BOA minutes 110915 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 1/11/2016 OC Board of Adjustment – 11/9/15 Page 40 of 48 conditions of approval typical for any type of use of this nature. That’s on 86 and that concludes section 5 so I think you’re going 1 to want to go through the points on page 85 and then go from there after you deliberate of course. 2 3 Michael Harvey: Just as a reminder, we don’t make recommendations on those three findings because their based on the 4 evidence material… and testimony entered into the record so, those are your decisions and issues to weigh based on what you’ve 5 heard tonight. 6 7 Karen Barrows: Is that it Pat? 8 9 Patrick Mallett: That’s it. 10 11 Karen Barrows: Thank you. 12 13 Susan Halkiotis: I might have a question. Just to go back about this agro-tourism, mostly because I’m new…. So explain again 14 about this project could have been pursued as an agro-tourism project, I’m looking in the general vicinity for an answer. 15 16 Michael Harvey: As we outline in the abstract there is an argument that can be made that a farm can engage in an agro-tourist 17 activity as part of the common acceptable everyday use of a farm parcel of property. When we first met with Kara, we obviously 18 had indicated based on the information we had she needed to go to the SUP process. She agreed and has further obviously 19 indicated she has a responsibility to go through that process. Now, can an argument be made that a farm can have a wedding 20 venue as an agro-tourist activity, the answer’s yes. But, I want to caution everyone here as I indicated at the onset of this meeting, 21 the Board of Adjusted doesn’t have the legal ability to determine whether or not a parcel property should or should not be 22 considered a farm. That’s State law. And, the Board of Adjustment should not determine or comment on the appropriateness of an 23 agro-tourist activity being considered part of a farm operation. 24 25 The State has granted the county of Orange and other counties certain powers. They have also eliminated certain responsibilities, 26 for lack of better way to put it. And one of them is regulating farm activities. Like it or not, an agro-tourist operation, which the State 27 has indicated, includes a wedding venue. It is a legitimate, recognized agro-tourist activity. The applicant however, at staff’s 28 determination is going through a regulated process with this Board. 29 30 Karen Barrows: Does that help you Susan? 31 32 Susan Halkiotis: Yes, it does. 33 34 Matt Hughes: I just am trying, I’m learning on the job, why did staff make that recommendation to the applicant? 35 36 Michael Harvey: It was our determination that we questioned whether or not there was any farm activity on the property, that 37 warranted it being classified as such. 38 39 Matt Hughes: Just by the nature of that land of that land does it get any kind of tax break for the woods or anything? 40 41 Michael Harvey: I can’t testify to that because I’m not an expert when it comes to tax administration but I will tell you, and it’s in 42 your packet, that this property is a farm through the issuance of a farm number by the USDA. 43 44 Karen Barrows: That help you Matt? 45 46 Matt Hughes: Yes. Can I ask the applicant a question now?... Well we had Dr. Stewart, the acoustical engineer, testify and he was 47 clear that you had an opportunity to hire Mr. Stewart or someone else to make clear at this time, at this hearing, to defend your 48 position as far as the sound is concerned, right? We understand that in good faith you’ve made certain conditions to try and 49 minimize the noise, I’m wondering whether or not you’ve considered actually hiring someone to document what you intended to 50 do, to document it. 51 52 Kara Brewer: Sure, obviously I wish that I had. I’m happy to work with anyone with any kind of expertise in sound. I don’t want 53 sound to travel anymore that anyone does for this particular project. So, I’m more than willing to look into any ways to stop that 54