Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
1 <br />Samantha Cabe: Did staff’s presentation raise any questions or need for rebuttal evidence or additional 2 <br />evidence from either the applicant or the contiguous land owners? 3 <br /> 4 <br />Henry Campen: Nothing about the staff’s presentation raises any concerns on behalf of the applicant. Your 5 <br />counsel’s interpretation of the ordinance does raise some concerns, I can speak to that or not at the 6 <br />appropriate time… 7 <br /> 8 <br />Samantha Cabe: Would the Board like the hear the applicants attorney’s opinion as to the necessary 9 <br />findings that have been in dispute with staff and the Board’s Attorney?… Can you make like a 30 second 10 <br />argument? 11 <br /> 12 <br />Henry Campen: With all due respect to my colleague… Courts are often called upon to interpret statues 13 <br />that have provisions that appear to be… in conflict, It’s called statutory interpretation. And a fundamental.. 14 <br />of statutory interpretation in the courts everywhere is that the courts have to interpret the statutes as a 15 <br />whole as making sense, that there’s some purpose behind it. Even though there may be parts in conflict, 16 <br />they have to harmonize those. That’s not an exactly analogy to what you’re doing here but it’s closest I can 17 <br />come up with on the spur of the moment. I think to require an applicant for this project to resubmit an entire 18 <br />application for a tower that’s been there for 20 years it just defies logic. And I don’t believe a court that’s 19 <br />called upon to judge this issue would find that that’s required, would find that that’s a harmonious, logical, 20 <br />reasonable interpretation requirement of the ordinance. I believe the way the staff has interpreted this 21 <br />where there are versions of the ordinance that address what is actually being proposed, yes he’s made 22 <br />recommendations with respect to those in… But the balloon test, for goodness sake, the balloon test was 23 <br />designed to give the neighbors some indication of where this tower’s going to appear on the horizon. Well, 24 <br />they’ve been looking at this tower for 20 years. So, that’s all I have to say. 25 <br /> 26 <br />Samantha Cabe: Thank you. Did that raise any questions for the Board? 27 <br /> 28 <br />Barry Katz: Just for a second… Resubmit the application; this is the concern that’s here. Mr. Bryan is 29 <br />asking for a resubmission of the application, is that true? 30 <br /> 31 <br />James Bryan: No, I’m not asking for anything, I’m advising the Board that they need an affirmed finding on 32 <br />all of the… 33 <br /> 34 <br />Barry Katz: Oh, ok so we’ve seen… 35 <br /> 36 <br />James Bryan: And how they do it is up to them. 37 <br /> 38 <br />Barry Katz: I see. Where we have, let’s say on page 200, is this not part of your application? 39 <br /> 40 <br />Henry Campen: It is the application. 41 <br /> 42 <br />Barry Katz: Alright, so we have it. Ok. 43 <br /> 44 <br />Susan Halkiotis: That’s kind of my question too. Except for those things that have been changed since 45 <br />1996… 46 <br /> 47 <br />Samantha Cabe: I have a proposal of how to do this. Once the staff has gotten all the information they 48 <br />need from the other people in the room then I’ll ask for a motion to close to public hearing and enter into 49 <br />27