Lewes still working toward home-based business regs

Lewes Mayor and City Council put the ingredients of a proposed reconstituted home-based business ordinance through a new blender Jan. 28. 

The ordinance was the main topic of the first working session, a new format designed to allow council members to have a more open conversation in a public setting.

Council passed the ordinance 3-2 Dec. 8, but then voted unanimously Jan. 12 to rescind it. Mayor Amy Marasco claimed they did not get it right.

That measure categorized home-based businesses into either low- or high-impact tiers. It set conditions for the number of nonresident employees, parking spaces and outdoor storage, depending on the tier.

Council has been discussing the home-based business ordinance for almost two years.

In 2024, then-Mayor Andrew Williams asked the Lewes Planning Commission to look at streamlining what was already on the books after the city rejected a permit for a dog-grooming business, filed by Sarah Prieto and Stephen Matthews.

The couple lives at 405 Savannah Road, right in the middle of a line of historic rowhouses zoned limited commercial - historic.

Their neighbors are opposed, claiming noise and odor from dogs, and the lack of parking would be detrimental to the community.

“Animal-based businesses belong in a mobile operational unit or party zoned commercial facilities designed to handle noise, waste, traffic safety and animal welfare, not inside a residential historic neighborhood,” said Jon Hill, who lives next door.

Matthews responded by insisting they will take every health and safety precaution to mitigate impact on neighbors.

“We have dog parks, allow dogs on the beach, [and] allow our owners to have four dogs,” Matthews said. “It seems strange to me that we would limit any kind of animal business, especially one that is specifically designed to make them healthier, groomed and presentable to the city.”

The ordinance council rescinded Jan. 12 did not single out dog grooming.

Previous versions called for an administrative review process, triggered by neighbors’ complaints, and tasked city staff with having the final say on a business.

In the rescinded version, council scrapped a proposed administrative process in favor of a more traditional conditional-use path to approval.

Councilman Joe Elder said he favors a system that does not give staff discretion.

“Discretion is a risk multiplier. There is a legal risk, an opportunity for people to challenge the people who make the decisions,” Elder said.

Elder said the city should not have a system that relies on neighbors tattling on neighbors.

But Kevin Keene, who chaired the LPC subcommittee that drafted the original ordinance, said that is not the intent.

“We thought it important that if businesses apply, that the neighbors have some say. I understand the concerns – it’s putting neighbor versus neighbor – but frankly, it’s just allowing voices to be heard,” Keene said.

Councilman Tim Ritzert said the ordinance should not create exceptions.

“We should be looking for compliance so we don’t have future applicants for home businesses saying, ‘You allowed it at [that] address, but you haven’t allowed it here,’” Ritzert said.

Council agreed that a home-based business ordinance should not be an obstacle to entrepreneurship. Council members also said existing home-based businesses would not be impacted by a new measure.

Marasco directed Elder, Ritzert and Keene to revisit the ordinance, including zoning and the business application form, and have a new version ready by council’s March meeting.