OCPB agenda 020117 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

ii. Allows for temporary residential units, including recreational vehicles (RV) and tiny homes constructed to the RV standard, for up to a 180-day occupancy; iii. References the various state and federal construction standards for temporary and permanent units; and iv. Clarifies utility connection requirements for permanent and temporary residential units, and v. Amends the Comprehensive Plan, specifically Appendix F, to change references of the Mobile Home Park Conditional Zoning (MHP-CZ) district to Home Park Conditional Zoning (HP-CZ) district consistent with the proposed UDO text amendment. For more background on this amendment please refer to Attachment 1. A summary of the recommended changes designed to address legal sufficiency concerns are: a. Section 2.9.2 Conditional Zoning District – rewording to maintain language consistency within this section of the UDO. b. Section 5.2.1 Table of Permitted Uses General Uses – eliminating references to the ‘temporary residential use’ category within the table. The Attorney is concerned the proposed language is too ambiguous and outside the scope of the approved UDO amendment outline form. c. Section 5.2.2 Table of Permitted Uses Economic Development – eliminating the above mentioned reference from the EDD table of permitted uses. d. Section 5.4.4 Temporary Use of a Residential Mobile Home – staff is eliminating references to ‘temporary residential uses’. e. Section 5.5.4 Mobile Home Parks – Clarifying and standardizing the use of the terms ‘space’ ; ‘ stand’ ; ‘stall’ ; and ‘utility stand’ within this Section. The Attorney prefers one term, specifically ‘space’, when referencing the physical area where a mobile home or temporary housing unit may be placed. f. Article 10 Definitions – Revisions to the definition of Home Park and Mobile Home Park to reflect recommended changes in nomenclature. Proposed text amendment language for both the UDO and Comprehensive Plan changes can be found in Attachment 5 within a “track changes” format. As previously indicated staff has highlighted changes from the original, approved, amendment package in yellow. Planning Director’s Recommendation: The Planning Director again recommends approval of the Statement of Consistency, indicating the amendments are reasonable and in the public interest, contained in Attachment 4 and the proposed amendment package as contained in Attachment 5. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Consideration and approval will not create the need for additional funding for the provision of County services. Existing staff, included in the Departmental staffing budget, will accomplish the work required to process this amendment. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Planning Director recommends the Planning Board: 22