Agenda - 05-08-2014 - 7c - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

M.- DRAFT 108 home occupation easier. There are structures that already exist as part of the home occupation that may not comply 109 with setback. We will not require people to bring those structures into compliance with code if adopted. 110 111 Pete Hallenbeck: In general, you can't shut down a currently legal operation with a zoning change. 112 113 Paul Guthrie: Has there been any consideration by the county attorney as to whether or not the way you have 114 separated this proposed ordinance that it violates the Equal Protection of Laws under the United States Constitution? 115 116 Michael Harvey: You would have to ask the county attorney but I will tell you and Ashley will confirm it, the county 117 attorney reviewed and signed off on this proposal. 118 119 Paul Guthrie: Even though two activities in two different locations and the sole difference in permitting and non - 120 permitting is the size of the property they exist on. 121 122 Michael Harvey: We currently have that same distinction in zoning districts throughout the county and it doesn't 123 violate the equal protection clause. Different zoning districts, different scenarios of the property breed different 124 standards and evaluation. That is already a constant within zoning ordinances throughout the county. 125 126 Paul Guthrie: Once the ordinance is passed, how will the organization communicate to the general public these new 127 standards? 128 129 Ashley Moncado: We will provide a source on the county website through our division with the new information to 130 contact me directly regarding questions. We will also have a press release to the local newspaper and a possible 131 outreach meeting. Based on how home occupations operate on a case -by -case basis it may be more difficult to do 132 one mass meeting because a lot will be a case -by -case basis on how it will affect an individual. If adopted we are 133 proposing a delay in implementation until July 1 to give staff time to get the information out. If it goes to May 8, we 134 are looking at a delay until July 1 for implementation. 135 136 Paul Guthrie: This is a permit fee, has there been consideration whether it could be considered tax? 137 138 Craig Benedict: It is not based on the value of the property. It is based on what the cost is to provide a review of the 139 proposal. It is based on personnel and time it is not based on property values. 140 141 Paul Guthrie: So you can document the average cost to review? 142 143 Craig Benedict: Yes. That is how we based it. 144 145 Michael Harvey: I would like to add the elected officials of the county set the fees not the planning staff. 146 147 Paul Guthrie: That is irrelevant to the question. 148 149 Michael Harvey: I disagree and I would refute that answer. 150 151 Paul Guthrie: As a fee it has to have some basis in fact to stand as a fee. So, if they make the judgment, unless 152 you can refute their judgment, then that brings it into jeopardy. On the other hand if you are comfortable that you 153 have data to support that fee, that makes it a different thing. I guarantee sooner or later, this will end up in court. It 154 may be later and usually when they end up in court, they are the nastiest kind of case that really isn't what anybody 155 ever thought about before. I am saying you are going to have to manage this and the ducks need to be all in a row. 156 Many of us have been through that and I can tell you that you don't want to get into that situation. Then you become 157 the bad guys on the block and that makes it more difficult to do all kinds of everything else here. 158 159 James Lea: On page 149, why is automotive repair services and detailing not considered a home occupation? 160