Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Councilmember Woestehoff replied in the case the resolution is to deny the HOP and one of the <br />reasons why the Planning Commission went that route was so they could outline conditions they <br />thought were important. This included having the Police Chief’s review of the facility and a limit <br />of the trips. He stated that even if the wording was a resolution to deny, the motion that was made <br />was to approve with certain conditions and if Staff has other conditions to add that now would be <br />a good time to add them. <br /> <br />City Administrator Ulrich replied there is a motion on the floor and asked that Deputy City <br />Administrator/Community Dev. Director Hagen review the conditions because he wasn’t sure if <br />those were in the motion and asked for clarification. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove asked if it was a good time to do that but also for Staff to meet with the <br />applicant to ensure there are parameters and have a good working plan. She stated that has been <br />done with other applicants and if there are going to be more conditions that it was important for <br />the applicant to have clarity and buy-in. <br /> <br />Mayor Kuzma asked Deputy City Administrator/Community Dev. Director Hagen to repeat the <br />motion with the included conditions. <br /> <br />Deputy City Administrator/Community Dev. Director Hagen asked if he should include the <br />conditions Staff had come up with to get Council feedback. <br /> <br />Mayor Kuzma replied now would be the time. <br /> <br />Deputy City Administrator/Community Dev. Hagen stated there is a condition of appointment <br />only, he didn’t catch the days of the week the applicant noted, only that he asked for three days <br />during the week with four hours a day and both weekend days with eight hours each. He asked if <br />Council wanted to clarify that more if it should be open for those times to adjust. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove commented she thought one day during the weekend and asked if <br />Deputy City Administrator/Community Dev. Director Hagen had said both days on the weekend. <br /> <br />Councilmember Specht commented that Councilmember Howell had mentioned not wanting to <br />micromanage a business. He asked if days and times were outlined for other businesses. <br /> <br />Senior Planner Anderson replied typically there is a quasi-business plan and based on that, if there <br />is support from Staff and is the will of the Council, those are often incorporated into the home <br />occupation permit because it clarifies it and aids with code enforcement. <br /> <br />Councilmember Specht asked Councilmember Heineman, as seconder of the motion, if he wanted <br />to push it back to Staff. <br /> <br />Councilmember Heineman replied he wanted to consider this permit the same way other permits <br />would be considered. He stated he didn’t want to push it through if due diligence hasn’t been <br />done; however, if answers to questions were given the same as with other home occupation permits <br />he could go with it. He stated he liked Senior Planner Anderson’s comments on a business plan <br />City Council /March 8, 2022 <br />Page 25 of 38 <br /> <br />