Orange County NC Website
reasonably decided and rules are correctly interpreted. He noted that facts decided by this board cannot be arbitrary or 1 <br />capricious but rather supported by competent, material, substantial evidence in the record. The rules are interpreted by 2 <br />the law. He reviewed how the Board of Adjustment determines the facts. This board makes findings of facts if facts are 3 <br />based on competent, material and substantial evidence that are not arbitrary or capricious and are presented in the 4 <br />record. Competent evidence is legally fit so that it is trustworthy, and reliable and competent evidence for traffic and 5 <br />property values must be provided by experts in those fields. James Bryan also reviewed that substantial evidence is 6 <br />sufficient to support a specific conclusion. 7 <br /> 8 <br />James Bryan then reviewed the flow for facts and shared a diagram that explained that before the public hearing, the 9 <br />application is submitted and the staff report is written. At the hearing, evidence is given on the record and then the 10 <br />hearing is closed and the board deliberates. The board then takes all the evidence presented for the record at the 11 <br />hearing and determines findings of fact based on whether it was competent, material and substantial evidence. The 12 <br />staff attorney noted that some evidence may be uncontested and other evidence may be excluded. In cases where 13 <br />there is evidence on both sides for a relevant standard, the board must decide based on its reasonable judgment. 14 <br /> 15 <br />James Bryan then reviewed how the board interprets a rule and presented a slide to remind everyone that if the text is 16 <br />clear and unambiguous, its plain meaning should be enforced. If an ambiguity remains, the board must favor the 17 <br />property owner and the free use of land. 18 <br /> 19 <br />James Bryan then established the framework for this case. Regarding jurisdiction, on Page 11 of the agenda packet, 20 <br />there is a letter from Current Planning Supervisor Michael Harvey dated October 13, 2017, that is a final and binding 21 <br />decision of staff, which carries the weight of law. Regarding whether the applicants have standing, the board will find on 22 <br />Page 51 of the agenda packet the applicants’ statement of standing. James Bryan reviewed that regarding the rule, this 23 <br />is a new statute N.C.G.S. §153A-340(b)(2a). This was passed by the General Assembly in July 2017. 24 <br /> 25 <br />Barry Katz said this is a case that predates the change in the law. He wonders how the change in the law is relevant to 26 <br />this case. James Bryan said the parties can better speak to that. 27 <br /> 28 <br />James Bryan then reviewed that before Michael Harvey wrote his letter on October 13, 2017, he received a request. 29 <br />James Bryan reviewed that the request was for a classification that the structure on the property is a structure for a 30 <br />farm purpose, pursuant to N.C.G.S. §153A-340(b)(2a). He then highlighted the first sentence in a paragraph of the 31 <br />statute that states: “A building or structure that is used for agritourism is a bona-fide farm purpose if the building or 32 <br />structure is located on a property that is owned by a person who holds a qualifying farmer sales tax exemption 33 <br />certificate from the Department of Revenue pursuant to G.S. 105-164.13E(a). James Bryan said he does not think 34 <br />either parties are arguing over the last part of that statement. James Bryan said the applicant included the property 35 <br />owner’s original request, which is one letter with four exhibits. James Bryan referred to Page 10 of the agenda packet to 36 <br />answer how staff responded to the rule, noting that Michael Harvey laid out four sections. 37 <br /> 38 <br />Barry Katz said the deed for the property was filed with Mark Chilton on March 24, 2015. Is it relevant for him to ask 39 <br />when the barn itself was purchased. 40 <br /> 41 <br />James Bryan said he does not know whether it is relevant but Barry Katz will have an opportunity to ask that when the 42 <br />applicant is before the board. 43 <br /> 44 <br />James Bryan returned to Page 10 of the agenda packet, noting there were five attachments to Michael Harvey’s letter, 45 <br />pages 12 - 50 of the agenda packet. He noted that Page 51 is what the appellant says is wrong with the staff’s 46 <br />determination. He noted that Page 68 is the new information that is available. This is 20 pages that were submitted by 47 <br />the applicant upon the board’s subpoena. This information includes the application to the state for a qualifying farmer 48 <br />exemption certificate number; the Internal Revenue Service letter issuing an employer identification number; and the 49 <br />plan of merger of Wild Flora Farm, LLC, with Southeast Property Group, LLC. 50 <br />4