other infrastructure for the business and our future home similarly reflects these principles and
the goals outlined for conservation in the Comprehensive Plan. We hired EarthCentric
Engineering and skilled local builders to construct the internal road in such a way as to minimize
erosion and our overall impact on the land. Our existing clearings are also designed to minimize
erosion and maximize proper drainage. Especially given that we are situated in the protected
Cane Creek watershed, we strongly support the principle of developing ethically and plan to
reflect this in the business and our future home construction. We will keep the physical
structures to the approximate square footage mentioned in the attached site plan and minimize
land clearing to preserve as much of the natural landscape as possible, including native
vegetation, water sources, and the abundant tree population. We are in the process of
replanting native trees to compensate for the minimal amount that will be cleared. These plants
capture carbon, stabilize the soil, and feed the local bees and butterflies. We are intentionally
developing in conversation with–not in opposition to–the land’s natural resources. We are
making the extra effort in all of these areas to preserve the environment for ourselves, our
neighbors, and future generations.
Business Site
In 2021, my father graciously agreed to help me purchase a lot in Orange County. The
aforementioned road was finished in 2023 and measures about a half-mile in length heading
west from Buckhorn Road. Our 33 acre lot is west of a large cul-de-sac at the end of this road,
and there will be no other homes beyond ours. We plan to build our home and a small canine
structure, which will measure roughly 1600 and 400 square feet, respectively, in 2026. Please
see the attached site plan for approximate building placements and proximity to neighbors.
The dogs will sleep in the specially-designed 400-sq ft Dog Den, located a bone’s throw from
our home’s front door. The structure, which we will keep locked at night, will be equipped with
safety equipment such as an audio monitoring device, an air purifier, a fire alarm, and a carbon
monoxide detector. The mini-split HVAC system will keep the space at a comfortable
temperature and humidity level year-round. The air purifier will ensure excellent air quality, and
the ceiling fans will keep air circulating at all times. All lights and utilities will be powered by
solar panels attached to the den’s steel roof. Additionally, the den will feature cabinets for
storage, a freezer and refrigerator for storing food, a washer and dryer for keeping blankets and
beds clean, and a utility sink for daily water and bowl-washing needs. The kennel side of the
building will feature clean, spacious crates that are durable, comfortable, and safe. The walls
37
will be constructed out of panels that are antimicrobial and waterproof.
Safety and Containment
Canine Adventure will maintain safety by carefully screening the temperament of each dog who
applies to work with us. Not all dogs will be the right fit for our services; only those who display
a willingness to follow direction and stay close, with no aggression toward others, will be
allowed to join the group. All dogs will be closely supervised at all times, and much of the day
will be spent either in a physically fenced area or inside the Dog Den. When outside of the
fenced area, all dogs will be leashed.
Mitigating Potential Impacts to Neighboring Properties
One concern that I could understand our neighbors having about such a business is related to
noise. While many canine businesses leave dogs outdoors and unsupervised for long portions
of the day, which can lead to excessive barking, I believe this is irresponsible and unfair to the
dogs. As much as time and weather will allow, I plan to be outside with the dogs either playing
in the fenced field or relaxing around our buildings. For a few hours each day, we will also be
hiking off-site at local public parks. As a professional certified trainer, I have plenty of tools to
mitigate barking, but the most effective ones are exercise and close supervision. I’ve always
said that a tired dog is a good dog, which makes for a happy family. When the weather is
stormy or excessively hot, all dogs will be kept indoors in a safe, comfortable environment.
After sunset and before 8:00 a.m., all dogs will be indoors except for a brief moment to relieve
themselves at night.
Another concern that I could imagine would be excessive lighting, unsightly buildings and/or
squalid conditions. We plan to only have a small motion-sensor light at the entrance of the dog
den for security purposes. Given the size and wooded nature of our land, no one would be able
to see the light from outside of the property boundary. Both our home and the dog den will be
beautifully constructed by a skilled local builder, and we will maintain both with pride. I have
always been committed to providing the best possible care for all dogs under my supervision,
and that includes a clean and comfortable place to rest. We will remain dedicated to maintaining
the Dog Den at the same standard of excellence as our own home. Dog waste will be
composted on the property as advised by an Orange County Environmental Health Specialist.
There will be no impact on local traffic, as Canine Adventure will provide all necessary
transportation of dogs.
About the Owner
My name is James Tilson. I graduated from the College of William and Mary in 2011 and began
working for the original Canine Adventure in Richmond, VA, in 2012. After impressing the
owner with excellent work over my first year, he offered me the opportunity to help expand the
company by opening a new branch in the neighboring city of Charlottesville. I gratefully
accepted, and over the next six years, I grew the Charlottesville branch into a successful
business with five full-time employees. In 2019, I moved to Ann Arbor, MI, with my partner
Katherine, who was attending the University of Michigan for graduate school. I opened another
new branch of Canine Adventure in Ann Arbor, and despite the pandemic over the following
years, I was able to successfully grow that branch into another thriving business. In early 2024,
38
the owner of Canine Adventure relayed the unfortunate news that the Virginia branches had not
been faring as well since 2020, and that after 15 years, they were finally closing the business.
He gave me his blessing to continue using the Canine Adventure name, and all of my clients in
Michigan were eager to continue their service, so I started a new company of the same name.
I have always cared deeply for the work that I do and the dogs that I work with. All of my clients
would attest to my dedication, and I’m proud of the work that I’ve done over the years. I have
learned a great deal about both dogs and managing a small business, and I have honed my
craft as a certified trainer. I am certain that this is the professional path for me, and looking
ahead, I hope to continue to serve local residents and their dogs.
Sustainability and Longevity
Although my wife and I currently work and live in Michigan, we are eagerly looking forward to
moving to North Carolina in 2025. My father, who lives in Orange County, is from Graham and is
an integral part of the development of our land. My sister and her family live in Durham. Many in
my family are Tar Heel alumni, and several have worked at UNC or Duke. We already feel a
deep connection to North Carolina and this part of Orange County and plan to settle here for the
rest of our lives. We already have a friendly relationship with some of our neighbors, and it is
extremely important to us that we maintain this friendship and respect toward those around us.
We will always be happy to hear and address any concerns that our business may pose. We
have already sent letters to each of our neighbors describing our proposed business and
received replies from a few, all of whom were supportive of the idea and excited to have a
helpful local service. Given the substantial size of our land and the limited number of dogs that
we will be caring for, we feel that we can operate Canine Adventure in a responsible way that
will have very little impact on our neighbors and in fact will offer a needed service for the
surrounding county. Thank you for your consideration.
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
Attachment 2
1
Staff Report
Special Use Permit SUP23-0011
Basic Information
Parcel Address Unaddressed parcel
located off Monotropa
Trail, Efland, NC
Parcel Identification
Number (PIN) 9832-60-7469
Applicant Name
and Address
James Tilson and Michael
Tilson
1025 Arbordale St.
Apt. 1
Ann Arbor, MI 48103
Property Owner
Name and Address
James Tilson and Michael
Tilson, 710 Greenwood
Rd., Chapel Hill, NC
27514
Agent(s), if
applicable
Kevin Hornik
The Brough Law Firm,
1526 E. Franklin St.
Ste. 200
Chapel Hill NC 27514
Parcel Size +/-32.4 acres
Future Land Use
Map (FLUM)
Designation
Agricultural Residential
FLUM Overlay(s) Resource Protection Area
Growth Management
System Designation Rural
FLUM Category
Description
Land in the rural areas where the
prevailing land use activities are
related to the land (agriculture,
forestry) and which is an
appropriate location for the
continuation of these uses.
75
2
Current Zoning
District AR (Agricultural Residential)
Current Use Undeveloped
Township Bingham
Requested Special
Use(s) Kennel (Class II)
Watershed District Cane Creek Protected
Watershed
76
3
Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning
North Agricultural Residential (AR), undeveloped land
South AR, undeveloped land
East AR, undeveloped land and residential uses
West AR, undeveloped land and residential uses
Existing Roads
North None
South None
East Monotropa Trail, 50’ Private Access Easement
West None
Existing Conditions/Physical Features
The site is primarily forested. The site contains floodplain in the southwestern portion along which an 80-
foot buffer is required on either side of the 100-year floodplain. The property has an existing private
easement “Monotropa Trail” for access to Buckhorn Road from the east and running south along the
eastern property line.
Public Water and Sewer
Private well and septic systems are used in this area. The Water and Sewer Management, Planning, and
Boundary Agreement (“WASMPBA”) does not designate this area as a Primary Service Area for water and
sewer services.
Proposed Project
Project Narrative
Per the applicant’s description: “The proposed business is a canine exercise, training, and overnight care
service called Canine Adventure. The mission statement is to provide dogs in our care with safety, affection,
clean water, healthy food, a comfortable and energy-efficient shelter, regular outdoor exercise, and the
experience of being in nature with canine and human companions. With a focus on quality of care, we propose
to keep to a limited capacity averaging fewer than 10 dogs per day and feature a fenced play area around
the canine shelter, called the Dog Den. Canine Adventure will be a service-based business that offers three
main services to local dog owners: Adventure Walks, Day Camp, and Stay Camp.” This Special Use Permit
application is being submitted as the applicant plans to board more than five dogs per night.
