03-18-2002 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19,2002 6:30 o ’clock p.m. (112333 Proposed Zoning Code Amendment - Home Occupations, Continued) Planning Commission in 1998. Gaffron noted those revisions have been incorporated into the new draft before the Planning Conunission tonight. Gaffron recommended the public hearing be reopened to see if there are any public comments. Gaffron stated if the Planning Commission would like to see an additional category for licensing or conditional uses, some additional work would need to be done by Staff prior to its approval. Smith inquired whether the licensing or conditional use category would allow’ the City to have some authority over those businesses which may not be able to meet all the enteria outlined in the ordinance. Gaffron stated it would. Hawn inquired whether there were any public comments relating to this application, There were no public comments. Kluth noted StaiThas listed a number of restrictions on home occupations without specifically identifying any particular home occupation. Kluth inquired if a resident is unable to meet those requirements whether they would be able to apply for a license or a cond fionul use permit. Gaffron stated if a business does not meet those standards outlined in the ordinance, they would not be eligible for a home occupation. Kluth stated he would be in favor of including language in the ordinance which would allow a home occupation to apply for a license or a conditumal use permit if they do not comply w ith all the critena. Kluth noted that the state licenses home day care and would not be covered under this ordinance. Gaffron stated home day care is licensed through the state and not by the City, w ith the City being required to allow home day care. Mabusth stated the Planning Commission has not thoroughly discussed w hether a conditional use permit or a license w ould be more appropriate in terms of enforcing any possible violations. Mabustli inquired whether Stall'prefers one over the other. Mabusth slated in her view she would prefer to see a conditional use permit. Gaffron stated one of the benefits of a condittonal use permit is that the Council would only see the application once unless it becomes a problem. Gaffron stated if a license is required, the Applicant would be required to apply once a year. Gaffron stated if the City would like to see a particular business on an annual basis, that requirement could also be included in the conditional use permit. llawTi stated she has concerns how the conditional use permit will be written, noting (he City does not know’ w hat types of businesses w ill be applying for a conditional use permit. Gaffron stated Orono ’s Zoning Code does not acknowledge what is called a “special use permit*’, which the statutes may allow' the City to do without having to meet conditional use permit mandatory approval standards. PAGE 4