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

Browse Search

.• DRAFT 268 Pete Hallenbeck: You are proposing that we not accept the planning director's recommendation? Is that correct? 269 270 Paul Guthrie: That would be the ultimate outcome but that was not my motion. My motion was we leave it on the 271 table. 272 273 Pete Hallenbeck: So you are saying we should not vote on it? So we are going to take a vote to not vote on it, is 274 that correct? 275 276 Paul Guthrie: If you pass the motion then it has to be brought up new. 277 278 MOTION made by Paul Guthrie to leave the recommendation on the table. Seconded by James Lea. 279 VOTE: 2 -4 (Pete Hallenbeck, Herman Staats, Tony Blake, Andrea Rohrbacher) Failed 280 281 MOTION made by Tony Blake with some reservation to accept the recommendation by staff on the major and minor 282 home occupation as presented and hopefully amended later. Seconded by Andrea Rohrbacher. 283 VOTE: 4 — 2 ( James Lea and Paul Guthrie) Passed 284 285 Herman Staats: The discussion was helpful. Whenever this goes to the public, if they understand staff is willing and 286 able to accomoodate them as best they can, I think that is important. 287 288 Craig Benedict: Part of our outreach will include scenarios, FAQs and we will try to use this input from the Board. 289 On the face, it may seem we are restricing something but we are actually liberalizing it. 290 291 Paul Guthrie: I voted no because I think it too broad, I think it is unenforceable. I think it discourages innovation and 292 business development in small businesses. I think it runs counter to the change and nature of work in America that 1 293 think is going to continue on a faster pace where work becomes more and more individualized. Finally, for the 294 planners in the room, I think Jane Jacobs would turn over in her grave. 295 296 James Lea: I just voted no because I believe it is too restrictive instead of promoting small business it is restricting 297 small business and I think it would be restrictive to a lot of people who are already in business. I don't think it is fair. 298 299 Pete Hallenbeck: I understand Paul and James' concerns but also I think we are going from incredibly restrictive to 300 less restrictive because it lets you do a lot more and that is a good step to take. It is important to get your concerns 301 noted but I hope that the whole thing doesn't get thrown out. James, with regard to the seasonal variance, we have 302 this concept about the art tour and the ability to come through and the farms having tours, it seems interesting to me 303 that we have this concept of this seasonal event that occurs where you have above normal traffic but that we are not 304 able to accommodate a tax business so perhaps the same spirit that allow for the annual art tours that is being 305 allowed could be applied to this. 306 * * * ** rol