For additional project information, see Application (Attachment 1) Exhibit B.
77
4
Site Plan
78
5
Proposed Access and Transportation Network Improvements
The Project is proposing access from a 50’ private access easement, named Monotropa Trail. Neither a
Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), or a Traffic Assessment was required for this application. Monotropa Trail
connects to Buckhorn Road, a publicly maintained right-of-way. NCDOT has reviewed and has no
objections to the site plan as presented.
Proposed Utilities
The property is not in an area served by public water/sewer. Water and wastewater services, including for
disposal of dog waste, will be provided via a private well and septic system that meet Orange County
Environmental Health standards.
Erosion Control/Stormwater Regulations
Erosion Control staff indicated a land disturbance permit will be required for this project. It will need to be
submitted before construction can be approved. Stormwater management will also need to be accounted for
with the understanding that land disturbance thresholds are cumulative to the parent tract and carry over to
any/all subdivided lots.
Land Use Buffers/Setbacks
North 150’ setback for all buildings, structures, dog run, pen, or exercise yard in which animals
are housed or exercised
South 150’ setback for all buildings, structures, dog run, pen, or exercise yard in which animals
are housed or exercised
East 150’ setback for all buildings, structures, dog run, pen, or exercise yard in which animals
are housed or exercised
West 150’ setback for all buildings, structures, dog run, pen, or exercise yard in which animals
are housed or exercised
Environmental Assessment (EA)
The applicant has provided an Environmental Assessment (EA) application and supporting materials as
required in Section 6.16 of the UDO with their submittal. These materials were shared with various State
agencies via the NC Department of Administration’s State Clearinghouse. Planning and Department of
Environment Agriculture Park and Recreation (DEAPR) staff have jointly reviewed the materials and
agree with a determination of “Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)” as required in Section 2.25.1 (B)
(5) of the UDO.
Solid Waste
The applicant has indicated development within the project will conform to the Orange County Solid
Waste Management Ordinance.
79
6
Ordinance Requirements
“Kennel (Class II)” is defined as Use #62(M) in the Table of Permitted Uses and within Article 10 Definitions
of the UDO as:
“An establishment involving animals of any species, excluding domesticated livestock, engaged in any
of the following:
a)The owning or keeping, for any purpose, of 20 or more animals;
b)The selling and/or training of guard dogs or security dogs;
c)The keeping of more than five animals at any given time for the purpose of breeding,
boarding, or rehabilitation.
The operator of a Kennel (Class II) shall be allowed to reside on the property to ensure the continuous
care of the animals kept on-site.”
In the case of this application, a Special Use Permit is required because the proposed use
would keep more than five animals at any given time. The Dog Den is designed to board up to
eight animals for overnight boarding.
Section 5.2.1 Table of Permitted Uses of the UDO lists “Kennel (Class II)” as a permitted use of property
within the AR general use zoning district subject to the issuance of a SUP.
Standards governing the development of a “Kennel (Class II),” as detailed in Section 5.6.8 of the UDO, are
as follows:
(1)Submittal Requirements. In addition to the information required by Section 2.7 or 2.9, as
applicable, the following information shall be supplied as part of the application for approval of this
use:
(a)Plans for all kennels, exercise yards, dog runs, pens and related improvements,
including signage.
(b)Site plan showing the improvements listed in a) above, other structures on the same lot,
and structures on adjacent property.
STAFF COMMENT: A Site Plan has been submitted with this request providing required
details.
Please note, this is the required site plan denoting compliance with the UDO as it relates to
the issuance of the SUP. A final site plan and Zoning Compliance Permit shall be required for
review and approval by the County prior to the commencement of earth disturbing activities
as required in Section 2.5: Site Plan Review of the UDO. Should the SUP be approved, the
Planning Director may only approve minor modifications from the site plan provided with this
application, as specified by Orange County UDO Section 2.7.14.
The applicant has also included a detailed narrative providing additional information on the
nature of the operations and activities envisioned for the property.
(2)Standards of Evaluation
(a)The site is of adequate size to protect adjacent properties from adverse effects of the
kennel.
STAFF COMMENT: Details provided within the Application Package (Attachment 1). The
UDO does not define what “adequate size” means in this instance. The subject parcel is +/-
32.4 acres and all “Kennel (Class II)” features are sited well within the required 150-foot
80
7
setback. The site plan and narrative submitted by the applicant detail that an extensive
amount of existing vegetation will remain on-site to act as a natural buffer for adjacent
properties.
(b) No part of any building, structure, dog run, pen, or exercise yard in which animals are
housed or exercised shall be closer than 150 feet from a property line, except property
occupied by the owner/operator of the kennel.
(i)The 150 foot setback established by this section shall not apply if all portions of the
facility, in which animals are housed, are wholly enclosed within a building.
(ii)For Class II Kennels developed within the EDE-2 zoning district, this setback shall
not apply to dog training activities where each dog is under the immediate control of
its trainer, owner, or other responsible individual.
(iii) For Class II Kennels developed within the EDE-2 zoning district, all buildings,
structures, dog runs, pens, or exercise yards in which animals are housed or
exercised shall observe the principal setbacks established within Section 3.7 of the
UDO in those instances where the property abuts other EDE-2 zoned property and
US Highway 70.
STAFF COMMENT: As detailed in the site plan, all proposed Kennel (Class II) elements
meet the minimum 150-foot setback. The subject parcel is not located within the EDE-2
zoning district, so standards (b)(ii) and (b)(iii) do not apply in this case.
(c)Any kennel, including primary enclosures or runs, which is not wholly enclosed within a
building shall be enclosed by a security fence at least six feet in height.
STAFF COMMENT: The Application Package (Attachment 2) and project correspondence
(Attachment 5) detail that a security fence six feet in height will be installed around the
fenced exercise area surrounding the Dog Den.
(d)The site plan shows parking, access areas and screening devices for all buildings and
animal boarding facilities existing or proposed for the property.
STAFF COMMENT: Thie site plan submitted within the Application Package (Attachment 2)
details that the project meets the required minimum of two parking space per UDO Section
6.9.7. One of the parking spaces will be provided as an ADA accessible space, in alignments
with DAC comments provided by Building Inspections staff.
(e)The site plan shall be reviewed by the Orange County Animal Services Department, and
found in conformance with the Animal Control Ordinance.
STAFF COMMENT: The Application Package was provided to Orange County Animal
Services Department on September 27, 2024. Review comments are available in
Attachment 5.
(f) Building plans for all kennel facilities shall be reviewed and approved by the Orange County
Animal Services Department prior to issuance of any building permits.
STAFF COMMENT: Applicant has been informed (Attachment 5) and Animal Services staff
have all application materials for this Special Use Permit application.
81
8
(g)All proposed signage shall comply with dimensional requirements as set forth within
Section 6.12.
STAFF COMMENT: The applicant has confirmed that no signage is being proposed for
the “Kennel (Class II)” use (Attachments 1 and 5).
(h)All necessary permits shall be obtained from Orange County Animal Services within the first
30 days of occupancy. Failure to obtain and maintain a valid Class II Kennel Permit or other
related permits which may be required by the USDA or Wildlife Resources Commission will
result in revocation of the Special Use Permit.
STAFF COMMENT: Applicant has been informed (Attachments 5) and Animal Services
staff have all application materials for this Special Use Permit application.
Proposed Conditions
General Conditions
1.For public safety as required in Section 5.3.2(B)(2) of the UDO, final assignment of a street address
shall be completed by Orange County Land Records prior to the issuance of any permit authorizing
land disturbing activity on the property in accordance with the Orange County Addressing
Ordinance.
2.Per Section 2.5 of the UDO, the applicant shall obtain all necessary development permits from the
County prior to the initiation of any land disturbing activity associated with the construction of the
proposed use including, but not limited to: Building Permit, Land Disturbance Permit (LDP), Solid
Waste Management Permit, and Zoning Compliance Permit.
3.In accordance with the provisions of Section 2.7.11(C) of the UDO, if any condition of this Special
Use Permit shall be held invalid or void, then this Special Use Permit shall be void in its entirety
and of no effect.
4.In accordance with the provisions of Section 2.7.11(D) of the UDO, the Special Use Permit will
automatically expire within 12 months from the date of approval if the use has not commenced or
construction has not commenced or proceeded unless a timely application for extension of this time
limit is approved by the Board of Adjustment.
Voluntary Conditions
1.Daytime boarding and training services are limited to the hours of 9:00am until 5:00pm, will be
conducted primarily off-site, and will not be offered on the weekends.
2.Overnight boarding guests will be kept indoors before 8:00am and after sunset, the only exception
being a brief and supervised break at night to relieve themselves in a fenced area.
3.The Kennel, Class II use will observe quiet hours from sunset until 8:00am, during which time there
will be no activities producing noises exceeding 50 dB(A) as measured from the property boundary
line.
82
9
4.A live-in on-site host responsible for the management and operation of the Kennel, Class II use
outside of normal business hours and during quiet hours may permanently occupy one of the
dwelling units shown on the site plan.
5.The Kennel, Class II use will accommodate no more than fourteen (14) dogs at a time, and will
accommodate an average capacity of fewer than ten (10) dogs at a time.
