Laserfiche WebLink
During the work session, the City Council directed stafft° complete the following: 1. Include language requiting the homeowner to have a vested interest in the business being operated <br /> on the subject property. <br /> 2. Decreased the number of non-resident employees allowed under the accessory structure home <br /> occupation section of the ordinance. <br /> 3. Quantified"excessive vehicular traffic." <br /> 4. Included surrounding density and lot size as a criteria for approving or denying a home occupation <br /> request. <br /> <br />Staff included an intent paragraph under Principal Dwelling Home Occupation and Accessory Structure <br />Home Occupation sections, which states the homeowner needs to have a vested interest in the business and <br />furthermore stat~.~ that the City is not interested in creating business-leasing nodes within a residential <br />district. The nurg, ber of non-resident employees has been reduced by half:, staffis proposing a maximum of <br />3 employees ' ~.msiead of the previously proposed 6 employees on 10+ acres. The following language has <br />been added to !quantify excessive vehicular traffic, '~l'he Home Occupation shall not generate <br />excessive vehicular traffic to the residential neighborhood, which shall be quantified as follows: <br />2 vehicle trips :per hour per standard 8 hour business day or 16 vehicle trips within a 24 hour <br />period. An inCrease at a rate of 25% is permitted if the subject property gains access from a <br />County, State, or MSA Street. The total traffic trips permitted includes employees and <br />deliveries." The following language has been added to both the Principal and Accessory <br />Structure Home Occupation sections within the ordinance; "The operation may not be permitted <br />if the density ahd lot sizes of the surrounding neighborhood are determined to be too dense and, <br />therefore, not compatible to the proposed business operation." The Home Occupation Ordinance <br />will allow the City Council the ability to review a Home Occupation Permit application request to operate a <br />business fi-om an accessory structure and provides some performance standards. The ordinance further <br />allows the City :Council to consider approving a business operation in an existing lawful non-conforming <br />accessory stmcm?es that do not have a residential dwelling on the property. City staff recommended that <br />the City Council introduce the Home Occupation Ordinance. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that in Subd. 4d the term "Independent Contractors" covers just <br />about any type of use so he was not sure what staff was trying to accomplish with that language. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik explained that staff was referring to builders, <br />landscapers, etc. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied that the term "Independent Contractor" should be defined within <br />the ordinance. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated that Subd. 5 Inspections allows for one annual inspection, but he <br />thought there should be language in place that would allow for additional inspections if there is <br />found to be a violation on the property. In addition, typically when there is a legal document or <br />contract there is some kind of consequence or fine if a rule is broken. He inquired if it was <br />possible to establish some form of consequence if rules are violated. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich explained that the City is not able to establish fines, but the City could <br />establish revocation of the home occupation permit. <br /> <br />City Council/November 25, 2003 <br /> Page 10 of 28 <br /> <br /> <br />