OCPB agenda 040214 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 2/5/14 3 109 Pete Hallenbeck: My second comment on this is on the minor home occupation, the 750 sq. ft. limit is interesting, it 110 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 111 benches and rooms for parts and electronics and I don’t think how much of your home yo u use is something that 112 impacts your neighbors. However, I’ll also point out that as an ordinance it is pretty nice because if that really 113 bothered me I could apply for a major home occupation and there is a mechanism to do that. That brings me to my 114 last comments and I can’t remember an ordinance that had so many lines in the sand that were being discussed. 115 We talked about sq. footage, number of trips, setbacks, what activity you can do, number of visits, size of vehicles, 116 and it is quite extraordinary for this Board to deliberate something that has so many different thresholds and lines in 117 the sand. I think it makes it a very difficult thing to discuss. Those are all my comments. Doesn’t anybody have 118 anything thing else to add? 119 120 121 MOTION by Tony Blake to recommend to the County Commissioners to accept this recommendation with comments. 122 Seconded by James Lea. 123 VOTE: PASSED 7-1 (Guthrie opposed) 124 125 Paul Guthrie: I believe that with this ordinance we are moving into an area that we are not prepared to deal with and 126 I think that while the intention is good, if you read the language carefully, especially when you start picking up the 127 UDO and reading the references, that it exposes the County to some great difficulty, that’s point one. Point two, due 128 to the current economic situation, the more and more independent, small businesses erupting whether they start in 129 the garage in California and become a billion dollar corporation or whether they start in a garage in Orange County 130 and become a fifty thousand dollar organization, this can and may, if not administered in a very careful way, be an 131 inhibition to economic development and to small business. I would much prefer to see the County develop a small 132 business license system using some of these definitions than to smuggle it through under a regulation of the use of 133 an individual residential property. With my own experience, two different enterprises in our family, one which falls 134 under this and one which does not, I would vote no. 135 136 ******137 ____________________________________ Pete Hallenbeck, Chair 175