Browse
Search
BOA agenda 121216
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Board of Adjustment
>
Agendas
>
2016
>
BOA agenda 121216
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/6/2018 4:24:58 PM
Creation date
3/6/2018 4:15:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
12/12/2016
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Document Relationships
BOA minutes 121216
(Message)
Path:
\Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active\Orange County Board of Adjustment\Minutes\2016
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
211
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
1 <br />James Bryan: It may depending on how you guys go about it. The critical to think about is we’ve had so 2 <br />much testimony, so much evidence, and it’s not advisory. It’s not about anything in the future, it’s not about 3 <br />anything what should be done in hypothetically cases. It’s about what Michael should have done. Put 4 <br />yourself in his shoes on May 18th, when he wrote that email, what should he have written? Put yourself in 5 <br />his shoes and say, “Well by the UDO he’s supposed to this do” and you should be able to say where in the 6 <br />UDO the current Planning Supervisor must do this. For instance, one thing is that if there is an appeal staff 7 <br />has to present it to the Board . They cannot make a determination that this isn’t worthy of the Board of 8 <br />Adjustment. They all get there. So if that gets appealed you would say, “yes, I could read in the UDO where 9 <br />it says you give this to the Board of Adjustment. That’s what you should’ve’ done”. What should’ve Michael 10 <br />done at what date? 11 <br /> 12 <br />Susan Halkiotis: I can’t start at that level. The level that I start at is that I believe that the farm is incidental 13 <br />to the wedding venue, not the other way around. And I come to that feeling about it just based on my 14 <br />question to Ms. Brewer at our last meeting, which was that if the farm was driving the whole thing then why 15 <br />in January those questions weren’t answered differently than they were? Which I think in the January 16 <br />application that the answer was that it was a special events building for the purpose of assembly 17 <br />something. I might be getting those quotes wrong. And then when I asked why that was Ms. Brewer had 18 <br />answered that she was advised to that by the Planning Department, which I didn’t quite understand. So 19 <br />that’s where I start with this; that the whole, to me, is just an effort to get around the decision that was made 20 <br />last November. That’s the way it feels from where I sit. Now I’ve got to reach and make a decision about 21 <br />Mr. Harvey’s findings? Correct? 22 <br /> 23 <br />James Bryan: Yes. What’s on appeal is Mr. Harvey’s determination. 24 <br /> 25 <br />Matt Hughes: Well I approach it from a different perspective. Take me from where we were in November all 26 <br />the way through today so I think we’ve clarified that because previously that was a SUP, we’re talking about 27 <br />another process altogether, that they’re not the same issue. And my feeling from that meeting in November 28 <br />is that the UDO is broadly written and we applied it regarding welfare or safety and some other things. I 29 <br />cannot remember exactly the terminology that the UDO calls for. In this meeting and the last meeting we 30 <br />talked about the business plan and how viable it was. My belief is I can see why that was discussed at 31 <br />different points, especially what was predominantly driving this in some way. In the previous meeting Ms. 32 <br />Brewer said that the way in which her farm plan summary is that the chestnuts and flowers, the order in 33 <br />which those were presented in the plan is… The primary focus will be chestnuts and then flowers and then 34 <br />honey and then event space. At least that’s how I interpreted her answer to my question. Now whether or 35 <br />not that all works out, that’s free enterprise. The farm may fail, what have you. I don’t think that it really 36 <br />matters. But what’s interesting to me is that the email from Mr. Ortoski in October of last year it does 37 <br />mention to the official over at the agriculture department that this barn would be part of a bona fide farm 38 <br />that would have some agricultural use to it. Now it doesn’t say which is primary; the barn event space or is 39 <br />it the growing, at the time, of herbs and flowers in addition to the agricultural events. So I do believe that 40 <br />that was part of the plan all along. From where I sit I do think it meets the criteria for a bona fide farm. It 41 <br />may not be what I think of as a farm, it just doesn’t but there are a lot of farms that aren’t what I think of as 42 <br />a farm. I do think that what’s obviously driving this is the agritourism part but from what I can tell it does 43 <br />meet the criteria for that. Even though that’s not necessarily what we’re deciding. I will agree that it is 44 <br />interesting that there’s all this extra capacity for things like the septic system and the space but I would also 45 <br />assume that it would be like building a highway. At 2 o’clock in the morning the highway doesn’t have a lot 46 <br />of cars on it. But you’re not building it for then. You’re building it for when you think you might need extra 47 <br />capacity, whenever that might happen to be. I don’t know how much tourism there would be but I would 48 <br />107
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.