Laserfiche WebLink
hREQUEST FOR ACTION <br /> River <br /> TO ITEM NUMBER <br /> Mayor and City Council 7.1 <br /> AGENDA SECTION MEETING DATE PREPARED BY <br /> Public Hearings October 15,2012 Chris Leeseberg,Park Planner-Planner <br /> ITEM DESCRIPTION REVIEWED By <br /> Conditional Use Permit: Sherilyn Wieber for Home Occupation Jeremy Barnhart,Planning Manager <br /> (Hair Salon—Hair Guru),Case No. CU 12-19 REVIEWED BY <br /> Cal Portner, City Administrator <br /> ACTION REQUESTED <br /> Staff and the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the request with the <br /> conditions outlined: <br /> 1. As a conditional use permit is not a building permit,the applicant shall apply for all <br /> required permits. <br /> 2. The building shall meet all building codes. <br /> 3. The building shall meet all fire codes. <br /> 4. Parking on 193'd Avenue shall be prohibited. <br /> 5. Exterior signage shall not exceed six (6) square feet. <br /> BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION <br /> The applicant proposes opening a hair salon in her existing home. The applicant states that the salon will <br /> be open by appointment only. Typical hours will be 10:00 a.m. —9:00 p.m. <br /> There will be no exterior modifications and the space inside is currently separate from the main house. <br /> PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Public Hearing <br /> One neighbor spoke during the public hearing indicating she lives next door to the subject property. She <br /> stated the applicant was a good neighbor and that she herself was a beautician. She questioned how <br /> many chairs would be in the salon (the applicant said two) and questioned what the re-sale of her <br /> property would be with a salon next door. She discussed the sidewalk the applicant is installing alongside <br /> her house and voiced concern of additional traffic. She was generally supportive of the request. <br /> It was noted that the re-sale value of any property cannot be determined based on an approval of a home <br /> occupation. The applicant noted what was happening with the sidewalk along the house was to address <br /> an ongoing soil erosion issue,but the design and placement of the sidewalk is irrelevant to the request. <br /> Planning Commission <br /> The hours of operation were clarified and the number of vehicles the applicant would possibly park on <br /> the driveway was questioned. The applicant indicated the most they would have is three. <br /> POWERED er <br /> N:\Departments\Community Development\Planning\Case Files\CUP\CU 12-19 Wieber Hair Guru CU 12-19_CC.docx NATURE <br />