BOA minutes 011116 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 10/10/2016 25 Samantha Cabe: Did staff’s presentation raise any questions or need for rebuttal evidence or ad ditional 1 evidence from either the applicant or the contiguous land owners? 2 3 Henry Campen: Nothing about the staff’s presentation raises any concerns on behalf of the applicant. Your 4 counsel’s interpretation of the ordinance does raise some concerns, I can speak to that or not at the 5 appropriate time… 6 7 Samantha Cabe: Would the Board like the hear the applicants attorney’s opinion as to the necessary 8 findings that have been in dispute with staff and the Board’s Attorney?… Can you make like a 30 second 9 argument? 10 11 Henry Campen: With all due respect to my colleague… Courts are often called upon to interpret statues 12 that have provisions that appear to be… in conflict, It’s called statutory interpretation. And a fundamental.. 13 of statutory interpretation in the courts everywhere is that the courts have to interpret the statutes as a 14 whole as making sense, that there’s some purpose behind it. Even though there may be parts in conflict, 15 they have to harmonize those. That’s not an exactly analogy to what you’re doing h ere but it’s closest I can 16 come up with on the spur of the moment. I think to require an applicant for this project to resubmit an entire 17 application for a tower that’s been there for 20 years it just defies logic. And I don’t believe a court that’s 18 called upon to judge this issue would find that that’s required, would find that that’s a harmonious, logical, 19 reasonable interpretation requirement of the ordinance. I believe the way the staff has int erpreted this 20 where there are versions of the ordinance that address what is actually being proposed, yes he’s made 21 recommendations with respect to those in… But the balloon test, for goodness sake, the balloon test was 22 designed to give the neighbors some indication of where this tower’s going to appear on the hori zon. Well, 23 they’ve been looking at this tower for 20 years. So, that’s all I have to say. 24 25 Samantha Cabe: Thank you. Did that raise any questions for the Board? 26 27 Barry Katz: Just for a second… Resubmit the application; this is the concern that’s here. Mr. Bryan is 28 asking for a resubmission of the application, is that true? 29 30 James Bryan: No, I’m not asking for anything, I’m advising the Board that they need an affirmed finding on 31 all of the… 32 33 Barry Katz: Oh, ok so we’ve seen… 34 35 James Bryan: And how they do it is up to them. 36 37 Barry Katz: I see. Where we have, let’s say on page 200, is this not part of your ap plication? 38 39 Henry Campen: It is the application. 40 41 Barry Katz: Alright, so we have it. Ok. 42 43 Susan Halkiotis: That’s kind of my question too. Except for t hose things that have been changed since 44 1996… 45 46 Samantha Cabe: I have a proposal of how to do this. Once the staff has gotten all the information they 47 need from the other people in the room then I’ll ask for a motion to close to public hearing and enter in to 48 deliberations. 49