Browse
Search
Agenda - 05-20-2014 - 7a
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2014
>
Agenda - 05-20-2014 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 05-20-2014 - 7a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/5/2016 3:55:21 PM
Creation date
5/16/2014 12:42:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/20/2014
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
7a
Document Relationships
Minutes 05-20-2014
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2014
ORD-2014-007 Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment Related to Home Occupations
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2010-2019\2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
69
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
C <br /> 65 <br /> Approved 5/7/14 <br /> 55 Andrea Rohrbacher I don't know how this will be enforced if someone were new to the area and decided they want <br /> 56 to start a home business, I think they would go ahead and set up an office and start doing what they do through the <br /> 57 home with a small office space and I don't think that would have an impact as we try to address this ordinance but it <br /> 58 seems we have put a lot of work into this and there are a lot of regulations that have been thought but will it <br /> 59 accomplish what we want it to do with respect to being able to avoid the folks that were not aware and found out they <br /> 60 were in violation. <br /> 61 <br /> 62 Pete Hallenbeck: So, some of your concern is for someone who had a smaller operation, one office with just <br /> 63 themselves,would they get into a situation where they were in violation and were not aware of it and how would that <br /> 64 enforcement occur and what would happen to them. Ashley, if you have one person with no employees it wouldn't <br /> 65 be. <br /> 66 <br /> 67 Ashley Moncado It would most likely be waived,and you would not have to go through the permitting process. <br /> 68 <br /> 69 Pete Hallenbeck: It would not be until you had employees showing up for work that things would kick in. <br /> 70 <br /> 71 Ashley Moncado Visitors,signage, and then these standards would be in effect. <br /> 72 <br /> 73 Andrea Rohrbacher What if you had no employees and offered craft classes and had twelve cars in front. <br /> 74 <br /> 75 Ashley Moncado Then you would have to go through this process. <br /> 76 <br /> 77 Andrea Rohrbacher How would that person know that? <br /> 78 <br /> 79 Ashley Moncado. Unfortunately, we would have a difficult time reaching them. We are going to provide outreach <br /> 80 and have education to let residences know of these changes. But in the situation you described we wouldn't know <br /> 81 unless a complaint was received or they contacted our office. <br /> 82 <br /> 83 Pete Hallenbeck: Someone involved in a home business and unaware they were in violation, it will be complaint <br /> 84 driven before someone finds out. At that point,the planning staff doesn't show up to put that person in jail but inform <br /> 85 them of the process. The goal in the planning office is that if someone complained,the person applied for the permit <br /> 86 and things would be great. The only problem would be if someone found out they were in violation and would not <br /> 87 apply for the permit then it goes to another level. <br /> 88 <br /> 89 Ashley Moncado. There is no fine. <br /> 90 <br /> 91 Michael Harvey The typical proceeding is educational first; we work together to correct it. If you choose not to <br /> 92 comply, then we would do an enforcement action which states you comply or else, as with any violation with the <br /> 93 code. It is incumbent upon the property owner to do their due diligence and determine what regulations, if any, are <br /> 94 applicable for anything they are proposing to do. <br /> 95 <br /> 96 Tony Blake: It seems the'structure built with suitable residential construction materials to resemble'is subjective and <br /> 97 could use a statement that says'compliments'or'the same as adjacent or neighborhood construction' I think one of <br /> 98 the reasons for this is to get people who have home base businesses to come into compliance and possibly pay <br /> 99 taxes and be part of the structure than flying under the wire. I am curious as to if there is a non-conforming existing <br /> 100 use where someone has been there for a while and now with this ordinance,can you make them? <br /> 101 <br /> 102 Michael Harvey As we have stipulated during the public hearing, we do have non-conforming regulations in the <br /> 103 UDO that specify that a use that was legal at the time it was created made illegal by amendment to the code is <br /> 104 allowed to continue, there are limits. This regulation liberalizes several existing situations that make establishing a <br /> 105 home occupation easier There are structures that already exist as part of the home occupation that may not comply <br /> 106 with setback. We will not require people to bring those structures into compliance with code if adopted <br /> 107 <br /> 108 Pete Hallenbeck: In general,you can't shut down a currently legal operation with a zoning change. <br /> 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.