5/16/1989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ItAY 16 1989 BOOK 76 P,iGE 841 the site plan for expansion was approved (May 17, 1988) show that the Commissioners seem to be amiable to grandfathering in those persons who were employed at that time irrespective of whether or not they were on-site family members Commissioner Bird felt that the argument that will be made today is the definition of "conducted" in that section of Ordinance 87-22 where it states that the activity is to be "conducted only by members of the family living within the residence". He anticipated that Mr. Kirrie will argue that family members will "supervise" the activities and that it doesn't mean that everyone who works there has to be family member. Administrator Chandler agreed that this seems to be coming down to a matter of interpretation and judgement. Commissioner Scurlock asked if Administrator Chandler had determined that there was a good faith effort by Mr. Kirrie throughout this process to go ahead and procure his necessary approvals and actually begin construction. Administrator Chandler stated that there were no problems in that respect. Mr. Kirrie had submitted his site plan and plans for building permits and as we got into our discussions, there were no problems other than trying to resolve those questions that were open. Commissioner Scurlock assumed then that staff would have no objection to a site plan extension. The other questions are 1) Did we impede his orderly progress in terms of the impact fees? 2) Did he vest? and, 3) Was there anything that we caused? Administrator Chandler advised that Mr. Kirrie submitted his plans in December, 1988, and the new rate would have kicked in on March 1, 1989. When Mr. Kirrie approached him the first part of February, he recognized the critical time element as it relates to the traffic impact fees, and made the time to make sure that we could get into it and try to resolve it in advance so there 16