WESTPHALIA — Following a public hearing last week, Westphalia aldermen approved a variance to allow a naturopathic wellness center and retail business by owner and sole clinician Angela Stuecken to operate in a residential area at 152 E. Main Street. The unanimous vote accepted seven of the eight conditions proposed by the Westphalia Zoning Commission: the business is restricted to use only by Stuecken, must have no plans for exterior modifications of the building, provide four off-street parking spaces behind the building, develop a compacted, chatted parking lot, Stuecken would adhere to state licensing and registration if required, she would apply for a city business license, the business is not transferable and that the property would have the variance only for the business stated.

Several of the dozen residents in attendance voiced concerns over businesses being allowed to operate in areas zoned for residential use.

“If you keep opening this up in residential areas in Westphalia, there’s not going to be a commercial area,” resident Steve Winkelman said. “You’ve got all of Main Street that’s non-residential.”

“These have become more frequent in the past five years,” Mayor Tammy Massman acknowledged. “That has been a concern. There are definitely home-based businesses encroaching on residential areas.”

“People who’ve lived here before thought that it was residential and then it’s not,” said Winkelman. “It’s not the same. It affects the value of properties, and it needs to be considered.”

Resident Tori Schneiders was asked if she was concerned about the value of her property falling due to being next to Stuecken’s proposed business.

“I don’t know what the future holds,” Schneiders replied. “There was a business behind my house before I moved in, and it didn’t affect the value of my property. I don’t think you can prohibit a small business in a small town or the town dies. I’m from Rich Fountain, and there is nothing there.”

Other residents asked if Stuecken’s business would be selling products that included cannabis, if the products she sold would be flushed down toilets or sinks and affect the groundwater, and had questions about putting up privacy fencing and restrictions on signage for the property.

Stuecken explained that although her business is listed as being open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Saturday, she does not plan on working 12 hours per day, seven days a week.

“I can only see one person at a time and my typical day is three people per day,” Stuecken explained. “I have a lot of remote clients (in) six states who I do remote tele-visits with. I’m just trying to get this out of my home and be able to have a quiet place. I have a family and pets, and a barking dog doesn’t work well on a Zoom call.”

Stuecken said that her business was predominantly a clinical service that sells some products.

“Nothing is getting flushed or put down the drain in the city’s water,” Stuecken said. “It is all safe. It’s all natural products. There are no blood or urine samples.”

Stuecken assured everyone that no biomedical material was being produced and she would not be selling any products containing cannabis.

Winkelman persisted, asking aldermen if they had considered putting a time limit on the business so that it could be reevaluated every year or five years.

Massman said the board had never been asked to add that as a stipulation but that aldermen and the zoning commission could consider it. However, she noted it would have to be presented to the city attorney to ensure the wording was correct before aldermen could vote on it.

Ultimately, aldermen rejected the Planning and Zoning Commission’s eighth recommendation to see what the city’s attorney had to say about a clause that would require the business owner to reapply for a variance every five years.

“A five-year review is awful risky for the business,” said Alderman Delbert Wieberg. “It’s already a risk to buy the property not knowing if your business is going to be approved.”

“There is no guarantee,” Massman agreed. “The Board of Aldermen and the Planning and Zoning Commission can’t consider the variance request until the property is purchased.”

Aldermen also did not specify that Stuecken had to put an impermeable surface on the parking lot or require privacy fencing.

Residents in attendance asked if there was enough parking and if the current driveway was too narrow for traffic to enable customers to park at the back of the property.

“I don’t think it’s fair to bring up parking when the parking problems from Fatima are ridiculous,” said Schneiders.

Massman and others agreed that the parking for the district continues to be a problem that does not seem to be going away.

Stuecken reiterated she would only be seeing a maximum of three clients per day.

“It is in the busiest part of town anyway,” Wieberg added.

After the variance was approved, Stuecken asked what to do next, and Massman instructed her to fill out a business license application available online.