10/14/1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

lawsuit. Attorney Vitunac did not understand the fetter, and did not know why Mr. Mensing wrote it. Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. _ Ed Busch, President of the Roseland Property Owners Associ- ation, stated that at the inception of the ROSE -4 zoning 41 district, their intent was to be fair to both residents of mobile homes and conventional homes, and were pleased to see the ROSE -4 district and its density come into effect. They regret, however, not having any representatives at the Board of County Commissioners' meeting of January 24, 1987, when owners of several businesses presented their situation, and the Board adopted Ordinance 87-22, allowing additional home occupational uses, and asked that all existing businesses come forward, be identified, and obtain occupational licenses. During their Association meetings, they have heard two sides on this issue, and have had several people step forward, some reasonable, and some not so reasonable. He stressed that they want to be fair in terms of grandfathering in legal businesses, and trust the Board will judge each of these businesses as they would if they were in any other area of the county. Chairman Scurlock asked if the 43 figure was fairly accurate, and Mr. Busch advised that the Association pretty much concurs with the number that staff has identified -- 5-8 existing businesses. He mentioned that Frank DeJoia is preparing to speak on this matter. Commissioner Bird understood that the Association is willing to have the existing businesses grandfathered in, but does not want any new businesses allowed in the area, and Chairman Scurlock asked for clarification on whether they want the existing businesses or just the existing businesses that have occupational licenses. 11 OCT 141997 Boo. 69fact 70®