BOA minutes 082714 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

APPROVED 10/13/2014 OC Board of Adjustment – 8/27/2014 Page 2 of 64 1 Larry Wright: I think this testifies to the quality of work that is done by our secretary and the planning 2 staff. I would like to move on to our agenda and it is on page 135 of our packet. 3 4 5 AGENDA ITEM 5: PUBLIC CHARGE 6 7 Larry Wright: Mr. Vice Chair, would you read the Public Charge. 8 9 The Board of Adjustment pledges to the citizens of Orange County its respect. The Board asks its citizens to 10 conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the Board and with fellow citizens. At any 11 time should any member of the Board or any citizen fail to observe this public charge, the Chair will ask the 12 offending person to leave the meeting until that individual regains personal control. Should decorum fail to be 13 restored, the Chair will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is 14 observed. All electronic devices such as cell phones, pagers, and computers should please be turned off or 15 set to silent/vibrate. 16 17 The Board of Adjustment is a quasi-judicial administrative body established in accordance with the provisions 18 of local regulations and State law to perform specified functions essential to the County’s planning program. 19 Action(s) taken by the board are based solely on competent, substantial, and material evidence presented 20 during a previously scheduled and advertised public hearing on a specific item. As detailed within Section 21 2.12.2 of the UDO the Board chair reserves the right to exclude evidence and testimony that is deemed: 22 ‘incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious’ and therefore fails to reasonably address the issues 23 before the Board of Adjustment. While it should be noted there is no time limit on the presentation of 24 evidence, the Chair asks that the presentation of evidence be consistent with established policies, rules of 25 procedure, and acceptable levels of decorum to ensure a fair and equitable hearing for all parties. 26 27 28 AGENDA ITEM 6: A-3-14 – Special Use Permit – Utilities: Gas Transmission Lines 29 In accordance with Section(s) 2.7 Special Uses, 5.2.2 Table of Permitted 30 Uses 5.3.2 Application of Use Standards – Special Uses, and 5.9.5 Electric, 31 Gas, and Liquid Transmission Lines of the UDO, PSNC has submitted a 32 proposal to install a new gas transmission line on several properties within 33 Orange County. The project will involve the establishment of a new 34 easement, installation of new gas line. 35 36 Larry Wright: I would like to ask our attorney to make a statement please. 37 38 James Bryan: I am just going to make a hopefully short statement about the general process. A lot of 39 this is already, what has already, been read but it bears repeating. Today the Board will consider a 40 request by the petitioner for a special use permit. Now this requires a quasi-judicial hearing in front of 41 the Board where the Board is going to act as a judge based on established standards. The standards 42 are going to be as detailed within the Unified Development Ordinance. Unlike other public hearings, 43 which are based on legislative decisions where the Board can hear pretty much anything, public 44 comment or public opinions or anything like this. By state statute, the Board can only hear substantial, 45 competent and material evidence. They are going to use a fair trial standard that is going to apply to the 46 proceeding, meaning that while employing something less than the formality of the Rules of Evidence 47 used in a courtroom, basic due process is going still apply and protect the individual. It is the petitioner’s 48 burden to produce sufficient evidence to show that all standards are met by the proposed use. The 49 evidence must be of a quality and quantity to support such a conclusion. All evidence must be 50 substantial, competent and material. In sort of every day terms, the evidence is trustworthy, relevant and 51 supports a conclusion. Those conclusions are those standards that are in here. Some matters may 52 require expert testimony. For example, the General Statutes specifically prohibit lay opinion on property 53 value and traffic safety. On those things, the public can’t give an opinion unless they are an appraiser or 54