OCPB minutes 040214 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 5/7/14 8 Pete Hallenbeck: At this point let’s see if anyone cares to move for a recommendation to accept the planning 376 director’s recommendation and we can take a vote on it. James, this is where you can make a decision to say no 377 and I want to emphasize that commissioners do pay attention to these. You are worried about seasonal variances 378 and you believe things related to automobiles should be allowed. 379 380 James Lea: I would like to make it part of the record that I am concerned about that. I think it should be allowed. I 381 understand if you are in the city there may be concerns. Also, with the major and minor home occupation, I have 382 problems with some of them. 383 384 MOTION made by Paul Guthrie that the proposal lie on the table. Seconded by James Lea. 385 386 Pete Hallenbeck: You are proposing that we not accept the planning director’s recommendation? Is that correct? 387 388 Paul Guthrie: That would be the ultimate outcome but that was not my motion. My motion was we leave it on the 389 table. 390 391 Pete Hallenbeck: So you are saying we should not vote on it? So we are going to take a vote to not vote on it, is 392 that correct? 393 394 Paul Guthrie: If you pass the motion then it has to be brought up new. 395 396 MOTION made by Paul Guthrie to leave the recommendation on the table. Seconded by James Lea. 397 VOTE: 2 – 4 (Pete Hallenbeck, Herman Staats, Tony Blake, Andrea Rohrbacher) Failed 398 399 MOTION made by Tony Blake with some reservation to accept the recommendation by staff on the major and minor 400 home occupation as presented and hopefully amended later. Seconded by Andrea Rohrbacher. 401 VOTE: 4 – 2 ( James Lea and Paul Guthrie) Passed 402 403 Herman Staats: The discussion was helpful. Whenever this goes to the public, if they understand staff is willing and 404 able to accomondate them as best they can, I think that is important. 405 406 Craig Benedict: Part of our outreach will include scenarios, FAQs and we will try to use this input from the Board. 407 On the face, it may seem we are restricing something but we are actually liberalizing it. 408 409 Paul Guthrie: I voted no because I think it too broad, I think it is unenforceable. I think it discourages innovation and 410 business development in small businesses. I think it runs counter to the change and nature of work in America that I 411 think is going to continue on a faster pace where work becomes more and more individualized. Finally, for the 412 planners in the room, I think Jane Jacobs would turn over in her grave. 413 414 James Lea: I just voted no because I believe it is too restrictive instead of promoting small business it is restricting 415 small business and I think it would be restrictive to a lot of people who are already in business. I don’t think it is fair. 416 417 Pete Hallenbeck: I understand Paul and James’ concerns but also I think we are going from incredibly restrictive to 418 less restrictive because it lets you do a lot more and that is a good step to take. It is important to get your concerns 419 noted but I hope that the whole thing doesn’t get thrown out. James, with regard to the seasonal variance, we have 420 this concept about the art tour and the ability to come through and the farms having tours, it seems interesting to me 421 that we have this concept of this seasonal event that occurs where you have above normal traffic but that we are not 422 able to accommodate a tax business so perhaps the same spirit that allow for the annual art tours that is being 423 allowed could be applied to this. 424 425 426 AGENDA ITEM 10: JOINT PLANNING LAND USE PLAN AND AGREEMENT: To receive educational information on the 427 Joint Planning Land Use Plan and Agreement, a joint planning effort between Orange County 428 and the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro that was adopted in the mid-1980s. The purpose 429