09-18-1995 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINLTI-S OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 18, 1995 (#7 - #2061 Ame Wasbcrg - Continued) Lind, -list commented that the application was a difficult proposal and suggested tabling the application until the applicant was present Schroeder nK)ved, Lindquist seconded, to table Application #2061 until the applicant was present Ayes 6, Nays 0. («S) #2062 TED ROZEBOOM/JOSEPHINE KNUDSON. 2967/2965 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARUNCES > Pt’BLIC HEARING 10:02-10:13 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The applicant, Ted Rozeboom, was present GafTron reported that the application is a joint request for variances to certain perfotmance standards of the home occupation use in the 1/2 acre, LR-IC, single family lakeshore residential zoning district The request is to allow a home occupation to occur on a tax parcel not owned by the home occupation applicant, in a building not occupied by the home occupation applicant, and in a building wlwre the entrance to the home occupation is not gained from within the structure but has a separate dedicated entrance GafTron noted that Rozeboom lives at 2967 Casco Point Road The dwelling at 2965 Casco Point Road, owned by Josephine Knudson, the mother-in-law of Rozeboom, received building permits for remodeling to create an office area in the lower level with an existing dwelling unit in the upper level The remodeling involved a workroom area, office space, and sitting area During review of the remodeling plans, the inspector noted the need for a home occupation license and advised the applicant of the requirements. The space was reviewed in April of 1995 and found certain home occupation conditions were not met A letter of August 18 to Mabusth defines the use of the space by Rozeboom By ordinance, the only person allowed a home occupation license is one who is residing at the residence, which is not the case in this application If the lots were combined into Rozeboom's name, the resideiKe at 2965 Casco would be considered a guesthouse, not the principal structure, and would stilt not met the conditions of the code for residency. It was noted that the two properties were originally one with the residence at 2965 Casco being the original carriage house of the home at 2%7 Casco. The properties were sep>arated in 1968 by subdivision GafTron questioned whether the home ocupation use now proposed would be acceptable with merely a lot combination. Staff questioned if this would be a case of a use variance, a commercial use in a residential zone, but the City Attorney indicated it would not because a home occupation is allowed in a home in a residential zone.