HomeMy WebLinkAboutA001 - department report r
CITY OF AMES
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PREPARED: MAY 10, 1977
MEETING DATE: MAY 18, 1977
CASE NUMBER: Z 77-6.
APPLICANT: City Council suggested this area be examined.
REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning from C-2 (General Commercial ) to C-4 (Retail
Commercial ).
LOCATION: Generally bounded on the north by the Chicago and Northwestern
Railroad, on the.south by Lincoln Way, on the east by Duff Avenue,
and on the west by Clark Avenue. (see attached map for exact loca-
tion)
SIZE: Approximately 9 acres.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: Subject Property - Commercial
North - Commercial , C-4
South - Commercial , C-2
East - Commercial , C-2
West - Commercial , C-2
FINDINGS:
Land Use Policy Plan: The adopted Land Use Policy Plan Map indicates this
area is suitable for continued use for commercial purposes.
Public Utilities: All utilities are presently available to the area. Pub-
lic utilities are adequate.
Transportation: This area is readily accessible from all parts of the com-
munity via Lincoln Way, Grand Avenue, or Duff Avenue. Vehicular park-
ing is limited in the area, although the municipal lot north of the
railroad tracks provides additional parking facilities for the area.
Physical Characteristics: Because of the extensive urban uses which pre-
sently exist, the area is characterized by older commercial structures,
parking lots and streets.
Zoning Ordinance: The primary difference between the C-2 and C-4 districts
is that parking must be provided on-site in the C-2 district, whereas
no on-site parking is required in the C-4 district. An example is the
Downtown, which is zoned C-4, and parking is not provided on-site but
adjacent to the properties.
ANALYSIS:
1. This request was precipitated by the fire which destroyed two buildings
on the west side of Kellogg Avenue earlier this year. Because of the
setback and parking requirements of the C-2 district, the property own-
ers could not rebuild to pre-fire setbacks. Because of the nonconform-
ity the property owners were required to file an appeal before the
Zoning Board of Adjustment. That appeal was granted.
2. Examination of the area by the staff has made the determination that a
majority of the structures in the rezoning area are presently nonconform-
ing in the C-2 district. Those same structures would become conforming
if the zoning is changed.
3. Properties along the north side of Lincoln Way have not been included
because most conform to the C-2 district requirements for providing
on-site parking. Because Lincoln Way is an arterial street, a minimum
of 60 feet setback from the centerline is required. It should also be
noted that the nature of the businesses along Lincoln Way requires that
on-site parking be provided.
4. This area was included in the assessment district which was
established for the construction of the municipal parking lot north of
the railroad tracks. Although separated from the parking area by the
railroad, the municipal lot does provide parking for the area. There
is also some limited parking facilities south of the railroad and
metered parking on the streets.
5. Rezoning the area C-4 would not only recognize the actual land usage
but would also serve to identify the area as part of the Downtown core.
Making the structures conforming might encourage investment in the area
which could result in an upgrading of structures. That may be an exag-
eration of the "benefits" derived from making the- structures conforming,
but it is certainly a possibility that should not be discounted.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning and Zoning Commission
initiate this request and make a favorable recommendation to the City
Council .
A problem has been found in the zoning ordinance text which greatly
effects the C-4 zoning district. Section 38-1033 of the text has a
letter (1 ) placed in the column for "Minimum Lot Width in Feet." This
is a requirement that all lots in the C-4 district must have a minimum
lot width of 35 feet at the front property line and 50 feet at the build-
ing line, which in the C-4 district is almost always the same. This
renders almost all lots in the C-4 district as being nonconforming.
In consultation with the City Attorney, it has been stated that this
provision serves no purpose within the intent of the C-4 district and
it should be eliminated.
It is, therefore, recommended that the Commission transmit to City Council
a recommendation to eliminate the letter (1 ) for the C-4 district from the
chart.
dw