OCPB agenda 040214 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 2/5/14 1 MINUTES 1 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 2 JANUARY 8, 2014 3 REGULAR MEETING 4 5 6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Hallenbeck (Chair), Cheeks Township Representative; Maxecine Mitchell, At-Large 7 Bingham Township; James Lea, Cedar Grove Township Representative; Herman Staats, At-Large, Cedar Grove 8 Township; Paul Guthrie, At-Large Chapel Hill Township; Buddy Hartley, Little River Township Representative; Tony 9 Blake, Bingham Township Representative; Johnny Randall, At-Large Chapel Hill Township; 10 11 12 MEMBERS ABSENT: Lisa Stuckey, Chapel Hill Township Representative; Andrea Rohrbacher, At-Large Chapel Hill 13 Township; Vacant- Hillsborough Township Representative; Vacant – Eno Township Representative 14 15 16 STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor; Perdita Holtz, 17 Special Projects Coordinator; Ashley Moncado, Special Projects Planner; Tina Love, Administrative Assistant II 18 19 ****** 20 Agenda Item 8: Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendment – Home Occupations: To 21 make a recommendation to the BOCC on Planning Board – and Planning Director – initiated 22 amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) to change the existing standards 23 for home occupations, modify and clarify existing regulations and definitions associated with 24 home occupations, and allow for the exemption of special events organized or affiliated with 25 a government or non-profit agency. This item was heard at the December 4, 2013 Planning 26 Board meeting. 27 Presenter: Ashley Moncado, Special Projects Planner 28 29 Ashley Moncado reviewed abstract. 30 31 Paul Guthrie: First the disclaimer that I give every time that we in our household have an interest in small business. 32 I have had a lot of questions with this and I have one particular thing that I want to raise which is not new but I want 33 to raise it again. That is for minor home occupations, no matter whether you have one customer per year or 500, 34 you have to pay $90 to the planning department for the privilege of having a license. I have real problems with that 35 with certain occupations those defined as minor home occupations. I have a little bit of problem with the 36 requirement of a plot plan if it has to be done professionally. I had suggested earlier that it should be sufficient in a 37 residential home to use what is on the GIS system as a sketch of the property and indicate on that whether or not 38 that would be viable. I would hope there could be some accommodation especially for extremely small line of 39 business so that it doesn’t become a big paperwork jungle in order to file. 40 41 Pete Hallenbeck: Well, Mr. Harvey do you have a comment on that? 42 43 Michael Harvey: As I’ve indicated before, a plot plan is a simple drawing that you can use the GIS map system, it’s 44 actually listed that way in the Unified Development Ordinance. It’s not a professionally prepared site plan. The $90 45 dollar fee is a one-time application fee. There are application fees for everything you have to do and this is a one-46 time fee that you have to pay. I don’t believe it is burdensome and I don’t believe it is unnecessary and I believe we 47 are within our right to charge the fee. 48 49 Paul Guthrie: I’m not going to follow with the natural comment other than to say, I believe that to be a burden on 50 people trying to start a small business in a residence and I think as a matter of public policy, given the nature of the 51 changing of the economics in this society, that we ought to be very careful about how we do this. That was one set 52 of comments. My personal opinion, and I think everybody has heard me before on the record, my personal opinion 53 is you will have massive ignoring of this. What will come will be selective enforcement. I’m not comfortable with 54 Excerpt of Minutes 173