6.The boarding house, detailed as “The Dog Den” on the submitted site plan will be locked at night,
and will be equipped with safety equipment such as an audio monitoring device, an air purifier, a
fire alarm, and a carbon monoxide detector.
7.The Kennel, Class II use operators will use a motion-sensor light at the entrance of the Dog Den
for security purposes. The light will be pointed at the ground. Given the size and wooded nature of
the property, neighbors would not be able to see the light from outside of the property boundaries.
8.Dog waste will be composted on the property as advised by an Orange County Environmental
Health Specialist.
9.There will be no impact on local traffic; all transportation of dogs will be conducted by the owner of
the Kennel, Class II use.
10.Extended Vesting Rights – The applicant plans to build their home and canine structure in the
spring of 2026, and this application will be considered at the end of 2024. The applicant requests
an additional six months of vestiture to begin said construction in 2026.
11.All existing vegetation will remain except, as indicated on the site plan, where structures or vehicular
access are detailed. Future clearing may occur within the 50’ access easement that runs south to
Lot E.
Review Milestones
Application Submittal Date August 12, 2024
Development Advisory Committee
(DAC) Review
September 19, 2024
Neighborhood Information Meeting
(NIM)
September 26, 2024
Note: the DAC is a staff/agency committee, established in Section 1.9 of the Unified
Development Ordinance.
Courtesy Review
Jurisdiction Date Sent Comments Received
State Clearinghouse September 27, 2024 October 29, 2024
83
10
Neither the review provided by the State Clearinghouse (available here:
https://centralpermits.orangecountync.gov/EnerGov_Prod/SelfService#/plan/63b886f9-4c84-
4205-a371-c398fd31addb?tab=attachments) nor the review provided by Orange County Animal
Services (Attachment 5) indicated any comments for concern.
Analysis
2030 Comprehensive Plan
Chapter 2 – Planning Principles
In October, 2004, the Orange County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) adopted guiding
principles to guide and direct development of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. There are several
Comprehensive Plan Planning Principles of relevance to Kennel (Class II) (Use # 62(M)) including:
2.Sustainable Growth and Development: Growth and development within the county should occur in a
pattern, location, and density that is sustainable over the long-term.
Staff Comment: The proposed project is a special use allowed within the AR zoning
district, should it comply with the UDO standards and meet the standards of evaluation
reviewed by the Board of Adjustment. Should it do so, the growth and development
realized by the project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s Agricultural Residential
Future Land Use (Comprehensive Plan Appendix F).
4.Natural Area Resource Preservation: Protection of the County’s natural areas, including forests,
wildlife habitat, and other important open spaces should be a priority. The County should work with
regional and local organizations, the towns, and private landowners to promote and achieve
preservation of the County’s important natural resources.
Staff Comment: This project proposes minimal land disturbance and tree removal to allow
for development, consistent with the narrative’s goal to maintain as much natural area as
possible while developing the site. (Application Packet, Attachment 1).
5.Preservation of Rural Land Use Pattern: The County’s rural areas are a cherished component of the
County’s character. Future development should preserve and enhance the county’s rural landscape.
Staff Comment: The proposed “Kennel (Class II)” use is consistent with the County’s rural
landscape, as presented in the site plan. Minimum land disturbance, lighting, and noise
are proposed and existing vegetation is to largely remain on-site, acting as a natural buffer
to adjacent properties. The owners sought to purchase property in a rural setting with
natural conditions that could be preserved and cultivated. (Application Packet, Attachment
1)
7.Promotion of Economic Prosperity and Diversity: Development of a diversity of new businesses and
expansion of existing businesses should occur in Orange County.
Staff Comment: The stated intention is to offer local services to Orange County residents.
(Application Packet, Attachment 1)
Orange County Animal
Services
September 27, 2024 October 24, 2024
84
11
8.Preservation of Community Character: Future growth and development should occur in a manner
that preserves and enhances the existing character of the County, its townships, and rural crossroads
communities.
Staff Comment: This project proposes development that is consistent with the
surrounding areas rural landscape. (Application Packet, Attachment 1)
Chapter 5 – Land Use Element, Section 5.6 Goals
There are several land use goals in the adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan of relevance to Kennels
(Class II) (Use #62(M)) including:
Land Use Goal 1: Fiscally and environmentally responsible, sustainable growth, consistent with the
provision of adequate services and facilities and a high quality of life.
Land Use Goal 2: Land uses that are appropriate to on-site environmental conditions and features, and
that protect natural resources, cultural resources, and community character.
Land Use Goal 3: A variety of land uses that are coordinated within a program and pattern that limits
sprawl, preserves community and rural character, minimizes land use conflicts, supported by an
efficient and balanced transportation system.
Land Use Goal 6: A land use planning process that is transparent, fair, open, efficient, and responsive.
Staff Comment: The location and character of the use, developed according to the plan
submitted, will be consistent with the rural land uses of the area in which it is to be located.
The use, as proposed and limited by the application and site plan, are consistent with the
2030 Comprehensive Plan’s stated goals for the physical development of the County, as
embodied in, or portion thereof, Land Use Goals 1, 2, 3, and 6.
85
September 11, 2024
NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM)
Special Use Permit for Class II Kennell: Canine Adventure, SUP23-0011
To Whom It May Concern:
We (the applicant) have submitted a Special Use Permit Application proposing to develop property located at the
intersection of 9832-60-7469 for Class II Kennell. Per Section 2.9 Conditional Districts of the Unified Development
Ordinance,you are receiving this letter because property you own is within 1,000 ft. of this parcel. The parcel is further
described below:
Property Information
Parcel ID Numbers (PIN)
9832-60-7469
Owner James Tilson
Applicant James Tilson
Location Monotropa Trail
Acreage 33
Zoning R/A
Watershed Designation Cane Creek Watershed
What is being proposed?
We are seeking a Special Use Permit to operate a Class II Kennel in Orange County’s Residential/Agricultural zoning
district, as is required by the County’s Table of Permitted Uses. The proposed business is a canine exercise, training,
and overnight care service called Canine Adventure. Our mission statement is to provide dogs in our care with safety,
affection, clean water, healthy food, a comfortable and energy-efficient shelter, regular outdoor exercise, and the
experience of being in nature with canine and human companions. With a focus on quality of care, we will keep to a
limited capacity averaging fewer than 10 dogs per day and feature fenced play areas around our home and the canine
shelter, which we are calling the Dog Den. Canine Adventure will be a service-based business that offers three main
services to local dog owners: Adventure Walks, Day Camp, and Stay Camp. We are submitting this Special Use Permit
application in hopes of allowing more than five dogs per night.
What is this meeting for?
This Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) will allow you and other nearby property owners to meet with the
applicant and discuss the proposal.
When and where is the meeting?
Meeting Information
Date 9/26/24
Time 7 P.M.
Place Google Meet
Address https://meet.google.com/mbm-gzzs-psr
Assigned
Planner
Taylor Perschau, Current Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Email:tperschau@orangecountync.gov Phone: (919) 245-2597
After the NIM, this proposal will go on to the Planning Board for review and recommendation to the Board of County
Commissioners. The Board of County Commissioners will then hold a public hearing to make a final decision on the
application. You will also receive a letter regarding when those meetings will take place and at what time.
If you have any questions regarding this project, feel free to reach out to us, my contact information is listed below.
Best Regards,James Tilson, CPDT jtilson42@gmail.com (412)726-3897
86
Orange County Planning and Inspections Department
Special Use Permit Application
Applicant: Canine Adventure LLC
Property: Orange County Parcel 9832-60-7469
Zoning: A/R Agricultural/Residential
SUP23-0011
The Neighborhood Information Meeting for Canine Adventure’s Special Use Permit application
SUP23-0011 was held on Thursday, September 26th at 7 pm on Google Meet. I was joined by
my partner Katherine Downs and also by our neighbor Greg Smythers. The three of us had a
friendly introduction and conversation. I asked if he had any questions or concerns about our
proposed business, and he said that he did not as the narrative had been comprehensively
informative. The meeting lasted around 20 minutes. As no one else joined during that time, the
meeting ended at 7:20 pm.
87
88
Attachment 4
PLANNING and INSPECTIONS
Cy Stober, AICP, Director | cstober@orangecountync.gov | 131 W. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278 | 919.245.2575
CERTIFICATION OF MAILING
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT EVIDENTIARY HEARING
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
I, Taylor Perschau, with Orange County, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that in
accordance with the provisions of Section 2.7 of the Orange County Unified Development
Ordinance (UDO) I have mailed, or caused to be mailed, via mail a Board of Adjustment
Evidentiary Hearing Notice regarding a Special Use Permit application proposing a Kennel,
Class II use on Orange County PIN 9832607469.
This notice informed those property owners within 1,000 of the subject property of the
proposed Special Use Permit modification. The owners were identified according to the Tax
Records and as required by the UDO.
The mailed notice specified the date, time, place and subject of the Evidentiary Hearing
meeting and provided information on the Special Use Permit review process.
WITNESS my hand, this 29th day of October 2024.
