Laserfiche WebLink
9. On March 5, 2026, Appellant filed a <br />Supplemental Pre -Hearing Brief. On <br />March 9, 2026, Appellant made a motion to <br />consolidate the hearings on the appeals <br />from the Planning Director's determination <br />and the Public Works Director's decision, <br />which the Board Chairperson denied. <br />10. On March 10, 2026, Appellant <br />requested a continuance of the scheduled <br />March 13, 2026, hearing date, to which the <br />Planning Director did not object. On <br />March 12, 2026, the Board Chairperson <br />continued the hearing until May 15, 2026. <br />N <br />hereby allowed. Any further <br />amendment to the petition will <br />not be entertained. <br />If desired by any party, either <br />party shall serve upon the <br />opposing party and file with the <br />Board any legal memoranda or <br />pre -hearing brief based on the <br />Second Amended Petition no <br />later than March 2, 2026, by 4:30 <br />p.m. <br />4. Appellant's request to switch <br />agenda items for the January 9, <br />2026, hearing date is now moot, <br />and hereby denied. <br />Appellant is ordered to mail a notice <br />of the new hearing date to all <br />persons required to be notified in <br />accordance with Board of Appeals <br />Rule 8-11( d). If the Board is unable <br />to hold the contested hearing on <br />March 13, 2026, Appellant shall re- <br />issue the required notice for any <br />subsequent date in accordance with <br />Board of Appeals Rule 8-11(d). <br />Rohr objects on the grounds that Fact 9 <br />does not accurately reflect the procedural <br />history. The Director and the Landowner <br />could have filed a Supplemental Prehearing <br />Brief and argued a lack of standing, but did <br />not do so. <br />Rohr objects on the grounds that Fact 10 <br />does not accurately reflect the procedural <br />history, <br />Record facts: <br />Chair had continued related case No. PL- <br />BOA-2025-000121 to May and Rohr <br />