04/24/2008 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

fact that the facility being built at Hanley Hall was going to be a "for -fee" facility, that they needed a place for residential treatment facility at no fees. Attorney Henderson referenced the one-year listing agreement with Lowe Realty, starting in December 2005 and ending December 2006, to show there was proof of activity that the owner of the property, New Horizons, was attempting to find a buyer for the property. He believed that the proof that they submitted concerning that listing of the property for sale, rebuts any presumption that there was an intent to abandon on the part of New Horizons. And that, he contends, fits squarely within the Lake Worth case discussed earlier. Attorney Henderson felt that the activity regarding repair to the property that took place from the end of the hurricanes of 2004 and at various points in between, also shows a lack of intent to abandon the property, and that it fits squarely within the Bow Point Case cited earlier, where the motel owner was conducting repairs for a period of 18 months and the city in that case was trying to shut them down because he had gone over the one year. Therefore, that should, on the issues of cessation only, lead the Board to a conclusion that there was no intent to abandon the use of this property by New Horizons. Adjunct to that, he said, there was the hurricane ordinance, and they have submitted proof that there were in fact three hurricanes during that period of time (Frances, Jeanne & Wilma), all declared natural disasters. Therefore they think this property qualifies under that ordinance; and as Director Boling indicated, the ordinance has been interpreted consistently in this County as excusing an owner of a nonconforming use of structure from the application of the one-year cessation period. He pointed out that in the John McCoy letter dated October 3, 2006, it is shown that staff relied heavily upon that ordinance; and relied more on that than on the question of whether there was a complete cessation of use of the property for a period of one year. Attorney Henderson, in conclusion, reminded the Board that he had mentioned earlier the concept of equitable estoppel. He remarked that he did not have a realistic expectation that April 24, 2008 48 Special Call Meeting (The Source)