Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Home Occupation Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Heated objections and facility concerns mark hearing on Richmond Township assessor's home-occupation variance
Summary
Patricia O'Neal sought an exemption to allow more non-household employees at her Richmond Township home office; about 20 objections, testimony from township officials about limited space and data-security concerns, and a history of a resolved violation led the hearing officer to continue the matter for more evidence.
A McHenry County hearing officer continued a petition by Patricia O'Neal requesting a variance to allow up to three non-household employees at her home (9903 West Hills Drive, Richmond) rather than the one employee allowed under the county’s home-occupation rules. The petition references the McHenry County Unified Development Ordinance and a prior violation (RFS25-016) for operating a home occupation with more than one employee, which staff said was closed after seasonal activity ended so the petitioner could seek a variance.
Approximately 20 objections were filed and discussed. Richmond Township supervisor Adam Mets testified that the township building is about 30 by 60 feet with a small assessor office (roughly 10 by 12 feet) and that bringing additional employees into the township building would create operational and security problems. Trustee Scott (Fred) described how the township boardroom and transportation staff use the space during daytime hours and said the assessor’s work requires room and safeguards. Township witnesses said the township pays for phone, internet and certain equipment but not for housing the assessor’s computers at the residence.
County staff explained that home-occupation regulations typically permit the landowner plus one outside employee; staff also said the property is heavily vegetated and parking appears to accommodate two to six cars and recommended checking with the health department about restroom capacity for seasonal employees. Attorneys and supporters for the petition argued the lack of alternative township office space and the technical/security costs of moving multiple computers justified the variance.
Hearing officer Mcernney said several factual and legal issues — the adequacy of township space, the prior violation’s resolution, parking and public-access impacts, and security/cost issues regarding assessor computers — required more evidence and input. He indicated the matter will be continued so the parties can submit additional documentation.
Next steps: The hearing officer continued the petition and asked parties to provide supporting evidence about space availability, security alternatives for sensitive data, and any mitigation measures; any recommendation will be forwarded to the McHenry County Board.
