Orange County NC Website
Approved 12/12/16 <br />OC Board of Adjustment – 10/10/16 Page 95 of 113 <br /> <br /> <br />farm plan talks about running educational programs for student and the recreational entertainment 1 <br />purposes, I think, is clear.- to view or enjoy rural activities, including farming, ranching, historic, cultural, 2 <br />harvest-your-own activities, -they’re having pick your own flowers, you pick flowers- or natural activities and 3 <br />attractions –they fit exactly within the statutory definition as it’s provided and would be looked to by any 4 <br />reviewing court following the rules of statutory interpretation, instruction. In this case when agritourism is 5 <br />not defined in the other 2 sections that address it. The applicant’s addressed 2 other cases that I would 6 <br />also like to point to as well. That being Balkums’ nursery company and versus Mecklenburg County and 7 <br />Steadman versus Rijdes and what I think is significant about these 2 cases is that the courts specifically get 8 <br />into the state policy with respect to agriculture. In Balkum’s Nursery, and this is under tab 9 of the 9 <br />applicant’s authorities notebook, this starts in the second to last paragraph of the first page, “It is a public 10 <br />policy of North Carolina to encourage farming, farmers, and farmland. The General Assembly has stated as 11 <br />policy in various ways. It’s declared to be the interest of public welfare that North Carolina farmers who are 12 <br />producers of field crops and other agricultural products including vegetables, bulbs, flowers, other 13 <br />agricultural products shall be permitted and encouraged and promoted, stimulating increased production, 14 <br />use, and sale”. The next 5-6 paragraphs continue to outline this policy in promoting North Carolina 15 <br />agriculture. The last one, which addresses 106-583 is interesting here where it states, “This section 16 <br />sanctions the development of new and improved methods of production, marketing, distribution, 17 <br />processing, utilization of plant commodities, all stages from the original to producer through to the ultimate 18 <br />consumer and the methods of conservation development and use of land.” So it’s encouraging farmers to 19 <br />take chances, to develop new methodologies, new markets for agriculture in this state, and that’s exactly 20 <br />what the Brewers’ are doing. When you talk about the Iredale case when it had to do with biodiesel and 21 <br />whether they had asked for a re-zoning or identified their uses as industrial versus agricultural. They were 22 <br />completely different than the related activity of agritourism that’s going on here, which is why I think it’s an 23 <br />important distinction. But in that case they were producing 500,000 gallons of biodiesel and they only 24 <br />claimed that they would nee 100,000 gallons on their farm and the courts said that’s too much of a 25 <br />disconnect. Now the disconnect that the applicants have tried to compare here and make a comparison is 26 <br />the size of their barn related to what the uses are. I think it’s very hard to pin down the Brewers at this time 27 <br />as to what the capacity and how that barn is going to be used for agricultural purposes when they’re maybe 28 <br />a year or less in and we’re looking at a 20-year timeline for a farm to develop and 1,300 chestnut trees to 29 <br />be processed and expansions of flowerbeds. There will be an acre and a half or more. And honey 30 <br />operations. The ability once you set up that infrastructure, which Mr. Katz so brightly pointed out, can be 31 <br />expensive. Once you buy the equipment to replace the labor this can become a processing facility for other 32 <br />chestnuts as they develop that market within the state. And that was part of the testimony was that 33 <br />chestnuts are not being grown right now. And it’s a growth opportunity that is highly beneficial to Orange 34 <br />County. But the point that I was making there with respect to the use in terms of the square footage of the 35 <br />barn and why that’s misplaced is that it completely ignores the fact that the revenue from an economic 36 <br />impact and how the agricultural activities and the production of this is going to be substantial. Planned to be 37 <br />substantial. And is not the cart behind the agritourism horse but the other way around. But it’s very 38 <br />important in the interim for a new farm to be able to take advantage of these agritourism opportunities to be 39 <br />able to bridge that gap and create these new markets. And again, North Carolina public policy is to 40 <br />encourage this innovation and agriculture. And so not only do they fit within the definition they fit within the 41 <br />state policy. And that’s, again, consistent with the testimony of Mr. White. In terms of a couple of small legal 42 <br />issues that I would be remiss not to mention… Mr. White has demonstrated through his experience, 43 <br />education, and training that he does hold a special knowledge different from the ley community with respect 44 <br />to food systems. He’s discussed his methodology, and its reliability. And he’s provided his opinion. He 45 <br />should be admitted as an expert on this question of consistency with plans and whether this is a viable 46 <br />farm operation that benefits and is consistent with the plans and policies of the state and Orange County. In 47 <br />addition, Ms. Brown objected with respect to Mr. White’s ability to testify on the question of agritourism, the 48 <br />definition of bona fide farm purpose, but rule 704 explicitly allows testimony as to the ultimate questions if it 49