____________________________________________
Taylor Perschau
Current Planning and Zoning Manager
Orange County Planning and Inspections Department
89
PLANNING and INSPECTIONS
Cy Stober, AICP, Director | cstober@orangecountync.gov | 131 W. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278 | 919.245.2575
October 29, 2024
NOTICE OF BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT EVIDENTIARY HEARING
TO REVIEW A SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION PROPOSING
A KENNEL, CLASS II USE
Dear Property Owner:
This notice is to inform you of a November 13, 2024 Board of Adjustment meeting, at which an
application for a Special Use Permit for an unaddressed parcel located off Monotropa Trail,
Efland, NC 27243 (PIN: 9832-60-7469) will be reviewed in an evidentiary hearing. The +/-32.4-
acre parcel is located within the Bingham Township. This notification is occurring in accordance
with the provisions of Section 2.7 Special Use Permits of the Orange County Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO).
The Special Use Permit request will be reviewed by the Orange County Board of Adjustment at
7:00 p.m., November 13, 2024 at the Whitted Meeting Facility (300 West Tryon Street,
Hillsborough, NC).
NO CHANGES ARE PROPOSED FOR YOUR PROPERTY. You are receiving this notice
because you own property located within 1,000-feet of parcel requested for a Special Use
Permit.
PROPERTY INFORMATION
Parcel ID Number (PIN) 9832607469
Owner James and Michael Tilson
Applicant James and Michael Tilson
Location An unaddressed parcel off Monotropa Trail,
Efland, NC
Acreage +/- 32.4 acres, all of which would be subject to
the Special Use Permit request
Current Zoning AR
Proposed Special Use(s) Kennel, Class II
Watershed Designation Cane Creek Protected
90
The Special Use Permit application proposes to utilize the property to operate a Kennel, Class II.
The proposed use would feature canine exercise, training, and overnight care on the property. As
required by the Orange County UDO, should the application be approved, conditions will be
binding for the property, with any significant change requiring subsequent Special Use Permit
request and a new hearing before the Board of Adjustment.
The review of all SUP applications is carried out in a quasi-judicial format, meaning that
decisions relating to the approval or denial of an application are based solely on the sworn
testimony of all parties involved with the case, both those for and against an application. The
applicant has the burden of establishing, by the submission of competent, material, and
substantial evidence, the existence of facts and conditions that demonstrate the project’s
compliance with the various requirements and standards for the proposed uses detailed within the
UDO. Those opposing approval of the application shall have the burden of establishing, also
through the submission of competent, material, and substantial evidence, the specific manner in
which the proposal does not satisfy the requirements for approval of the application.
Public comments in the form of sworn testimony meeting evidentiary standards can be accepted.
Quasi-judicial hearings and decisions require a ‘fair trial standard’ including accepting only
competent, material, and substantial evidence. Personal, anecdotal, or hearsay comments,
however, shall not be accepted as they do not represent ‘competent, material, and substantial
evidence.’ Additional information related to Special Use Permits can be found at the following
link: https://www.orangecountync.gov/DocumentCenter/View/21348/Special-Use-Permit-Fact-
Sheet?bidId=
If you cannot attend the Board of Adjustment meeting and the website does not answer your
questions about the requested Special Use Permit, you may call 919-245-2575 during regular
business hours and you will be directed to a staff person who can assist you.
Sincerely,
Cy Stober
Planning & Inspections Director
Additional information is available on the Orange County Planning Department’s website:
https://www.orangecountync.gov/3038/Active-Development-Projects or scan below:
91
Orange County Government | www.orangecountync.gov | 919.732.8181
Attachment 5
PLANNING and INSPECTIONS
Cy Stober, AICP, Director | cstober@orangecountync.gov | 131 W. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278 | 919.245.2575
October 25, 2024
Canine Adventure Special Use Permit (SUP) Application
Case #: SUP23-0011
PIN: 9832-60-7469
Re: Development Advisory Committee Report for SUP23-0011 (UDO § 1.9.5)
The Orange County Development Advisory Committee (DAC) met on September 19, 2024, for a
review and discussion of the special use permit application for PIN 9832-60-7469 (Case #:
SUP23-0011).
The Orange County DAC has no objections to the approval of the special use permit application
so long as the items in the attached departmental memos are addressed. The application
package features an abstract and staff report that provide the foundations for my
recommendation regarding this application and request.
Sincerely,
Cy Stober
Planning & Inspections Director
92
PLANNING and INSPECTIONS
Cy Stober, AICP, Director | cstober@orangecountync.gov | 131 W. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278 | 919.245.2575
Development Advisory Committee (DAC) Comments
DAC review comments and recommendations do not constitute plan or permit approval for this application
and/or replace any other plans and permits that may be required by other County departments and State
agencies.
Project: SUP23-0011 (Canine Adventure)
Location/PIN: 9832607469
Applicant: James Tilson
Staff Planner: Taylor Perschau, Current Planning and Zoning Manager
DAC Meeting Date: 9-19-2024
Addressing and
Land Records Date: 9/11/24 Staff:
Britney Pendleton
brpendleton@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2576
1. Addressing: If approved, it’s likely the RSF and the proposed Dog Den building will have
separate addresses assigned from Monotropa Trail. This is assuming the Dog Den
building will have it’s own power meter, employee bath/kitchen and potentially septic
system. The addresses would be assigned as part of the building permit process.
Addressing@orangecountync.gov - BP
Attorney’s Office Date: Staff:
James Bryan
jbryan@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2319
1. None received.
Building
Inspections Date: 9/16/24 Staff:
Michael Rettie
mrettie@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2604
1. Please verify if customers or employees will be using/accessing this facility (bathroom
facilities may be required, depending upon occupancy along with parking and ADA
compliance).
2. Commercial permit application will be required for construction of this facility,
House would be permitted under Residential application.
DEAPR Date: Staff:
Chris Hirni
chirni@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2514
1. None received.
Environmental
Health Date: 9/16/2024 Staff:
Victoria Hudson
vhudson@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2365
93
1.No applications have been received for this parcel, and no records exist.
2.There will be industrial process wastewater considerations and septic maintenance
conditions when permitting the septic system.
Erosion
Control Date: 9/11/24 Staff:
Nate Jacobsen/ Tyler Sliger
njacobsen@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2580
1.Land Disturbing Permit appears to have been issued (LDP22-0055), no further
comments.
2.A land disturbance permit will be required for this project. It will need to be
submitted before construction can be approved.
Fire and Life
Safety Date: Staff:
Chris Pendergrass
cpendergrass@orangecountync.gov
919-245-6125
1.None received.
NCDOT Date: 9/17/24 Staff:
David Genwright
Digenwright@ncdot.gov
336-570-6833
1.A driveway permit has been previously issued for this road connection. No action
required unless the county requires upgrades or modifications to the road connection.
Planning Date: 9/17/24 Staff:
Taylor Perschau
tperschau@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2597
Application Comments
1.Narrative references “fenced play areas around our home and the canine shelter,” while
site plan only details fencing around the dog den. Please confirm which is most accurate
and update plan or narrative to correspond.
2.Please confirm whether the Special Use Permit is proposed to apply to entirety of the +/-
32.4 acre tract or only to a portion of the property.
3.Please update narrative to detail property zoning as “AR-Agricultural Residential.”
Site Plan Comments
4.Site plan needs to meet specifications detailed in UDO Section 2.5.
5.Please confirm number and location of fenced areas if any exist outside of the fenced
area detailed by the dog den.
6.Please confirm whether any signage is being proposed.
7.Per UDO Section 5.6.8(B), please revise site plan to showing structures on adjacent
property.
8.Please update site plan to detail the required 150’ setback or otherwise detail the
distance of the Kennel use from property lines.
9.Please include fencing detail to confirm proposed fencing meets the 6’ height
requirement established by UDO Section 5.6.8(B)(2)(c).
10.Off-street parking standards detailed in UDO Table 6.9.7 require a minimum of one
space per four pens/stalls. Plan proposes eight pens; site plan to detail minimum of two
parking spaces related to Kennel use.
11.Existing vegetation may be accepted as a buffer/screening for the Kennel use. Please
ensure existing vegetation/natural buffer is detailed on site plan to capture this.
12.Please note that, when submitting for building permits, kennel facilities shall be reviewed
by Orange County Animal Services Department prior to issuance of building permits.
Similarly, all necessary permits shall be obtained from Orange County Animal Services
within the first 30 days of occupancy. Failure to obtain and maintain valid permits which
94
may be required by the USDA or Wildlife Resources Commission will result in revocation
of the Special Use Permit.
13.Site plan notes detailed in Exhibit C-1 to be relocated to site plan sheet. May be placed
as site plan notes on the site plan itself.
Solid Waste Date: Staff:
Matt Taylor
mtaylor@orangecountync.gov
919-918-4905
1.No Comment
Stormwater
Management Date: 9/13/24 Staff:
Christopher Sandt
csandt@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2583
1.The project is located in the Cane Creek Protected Watershed Overlay District. Stormwater
Management is required if the proposed Land-Disturbing Activity exceeds 43,560 square feet.
NOTE: Land disturbance thresholds are cumulative to the parent tract and will carry over to
any/all subdivided lots.
