Laserfiche WebLink
The Association was very concerned about the decision made <br />January 24th that allowed a broader range of home occupations in <br />the ROSE -4 District than allowed in any other residential -- <br />district in the county. If Ordinance 87-22 is allowed to stand, _ the Association feels that the ROSE -4 district will be downgraded <br />and become a magnet for businesses that are now allowed in <br />residential districts in any other part of the county. Mr. <br />DeJoia believed the reason why so many of the residents did not <br />show up at the January 24th meeting was due to staff's emphatic <br />recommendation not to allow any additional home occupations in <br />the district. Section 25-D (3) allows for non -impacting <br />occupations, but this could result in heavy equipment being <br />stored on a lot next to a well -kept home. He felt that the <br />grandfathering clauses are too complicated for laymen to -get <br />into, and trusted the County's competent staff to handle the <br />complexities of the issue. He believed that most people in <br />Roseland like the low density concept of 4 units per acre. In <br />conclusion, he urged the Board to rescind Ordinance 87-22, and <br />decide which of the existing businesses will be allowed to stand. <br />Chairman Scurlock pointed out that during the January 24th <br />meeting it was suggested that there were 43 existing businesses <br />in that area and that many of the owners of these businesses were <br />afraid to come forward. It also was suggested that the figure may <br />be higher than 43, and that was one of the major reason why the <br />Board wanted to come up here and get the input of all the people <br />concerned. <br />Lena Marshall, 7655 129th Street, Roseland, wished to thank <br />the staff for coming with up Alternative #4, but it was pointed <br />out that Commissioner Wheeler came up with Alternative #4 <br />yesterday after working with the Planning staff. <br />Mrs. Marshall suggested that some criteria be added to that <br />alternative which would require the existing businesses to clean <br />up as far as environmental hazards and appearances are concerned. <br />13 <br />T 14 1987 BOOK .69 PAGE 702 <br />