Agenda - 5-a - Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Table of Permitted Uses

Browse Search

62 DRAFT 271 Michael Harvey asserted that it would be the totality of all the definitions, standards and framework that would 272 establish the County with the authority to say they are a place of worship and reiterated it would have to be done on a 273 case-by-case basis. 274 275 Randy Marshall asked whether the Rams club would be considered a place of worship. Mr. Harvey stated that for 276 some people, yes, but it would be considered a club with respect to the construction of the UDO. Randy stated that 277 that was his pointed and commented that it was in the mind of the beholder. Mr. Harvey replied that he understood 278 but stated that it would be a club based on the current definition. 279 280 Alexander Gregory remarked that he thought there to enough logic there in the case-by-case basis. 281 282 Michael Harvey commented that Randy had a valid point but stated there would be larger issues involved if 283 everything remained in one central category. He explained it would be difficult to handle and try to make exclusions 284 instead of just splitting it out. 285 286 Craig Benedict commented that he felt as though there was something missing in regard to someone wanting to put 287 an assembly facility for retreat uses in a commercial area. He stated that this type of situation would have previously 288 been captured by the general category. 289 290 Michael Harvey remarked that if the board wanted to add retreat center as a permitted use in any commercial district, 291 they could do so and then staff could incorporate. Mr. Harvey recommended that since the board was already going 292 to ask the County Attorney for direction prior to voting, that they might want to add for the staff to consider allowing 293 retreat centers in commercial zoning districts as well. Mr. Benedict mentioned that they sort of had that and stated 294 he couldn't think of anything else to call it in the table. 295 296 Michael Harvey spoke on special events and mentioned that it was split out. He explained there was now a 297 distinction between rural special events and special events and stated that rural special events by definition have to 298 happen on a farm. He continued to page 69(A)through 73 and stated there were only formatting changes. He 299 then reminded everyone of the provision he spoke of earlier regarding the burden of persuasion in section 5.3.2. He 300 then moved to page 74 which eliminates all the regulatory standards for governing how we approve dorms,fraternity, 301 and sororities. He stated 74 (A) had changes in formatting. He briefly spoke of the change performed on page 79 302 dealing with Class 2 kennels and explained any changes that occurred. 303 304 Michael Harvey then guided the board to pages 79 through 83 regarding short term rentals. He said they had 305 lumped everything into term short-term rentals and explained that they had eliminated all the discretionary standards 306 of evaluation per the attorney's requirements. Additionally, Mr. Harvey mentioned they had eliminated some of the 307 language listed for short term rental large referencing that it had to demonstrate a compliance with parking which 308 was already mandated by the ordinance. 309 310 Lydia Wegman, asked Mr. Harvey if he meant for rentals. Mr. Harvey replied, yes and explained that a site plan 311 would have to be submitted and it would have to demonstrate compliance with the code. 312 313 Michael Harvey stated there has been questions raised about how this impacts Airbnb. Mr. Harvey stated that the 314 current ordinance does not allow for nonhost occupied structures in the residential zoning districts. He stated, if you 315 want to go through a Special Use Permit,you can technically have a non-host occupied structure, but you can't have 316 an Airbnb. Furthermore, if you don't have a host then it's not a short-term rental and therefore is not permitted. In 317 fact, Mr. Harvey stated, it would be a nonhost occupied short-term rental which is not permitted in residential districts 318 and that is consistent with the current code. This does not impact the rental of a house for use as a single-family 319 residence. 320 321 Randy Marshall, does this knock down the arboretums desire to use that house as an Airbnb 322 323 Michael Harvey conveyed that there would still be existing impacts on the Keith Arboretum from the current code. 324 Mr. Harvey said that it didn't add any heightened level of complexity to their ability to do that and questioned whether 325 or not the lease allows it to happen in the first place.