Transportation
Services Date: 9/16/24 Staff:
Darlene Weaver
dweaver@orangecountync.gov
919-245-2002
1.No comment
95
Orange County Planning and Inspections Department
Special Use Permit Application
Applicant: Canine Adventure LLC
Property: Orange County Parcel 9832-60-7469
Zoning: A/R Agricultural/Residential
SUP23-0011
Regarding DAC comments:
Addressing and Building Inspections
There will be no bathroom or kitchen in the dog den. Clients will not need access to the building.
There will be no employees other than the owner and applicant, James Tilson.
Planning
1. We only plan to fence around the dog den. I have updated the narrative to reflect this.
2. Yes, this application is proposed to apply to the entirety of our 32.4 acre property.
3. I had put that in the proposed land use section, but I will add it to the title section as well.
4. Ok, I will review that.
5. No other fencing other than what is on the site plan.
6. No signage is being proposed.
7. Ok, we'll add that.
8. Ok, we'll add that.
9. Yes, the fence will be 6 ft. tall and we will add that detail.
10. Clients will not be coming to the land, but we will add 2 parking spaces next to the Dog Den,
including one that is ADA accessible.
11. Ok, we will add that.
12. Noted; thank you.
13. Ok, we will adjust that.
96
ANIMAL SERVICES
1601 Eubanks Road http://orangecountync.gov/animalservices phone: (919) 942-7387
Chapel Hill, NC 27516 fax: (919) 918-2393
October 24, 2024
I have reviewed the SUP23-0011 Canine Adventure. The information I reviewed appears to be in conformance with
the Orange County Unified Animal Control Ordinance. Currently, I do not have any comments to add.
Ashley Miller
Animal Control Manager
Orange County Animal Services
(919) 932-4949
97
Sec. 4-71. Class I kennels.
(a)In General. A noncommercial or not for profit establishment maintained by any person where
animals of any species, excluding domesticated livestock, are kept for the purpose of showing,
competition, hunting or sport, and which establishment is so constructed that the animals cannot
stray therefrom, and which maintains more than six but less than 19 animals.
(b)Standards for Class I Kennels. All noncommercial kennels shall, in addition to other requirements
of this article, comply with the minimum standards of this section. The premises at noncommercial
kennels shall meet the following standards:
(1)All enclosures housing animals must provide adequate shelter.
(2)The food shall be free from contamination, wholesome, palatable and of sufficient quantity
and nutritive value to meet the normal daily requirements for the condition and size of the
animal.
(3)All animals shall have fresh potable water available at all times.
(4)All areas housing animals shall be free of accumulated waste and debris and shall be
maintained regularly so as to promote proper health.
(5)All areas housing animals shall be free of accumulated or standing water.
(6)All animals housed shall be provided with proper veterinary care to promote good health.
(c)Owners or operators of class I kennels must apply to the Animal Services Director for a Class 1
Kennel Permit and pay any designated privilege tax to receive a permit to own or operate a
noncommercial kennel in the county.
(d)Kennel facilities shall be subject to inspection during reasonable hours by the Animal Control
Officer upon his request.
(e)Failure to meet the standards set out in this section shall be grounds for the issuance of a citation
subjecting the owner to the penalties described in this article, and/or the issuance of an abatement
order to comply with the provisions of this article.
(f)Revocation. A permit issued in accordance with this section may be revoked by the Administrator
after notice and hearing, for any reason that would have justified denial of the permit in the first
instance or for violation of another section of the Chapter. If the Administrator denies or revokes a
permit in accordance with this section, the owner or operator shall be notified of their right to
appeal such decision in accordance with Section 4-53.
Sec. 4-72. Class II kennels.
(a)In General. Any person maintaining any commercial establishment where animals of any species
excluding domesticated livestock, kept for the purpose of breeding, buying, selling, grooming or
boarding such animals or engaged in the training of dogs for guard or sentry purposes, and which
establishment is so constructed that the animals cannot stray therefrom; or any person owning or
keeping 20 or more animals, excluding domesticated livestock, each of which is four months of age
or older.
(b)Standards for a Class II Kennel. All commercial kennels shall, in addition to the other requirements
of this article including those for a 4-71 above, comply with the minimum standards of this
subsection. The premises of commercial kennels shall meet the following standards:
(1)Buildings or enclosures must be provided which shall allow adequate protection against
extreme weather conditions. Floors of buildings, runs and walls shall be of a nonporous
material or otherwise constructed as to permit proper cleaning and disinfecting.
Temperatures in animal containments shall be maintained at a level that is healthful for every
species of animal in the containment.
(2)Cages, kennels or runs shall have sufficient space for each animal to sit, stand up, lie down,
turn around and stretch out to its full length without touching the sides or tops of the cage,
kennel or run. Cages, kennels and runs are to be of a material and construction that permits
cleaning and disinfecting, and shall have an impervious surface. Cage, kennel and run floors of
concrete shall have a resting board or some type of bedding. Cages, kennels and runs shall
98
provide protection from the weather. All animal quarters are to be kept clean, dry and in a
sanitary condition. Cages, kennels and runs shall be structurally sound and maintained in
good repair to protect animals from potential physical harm, contain the animals, and restrict
the entrance of other animals and people.
(3) Animals shall not be placed in cages, kennels or runs less such cages, kennels or runs are so
constructed to prevent animal excreta from entering other cages, kennels or runs.
(4) Sufficient shade shall be provided to allow all animals kept outdoors to protect themselves
from the direct rays of the sun.
(5) Each animal shall be given the opportunity for vigorous daily exercise as appropriate.
(6) Litter boxes shall be provided for cats and kittens.
(7) Food shall not be contaminated and shall be wholesome, palatable, and of sufficient quantity
and nutritive value and offered at appropriate intervals to meet the normal daily
requirements for the condition, size, and age of the animal. Food for all animals shall be
served in a clean container so mounted that the animals cannot readily tip it over or defecate
or urinate in it.
(8) Supplies of food and bedding shall be stored in facilities that adequately protect such supplies
against infestation or contamination by vermin. Refrigeration shall be provided for supplies
of perishable food.
(9) All animals shall have fresh, potable water available at all times. Water containers shall be of
a removable type and be mounted or secured so that the animals cannot readily tip them over
or defecate or urinate in them.
(10) All food and water containers shall be cleaned and disinfected daily.
(11) All animals must be fed and watered, and all cages and kennels cleaned each day, including
Sundays and holidays.
(12) Adequate veterinary care shall be provided as needed for each animal.
(13) Provisions shall be made for the removal and disposal of animal and food waste, bedding and
debris.
(14) Facilities such as a washroom, sink or basin shall be provided to maintain cleanliness among
animal caretakers and animal food and water containers.
(15) Facilities for animals shall be adequately ventilated to provide for the health and comfort of
the animals at all times. Such facilities shall be provided with fresh air, either by means of
windows, doors, vents or air conditioning, and shall be ventilated so as to minimize drafts,
odors, and moisture condensation.
(16) Facilities for animals shall have ample light by natural or artificial means or both, of good
quality and well distributed and as appropriate for each animal's health and well-being. Such
lighting shall provide uniformly distributed illumination of sufficient light intensity to permit
routine inspection and cleaning during the entire working period. Enclosures shall be so
placed as to protect the animals from excessive illumination.
(17) Every person owning, operating, or maintaining such a facility shall post a notice clearly
visible from the ground level at the main entrance to the facility containing the names,
addresses and telephone numbers of persons responsible for the facility where they may be
contacted during any hour of the day or night.
(c) Owners or operators of Class II kennels must apply to the Animal Services Director for a Class II
Kennel Permit, pay any designated fee, to receive a permit to own or operate a Class II Kennel in
Orange County.
(d) Kennel Facilities shall be subject to inspection during reasonable hours by an Animal Control
Officer upon his or her request. A fee in the amount of $25.00 shall be assessed against the owners
or operators of a facility for failing to permit an inspection pursuant to this subsection in order to
defray the costs of repeat travel to the facility.
(e) Failure to meet the standards set out herein shall be grounds for the issuance of a citation
subjecting the owner to the penalties described herein, and/or the issuance of an abatement order
to comply with the provisions of this article.
99
(f)No person may own or operate a Class II Kennel within the County unless and until such person
satisfies the requirements of this section and has been issued any privilege license if required.
(g)A permit issued in accordance with this section may be revoked by the Administrator after notice
and hearing, for any reason that would have justified denial of the permit in the first instance or for
other violations of this Chapter. If the Administrator denies or revokes a permit in accordance with
this section, the owner or operator shall be notified of their right to appeal such decision in
accordance with Section 4-53.
Sec. 4-73. Pet shops.
(a)In general. A person that acquires for the purposes of resale animals, excluding domesticated
livestock, bred by others whether as owner, agent, or on consignment, and that sells, trades or
offers to sell or trade such animals at retail or wholesale, or a person that holds or keeps animals,
excluding domesticated livestock, for the purpose of cleaning or grooming.
(b)Standards for Pet Shops. All pet shops, including pet shops run in conjunction with another animal
facility, shall, in addition to the other requirements of this article, comply with the minimum
standards of this section. The premises for pet shops shall meet the following standards:
(1)There shall be available hot water at a minimum temperature of 140 degrees Fahrenheit for
washing cages and disinfecting, and cold water easily accessible to all parts of the shop.
