Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Home Occupations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning staff proposes loosening home-occupation rules to allow limited personal services by appointment
Summary
Planning staff presented draft changes to the home-occupation rules to allow by-right instruction, consultation and limited personal-service uses (nail, hair, massage) under defined conditions, while keeping product-sale and repair uses restricted; staff also flagged parking, ADUs and garage-use questions for further review.
Planning Department staff returned to the commission to continue a text-amendment discussion on home-occupation rules, responding to a prior December request to evaluate whether some home occupations should be permitted rather than requiring conditional use permits (CUPs).
Staff said existing rules allow home occupations as an accessory use provided they remain incidental to the dwelling, occupy no more than 25% of floor area, have no exterior storage or signage, and maintain a residential exterior character; on-site consultation and nonresident employees are currently prohibited unless approved by CUP.
The draft proposal presented would permit by right instruction, consultation and limited personal-service businesses (nail, hair and massage) subject to restrictions: appointment-only operations, one non-resident employee limit, one client at a time (or defined small group), designation of the specific room to be used, and required approvals from building, zoning and health departments. Staff said the requirement to designate an interior room aims to ensure the room meets state and local regulatory standards for personal services.
Staff emphasized the draft keeps sales of goods, large-repair or product-repair services and high-turnover retail out of the home-occupation category because they are harder to size- and neighborhood-appropriate and risk becoming de facto commercial outlets.
The presentation raised parking and accessory-space questions. Commissioners asked whether converting a garage to a business would make a property nonconforming if the conversion eliminated required off-street parking; staff replied off-street parking implications would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and that additional parking may still be required via CUP for larger operations. Commissioners and staff discussed whether accessory dwelling units (ADUs), detached garages or carriage houses should be eligible locations for home occupations and whether a separate permitting approach is needed for accessory spaces.
Ending: Staff said they will return with a formal amendment draft for initiation at a public hearing after further work on parking standards and character-district exceptions.
