Skip to main content

AgendaQuick™

View Agenda Item

7.1.
CC Regular Session
Meeting Date:
02/22/2011
By:
Tim Gladhill, Community Development

Title:

Request for a Home Occupation Permit to Operate a Home Based Office for Carefree Home Services at 7830 149th Ln NW; Case of Michael Beach

Background:

On January 6, 2011, the City received an application for a Home Occupation Permit from Michael Beach to continue a home-based office to support the operation of Carefree Home Services. The City previously approved the operation as an Interim Use Permit (IUP) on January 22, 2008, which is set to expire January 22, 2011. The previous application was approved under a previous ordinance regulating home occupations. The Applicant now has the ability to petition the City Council, following the procedures of a conditional use permit process, to operate home occupations that operate beyond certain parameters, such as the number of non-resident employees.

Notification:

A Public Hearing was held on Thursday, February 3, 2011.  Property owners within 350 feet of the Subject Property were notified of the Public Hearing via Standard US Mail.  The Public Hearing was properly advertised in the Anoka County Union.

Observations:

The Beach family has been operating Carefree Home Services out of their home since 1990. Michael Beach is the owner of the Subject Property and owner/operator of Carefree Home Services. A complaint was made about parking at the home in 2007, which triggered the original review as an IUP. The original review revealed that there were clear indications of a home-based business. The IUP was approved at that time with the intention to allow the owner ample time to find an suitable alternative location to continue the office operations for Carefree Home Services.
 
Since that time, the City approved amendments to the Home Occupation Ordinance to allow for flexibility in home-based businesses, including administrative approvals and City Council approval for home occupations operating beyond certain thresholds.
 
The Subject Property is approximately one (1) acre, and thus, the Applicant would be allowed one (1) non-resident employee to work on the Subject Property and is permitted up to 20% of the gross living area of the dwelling unit for activities related to the Home Occupation.
 
According the Applicant, Carefree Home Services is a home health care agency providing personal care services to clients in their homes. Employees provide these services at the clients' residence and do not come to the Subject Property for any required work.  The Applicant has clients in the northern metro, Brainerd, and Mora. The Brainerd and Mora areas, which include roughly half of the clients and employees, are handled by managing personnel in those areas, and do not report to the Subject Property.
 
The Applicant has only one non-resident employee coming in to the Subject Property daily and uses approximately 16% of the 2,662 square foot dwelling unit for the Home Occupation. Hours of operation are proposed to be from 8:30am to 5:00pm Mon-Thurs, 8:30am to 1:00pm on Friday, and closed Saturday and Sunday. A majority of the office operation done through the Subject Property is done by phone, mail, fax, or computer. File management, billing, and payroll for the whole company and staffing for the local area is done from the Subject Property. The Applicant does have the occasional person coming into the office to exchange paperwork, but this is proposed to be reduced to only 2 or 3 people a week on average, since the Applicant is no longer allowing checks to be picked up as of February 1, 2011 (there were about 4-5 people picking up checks previously).
 
The number of non-resident employees triggers review by the Planning Commission and City Council. The Applicant was offered an alternative to appoint one (1) person to serve as the non-resident employee and all others to correspond via means that do not require being physically at the Subject Property, however, the Applicant states that the flexibility of allowing 2-3 non-resident employees to arrive at the Subject Property is critical to the core function of the business. The Applicant also expects some downsizing as the Department of Human Services has announced some cuts to services and a greater on-line presence, additional office staff is not necessary. The Applicant expects no more than two (2) vehicle trips per day related to the Home Occupation and states that all parking can be accommodated on the existing driveway.  At the Planning Commission meeting, the Applicant clarified that one non-resident employee works at the Subject Property, and the remainder work off-site and only come to the Subject Property occasionally related to paperwork.  The Applicant stated at the Planning Commission that no more than four (4) non-resident employees will be at the Subject Property at one time.
 
Recent inspections and review of aerial photography reveal that off-street parking accommodated on the existing driveway are the only indications of the home occupation. The number of motor vehicles seen through this review (no more than 3-4 at a time) reveal that traffic levels may certainly be elevated, but only to a minor degree. In addition, the City has no indication or evidence that traffic levels allowed under the home occupation ordinance are exceeded.

Recommendation:

The Planning Commission recommends approval of the Home Occupation Permit.

Funding Source:

All costs associated with the application are the responsibility of the Applicant.  An escrow has been placed by the Applicant to cover City costs of the application.

Council Action:

Motion to adopt the resolution adopting findings of fact,
 
-AND-
 
Motion to adopt the resolution approving the request for a home occupation.
 
-OR-
 
Motion to deny the request based on findings of fact.

Attachments

Form Review

Inbox Reviewed By Date
Kurt Ulrich Kurt Ulrich 02/17/2011 08:45 AM
Form Started By:
Tim Gladhill
Started On:
01/31/2011 08:26 AM
Final Approval Date:
02/17/2011