(2)Fresh water shall be available to all species at all times. Containers are to be cleaned and
disinfected each day. All water containers shall be removable for cleaning and be mounted so
the animal cannot turn them over or defecate in them.
(3)The temperature of the area around the animal enclosures in the shop shall be maintained at
a level that is healthful for every species of animals kept in the shop.
(4)All cages and enclosures are to be of a nonporous material for easy cleaning and disinfecting.
Each cage must be of sufficient size that the animal will have room to stand, turn, lie down
and stretch out to its full length without touching the sides or tops of the enclosure, and floors
of sufficient strength and design to ensure the animal's limbs or paws cannot pass through
the floor material.
(5)All animals under three months of age are to be fed at least two times per 24 hours. Food for
all animals shall be free from contamination, wholesome, palatable and of sufficient quantity
and nutritive value to meet the normal daily requirements for the condition and size of the
animal. Food for all animals shall be served in a clean dish so mounted that the animal cannot
readily tip it over, and shall be of the removal type.
(6)Each bird must have a perch and sufficient room to sit on a perch. Perches shall be placed
horizontal to each other in the same cage. Cages and perches must be cleaned every day, and
cages must be disinfected when birds are sold or as otherwise transferred. Parrots and other
large birds shall have separate cages from smaller birds.
(7)There shall be sufficient clean, dry bedding to meet the needs of each individual animal.
Provision shall be made for the removal and disposal of animal and food waste, bedding and
debris, to ensure the enclosure is maintained in a clean and sanitary manner.
(8)All animals must be fed and watered and all cages cleaned every day, including Sundays and
holidays.
(c)Failure to meet these standards shall be grounds for the issuance of a citation subjecting the
owner to the penalties described in this Division, and/or the issuance of an abatement order to
comply with the provisions of this Division.
(d)Owners or operators of pet shops must apply to the Animal Services Director for a Pet Shop
Permit, pay any designated privilege tax and receive a permit to own or operate a pet shop in the
county.
(e)Facilities shall be subject to inspection during reasonable hours by the animal control officer or
other appropriate representative of the animal control officer or other appropriate representative
of the animal protection program upon his request.
100
(f)No person may own or operate a Pet Shop within the County unless and until such person satisfies
the requirements of this section and has been issued a privilege license if required.
(g)A permit issued in accordance with this section may be revoked by the Administrator after notice
and hearing, for any reason that would have justified denial of the permit in the first instance or for
other violations of the Chapter. If the Administrator denies or revokes a permit in accordance with
this section, the owner or operator shall be notified of their right to appeal such decision in
accordance with Section 4-53.
Sec. 4-74. Permit procedures.
The Animal Services Director shall establish procedures to govern the permitting process.
101
Attachment 6A
STANDARDS EXAMINED AND EVIDENCE RECEIVED
BY THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
PERTAINING TO A REQUEST SUBMITTED BY
JAMES TILSON AND MICHAEL TILSON
PROPOSING A KENNEL (CLASS II) USE
ON A PARCEL OF PROPERTY LOCATED OFF MONOTROPA TRAIL
(PIN 9832-60-7469)
As required under Section 5.2 Table of Permitted Uses of the Orange County Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO), a Special Use Permit is required for a “Kennel (Class II)” use, in
accordance with the provisions of Section 2.7 of the UDO. Such permits shall comply with general
and specific standards as set forth in Section(s) 5.3.2 and 5.6.8 of the UDO.
Section 5.3.2(A)(2) of the UDO requires written findings certifying compliance with the following:
(1) The use will maintain or promote the public health, safety and general welfare, if
located where proposed and developed and operated according to the plan as
submitted;
(2) The use will maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property (unless the use
is a public necessity, in which case the use need not maintain or enhance the value
of contiguous property); and
(3) The location and character of the use, if developed according to the plan
submitted, will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and the use
is in compliance with the plan for the physical development of the County as
embodied in these regulations or in the Comprehensive Plan, or portion thereof,
adopted by the Board of County Commissioners.
In addition, the Board shall make findings certifying that the application is complaint with the
following specific standards:
(1) Specific standards for the submission of Special Use Permit applications as
outlined within Section(s) 2.2 and 2.7 of the UDO.
(2) Specific regulations governing the development of “Kennel (Class II)” as set forth
in Section 5.6.8 of the UDO.
(3) Section 5.3.2(B) relating to the method and adequacy of the provision of:
a. Sewage disposal facilities, solid waste, and water;
b. Police, fire, and rescue squad protection;
c. Vehicular access to the site and traffic conditions around the site;
d. Other use specific standards as set forth within the UDO.
(4) The general findings outlined within Section 5.3.2(A) (2).
Listed below are the findings of the Orange Planning staff regarding the application in question.
The findings have been presented by Article and requirement to assist the Board of Adjustment
in its deliberations.
Attachment 6A
REQUIREMENT UDO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOF
Per Att 6 (b)
Submittal Requirements for all SUP Applications
Proper forms Section 2.2 Staff Testimony
Application (Attachment 1) 1
Fees paid Section 2.2.4(D) Application (Attachment 1)
[Fees paid at time of submittal.] 1
Full description of use
• Location
• Appearance
• Operational characteristics
Sections 2.5.3(F)
and 2.7.3(B)(1)
Application (Attachment 1)
Exhibit B – Narrative of
Proposed Land Use of the
Application (Attachment 1)
[Details “Kennel (Class II)” use
and operations]
Exhibit C – Site Plan of the
Application
(Attachment 1)
[Site layout for “Kennel (Class
II)” use and project notes]
2 - 7
Owner Information Section
2.7.3(B)(2)
Application (Attachment 1)
[James Tilson and Michael
Tilson, 710 Greenwood Rd.,
Chapel Hill, NC 27514]
1, 2
Site Plans
(10 copies)
Section
2.7.3(B)(4)
10 Copies of Site Plan
Submitted 2, 14
List of parcels within 1,000 feet Section
2.7.3(B)(5) Application (Attachment 1) 2
Elevations of all structures Section
2.7.3(B)(6)
Exhibit C – Site Plan of the
Application
and Building Plans
(Attachment 1)
2
10 copies of Environmental
Assessment (or EIS)
Section
2.7.3(B)(7)
Application, Environmental
Assessment Application
(Attachment 1)
[EIS Not Required]
2
Method of Debris Disposal Section
2.7.3(B)(8)
Exhibit C – Site Plan of the
Application
(Attachment 1)
2
Attachment 6A
Development Schedule Section
2.7.3(B)(9)
Exhibit B – Narrative of
Proposed Use (Attachment 1) 2
Extended Vesting Request Section
2.7.3(B)(10)
An additional 6 month vesting
period was requested by the
applicant. This would extend
the 12 month timeframe within
which construction is to
commence as specified in UDO
Section 2.7.11(D)
24
Submittal Requirements
Section 5.6.8 Application (Attachment 1)
2, 14
REQUIREMENT UDO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOF
Notification Requirements for all Evidentiary Hearings
Mailed Notice all adjacent
property owners (at least 10
days but no more than 25 days
prior)
Sections
2.7.5(B) and
2.7.6(A)(1)
NIM and BOA Materials (Attachments 3
& 4)
NIM notices mailed by applicant
September 11, 2024 prior to September
26 NIM.
BOA Public Hearing Notices mailed by
staff on October 29, 2024. Certification
available in Attachment 4.
8, 9
Sign Posting on Property (at
least 10 days prior)
Sections
2.7.5(D) and
2.7.6(A)(2)
NIM and BOA Materials (Attachments 3
& 4)
NIM signs posted by applicant on
September 12, 2024 prior to September
26 NIM.
BOA signs posted by staff on October
29, 2024. Certification available in
Attachment 4.
10
REQUIREMENT UDO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOF
Waste, Safety and Access Requirements for all SUPs
Waste Disposal
Method and adequacy of
provision for sewage disposal
Section
5.3.2(B)(1) Exhibit C – Site Plan of the Application
(Attachment 1) 2, 11
Attachment 6A
facilities, solid waste and water
service.
[Both Environmental Health and Solid
Waste offered review comments
(Attachment 5).]
Safety
Method and adequacy of
police, fire and rescue squad
protection.
Section
5.3.2(B)(2)
Exhibit C – Site Plan of the Application
(Attachment 1)
[Fire and Life Safety Division reviewed
application in September 19
Development Advisory Committee
meeting (Attachment 5).]
2, 12
Vehicle Access
Method and adequacy of
vehicle access to the site and
traffic conditions around the
site.
Section
5.3.2(B)(3)
Exhibit C – Site Plan of the Application
(Attachment 1)
[NCDOT offered review comments
(Attachment 5).]
2, 13
REQUIREMENT UDO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOF
Standards Specific to this Use: “Kennel (Class II)” Use
Site Plan
A site plan prepared in
accordance with Section 2.5
Site Plan Review
Section 2.5
Exhibit C – Site Plan of the Application
(Attachment 1)
[Site plan is in compliance with Section
2.5 of the UDO.]
2, 14
Standards of Evaluation
(a) The site is of an adequate
size to protect adjacent
properties from adverse effects
of the kennel
Section
5.6.8
Application (Attachment 1) 2, 16
(b) No part of any building,
structure, dog run, pen, or
exercise yard in which animals
are housed or exercised shall
be closer than 150 feet from a
property line.
