Laserfiche WebLink
r i <br /> MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Tuesday,February 19,2002 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#2333 Proposed Zoning Code Amendment—Home Occupations,Continued) <br /> Planning Commission in 1998. Gaffron noted those revisions have been incorporated into the new draft <br /> before the Planning Commission tonight. <br /> Gaffron recommended the public hearing be reopened to see if there are any public comments. Gaffron <br /> stated if the Planning Commission would like to see an additional category for licensing or conditional <br /> uses, some additional work would need to be done by Staff prior to its approval. <br /> Smith inquired whether the licensing or conditional use category would allow the City to have some <br /> authority over those businesses which may not be able to meet all the criteria outlined in the ordinance. <br /> Gaffron stated it would. <br /> Hawn inquired whether there were any public comments relating to this application. <br /> There were no public comments. <br /> Kluth noted Staff has listed a number of restrictions on home occupations without specifically <br /> identifying any particular home occupation. Kluth inquired if a resident is unable to meet those <br /> requirements whether they would be able to apply for a license or a conditional use permit. <br /> Gaffron stated if a business does not meet those standards outlined in the ordinance, they would not be <br /> eligible for a home occupation. <br /> Kluth stated he would be in favor of including language in the ordinance which would allow a home <br /> occupation to apply for a license or a conditional use permit if they do not comply with all the criteria. <br /> Kluth noted that the state licenses home day care and would not be covered under this ordinance. <br /> Gaffron stated home day care is licensed through the state and not by the City,with the City being <br /> required to allow home day care. <br /> Mabusth stated the Planning Commission has not thoroughly discussed whether a conditional use permit <br /> or a license would be more appropriate in terms of enforcing any possible violations. Mabusth inquired <br /> whether Staff prefers one over the other. Mabusth stated in her view she would prefer to see a <br /> conditional use permit. <br /> Gaffron stated one of the benefits of a conditional use permit is that the Council would only see the <br /> application once unless it becomes a problem. Gaffron stated if a license is required,the Applicant <br /> would be required to apply once a year. Gaffron stated if the City would like to see a particular business <br /> on an annual basis,that requirement could also be included in the conditional use permit. <br /> Hawn stated she has concerns how the conditional use permit will be written,noting the City does not <br /> know what types of businesses will be applying for a conditional use permit. <br /> Gaffron stated Orono's Zoning Code does not acknowledge what is called a"special use permit",which <br /> the statutes may allow the City to do without having to meet conditional use permit mandatory approval <br /> standards. <br /> PAGE 4 <br />