My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-18-2002 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2002
>
03-18-2002 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/16/2023 3:34:33 PM
Creation date
2/16/2023 3:31:05 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
320
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
To: <br />From: <br />Date: <br />Subject: <br />PC WORK SESSION - Friday, March 15, 2002 <br />8:00 a.m. - Council Chambers <br />Chair Hawn and Planning Commissioners <br />Mike Gaffron, Planning Director <br />March 4, 2002 <br />t^2333 - Amend Home Occupation Standards - Section 10.20, Subd. 4 <br />- Draft Ordinance For Review and Recommendation <br />- Additional Discussion re; Options of CUP or License <br />List of Exhibits <br />A - Table - Sampling of other cities’ regulator)' structures <br />B - State Statutes 462.357, Subd. Ic, le - Amortization of Use; Nonconfonnitics <br />C - State Statutes 462.3597 - Interim Uses <br />D - Draft Ordinance 2-15-02 <br />E - Staff memo of 2-15-02 <br />F - Staff memo of 1 1-2-01 <br />G - Staff memo of 7-3-01 <br />H - Staff memo of 6-20-01 <br />I - List of Home Occupations in Orono including Licensing History <br />Planning Commission reviewed this it"m on February 1 9 and tabled it pending additional discussion <br />regarding a second tier of regulation. This vvould involve cither licensing or a CUP for those home <br />occupations that have potential impacts on a neighborhood. Planning Commission requested that <br />staff provide additional material regarding the merits and constraints of both the CUP and licensing <br />options, as well as the ramifications of‘grandfathering ’ existing uses. <br />I,cvcls of Regulation <br />In reviewing how other cities regulate home occupations, it is clear that there is a wide range of <br />methods currently m use. Of 12 cities sampled in the metro area, a majority have two levels of <br />regulation. The first or lowest level is t>pically the establishment of home occupations as an allowed <br />accessory use, with no pennit or license required. The second level is most commonly reserx ed for <br />those uses which involve greater potential neighborhood impacts, such as commercial \elude <br />storage. The second level is administered in a variety of w ays among the sampled cities, including <br />licensing, CUP or ‘Special Use Pennit’, and in some cases an interim Use Permit. The use of <br />‘Conditional Use Permit’ and ‘Special Use Pennit’ is interchangeable and they are considered as <br />identical under the law-; some cities don’t list conditional uses, they list special uses. <br />The Interim Use Permit is authorized by Minnesota Statutes as a method to allow what would <br />otherwise be a iion-confonning use for a limited period, commonly used by cities with staged <br />development plans to allow temporary uses of land before it is developed. Three of the tw clve cifies <br />sampled (Plvniouth, Lakeville and Woodbury) use an Interim Use license or permit for their second <br />level of regulation, suggesting that such use is intendt 1 to be of a short term.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.