03-18-2002 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

U2323 Home Occupations March 4,2002 Page 2 License vs CUP Planning Commission has requested a comparison of the licensing and conditional use pcmiit methods for a second level of regulation. The following table provides such a comparison: Home Occupations, Level 2: 1 Jeensing VS Conditional Use Permit licensing CUP Public Notification Optional; Orono has not previously required it; i.c. public input is minimal or non-existent Required, 350’; public input is cncouiaged Reviewing Body Staff & Council only Staff. Planning Commission & Council Term of Approval Usually one year, license can be reviewed if there are complainis No term, continues in effect until use ceases or changes. Usually only reviewed upon complaint; could specify a review period in conditions Approval isvuvd to/for:Property owner (person)CUP issued for the use and goes with the property; not to a panicular person Ability to attach • conditions specific to the approval Special conditions can be ''.ttached, but usually limited to standard code requirements Conditions intended to limit or mitigate the potential negative impacts of the use are commonly attached Ability to revoke Council can revoke, licensee usually will be allowed a hearing before C ouncil action to revoke Unless periodic review or review upon cornpiaint is a condition of original CUP approval, CUP can't be reviewed except by petition of 75% of landowners within 1000*; Council can revoke if a violation of the original conditions is found, or more conditions can be attached... Application Fee (2002 Fee Schedule) S50 initial; $30 unnuallv thereafter $175 applica»:iin fee for “Residential Accessory Use CUP” Degree of administrative effort required Initial review may require a moderate amount of staff time; subsequent annual renew als require minimal staff effort Initial review usually requires substantial staff time, but there arc no annual reviews