HomeMy WebLinkAboutA012 - Memorandum from Ames Chamber of Commerce, input on proposed zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations Amu
Ames Chamber of Commerce 1 O w
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Ames Chamber of Commerce and Ames Economic Development Commission
Zoning and Subdivision Task Force
Date: July 30, 1998
Subject: Input on New Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations
First of all, we want to thank the Mayor, City Council and City Staff for the enormous
amount of time they have devoted to enhancing the first draft of these documents. In
addition, the Chamber and AEDC want to thank the Mayor and City Council for
modifying the earlier versions of the zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations based
on our suggested changes.
We want to acknowledge the City Council for these positive modifications that have been
made to date:
• We believe the change in the definition of family from two unrelated people to three
unrelated people was appropriate. It reflects the current ordinance and the fact that
Ames is a university based community.
• The City Council changed the basis of restoring nonconforming structure damage to
70% of assessed value rather than 70% of market value.
• We appreciate the elimination of the landscaping requirement of having 95% opaque
year round. This provision was unrealistic given our climate.
• In the commercial zones, we approve increasing the maximum building setback from
10 feet to 60 feet. If this were to remain at 10 feet,most of the commercial buildings
in Ames would be nonconforming.
• For commercial and industrial zones, we support changing the approval authority
from City Council to Staff.
213 Duff Avenue • Ames, Iowa 50010 • (515) 232-2310 • FAX (515) 232-6716
web site: www.ames.ia.us e-mail:chamber@ames.net
r �
• We appreciate the elimination of the distinction of low impact and high impact in
industrial zones as well as maintaining staff approval authority.
• Also, we approve of the change allowing office developments in general industrial
but we wonder if the minimum FAR of.35 might be too high.
While we appreciate the City Council incorporating most of our suggested changes into
the latest revised document, the following areas are of concern to us:
• We appreciate the new section on page 1-4 regarding vested rights. However, it is
unclear how this would work for a residential development. Take the case of the
Dauntless subdivision, a site plan has been approved for the development which
contains over 150 acres. However, only a small part of the development has been
completed. Are the portions not yet completed to be developed under the new
ordinance or the current ordinance?
• The new zoning ordinance would require that all parcels of land larger than 40 acres
in size be developed as Village Residential. The developer can try to get the property
rezoned to Suburban Residential if they can demonstrate that parcel due to its
configuration, shape or unique topographic conditions cannot be developed to meet
the goals in the Land Use Policy Plan to provide for design integration and social and
physical interaction. This exception seems very vague and causes more uncertainty
for developers. We believe that developers should be given the choice to either
develop under Village Residential or Suburban Residential for the following reasons:
• The developer has its capital at risk and is in the best position to
determine what consumers want in terms of new residential
developments.
• Consumers should be given a choice in developments and not have to
select from only new village developments.
• The Somerset development is exciting but will it be successful?
Should all new lands be developed as village residential when we do
not know if this type of development will be embraced by consumers?
• Given the ordinance as drafted, developers will choose to build fewer
homes in Ames. They will make their investments in nearby cities.
This population and purchasing power loss will dramatically impact all
businesses in Ames.
• Therefore, we would recommend that the base zoning be suburban
residential with a floating village residential zone or that the developer
r
be allowed to select the best option for their development without
having to meet certain conditions.
• We do not understand why, on page 12-4, a suburban residential development should
provide significant amounts of plant material sized in excess of landscaping
requirements in Section 4.4 of the ordinance. Why are the standards higher for this
type of development?
• Medium density multi-family developments will be required to have a minimum
landscape area of 40%. Almost all recently built apartment complexes of this type do
not have this much land devoted to landscaping. With more landscaping, you can
built less units on a given parcel of land. The land cost will have to be spread to a
smaller number of units which increases the cost per unit. This landscaping
requirement will increase apartment rental rates in Ames. We would suggest this
minimum be decreased to 25% in RM districts and 20% in RH districts.
• In RH districts, it is appropriate to allow satellite parking as allowed by the current
ordinance.
• It would be beneficial to conduct a study to determine the increased cost of
development that will occur with this new ordinance.
• For industrial projects, the efficiency of the existing development process has been
complimented by Ball Plastic Container Corporation and Barilla. We request that the
City conduct an analysis of the proposed system in order to ensure that these changes
do not increase the time involved to achieve site plan approval and construction of a
building.
• We believe it is important to approve the new map at the same time as the new
ordinance. It is difficult to gauge the impact of the new ordinance until the map is
approved.
In conclusion, we want to thank the Mayor and City Council for the changes you have
made and to ask you to make additional modifications. The community appreciates the
time you have spent improving this ordinance so that it fits our community's needs and
its future.
acc98Auppzon/7-30mtg.doc