Good feedback on the public safety levy. I think that I’m convinced to leave that alone unless it is for capital projects (buildings, fire trucks, etc). The Land-Use committee will, this very evening, again take up the issue of Home-Based businesses. Postings after tonight aren’t too late. No final vote will be taken until the committee refers this out for council action. Allow me to begin with some clarification:
1: Businesses that have customers (suppliers, employees, etc) coming into the home are called a “Home-Based Business” and require a special use permit that is currently approved by City Council vote.
2: Businesses that do not have customers or other visitors coming to the house do *not* need a special use permit and only require an occupancy permit. This type of business is **NOT** affected by the legislation under consideration. I started my computer consulting business in this way and since nobody additional comes to the home, it isn’t a big deal.
The changes currently under consideration do two things. The first is to restrict the kind of Home-Based businesses allowed under city code to those that deal with education: tutoring, music teachers and the like. The second change would make the issuance (is that a word?) of a special use permit strictly an administrative affair – there would be no vote by the City Council.
Other jurisdictions handle this in several different ways but most of them use variations on the “Allowed Use” theme that we are proposing. Some only have a prohibited use list and allow everything else (interestingly, Fairfax specifically prohibits “Large Animal Veterinarians”). Several treat this as an administrative affair as we are proposing to do. Additions to the allowed use list are possible by something called a Zoning Text Amendment and I believe that such an amendment does require a council vote.
#
I have mixed views on this but this blog ain’t about what I think, it’s about what you think so let’s hear it.
January 4, 2007 at 5:11 pm
Are you SURE you REALLY want me to give you my view point on this? What time is that meeting!
January 5, 2007 at 11:56 am
I don’t think limiting home based businesses to only certain allowed uses is a bad idea, but limiting it to educational businesses only is going too far. What about home based day care and babysitting facilities?
Personally, I’ve always dreamed of doing picture framing in my basement part time, but under these rules, I wouldn’t be allowed to – even though I don’t see how it could have any possible negative consequences on my neighborhood. Of course, I could always just run the business “under the table” and avoid the whole issue of a license (and taxes).
January 5, 2007 at 2:11 pm
You have arrived at the very question we are struggling with. Do we simply extinguish the possibility of home based businesses or do we allow a few? If we allow a few, which? If we allow music teachers, what about art teachers? What about someone who teaches people to frame artwork?
BTW, I believe that day care is dealt with in a seperate section of the City code but would have to confirm that.
January 5, 2007 at 3:14 pm
Andy,
Thanks for the opening this “vox populi” blog. Great idea. I wanted to throw in my 2 or 3 cents on the “allowed use” idea. In my old neighborhood (not in Manassas), a little old lady across the street ran a piano class out of her home. Every afternoon our street would turn into a waiting line of Moms in cars, dropping off, waiting or picking up their budding Chopins.
It was a pain in the neck and a bit of a traffic hazard, but I never complained because, well, she was a little old lady. But it certainly changed the “character” of our neighborhood for several hours every weekday. Whatever the exceptions, if SUPs for home-based businesses are permitted it would be critical that restrictions be included in the changes on how many customers/cars per hour would be allowed.
Somewhat facetiously, it almost depends on the part of Manassas we are talking about. More and more city neighborhoods feature “driveway to driveway” parked vehicles (thanks to overcrowding) so no one would really notice extra home-based biz vehicle traffic! That may sound overly cynical but there is some truth in that.
I would hate to see lovely neighborhoods like Pill Hill or Old Town go the way of the curbside parking lots. And no, I don’t live in either.
D.A.
January 5, 2007 at 3:16 pm
What if you want to teach massage therapy – and if has the
same impact on traffic, parking etc. as a piano or woodworking
teacher – how do you deny one and approve the other?
Andy has a good idea – letting citizens focus on these issues
without the burning passion of a pending case just around the corner,
but knowing, if history is a guide, one will show up sometime in 2007.
Things like this are the nuts and bolts of local government.
Really would like to read some more reasoned views and ideas.
January 5, 2007 at 3:39 pm
You know, it might help the discussion a bit if we all knew how many existing home based businesses there are in the city and what kind of services they provide. Is that info available from the city website? It would give us an idea of how much demand there is for this sort of thing. I personally can’t think of anyone I know in the city that has a home based business other than tutoring and babysitting.
January 5, 2007 at 5:34 pm
Did get some numbers from planning –
– Seven have been approved since 2000
– Math tudor, moving services(office only),music lessons, massage(2),
electrolysis services and gift in home show room. Prior to 2000,
I think they had at least two beauticians and a fellow teaching
woodworking. Obviously, a mixed bag.
–
January 5, 2007 at 6:04 pm
I would favor prohibiting any new home based businesses. Home businesses do change the character of residential neighborhoods. Even if the City Council puts limitations on the home based busniness such as number of customers, times the business may be open, the number of cars that may be at the business, there is no mechanism in the City to enforce such limitations. The residential neighborhoods in Manassas are already being stressed by the proliferation of illegal boarding houses and the City has been unable to enforce laws designed to prevent them. We should not add homebased busninesses which will be another factor in changing the character of Manassas.
January 6, 2007 at 12:40 pm
Thanks for the forum to discuss issues.
January 7, 2007 at 10:07 pm
Legal home based businesses are a part of our culture going back to the Revolutionary War. The key is legal ones. As a commercial property owner I am continually amazed at the number of “home based” businesses that totally skirt all of the laws and pay no taxes (resulting in law abiding folks paying more). We should allow them within reason. The keys are legal, reason and enforcement. For example, tell me why the guy down the street with 3 or 4 construction type pick-ups or vans doesnt have to have a home based business license. The same for the guy running a mail order business.
January 8, 2007 at 3:18 pm
I’d be fine with the a public safety levy. I would also be fine with a school-related levy, although a school levy is not a subject of the blog nor of any other discussion as far as I know. I like the symbolism of a school levy. The reason is simple: It’s for the kids! I want Manassas to have great schools and I’m willing to pay even a lot more. I wish we stood for better schools (a positive concept), rather than for needing more police (a fear-based concept). A general question: Are we using the word “levy” because everyone is afraid of calling something a tax increase? If so, that’s chicken ____, although I do understand the political necessity of chicken ____. But if someone votes for a levy then they better admit that they voted to raise taxes. I wish folks could just straight up admit that we need more money and raise taxes. Go ahead and accuse those who are willing to vote for a levy but not a tax increase as perpetrating a subterfuge on the public.
On home businesses, I guess I’m ok with permits for educational-based business where customers (kids) come to houses. Perhaps “educational” should be confined to high school and below, since that’s probably what is contemplated. Who knows what endeavors could be characterized as educational as applied to adults. Sex ed? Palm reading ed? You get my drift.
January 24, 2007 at 10:59 pm
Nice Post.
That was well said. Always appreciate your indepth views. Keep up the great work!
John