Section
5.6.8 Application (Attachment 1)
2, 17
(c) Any kennel, including
primary enclosures or runs,
which is not wholly enclosed
within a building shall be
enclosed by a security fence at
least six feet in height.
Section
5.6.8 Exhibit C – Site Plan of the Application
(Attachment 1)
2, 18
Attachment 6A
(d) The site plan shows
parking, access areas, and
screening devices for all
buildings and animal boarding
facilities existing or proposed
for the property.
Section
5.6.8
Exhibit C – Site Plan of the Application
(Attachment 1)
2, 19
(e) The site plan shall be
reviewed by the Orange County
Animal Services Department
and found in conformance with
the Animal Control Ordinance.
Section
5.6.8
Project correspondence (Attachment 5) 2, 20
(f) Building plans for all kennel
facilities shall be reviewed and
approved by the Orange
County Animal Services
Department prior to issuance of
any building permits.
Section
5.6.8
Project correspondence (Attachment 5) 2, 21
Attachment 6A
(g) All proposed signage shall
comply with dimensional
requirements as set forth within
Section 6.12.
Section
5.6.8
Applicant is not proposing any signage. 2, 22
(h) All necessary permits shall
be obtained from Orange
County Animal Services within
the first 30 days of occupancy.
Failure to obtain and maintain a
valid Class II Kennel Permit or
other related permits which
may be required by the USDA
or Wildlife Resources
Commission will result in
revocation of the Special Use
Permit.
Section
5.6.8
Project correspondence (Attachment 5) 2, 23
REQUIREMENT UDO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOF
General Welfare, Value & Harmony Standards
The use (will / will not)
maintain or promote the public
health, safety and general
welfare, if located where
proposed and developed and
operated according to the plan
as submitted.
Section
5.3.2
(A)(2)(a)
Application package as contained in
Attachment 1 inclusive including, but not
limited to:
• Narrative;
• Site Plan;
• Proposed Conditions;
• Environmental Assessment (EA)
Application; and
• Site Plan.
Project Correspondence and DAC
Comments (Attachment 5)
28
Attachment 6A
The use (will / will not)
maintain or enhance the value
of contiguous property (unless
the use is a public necessity, in
which case the use need not
maintain or enhance the value
of contiguous property).
Section
5.3.2
(A)(2)(b)
Application package (Attachment 1);
Staff Report (Attachment 2);
Project Correspondence and DAC
Comments (Attachment 5); and
Evidence submitted by applicant
25
The location and character of
the use, if developed according
to the plan submitted, (will /
will not) be in harmony with
the area in which it is to be
located and the use is in
compliance with the plan for the
physical development of the
County as embodied in these
regulations or in the
Comprehensive Plan, or portion
thereof, adopted by the Board
of County Commissioners.
Section
5.3.2
(A)(2)(c)
Application package as contained in
Attachment 1 inclusive including, but not
limited to:
• Narrative;
• Environmental Assessment (EA)
Application; and
• Site Plan;
• Proposed Conditions;
• Zoning Report
Staff Report (Attachment 2)
Project Correspondence and DAC
Comments (Attachment 5).
26
Attachment 6B
FINDINGS OF FACT
BY THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
PERTAINING TO A REQUEST SUBMITTED BY
JAMES TILSON AND MICHAEL TILSON
PROPOSING A “KENNEL (CLASS II)” USE
ON A PARCEL OF PROPERTY LOCATED OFF MONOTROPA TRAIL
(PIN 9832-60-7469)
Based upon the competent, material, and substantial evidence received at the evidentiary
hearing, the Board of Adjustments gave each piece of evidence its due weight and makes the
following Findings of Fact:
Application Components
1. James Tilson and Michael Tilson filed an application for a Special Use Permit (SUP)
related to Orange County PIN 9832-60-7469 on August 12, 2024 for Use 62(M), Kennels
(Class II) with a fee paid.
2. The application included site plans and attachments as included in the agenda materials
received by the BOA, specifically: Attachment 1.
3. The existing conditions on the property include: The parcel is currently undeveloped with
the only land disturbance activities related to the existing Monotropa Trail.
4. The proposed buildings include: a 350 square feet Dog Den in which overnight boarding
will occur, a private residence to be occupied by the owner-operator, and a carport for use
by the private residence.
5. The access, parking, and “Kennel (Class II)” areas include: The project will be utilizing the
existing ingress/egress on Monotropa Trail. Two parking spaces are required for this use
per Section 6.9.7 of the UDO, one of which will be ADA accessible. The applicant details
that no customers will be driving to the site as all dogs will be picked up off-site and
transported back to the subject property for day camp and overnight boarding. The Dog
Den, surrounding fenced area, and proposed trails are the main use areas for the “Kennel
(Class II)” use.
6. The landscaping includes: maintaining existing vegetation except as identified in the site
plan. There is no use-specific landscaping requirement for a “Kennel (Class II)”. The 150-
foot use setback along all property lines and existing vegetation both serve as buffers to
adjacent properties.
7. Taylor Perschau, a member of the Orange County Planning & Inspections Department
staff, provided sworn testimony regarding receipt of the following: 10 copies of site plans,
a list of parcels within 1,000 feet, 10 copies of Environmental Assessment, method of
debris disposal, and development schedule.
Notice Requirements
8. Notices of a Neighborhood Information Meeting were mailed on September 11, 2024 by
the applicant and the meeting was held on September 26, 2024.
9. Notices of the BOA Evidentiary Hearing were mailed on October 29, 2024 and the meeting
held on November 13, 2024.
10. Signs were posted on September 12, 2024 for the Neighborhood Information Meeting and
on October 29, 2024 for the Evidentiary Hearing.
Waste, Safety & Access
11. The waste disposal methods were reviewed by Victoria Hudson, Environmental Health
Director with the Orange County Environmental Health Department, and Matthew Taylor,
Environmental Enforcement Supervisor with the Orange County Solid Waste Department.
Environmental Health review indicated there would be industrial process wastewater
considerations and septic maintenance conditions when permitting a septic system, to
Attachment 6B
which the applicant confirmed that no grooming would be happening related to the “Kennel
(Class II)” use. Solid Waste review indicated no concerns.
12. The method of police, fire and rescue squad protection were reviewed by Christopher
Pendergrass, Interim Fire and Life Safety Division Chief and County Fire Marshal. There
was no indication of concern.
13. The method of vehicle access was reviewed by David Genwright, Assistant District
Engineer with NCDOT District Office. There was no indication of concern.
Kennel (Class II)
14. Site plan submitted: Site plan was provided in compliance with Section 2.5 of the UDO.
15. The lot size is: +/- 32.4 acres, all of which are subject to the SUP for Use #62(M), Kennel
(Class II).
16. The site is of an adequate size to protect adjacent properties from adverse effects of the
kennel: There is no lot size minimum for a “Kennel (Class II)” use. The subject parcel is
heavily wooded, and the use maintains the minimum 150-foot setback from all property
lines.
17. No part of any building, structure, dog run, pen, or exercise yard in which animals are
housed or exercised shall be closer than 150 feet from a property line: the “Kennel (Class
II)” use meets the required 150-foot setback from all property lines. The closest “Kennel
(Class II)” element is 215 feet from the eastern property line.
18. Any kennel, including primary enclosures or runs, which is not wholly enclosed within a
building shall be enclosed by a security fence at least six feet in height: the proposed
30,000 square foot fenced area is detailed to be enclosed by a fence six feet in height.
19. The site plan shows parking, access areas, and screening devices for all buildings and
animal boarding facilities existing or proposed for the property: required minimum parking
is featured by the Dog Den and all “Kennel (Class II)” facilities are screened by the existing
natural vegetation on-site while also meeting the 150’ setback from property lines.
20. The site plan shall be reviewed by the Orange County Animal Services Department and
found in conformance with the Animal Control Ordinance: the application package was
sent to Animal Services on September 27, 2024 for review. Orange County Animal
Services completed review and indicated no concerns with the proposed project.
21. Building plans for all kennel facilities shall be reviewed and approved by the Orange
County Animal Services Department prior to issuance of any building permits: the
applicant is aware of this requirement as was detailed in the Development Advisory
Committee comments dated September 19, 2024.
22. All proposed signage shall comply with dimensional requirements as set forth within
Section 6.12: the applicant is not proposing any signage for the “Kennel (Class II)” use.
23. All necessary permits shall be obtained from Orange County Animal Services within the
first 30 days of occupancy. Failure to obtain and maintain a valid Class II Kennel Permit
or other related permits which may be required by the USDA or Wildlife Resources
Commission will result in revocation of the Special Use Permit: the applicant is aware of
this requirement as was detailed in the Development Advisory Committee comments
dated September 19, 2024.
24. The applicant requested an additional 6 month vesting period.
General Welfare, Value & Harmony
25. The expected value difference with the proposed use for contiguous property is: As
presented and entered as evidence on the evening of the evidentiary hearing.
