|
Mobile Home property. Tonight is the first night we have had sworn testimony about the location. It is consistent with 1
<br />that finding. Two, he determined that either on the Bingham Woods Mobile Home property and/or on the 2
<br />undeveloped property, there was a shooting range. The evidence you have heard tonight in addition to the legal 3
<br />arguments I am going to make, demonstrate conclusively there is a shooting range, you have the right to make a De 4
<br />Novo review of those issues. The reason we appealed Mr. Harvey’s 2014 decision is because he, in essence, said 5
<br />there is no shooting range, we have no evidence that is, on the Bingham Woods Mobile Home Park property. The 6
<br />issue tonight, is there a shooting range and we have talked about where this is defined in the UDO. The answer is, 7
<br />there is no specific definition of shooting range in the UDO. All you have is the term recreation facility for profit and 8
<br />this is under UDO section 10.1. I have concluded that in tab 12 in your notebook but it is not necessary at this time. 9
<br />In fact, I have included all the UDO provisions that I am citing to, also relevant statute about Land vs. Wesley Chapel 10
<br />since my colleague appears to be fixated on that. Shooting range … I want to digress for just a moment on what 11
<br />Land vs. Wesley Chapel says. So county staff has attempted to argue that this court of appeals case says you 12
<br />cannot regulate something, what essentially, they don’t ever specifically state in staff response why they think Land 13
<br />vs. Wesley Chapel is relevant so I will tell you what the holding of that case was. It says, “unless an ordinance clearly 14
<br />prohibits a specific use, that land use is allowed”. That is all Land vs. Wesley Chapel stands for. In that case, the 15
<br />Village of Wesley Chapel tried to require a special use permit for an existing shooting range and the court of appeals 16
<br />said no, you can’t do that you have no reference to shooting range, therefore it is not regulated by your ordinance 17
<br />and is allowed. Here, Orange County clearly regulates shooting ranges. At this point, it is not an appeal or argument 18
<br />issue because Mr. Taibi and his client, Mr. Klein, never challenged that determination. They have conceded from day 19
<br />one that Orange County regulates shooting ranges so Land vs. Wesley Chapel is irrelevant. So what is a shooting 20
<br />range? It is not defined in the UDO. Mr. Harvey correctly pointed out, or maybe he didn’t, but states this but I think 21
<br />he would agree. There are some standards for “for profit” shooting ranges. Non-profit do not have standards, 22
<br />additionally, the term non-profit recreational facility does not include shooting ranges so you have some ambiguities 23
<br />and mix-ups in the ordinance. What is clear is the ordinance regulates shooting ranges. There is a lot of talk about 24
<br />non-profit corporations and things like that. Respectfully, that is the staff confusing an illegal use with an unregulated 25
<br />use. It is… at best to say if you don’t meet all the requirements in our ordinance, you don’t exist and you are not 26
<br />illegal. That would be saying if I had an asphalt batch plant in a residential area, as long as it is not…on the other 27
<br />requirements in the definition, it doesn’t exist. Clearly that is not the case but county staff does, as they say do we 28
<br />regulate this, and then they say does the use exist. Our UDO clearly regulates shooting ranges and says they are 29
<br />allowed in some places and not others and then the question of whether Mr. Klein’s range is lawful and complies to 30
<br />the ordinance, completely different question because as Mr. Harvey indicated at the beginning of the hearing tonight. 31
<br />There is a way Mr. Klein could have a lawful shooting range and if he had a special use permit issued for that range 32
<br />on his property, I will tell you now, and my clients would not be here tonight. There is however one good definition 33
<br />that I will point to you for shooting ranges. In the absence of a shooting range definition, the UDO, I am going to cite 34
<br />you to the North Carolina Shooting Range Protection Act, we are not required to follow this but I do think it is 35
<br />instructive. If you will look on page 6 of my Memorandum of Law, the definition is there. It is the last paragraph. This 36
<br />is the separate sheet of paper I handed out. I am going to read the statute. This is GS 14-409.45 from the North 37
<br />Carolina Shoots Sporting Range Protection Act of 1997. A sport shooting range or range is defined as “an area 38
<br />designed and operated for the use of rifles, shotguns, pistols, skeet, black powder or any other similar shooting”. 39
<br />Respectfully, there is no physical structure requirement. It says an area. If any of y’all have ever been to a wildlife 40
<br />club or been out to a relative with a lot of land, you know sometimes that area is just an open field. This act was 41
<br />designed to protect existing shooting ranges that have been around from 1994 and earlier, not including Mr. Klein’s 42
<br />range as the testimony shows it appears to have been established around 2010. This is designed to protect all sorts 43
<br />of range uses. I would respectfully submit that in the absence of additional definition in the ordinance that is the best 44
<br />definition you have. What evidence do we have tonight that this is an area for sports shooting? We have audio that 45
<br />has been verified, of the volume, of the frequency, of the intensity, of the direction of the range. You have evidence 46
<br />that multiple shooters shoot on multiple occasions on the same location with regularity. Seems like every week if not 47
<br />more often. The only controverted evidence in the record is that non-family members are using the range. We don’t 48
<br />know how many but we know that residents of the mobile home park are using the range. There are also emails in 49
<br />Exhibit 10 from Sheriff Lindy Pendergrass to Mr. Harvey talking about the berm because the sheriff’s department has 50
<br />45
|