|
APPROVED 5/10/2010
<br />
<br />OC Board of Adjustment – 3/8/2010 Page 74 of 86
<br />1 2 3
<br />4
<br />5 6 7
<br />8
<br />9 10 11
<br />12
<br />13 14 15
<br />16
<br />17 18 19
<br />20
<br />21 22 23
<br />24
<br />25 26
<br />27
<br />28
<br />29 30
<br />31
<br />32
<br />33 34
<br />35
<br />36
<br />37 38
<br />39
<br />40
<br />41 42
<br />43
<br />44
<br />45 46
<br />47
<br />48
<br />49 50
<br />51
<br />52
<br />53 54
<br />tells you about how the facility is going to be constructed. You still have some overall sense or fear of it. On this value
<br />question, that is really interesting. I think it is a lot simpler than it has been made out. We all know that you can only do a
<br />data analysis based on the data available to you. The data available to Vic Knight is slim; he will be the first to acknowledge
<br />that, he did the best analysis he could. Mr. Tolley’s opinion is not that the available data is so slim that you can’t do any
<br />analysis at all and he hasn’t come in here to tell you that there would be any negative impact on property values nor has he
<br />from the realtor. I should have got two kinds of realtor folks, none of them have come in here to flat out tell you there is going
<br />to be reduction in value but look, and you guys have got to decide it and that is the question here. There could never be a
<br />Class II kennel in Orange County ever if the data doesn’t exist according to Mr. Tolley because nobody could ever render an
<br />opinion about it. Not to go too far, a little, just a texture of common sense applied to the value question can help. Value is
<br />affected by things that we all associate with being detrimental, demonstrable detrimental to a residential community like
<br />unbearable noise, unbearable odor, pollution, right? Large increases in traffic. Those are standard kinds of impacts which
<br />significantly adverse to the amenities of a quiet community could cause the value of contiguous property to go down that is
<br />what we are talking about. So if it work $150,000 house today, once you put in the facility, it is work $149,000, went down
<br />but there is nothing you have heard here about any kinds of impacts that would cause such a reduction in value other than
<br />pure speculation and you have otherwise heard from the application pack from Mr. Whitaker and the like and then Mr.
<br />Stewart everything that has gone into this in order to prevent those kinds of things. All of that is completely uncontradicted.
<br />One final thing, sort of a red herring, let’s assume, I don’t know what the laws are but I am assuming the law here is that if
<br />you were some kind of seller that you would want to disclose that there is a Special Use Permit pending or someone is going
<br />to put in a commercial use. For example, next door, there was otherwise a residential use, don’t be fooled by that, that is a
<br />material fact in as much as there is a material change to the property, to the use of the property, other than what it was
<br />before. Before it was a house, now it is a house plus a small commercial enterprise. But to all it a material fact, doesn’t
<br />mean it is a fact that is adverse to property value. That means I ask the question for you to decide because if just calling a
<br />material fact means that it hasn’t an adverse affect on property value, then you could never have a Class II Special Use
<br />Permit anywhere in Orange County because in all instances you would have to disclose that there is going to be a new
<br />commercial establishment. They make it out, when they call it a material that is a trick, a way of saying that if you have to
<br />disclose a material fact, there must be something woefully evil about that enterprise and therefore automatically reduces
<br />value. When no witness has come in this place to say, data or no data, that in their opinion it is going to reduce value and
<br />why. That kind of red herring thing is unnecessary. The bottom line is where I have began, I believe a lot of effort has been
<br />put in this by this applicant. This Special Use Permit for this use is for a permitted use in this county. There is nothing here
<br />to indicate that it would be unhealthy or hurt the welfeare of the citizenry. The only evidence that you have before you is that
<br />the impact, if any, are virtually diminisheus if not far exceeded by what otherwise goes on in terms of traffic and the like in
<br />that community. Therefore, as a matter of common sense, it is not going to diminish the value of any contiguous property so
<br />I think all the requested findings you have to make here exist. That is what we ask you to do.
<br />
<br />Jeffrey Schmitt: Thank you Mr. Herman. Mr. Maitland.
<br />
<br />Rob Maitland: First of all I want to say that this is an important and significant case to many, many people because the
<br />decision you are making here today will irreversibly change the character of this neighborhood. You can’t go back. It is the
<br />very essence of this neighborhood, particularly the Southerland’s home where she has lived her whole life. So Lonsway
<br />since September 3. I do take some exceptions to some of the arguments made tonight. We are not saying he can’t have a
<br />dog kennel. We are saying it is not appropriate here and that is the decision you need to focus on. What about all the
<br />existing, vacant commercial space in this county. Why doesn’t he put his dog kennel there? Just like the Sunny Acres Pet
<br />Resort is. The reason there is no data out there is there shouldn’t be a dog kennel in this situation. That is why it is not
<br />available but you can find it in a commercial space. There is a dog kennel on Franklin Street. There is plenty of dog kennels
<br />around you can find but they shouldn’t be 80-180 feet from somebody’s front porch. It doesn’t have to be there. I gotta say
<br />right up front, I want to apologize for my enthusiasm for this case; there is a lot of pressure on me. I got people here that are
<br />counting on me to battle a man who admitted in his testimony, he has got $700,000 invested in this. I have never done a
<br />case like this before. I was the only attorney in town stupid enough to take it because the minimum fee to take a case like
<br />this is $15,000 and you want to know why. Because big money does this kind of cases. That is why they felt like they got
<br />ramrodded in front of this board and really, truly from the bottom of my heart give you guys a lot of respect because you have
<br />really looked this thing fresh from the beginning. You didn’t have to, you could have gone through the motions and I can tell
<br />by the questions you have ask, you are doing you job here and it is a job. You are the county, you are to protect the citizens
<br />of this county and enforce our rules and regulations for their benefit. It is plain out inconceivable to me and I didn’t know it
<br />was like this before I took this case but when AT&T wants to build a cellular tower, you know who has to fight it? The Mr.
|