PC 111407 - Laserfiche WebLink

they were aware they needed a permit or were advised that they did need one. She noted that the City did not receive many Code enforcement complaints on home occupations. Commissioner Blank moved to deny PAP-109, thereby upholding the Zoning Administrator’s decision to deny PHUP-18. Commissioner Olson seconded the motion. Commissioner Blank believed that the competitive aspects of this issue were relatively unimportant in his thought process. He noted that the approved home occupations on the list provided by staff had one condition that they could not comply with; this particular one, however, had four conditions which he believed to be too much. Chairperson Fox liked the application and would like to uphold the appeal. She noted that this was not a full-service bridal shop and was for a niche market that required long-sleeved wedding dresses. She noted that the neighborhood was largely supportive of the use and believed the small scale of the use would not be a detriment to the neighborhood, particularly if it were conditioned for a two-year time period and that it could come back to staff or the Planning Commission if there were any complaints. Commissioner Pearce noted that she had struggled with this matter and wanted to support the applicants. She noted that the home occupation did not meet four of the conditions, but the applicants had repeatedly stated that they were willing to work with staff to mitigate the conditions and to ensure that it would fit into a residential neighborhood. Conversely, she noted that if it required that much hard work to make it fit, then perhaps the use did not fit into the neighborhood. Commissioner Narum noted that she also had struggled with this application; however, she commended the applicant’s honest about her intentions and believed that in a sense, the applicant is being penalized for being honest. Additionally, the applicant was willing to restrict the business to one room. She believed that Condition L regarding the home occupation not being visually apparent beyond the boundaries of the site was a big issue, and she understood the points made about supporting retail and the Downtown businesses. She indicated that as a compromise, she could support this application but with a sunset clause, and after hearing from the owner of J’aime Bridal, she would like to shorten that period from two years to 12-18 months. Commissioner Olson noted that he had not struggled with this application at all and believed that staff was correct in indicating that the proposed occupation was a retail operation best suited for a retail location. He believed that non-compliance with four conditions was too much and that the use was not suited for this location, even if the applicants have stated that they would work with staff. Commissioner Blank noted that staff had indicated that it would be very difficult for Code Enforcement to assess whether the conditions will be upheld. He added that he did not feel the applicants were being penalized for being honest as all applicants are expected to be honest. He PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, November 14, 2007 Page 10 of 34