Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
833 <br />Gordon, to refer this item to-the Planning Board for a recommendation to be <br />-.returned to the Board of Commissioners on August 3rd; 1992. <br />,.,VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />3. ZONING ORDINANCE TEST AMENDMENTS <br />A_. HOME OCCUPATIONS ARTICLES 6.16.6 AND 22 <br />This item was presented by Mary Scearbo for the purpose of <br />receiving citizen comments. This proposed zoning ordinance text amendment <br />will create more performance-oriented standards for home occupations. The <br />substantive changes proposed in the amendment pertain to setbacks and square <br />footage limits for accessory structures on lots larger than 200,000 square <br />feet (Article 6.16.6.3). The proposed standards would allow greater <br />flexibility in the location of home occupation accessory buildings if the <br />site contained wooded areas or topographic features which provided effective <br />screening. In contrast, the location of structures in open areas would be <br />more restricted In some instances.. other proposed changes involve the use <br />of large existing structures for home occupations activities. The amendment <br />was originated by the Planning Staff to address problem situations which have <br />been encountered in administering home occupation -regulations. A recent <br />example involved a deep lot about 11 acres in size, with the residence <br />located almost 1000 feet from the road. Current regulations required the <br />home occupation structure to be located in an unsuitable location to the rear <br />of the residence. The desired location was. in a wooded area, several hundred <br />feet from the road. The home occupation could not be approved, even though. <br />the use would have been very heavily screened, and would not be visible from <br />the roadway. These proposed amendments begin a more comprehensive overhaul <br />of home occupation standards. The issues addressed at this time will resolve <br />situations which are more commonly encountered. Staff will be proposing in <br />a subsequent amendment changes to requirements for smaller lots, specific <br />standards related to traffic impacts, and additional standards for home <br />occupations which could potentially create nuisance impacts. <br />QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OR PLANNING BOARD <br />Commissioner Willhoit asked for clarification regarding the number <br />of persons who would be allowed to be employed in the-.home. Ms. Scearbo <br />indicated that' the deftnition is interpreted to mean that two full-time <br />persons (FTP) may be employed at any one time. That could include part-time <br />positions equaling two full--time positions. <br />Commissioner Gordon provided written comments on this text <br />amendment and will provide further details to the staff at a later date. <br />THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by <br />Commissioner Willhoit, to refer the proposed amendment to the Planning Board <br />for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner <br />than August 3, 1992. <br />VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />b. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROCEDURES <br />This item was presented by Planning Director Marvin Collins <br />for the purpose of receiving citizen comment on a proposed amendment to the <br />Subdivision Regulations. This procedure would change the certificate