PC 111407 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chairperson Fox noted that she recalled that an ambulance service operated in a residential neighborhood near Noah’s Bagel and Safeway and that it was given a temporary use permit until it received a permanent conditional use permit for a home occupation. She inquired why a temporary use permit cannot be granted in this case when one was given in the past. Ms. Decker stated that a temporary use permit is not the process used for home occupation permits. Temporary use permits are for other applications such as Christmas tree sales lots and outdoor sales. She added that a home occupation permit is not the same as a conditional use permit, which requires that certain specific findings be made. A home occupation permit does not require that those conditional use permit findings be made; it has different conditions that are listed in both the previous and supplemental staff reports for this project. To approve this project, the Commission would need to determine that this home occupation met those required conditions. Commissioner Blank commended staff for a well-done report for a complex issue. He then inquired if, theoretically, the Commission can condition this project to have a two-year permit. Ms. Decker replied that it could be done. She added that while staff has recommended the denial of the appeal, it has provided a list of conditions in Exhibit B should the Commission overturn the Zoning Administrator’s denial. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Rebecca Andrus, applicant, requested clarification of the difference between the home occupation permit and the non-exempt home occupation permit. She clarified that her ultimate goal was to move to a storefront and did not want to run a long-term shop out of her home. She intended to get the business started and move after two or three years to a storefront. She indicated that she planned to store the dresses in the large room, with a screen for changing and a couch and coffee table for the guests. She requested clarification regarding whether the large room would be considered as one or two rooms. She noted that she was willing to work with the City and the neighbors on the four conditions specified in the staff report and would take the means necessary to comply with them, such as having the dresses delivered elsewhere should the neighbors complain about frequent deliveries. She added that if her mother and sister-in-law (the employees) were deemed to be coming over too frequently, they could forego attending the appointments to show dresses. To reduce vehicle traffic on her street, she stated that she would have only one appointment per night and would allow the client to park in their driveway. In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Fox regarding whether, in the event of traffic complaints, the home occupation permits would go through the process of a conditional use permit where hearings would be held to see whether the home occupation permit should be revoked. Ms. Harryman reiterated that it was not a conditional use permit but that there was some flexibility built into this section of the Code. She confirmed that this home occupation permit could include a sunset clause and that it could be brought back to the Commission if any of the conditions were not met. Jaime Zile, owner of J’aime Bridal located at 111 West Neal Street, stated that she was not in competition with this niche market but she was very concerned about the precedent it may set, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, November 14, 2007 Page 8 of 34