HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes 5-11-2011MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AMES, IOWA MAY
11, 2011
The Ames Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) met, pursuant to law, in regular session at 7:00
p.m. on May 11, 2011, in the Council Chambers of City Hall with the following members
present: Bruce Calhoun, Elizabeth Erbes, Sandra McJimsey, and Thomas Weber. Board
Member Taylor was absent. Staff members Steve Osguthorpe, Andrew Farley, and Judy Parks
were also present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Moved by Erbes, seconded by McJimsey, to approve the minutes
of the meeting of April 27, 2011, as written.
Vote on Motion: 4-0. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NO. 11-09 – SPECIAL HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT – 3314
HOOVER AVENUE
Public Hearing on application for a Special Home Occupation Permit to
allow the expansion of an existing home professional office
Planning and Housing Intern Andrew Farley explained that the request is to allow
the expansion of a Permitted Home Occupation that was approved in 2008. The existing
home occupation is a company that provides background checks and applicant tracking
support. The home has an attached two car garage, and the office for the business
will be in the back of the garage. In addition to the garage there are four parking
spaces in the driveway.
The home business is operated by the applicant with occasional assistance from
her husband. There is a growing need for the assistance of administrative
personnel. Permitted Home Occupations can employ only members of the household
residing in the dwelling unless approval for the employment of up to two non-family
members is granted by the ZBA.
Mr. Farley reviewed the details of the application and applicable law as found
in the staff report. He said that a handful of inquiries were received by staff
regarding the application, but none of the callers had any objections to the
business. He also noted that there are two Permitted Home Occupations currently
at this location; one for the current business that provides background check
and applicant tracking support, and a second for website design and independent
sales consulting.
According to Mr. Farley, enough off-street parking exists for the residents and
two employees. The nature of this type of business and having only one or two
non-family member employees is unlikely to exceed the allowed 10 vehicle visits
per day. Staff has concluded that the proposed use will not alter the normal
residential character of the area, and approval of the application is recommended.
Board Member McJimsey asked about the garage. She noted that since it is attached,
it would not be considered an accessory building. The staff report states that
the business will occupy less than 400 square feet; Ms. McJimsey said that this
is not germane since it is not an accessory building. She thinks that it makes
more sense to say that it will occupy less than 25 percent of the total square
footage.
Chair Calhoun asked about the other home occupations on the subject property.
He wonders if all of the trips generated by the combined businesses will exceed
the maximum allowed.
Becky Venneman, 3314 Hoover Avenue, Ames, Iowa, stated that the background check
business has always been part time until recently. Due to the acquisition of
additional clients, it has become full time and she needs administrative help.
In regards to the other permitted occupations, Ms. Venneman indicated that the
sales consulting business hasn’t been active for six or seven years. She has started
to phase out of the website design business, and now has two small web hosting
clients. She is also in the process of phasing those clients out. Other than
maintaining her own website, there will not be any website hosting or design.
Ms. Venneman estimated that she spent less than 40 hours per year on the website
business in the past couple years.
Mr. Calhoun asked if background check clients come to the house. Ms. Venneman
indicated that she has had someone show up out of the blue from the yellow pages,
but she does not invite anyone to the house. She meets clients at other places
of employment or at coffee shops.
Ms. McJimsey asked if the business may grow to the point where more than two part
time employees will be needed. Ms. Venneman said that she hopes it will; if it
grows to the point that a full time employee is needed, she will locate the business
outside the house. She is looking for someone part time for typing,
clerical/filing, and accounting tasks. She is asking for up to two employees
because she is not sure that she can find one person capable of all of those tasks.
Mr. Calhoun said that he is concerned about other home occupations, even though
they’re not active. If they do suddenly become active, things could add up and
might exceeded the restrictions. Planning and Housing Director Steve Osguthorpe
said that the Board could condition the approval on invalidating the old permits.
Assistant City Attorney Judy Parks said that the Board could require the applicant
to surrender the permit for the website design business once she is finished phasing
out the two clients. Ms. Parks said that it is fairly rare to have more than one
permit at a home. The City does keep a database of home occupation permits, but
typically if a home business phases out or becomes defunct, people don’t surrender
their permit.
Board Member McJimsey asked if any complaints had been registered against the
applicant for any of the existing occupations. Mr. Osguthorpe indicated that he
was not aware of any complaints. Ms. McJimsey inquired about remote employees
and how they figure into the limitation of two employees. Assistant City Attorney
Parks recalled a case where the Board approved of four non-family member employees,
but no more than two were allowed on site at a time. Ms. McJimsey asked if this
was established by precedent. Ms. Parks said that it is; this situation is fairly
uncommon. The applicant could have more than two employees but never more than
two coming to the residence at one time.
Mr. Calhoun questioned whether the Board has the power to grant more than two
non-family member employees, regardless of whether the employees are offsite or
not. This issue was discussed at length. Ms. Parks reiterated that there have
been occasions, though rare, when more than two non-family member employees have
been allowed, but only two were allowed to be at the location at any given time.
Moved by McJimsey, seconded by Weber, to adopt ORDER NO. 11-09, thereby approving
the request for a Special Home Occupation to allow the applicant to continue her
permitted home occupation and to have no more than two non-family member employees
working at 3314 Hoover Avenue at any given time, subject to the home occupation
being operated as described in the staff report.
Board Member Calhoun asked about conditioning the approval on the applicant
surrendering the other Permitted Home Occupation permits. It was determined that
the other Board members did not see the need for those permits to be surrendered
since both businesses are essentially defunct.
Roll Call Vote: 4-0. Motion declared approved unanimously.
COMMENTS: There were no comments by the Board.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m.
______________________________ _____________________________
Emily Burton, Recording Secretary Bruce Calhoun, Chair