OCPB minutes 120215 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 1/6/2016 4 Michael Harvey: For the same reasons we regulate other businesses. We want to ensure there is a balance allowing 156 for reasonable use of property. Sexually oriented businesses have identified secondary impacts that can affect 157 adjacent property owners. What these regulations are designed to do is ensure they can be developed and not have 158 an impact on those identified sensitive land uses. 159 160 Maxecine Mitchell: Are we legally able to restrict alcohol consumption from certain businesses? 161 162 Michael Harvey: State law grants local government the authority to regulate sexually oriented businesses including 163 establishing regulations governing the consumption of alcohol. 164 165 Laura Nicholson: Are there any zoned properties in Orange County that would allow this? 166 167 Michael Harvey: Yes there are a few properties zoned that could allow for the development of a sexually oriented 168 business. 169 170 Maxecine Mitchell: So if these lots are developed, any new sexually oriented businesses will need to get a property 171 rezoned for this kind of land use? 172 173 Michael Harvey: That is correct if available property is developed for such a use. There is, however, available land 174 area that could be rezoned to support such development. 175 176 James Lea: Will there be any substantial economic development impact from approval of the text amendment? 177 178 Michael Harvey: It depends on your point of view. There are those that might argue this regulation may impede the 179 development of a commercial venture. There is also a possibility local businesses may have an aversion to having a 180 sexually oriented business locating near them because of perception concerns and a desire not to want to see it. 181 From my standpoint, however, I believe the proposed regulation is reasonable. 182 183 Lydia Wegman: Does anyone have any further questions or concerns before we consider a motion? 184 185 Laura Nicholson: I just wanted to say that I think you all did a great job of including everyone’s concerns from the 186 quarterly public hearing. 187 188 Patricia Roberts: I still have concerns with regulating such businesses, especially how it is listed in the amendment. I 189 feel that these regulations are strict. 190 191 Paul Guthrie: I don’t feel as if this text amendment is substantiated from a legal standpoint. 192 193 Lydia Wegman: If there aren’t any other questions let’s move forward with our first motion. 194 195 MOTION made by Buddy Hartley to approve changes. Herman Staats seconded. 196 VOTE: 7 – 2 (Paul Guthrie and Patricia Roberts) 197 198 Lydia Wegman: Can you please state your reason for opposition? 199 200 Paul Guthrie: I disagree for the reason previously stated. 201 202 Patricia Roberts: I don’t think we should be so heavily restricting sexually oriented businesses. 203 204 Lydia Wegman: Should we go around the room to see if there are any concerns making the recommendations to the 205 BOCC? 206 207 Maxecine Mitchell: I recommend it. 208