BOA minutes 101110 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 11/8/2010 OC Board of Adjustment – 10/11/2010 Page 28 of 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 Tom Brown: Well he has modified some portion of it. David Blankfard: I am talking about the space rental for private events, birthday parties for little kids where they’re doing the education portion of it would be part of the Special Use Permit. However, the wedding receptions would not. Tom Brown: Staff has made the position that they don’t believe that is part of the approved operational characteristics of the facility and it constitutes a modification. That is what we are here to decide either we agree with that or we don’t. David Blankfard: So if we agreed we affirm. Tom Brown: We affirm. David Blankfard: Ok then we have to approve for modification, or not. Tom Brown: Then the appellant, their choice is to cease and desist on any activities that are in the determination from the zoning officer if they wish to start those activities once more they would have to come before the Board with a Special Use Permit for those additional uses. It would be a separate thing with testimony and then we would have to decide how to deal with those additional uses. Would you have anything to add to that Mr. Harvey? Michael Harvey: The Board has the authority as I’ve stated to obviously take a look at the breadth and width of this decision and modify it and determine what they believe if your decision is to affirm, what constitutes a modification what doesn’t constitute a modification. Again, the example I am going to use, and I am not trying to direct the Board in any one direction. You’ve heard testimony this evening from the applicant that they believe the birthday parties are consistent with the SUP. They have provided documentation they think makes that argument, this Board could conceivably find that they will affirm a decision that there are certain aspects of rentals that are not consistent with the approved Special Use Permit excluding x, y, and z if that is your decision. You could one respect affirm portions of my decision while negating others. Dawn Brezina: Then those portions that are negated those would go to mediation? Is that correct? Tom Brown: No, that’s a separate issue. David Blankfard: It would be part of another Special Use Permit. Dawn Brezina: It would be a new Special Use Permit. Mark Micol: Mr. Chairman could we just take one issue at a time and start with the yoga instruction and then affirm that based on his comments and then special events, affirm or not affirm, and kind of go one at a time? Is that how you would do it? Dawn Brezina: We have to have a motion, there has to be a motion. Tom Brown: The way this is going the way it would play out, number one is we don’t believe mediation is not the route to go which that means we would close the public hearing then the discussion amongst ourselves will begin. We will look the zoning officer’s determination and then we will specify whether we affirm but we can modify. So if it’s a modification of the zoning officer determination then we can look at those specific events and see if we have a consensus on whether they should be included or not. That’s really the bottom line but we have to do it in conjunction with Section 8.7.1 of the Zoning Ordinance so we cannot deviate from the spirit or the word in the Zoning Ordinance, otherwise we are making policy. Would the sense of the Board be that we close the public hearing and then we decide on the merits of this case and the zoning officer’s determination?