BOA minutes 101016 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 12/12/16 OC Board of Adjustment – 10/10/16 Page 105 of 113 Susan Halkiotis: Is that what’s before us? We’re not modifying this decision, we’re either accepting it or 1 we’re reversing it? 2 3 James Bryan: That’s their prayer for relief but this Board always has the ability to affirm, reverse, or modify. 4 5 Barry Katz: Based on the testimony we heard today? 6 7 James Bryan: Right. The appellant has the burden to prove that there was an error made. 8 9 Barry Katz: So on the rulings, which is really what we’re dealing with here, 2A Orange County Planning 10 Director inaudible shall review the March 16th 2016 building permit application and make a determination 11 as to whether the structure identified will be used for bona fide farm purpose and whether the use as a 12 wedding event is related or incidental to the bona fide farm purposes, if any. It’s a request that Inaudible. 13 So 2 really begs to the question whether the building permit, approved for agricultural purposes, was based 14 on the fact that it was agriculture purposes is an error? Or questions whether it is? 15 16 James Bryan: No. So the building permit issued is outside the jurisdiction of this Board. It’s whether Michael 17 should have told them, “Hold up. I need to tell you yes or no on this” instead of allowing it by doing nothing 18 and saying, “No, I’m going to hold off on a decision”. 19 20 Barry Katz: How does that relate to the rulings? On you your last page is we were to consider number 2 21 and the basis of reversal would be based on the testimony we heard here tonight. Correct? 22 23 James Bryan: You have to make findings of fact about what caused you to believe that Michael was in 24 error. That he should have made a determination. And you don’t have to make that determination, you’re 25 telling him that he has to make that determination. 26 27 Barry Katz: Oh, ok. So we’re not making that determination. The Planning Director will revisit this, correct? 28 29 James Bryan: Right. 30 31 Barry Katz: I understand now. Ok. So we have to state what the basis of a reversal would be? 32 33 James Bryan: Right. You’d have to say, “Yes, you have to make this call in telling the building inspector that 34 this is or isn’t a farm”. 35 36 Barry Katz: it’s whether or not it will be used for bona fide farm purposes and whether the use of the 37 wedding and event center is related to or incidental to the bona fide farm purpose. That would be the basis. 38 If we determined that that would be what we would suggest that he go back and reconsider? I’m 39 excessively worried about this because this is new territory for me. 40 41 James Bryan: It’s new territory for a lot of us. I didn’t quite follow that last one. 42 43 Barry Katz: My point is this, that here we are, we heard testimony tonight which one side or the other was 44 defending or purporting that the barn and the wedding venue was not incidental to the purported farm. 45 That’s what 2A speaks to. And therefore, if we were to consider reversing the decision we would have to 46 state why we thought the evidence that we heard supports the idea that the barn was not incidental to an 47 agricultural use. 48 49