BOA agenda 111212 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

DRAFT -25- 1284 ownership, the SUP would become null and void unless sold to another party listed on the 1285 application." 1286 1287 Larry Wright: If it was sold to his daughter and son -in -law, this operation would still be able to 1288 go on? 1289 1290 Michael Harvey: Yes, because the intent is if it is controlled as part of the kennel operation and 1291 it is maintained by the owner /operator of the kennel, then the condition is still valid but if I bought 1292 it and I wasn't part of the kennel operation, then they are no longer complying with the 1293 ordinance and have two choices, make it conform or shut it down. 1294 1295 Larry Wright: My concern is that it would turn into a grave field in the unfortunate event that 1296 something happened to the Griffin's. 1297 1298 Mark Micol: They would have to come before. the board again to get a new SUP? 1299 1300 Michael Harvey: Ms. Ayer has talked about modifying, if we get to that point, a condition. We 1301 can go over that at an appropriate venue but I think there is language that we can massage that 1302 condition and still stipulate whoever runs that kennel has to own that property but we want to 1303 provide that they hear their options in order to address the sale of that parcel if it is not to 1304 someone associated with the kennel 1305 1306 James Carter: Counsel, do you agree with that? 1307 1308 Sahana Ayer: Yes, and I discussed it with Michael so if for some reason the Griffin's no longer 1309 own the property then whoever purchases the land has to comply with the SUP. 1310 1311 Bob Hornik: As a practical matter, I haven't spoken to Sahana about this but I think the idea is 1312 that Mr. Griffin or whoever his successor might be entitled to his property would also have to be 1313 an owner /operator of the kennel so that if somewhere down the line... if Ms. Purner and her 1314 husband inherit the Griffin property, later they can sell that property and the kennel as long as 1315 they sell it together. 1316 1317 Michael Harvey: The recommended condition reads: "As denoted on the site plan, if the 1318 ownership of the northern contiguous property is sold or otherwise fallout of ownership from any 1319 individual connected with the ownership and /or operation of the kennel facility, the kennel facility 1320 shall be forced to cease and the approved SUP shall be become null and void." What Sahana 1321 had suggested is that the applicant shall have an appropriate amount of time to come back to 1322 the Board of Adjustment and revise the site plan to bring it into compliance with the 150 foot 1323 setback, so there are a couple different options. 1324 1325 Sahana Ayer: In any event, if two different people own the properties, then they would not be 1326 complying with 150 foot setback and that makes the SUP null and void. At that point, they have 1327 the option to have to come back before the Board to see if they can modify the SUP and make it 1328 into compliance. 1329 1330 Larry Wright: Or else they are connected with the ownership of the enterprise? 1331 1332 Sahana Ayer: Yes. 1333 1334 David Blankfard: Mr. Abbott, was a hydrogeology study required for this? 1335 1336 Chad Abbott: We met with Terry Hackett... 1337 OC Board of Adjustment — 5/14/2012 Page 25 of 41