26. The location and character of the use is: If developed according to the plan submitted and
in accordance with the conditions, the project will be in general harmony with the
surrounding area and the use would be in compliance with the plan for the physical
Attachment 6B
development of the County as embodied in the Unified Development Ordinance or in the
Comprehensive Plan, or portion thereof, adopted by the Board of County Commissioners.
27. The character of the area in which the use is located is: Rural with undeveloped parcels
and low-density residential.
28. The use will maintain or promote the public health, safety and general welfare, if located
where proposed and developed and operated according to the plan as submitted.
Attachment 6C
CONCLUSIONS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
PERTAINING TO A REQUEST SUBMITTED BY
JAMES TILSON AND MICHAEL TILSON
PROPOSING A KENNELS (CLASS II) USE
ON A PARCEL OF PROPERTY LOCATED OFF MONOTROPA TRAIL
(PIN 9832-60-7469)
When applying the adopted Findings of Fact to the relevant Standards found in the UDO, the
Orange County Board of Adjustments makes the following Conclusions:
1. All necessary submittal requirements were met, including:
a. Submittal of proper forms (UDO 2.2, Finding of Fact 1); and,
b. Fees paid (UDO 2.2.4, Finding of Fact 1); and,
c. The use was fully described (UDO 2.5.3(F) and 2.7.3(B)(1), Finding of Fact 2-6);
and,
d. Owner Information was provided (UDO 2.7.3(B)(2), Finding of Fact 1 and 2); and,
e. The facilities were described (UDO 2.7.3(B)(1), Finding of Fact 2-6); and,
f. Access, parking, and Kennels (Class II) use were identified (UDO 2.5.3(F),
2.5.3(L), 5.6.8, Finding of Fact 5 and 13); and,
g. Plans were identified (UDO 2.5.3(K) and 2.7.3(B)(1), Finding of Fact 2 and 14);
and,
h. Site plans were submitted, (UDO 2.5, Finding of Fact 2 and 14); and,
i. A list of parcels within 1,000’ was provided (UDO 2.7.3(B)(5), Finding of Fact 2);
and,
j. Environmental Assessment was submitted (UDO 2.7.3(B)(7), Finding of Fact 2);
and,
k. Method of Debris Removal was described (UDO 2.7.3(B)(8), Finding of Fact 2);
and,
l. Development Schedule was provided (UDO 2.7.3(B)(9), Finding of Fact 2), and
2. Proper notice was provided as required by statute and ordinance, including:
a. Notice was mailed for the Neighborhood Information Meeting (UDO 2.7.5(B),
Finding of Fact 8); and,
b. Signs were posted for the Neighborhood Information Meeting (UDO 2.7.5(D),
Finding of Fact 10); and,
c. Notice was mailed for the Evidentiary Hearing (UDO 2.7.6(A)(1), Finding of Fact
9); and,
d. Signs were posted for the Evidentiary Hearing (UDO 2.7.6(A)(2), Finding of Fact
10).
3. Waste, Safety and Access requirements were met, including:
a. The method and adequacy of providing for sewage disposal facilities, solid waste
and water service is sufficient for the proposed use (UDO 5.3.2(B)(1), Finding of
Fact 2 and 11); and,
b. The method and adequacy of police fire and rescue squad protection is sufficient
for the proposed use (UDO 5.3.2(B)(2), Finding of Fact 2 and 12); and,
c. The method and adequacy of vehicle access to the site and traffic conditions
around the site are sufficient for the proposed use (UDO 5.3.2(B)(3), Finding of
Fact 2 and 13).
4. Standards specific to the Kennels (Class II) use were met, including:
a. A proper site plan submitted (UDO Section 2.5), Finding of Fact 2 and 14); and,
b. The site is of an adequate size to protect adjacent properties from adverse effects
of the kennel (UDO Section 5.6.8(B)(2)(a), Finding of Fact 2 and 16); and,
Attachment 6C
c. No part of any building, structure, dog run, pen, or exercise yard in which animals
are housed or exercised shall be closer than 150 feet from a property line: the
Kennels (Class II) use meets the required 150-foot setback from all property lines.
(UDO Section 5.6.8(B)(2)(b), Finding of Fact 2 and 17); and,
d. Any kennel, including primary enclosures or runs, which is not wholly enclosed
within a building shall be enclosed by a security fence at least six feet in height
(UDO Section 5.6.8(B)(2)(c), Finding of Fact 2 and 18); and,
e. The site plan shows parking, access areas, and screening devices for all buildings
and animal boarding facilities existing or proposed for the property, (UDO Section
5.6.8(B)(2)(d), Finding of Fact 2 and 19); and,
f. The site plan shall be reviewed by the Orange County Animal Services Department
and found in conformance with the Animal Control Ordinance, (UDO Section
5.6.8(B)(2)(e), Finding of Fact 2 and 20); and,
g. Building plans for all kennel facilities shall be reviewed and approved by the
Orange County Animal Services Department prior to issuance of any building
permits, (UDO Section 5.6.8(B)(2)(f), Finding of Fact 2 and 21); and,
h. All proposed signage shall comply with dimensional requirements as set forth
within Section 6.12, (UDO Section 5.6.8(B)(2)(g), Finding of Fact 2 and 22);
i. All necessary permits shall be obtained from Orange County Animal Services
within the first 30 days of occupancy. Failure to obtain and maintain a valid Class
II Kennel Permit or other related permits which may be required by the USDA or
Wildlife Resources Commission will result in revocation of the Special Use Permit,
(UDO Section 5.6.8(B)(2)(h), Finding of Fact 2 and 23).
5. General welfare, value and harmony standards applicable to all SUPs have been met,
including:
a. The use will maintain or promote the public health, safety and general welfare, if
located where proposed and developed and operated according to the plan as
submitted (UDO 5.3.2(A)(2)(a), Finding of Fact 28); and,
b. The use will maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property (UDO
5.3.2(A)(2)(b), Finding of Fact 25); and,
c. The location and character of the use, if developed according to the plan
submitted, will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and the use
is in compliance with the plan for the physical development of the County as
embodied in these regulations or in the Comprehensive Plan, or portion thereof,
adopted by the Board of County Commissioners (UDO 5.3.2(A)(2)(c), Finding of
Fact 26).
NAME OF BOARD/COMMISSION: __Board of Adjustment (BOA)______________
Report Period January 2024-December 2024
ORANGE COUNTY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
ANNUAL REPORT/ WORK PLAN FOR THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
The Board of Commissioners appreciates the dedication of all the volunteers on their
boards and commissions and welcomes input from various boards and commissions
throughout the year. Please complete the following information, limited to the front and
back of this form. Other background materials may be provided as a supplement to, but
not as a substitute for, this form.
Board/Commission Name:
Board of Adjustment (BOA)
Person to address the BOCC and contact information:
Leon Meyers, BOA Chair
lmeyersnc@gmail.com 919 422-5773
3126 Carriage Trail, Hillsborough
Primary County Staff Contact:
Patrick Mallett, Deputy Director Development Services
Planning & Inspections Department
pmallett@orangecountync.gov
Office (919) 245-2577 / Mobile (919) 819-3402
How many times per month does this board/commission meet, including any
special meetings and sub-committee meetings?
One meeting per month as outlined in the published BOA Calendars.
https://www.orangecountync.gov/1178/Calendars
Note: the BOA only meets on published dates when there is a case to be considered
and/or required administrative actions or training.
Brief Statement of Board/Commission’s Assigned Charge and Responsibilities.
As required by NCGS §160D-302 and Unified Development Ordinance (UDO)
Section 1.8.1, the BOA is required quasi-judicial appointed board that is established
and maintained to hear and decide:
1. Appeals regarding any decision, or determination made by the Planning Director;
2.Applications requesting the approval of Special Use Permit (SUP);
114
3.Variance requests from the minimum requirements of the UDO; and
4.Other matters as required by state law, the UDO and/or the BOCC.
What are your Board/Commission’s most important accomplishments?
1.Successfully deciding appeals, variances and SUPs per the state statue and
UDO requirements without any higher appeals or legal challenges.
2.Revised procedures and processes regarding legal standing for cases.
3.Successfully appointing all the required and alternate BOA seats.
4.Revising the applications, required materials and published calendars to make
the process simpler, quicker and more accessible to the public.
List of Specific Tasks, Events, or Functions Performed or Sponsored Annually.
N/A
Describe this board/commission’s activities/accomplishments in carrying out
BOCC goal(s)/priorities, if applicable.
1.Successfully meeting state and UDO requirements for BOAs.
Describe the collaboration relationship(s) this particular board has with other
advisory boards and commissions?
1.Operationally none. The BOA is by definition an independent, autonomous
quasi-judicial decision-making body.
2. Administratively, BOA’s meetings, needs and support is coordinated alongside
the Planning Board.
Identify any activities this board/commission expects to carry out in 2024 as they
relate to established BOCC goals and priorities. If applicable, is there a fiscal
impact (i.e., funding, staff time, and other resources) associated with these
proposed activities (please list).
1. Continuing to improve the process and public information about the BOA and its
processes.
2.Streamlining the review process and legal notification processes.
3. Improving language translation and interpretive services for BOA cases.
What are the concerns or emerging issues your board has identified for the
upcoming year that it plans to address, or wishes to bring to the Commissioners’
attention?
1.None.
115