Browse
Search
Agenda - 02-18-2014 - 5a
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2014
>
Agenda - 02-18-2014 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 02-18-2014 - 5a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/3/2015 10:35:23 AM
Creation date
6/3/2014 11:13:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Document Relationships
Minutes 02-18-2014
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
47
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
47 <br />DRAFT <br />109 <br />110 Pete Hallenbeck: My second comment on this is on the minor home occupation, the 750 sq. ft, limit is interesting, it <br />111 takes me out of the game for the sq. footage I have in my house. It takes room to have a machine shop and test <br />112 benches and rooms for parts and electronics and I don't think how much of your home you use is something that <br />113 impacts your neighbors. However, I'll also point out that as an ordinance it is pretty nice because if that really <br />114 bothered me I could apply for a major home occupation and there is a mechanism to do that. That brings me to my <br />115 last comments and I can't remember an ordinance that had so many lines in the sand that were being discussed. <br />116 We talked about sq. footage, number of trips, setbacks, what activity you can do, number of visits, size of vehicles, <br />117 and it is quite extraordinary for this Board to deliberate something that has so many different thresholds and lines in <br />118 the sand. I think it makes it a very difficult thing to discuss. Those are all my comments. Doesn't anybody have <br />119 anything thing else to add? <br />120 <br />121 <br />122 MOTION by Tony Blake to recommend to the County Commissioners to accept this recommendation with comments. <br />123 Seconded by James Lea. <br />124 VOTE: PASSED 7-1 (Guthrie opposed) <br />125 <br />126 Paul Guthrie: I believe that with this ordinance we are moving into an area that we are not prepared to deal with and <br />127 1 think that while the intention is good, if you read the language carefully, especially when you start picking up the <br />128 LIDO and reading the references, that it exposes the County to some great difficulty, that's point one. Point two, due <br />129 to the current economic situation, the more and more independent, small businesses erupting whether they start in <br />130 the garage in California and become a billion dollar corporation or whether they start in a garage in Orange County <br />131 and become a fifty thousand dollar organization, this can and may, if not administered in a very careful way, an <br />132 inhibition to economic development and to small business. I would much prefer to see the County develop a small <br />133 business license system using some of these definitions than to smuggle it through under a regulation of the use of <br />134 an individual residential property. With my own experience, two different enterprises in our family, one which falls <br />135 under this and one which does not, I would vote no. <br />136 * * * * ** <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.