Laserfiche WebLink
Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, and Councilmembers Zimmerman, Elvig, Cook, <br />Kurak, Pearso,, and Strommen. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Case #3: ~Request for a Home Occupancy Permit; Case of Julie Lorge <br />Community Development Director Frolik explained that the City has received an application <br />from Julie Lo~ge for a home occupation permit to establish a one-chair hair salon in her home <br />located at 702.i 153rd Avenue NW. Julie Lorge is proposing to relocate her established one-chair <br />hair salon fro~ her previous home in Ramsey to the subject property. The applicant properly <br />applied for an{l received a home occupation permit for the salon at her previous home in 1994. <br />The Planningl Commission and City staff recommended approval of the request for home <br />occupation pe~nit. <br /> <br />Motion by Cogncilmember Kurak, seconded by Councilmember Elvig, to adopt Resolution #03- <br />11-308 adoptigg Findings of Fact #0660 relating to Julie Lorge's request for a home occupation <br />permit. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, and Councilmembers Kurak, Elvig, Cook, Pearson, <br />Strommen, and Zimmerman. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Motion by Cogncilmember Kurak, seconded by Councilmember Elvig, to adopt Resolution #03- <br />11-309 approving Julie Lorge's request for a home occupation permit based on the findings of <br />fact. ~ <br /> <br />Motion carrieC[ Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, and Councilmembers Kurak, Elvig, Cook, Pearson, <br />Strommen, and Zimmerman. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Case #4: <br /> <br />.iRequest for a Zoning Amendment to Chapter 9, Section 9.11.04 Home <br />i Occupations; Case of Lonny Menard <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik explained that the City Council reviewed the proposed <br />revised Home .~ccupation Ordinance at the November 3, 2003 City Council work sessio~ The current <br />Home Occupation Permit restricts home occupations to the confines of the dwelling, which excludes <br />attached or detached garages. The ordinance also does not allow for employees other than residents that live <br />on the prope!W.~ Staff reviewed the following proposed additions to the ordinance with the City Council <br />during the wo~ session: <br /> 1. Establishes standards for occupations conducted within the dwelling. <br /> 2. Langmge has been added to allow businesses to be operated from an accessory structure for parcels <br /> 3 acres .Or greater in size and establishes standards for these operations. <br /> 3. Gives the City Council the flexibility to approve or deny a business operation within a pre-ex}sting <br /> aCCessary.~ slyucmre that is located on a parcel that does not contain a residential dwelling. It should' <br /> be nok~d that City Code no longer allows accessory structures to be constructed on a property that <br /> does ndt contain a principal dwelling. <br /> 4. ' Establ~hes a list of spedfic business operations that may be considered a little more intensive (i.e. <br /> traffic 0~r production of product) for parcels 10 acres in size and greater that are located within the <br /> Rural Developing and Rural Preserve areas <br /> 5. Allows! employees, that are not occupants of the residential dwelling. The number of employees <br /> permitt~ is based on lot size. <br /> <br />City Council/November 25, 2003 <br /> Page 9 of 28 <br /> <br />P29 <br /> <br /> <br />