Agenda - 5-a - Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Table of Permitted Uses

Browse Search

72 DRAFT 221 Michael Harvey: No, it was added to 2.10.3, 2.11.3, 5.3.2,the sections dealing with Variances, Interpretations and 222 Special Use Permits. 223 224 Hunter Spitzer: Okay. 225 226 Carrie Fletcher: Part of the comments were to keep it so the average person could do it on their own without legal 227 assistance and to keep it cost effective.You understand the terminology, but the average person may not and therefore 228 you are going to end up requiring the applicant to hire legal help. 229 230 James Bryan: I understand that, and I think you are defeating the purpose if you don't expand it. It's 600 pages and not 231 user friendly to begin with. If you were to leave the burden of persuasion out and leave it implicit, then those wily 232 attorneys are going to be only ones able to pick that out while the average person wouldn't look for the loopholes.This 233 is closing the loopholes and making it harder for attorneys to get around the system. 234 235 Randy Marshall: This seems to create loopholes. If there is no concrete criteria for persuasion, any attorney can 236 challenge not being persuaded when there is no criteria or definition for persuasion. It is left up to the governing board 237 to say,whatever you put out there, I am not persuaded. It provides an undue decision-making authority on the 238 governing board who rules. I would prefer to see Orange County go in it's own direction and then if there's a problem 239 with that, it will surface. I can't see that someone would come and say they will take us to court because we didn't add 240 the phrase. 241 242 James Bryan: Either John or I are at the boards and we would advise against those arguments. The enabling statutes 243 say that someone has to have substantial material and competent evidence and case law indicates that once you have 244 that you have a right to the permit. That is the burden of proof. The different parts of it about the production of 245 documents and persuasive arguments are subparts to that. 246 247 Adam Beeman: I have applied for permits in this County since 2008, and I just don't see is as being a fair process to 248 someone who can't afford deep pockets to get out of it. If you just scratch persuasion off, I am happy. But you are 249 telling me I have to persuade you yet don't give me any concrete steps to hit. That is a problem for me. It seems 250 objectified. I read your paragraph that if I provide all of this stuff then I deserve it, so then scratch out persuasion 251 because I have accomplished all of that. Why do I have to persuade you? If I come in and present my evidence and 252 testimony, I have either persuaded you or not. 253 254 James Bryan: It is a problem with semantics, but I am telling you what the law says. The law says you are always 255 persuading the Board. The Board has discretion. 256 257 Adam Beeman: That is my problem. It seems like a backdoor to say no to any project regardless if I qualify or not. 258 259 James Bryan: It can't be that. 260 261 Adam Beeman: It sounds like it. I am a layperson not a legalese, and it doesn't make sense to me. When I read it, it 262 sounds like you are discouraging me from doing it. I am at the mercy of presenting my case instead of handing you the 263 facts. 264 265 James Bryan: The facts aren't the facts. 266 267 David Blankfard: I have an example of the facts aren't the facts. I was on the Board of Adjustment and we had an 268 applicant come in and say they wanted to have a kennel put in. They had their own realtor come in and say it's going to 269 maintain or enhance their property, but the neighbors had another expert say, no, it is not going to. We had to pick 270 between the two on who was most persuasive. 271 272 Randy Marshall: Persuasive or factual? 273 274 David Blankfard: They were both qualified but just had different opinions. 275