OCPB minutes 040214 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 5/7/14 7 Pete Hallenbeck: If you went for a conditional use permit, they clearly define what you can and cannot do. The 323 process involves your neighbor’s input. 324 325 James Lea: Some of my neighbors do work at home on vehicles. I feel they have the right to take their garage and 326 service people’s cars if that is what they choose. 327 328 Paul Guthrie: We rent property in another county in this state and many times deal only by telephone and receive 329 mail back and forth about those rentals. Does that put us in a category to need a permit from Orange County to do 330 that business that takes place totally in another county? 331 332 Ashley Moncado: I would not think so. You don’t have people visit you on site and there is no advertisement on that 333 property. 334 335 Pete Hallenbeck: It has come up that large properties are favored and I think that is a natural outcome of the goal of 336 trying to have a balance because when you have a large property, you have to make a lot more noise when you are 337 on a large property. We have talked about enforcement and it is complaint driven. We have some idea of the 338 general approach or attitude of the county. Paul, I want to address your $90 fee is too much, my understanding is 339 that every time you apply for a permit in the county there is a fee and the goal is the person doing things in 340 generating pays for that as opposed to all the taxpayers subsidizing. On the $90 too much, this may be the nature of 341 the stuff I get into. There may be some businesses that are a substantial percentage you are spending to get into the 342 business but I think for a lot of people, you have a lot of other costs. I think the fee is reasonable. Herman, it is all 343 about the balance. I have read every page of these changes and I think this whole process has an incredible amount 344 of input from the Planning Board and the BOCC. I really like the major and minor home use. James, with your 345 comment, we can make a note of this and if you wish to vote against this and make a note of it, it will stand out. I like 346 the fact this protects the rural buffer by not allowing the major home occupations. I am happy to go with this 347 recommendation because it is a good step forward. There is always the opportunity to modify the UDO. 348 349 Tony Blake: Is there a regulation for home-based businesses involving hazardous material or above and beyond 350 what is stored at a residence. 351 352 Ashley Moncado: There is language in “Uses Not Permitted” that does not include all uses that would be unsuitable. 353 354 Michael Harvey: That is addressed in the UDO and other regulations. 355 356 James Lea: Comparing minor and major home occupations, I have a tax service and I am not on five acres of land 357 however, at certain times of the year, there may be 20 or more people to come to my house to get tax service, where 358 does my service fall under? 359 360 Ashley Moncado: Most likely, it would be minor. 361 362 James Lea: Then it limits the number of people who come to my house? 363 364 Ashley Moncado: Correct. You could operate the business but you could only have up to six-customer visit per day. 365 366 James Lea: Isn’t it that restrictive. This part to me is too restrictive. 367 368 Pete Hallenbeck: It gets back to the balance concept. You are concerned there may be some home occupations 369 that may have a peak load for relative short periods of time and this could keep those businesses from happening. 370 371 Andrea Rohrbacher: Where do corn mazes fit in? 372 373 Ashley Moncado: They would most likely be exempt because they are agritourism. 374 375