Laserfiche WebLink
^2333 Home Occupations <br />I'cbruary 15, 2002 <br />Page 3 <br />Categories for regulator^' control could similarly be established for dealing with uses that can't or <br />don’t meet one or more standards but which can mitigate or eliminate the adverse neighborhood <br />impacts if operated subject to certain conditions. The options would include; <br />a. Require a CUP. The CUP entry in the Zoning Code would have to be written such <br />that the C'ouncil would have to find that the adverse impacts of the use can be <br />remedied by adherence to specified conditions, and clearly spell out Coiineil’s <br />authority to review or revoke if the conditions are not met or if the conditions fail to <br />mitigate the adverse neighborhood impacts; OR <br />b. Instead of a CUP, require an annual license for such u.ses. if it'.s important to review <br />the use on a regular ongoing basis; or a one-time license subject to re\ iew or <br />revocation only if the home occupation becomes a problem. <br />Procedural Status of Amendment <br />Planning Commission held a Public 1 learing on this matter on November 19. There were no public <br />comments. You tabled this item to a work session, which was held on December 20. fhe result of <br />the work ,ses.sion was direction to stafTto make a number of revisions to the draft approved by <br />Planning Commission in 1998. <br />.Staff Kecommendatioii <br />Re-open the public hearing to see if there are any public comments. Review the draft ordinance and <br />discuss w hether it accomplishes the Planning Commission's intent, whether it lea\ es any loose ends <br />that should be tied up. whether it needs to be more or less restrictive in specific areas, and how it <br />impacts e.xisting known home occupations. Discuss whether there should be different levels of <br />regulatory control. Direct staff to make any appropriate revisions, and either table for further re\ iew- <br />or send it on to Council with a recommendation.