BOA agenda 111218 - cancelled - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

and as such was not subject to county zoning regulation and the owner could engage in agritourism activities, which the 1 statute indicates includes weddings. Staff provided Andy Petesch with a copy of the determination, along with LeAnn 2 Brown, attorney for the appellants. That staff determination has been appealed. 3 4 Michael Harvey reviewed that the appeal begins on Page 5. The subpoena response begins on Page 68. The request 5 to quash or modify the subpoenas begins on Page 89. The aforementioned Attachment 4 begins on Page 92. The 6 excerpt from the May and July 2018 meetings begins on Page 94. He asked that the abstract and all attachments be 7 put in the record. 8 9 MOTION by Susan Halkiotis to enter the abstract and all attachments into the record. Barry Katz seconded. 10 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 11 12 LeAnn Brown said she represents the appellants and read their names, acknowledging they are the same people who 13 have been involved in the other appeals this board has heard regarding this property. She said that this is an appeal of 14 a decision that was made October 13, 2017. She said the appeal was dated November 7, 2017, and noted it has taken 15 awhile to get before the Board of Adjustment. She said one of the first items that the board needs to deal with is the 16 item regarding standing. She said she has a certified copy of the minutes from the first time the Orange County Board 17 of Adjustment heard an appeal regarding this property, which included detailed evidentiary materials that gave evidence 18 of standing. So, in addition to what’s in the application that Michael Harvey has introduced into evidence addressing 19 standing, she is offering into evidence those minutes so that the board does not have to receive additional hours of 20 testimony about standing. She asked that the board receive that as sworn testimony. Also included in those minutes is 21 the determination that was made by this board in connection with the Special Use Permit that the use that was 22 proposed would not maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property. She noted the board has received the 23 certified copy of the minutes twice as sworn testimony in determining whether her party has standing. 24 25 Barry Katz asked for the date of the meeting minutes regarding standing. 26 27 LeAnn Brown answered October 10 and 24, 2016. And everyone still lives in the same place and is still doing the same 28 thing. LeAnn Brown explained the circumstances whereby several people she represents could not be present this 29 evening and acknowledged that she would have to ask for this public hearing to be continued if the board determined it 30 needed testimony from the individuals in order to establish standing. 31 32 LeAnn Brown said in the October 2016 minutes she is passing out, Page 19 acknowledges the board’s earlier finding 33 that those individuals she represents have standing, in addition to what’s on Page 51 of the agenda packet. She asked 34 if the board agreed to find standing. Board members informally agreed. 35 36 Andy Petesch requested to make a brief comment regarding the submission of these materials as standing. Andy 37 Petesch does not object to the certified minutes but wanted to note for the record that he objected then and objects now 38 to the finding that the individuals LeAnn Brown represents have standing. 39 40 LeAnn Brown asked if the board finds that the individuals she represents have standing so that she can proceed. Board 41 members nodded. LeAnn Brown noted for the record that all the board members nodded assent. 42 43 LeAnn Brown said in the materials filed in the appeal, there is an error alleged that she wants to address. She said 44 Southeast Property Group, LLC, which is now called Wild Flora Farm, LLC, by merger -- a merger that occurred well 45 after this tax certificate -- Southeast Property Group, LLC, applied to this board for a Special Use Permit in 2015. The 46 facts are, as is reflected in the minutes that the board has received into evidence, that Michael Harvey originally 47 determined that a Class B Special Use Permit was required for the events center that was going to be built upon the 48 property. There was no appeal taken of his determination that a Special Use Permit was required. She was not the 49 attorney for the opposing individuals at that time, but by the time the public hearing was held by the Board of 50 7