BOA agenda 061217 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

DRAFT 50 1 Matt Hughes: Well, I think that also speaks to something else and that is if we determine that the 2 structure is not being used for a bona fide or won’t be used for a bona fide agricultural purpose or 3 farming purpose my. I mean, even under what the appellant is asking for, as I read it, the farm is 4 already erected. The farm is already there. Even if. Or the barn is already erected; the barn is 5 already there. So even if we issue a stay the building is still there. It’s just it cannot be used for 6 wedding or event space. So all the pieces for a future event space are already present. So really, 7 whatever y’all determine today, I mean the facility is there. So, really, it’s just whether or not, in my 8 opinion we are allowing them to move forward in using the. Allowing the different components of 9 their business plan to operate concurrently or not. 10 11 Karen Barrows: I think you’re right. 12 13 James Bryan: I’m sorry Matt, to clarify your point. So the application, are you saying that there’s 14 any farm purpose being used for the structure? And. 15 16 Matt Hughes: Well based on, well based on what we’ve heard, yes. The building itself would be at 17 some point in time during the year, whether it’s used for storage of flowers, or processing of, I think 18 we heard at a previous hearing, chestnut flour, and other things. So the structure itself would at 19 some point be used for a bona fide farm purpose. I think where the hang up is is the event space 20 purpose. And so if there is a motion, one of the things I’m going to ask for is a division of the 21 question and vote on each component of it individually. If that, if that comes up. Because I would 22 like to register opinion on the various components of a motion where I may agree with the majority 23 on the Board, but I do think it’s a more complicated issue than, than maybe it’s even been 24 presented to us because we do have really these two different businesses on the same piece of 25 property. 26 27 James Bryan: So, I’m sorry. It’s late. I’m tired. So you’re saying, you would be saying that an 28 exemption exists for A, B, C; the honey tasting, but a zoning compliance permit would be required 29 for weddings, the children’s tours, or? 30 31 Matt Hughes: I mean, I can see conceivably that is where we could. 32 33 Barry Katz: I’m sort of cold on that myself. 34 35 Matt Hughes: We could come down. 36 37 James Bryan: I think that’s one thing the Board has to consider is whether any non-farm use pulls 38 the entire structure out of the exemption. 39 40 Susan Halkiotis: Well, you know, the way that Matt phrased that suggestion is interesting because 41 what he said was that he could see how there were two separate businesses that are running in… 42 43 Matt Hughes: And as Ms. Brown said, they’re not contesting the agricultural, if I heard her correctly, 44 the agricultural component of this, which is the flower business. 45 46