Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />TO;Planning Commission <br />FROM:Alan P. Olson <br />DATE; May 11, 1982 <br />SUBJECT: Proposed Zoning Amendments - Suntanning Equipment <br />The attached ordinance draft has been revised according to the <br />Planning Commission's direction at the April 19, 1982, meeting. <br />Language and numbering have been revised. The B—4 conditional <br />use permit has been omitted, allowing either conditional or <br />accessory uses in the B-1, B—3 and B~5 districts only. <br />The suggested parking ratio of lb spaces per booth is probably <br />higher than our 1 space/150 sf retail requirements. It was <br />suggested at this ratio because of the stated turnover rate <br />where booths are reserved on short 15-30 minutes schedules. <br />A ratio of tanning booths to barber or beautician stations is <br />required in order to legally define what constitutes an accessory <br />use as opposed to a principal use requiring a conditional use <br />permit. The 1 to 4 ratio was suggested by the interested parties. <br />To date we still have not received the expected conditional use <br />application. Perhaps we never will. The accessory use is <br />continuing low-key until this ordinance is considered. <br />I recommend that Planning Commission do act on May 17, 1982, <br />making some recommendation to the Council, so that they in turn <br />can act by the end of May: <br />1. <br />2. <br />3. <br />Approve revised draft as presented; <br />Approve ordinance adoption with modifications; or <br />Recommend m adoption. This would have the effect of <br />continuing the status quo where suntanning booths are <br />an unpermitted use. Separate suntan studio businesses ^ <br />would not be allowed. In this case, however, it might <br />still be reasonable for Council to in*:erpret and allow <br />accessory suntanning equipment without requiring ordinance <br />adoption. <br />\ <br />1