Orange County Approved BOA Minutes 21 01 11

Browse Search

Approved 8/9/2021 1 Mr. and Mrs. William and Leslie Weidner, 1001 Holly Creek Lane (determined to have standing at Dec 11, 20 meeting), 2 Mr. Bjorn Nordwall, 1111 Holly Creek Lane 3 4 Chair Meyers indicted at the December 14 regular meeting, the Board determined standing on several individuals. 5 Chair Meyers said additional requests for standing were received for Case A-4-20 (since December 11 meeting). 6 7 Chair Meyers indicated the Board would address standing claims first and asked Mr. and Mrs. Lloyd to come forward to 8 summarize their claim to standing on this case. Mr. Lloyd informed the Board they were an adjacent property owner 9 and their residence was the closest to the proposed cricket facility. Mr. Lloyd indicated he had sold the property to Mr. 10 Patil and Mrs. Cardoza and had been supportive of the cricket facility. Mrs. Lloyd indicated the family had owned 11 property in the area for well over 150 years. 12 13 Chair Meyers reviewed the necessary elements constituting standing, including proximity and special damages. Mrs. 14 Lloyd indicated they did not believe they would experience any financial hardships over the development of the cricket 15 field. Mr. Harvey interjected he believed the Lloyds were here this evening to speak in support of the application and 16 were not seeking standing for the purpose of alleging special damages. 17 18 Chair Meyers asked Mr. Nordwall to come forward to summarize his claim to standing (the Board received Mr. 19 Nordwall's standing request form). Chair Meyers asked if the Board had any questions. Seeing none, Chair Meyers 20 asked for a motion. 21 22 MOTION made by Vice-chair Halkiotis to grant Mr. Nordwall standing to speak on Case A-4-20. 23 24 Mr. Mufuka asked to be recognized. Mr. Mufuka argued Mr. Nordwall does not have proximity to the proposed cricket 25 fields and did not allege special damages relating to his property. Mr. Mufuka suggested Mr. Nordwall does not have 26 standing. 27 28 Vice-chair Halkiotis said the Board has always erred on the side of caution and were very lenient with determinations on 29 standing in an effort to avoid claims of impropriety. Mr. Bryan agreed the Board's policy was very lenient but indicated 30 decisions on a case are based on the competent material evidence and testimony from those with standing forming the 31 basis of a decision. While the Board may be lenient in recognizing standing, they have always required a solid basis of 32 facts supporting arguments made for and against a project. 33 34 There was general discussion on the need for evidence and testimony versus simple allegations of special damages. 35 36 Mr. Mufuka indicated Mr. Nordwall was not arguing the cricket field would negatively impact his property or create 37 special damages but was arguing there were inconsistences within applicant's statements justifying denial of the 38 request. 39 40 Chair Meyers asked Mr. Nordwall to discuss what special damages would result on this property if the project were 41 approved. Mr. Nordwall indicated the site plan is not explicit in what will actually occurring with the development of 42 parking and disturbance of the proposed cricket field. Granting the special use permit will impact his property values. 43 44 Chair Meyers asked if there was a second to Vice-chair Halkiotis' motion to grant standing. Mr. Scott seconded the 45 motion. 46 47 VOTE: Unanimous. 48 49 Chair Meyers asked if there was anyone else alleging standing. With none, Chair Meyers asked all parties intending to 50 offer testimony/evidence to come forward and be sworn (those individuals not sworn on December 14, 20 meeting). 6