Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Home Business topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board deadlocks on request to use rental home as administrative office for driving school
Summary
Ferris Goolan sought permission to keep a small, administrative-only driving-school office at his rental home, pledging no students or clients would visit. Neighbors asked for assurances about shared driveways and traffic. The board was split 44 and the request failed to reach the required votes.
Get email alerts on the Home Business topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A proposal to allow a driving-school owner to maintain an administrative office in a rental residence drew neighbor concern about traffic and long-term property use and failed to gain approval after an evenly split board vote on May 13.
Ferris Goolan asked the board to allow a private office at 26247 Shainer exclusively for administrative and recordkeeping functions for his driving school; he said he would pick up and drop off students at their homes and would not host students or clients at the property. He said his 2024 vehicle intended for training would be kept in the driveway and outfitted with a dual-control brake and required insurance.
A neighbor, Susan Corey, who shares a driveway with Goolan, said she had no objection to strictly administrative uses but wanted assurances that students would not be visiting or parking at the home. Board members questioned the long-term effect of permitting a business in an R1C residential neighborhood, especially given the property is a rental and variances typically "run with the land." Mr. Green and the chairman expressed concern that allowing business uses in residences could lead to incremental commercial activity in neighborhoods.
The motion to permit an administrative-only driving-school office failed on a 44 split (required approvals not met). Staff noted enforcement tools exist if the approved use expands beyond the restrictions, and members discussed narrow language to limit any approval to a single vehicle and no on-site clients if the matter is reheard in future.
The petitioner was advised to secure any needed state approvals for his training vehicle and to coordinate with staff if he pursues a revised application that includes property owner documentation or narrower conditions.

