Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutA006 - Letter from Jensen Design Build, concerns about proposed ordinance pt,to 7-0-14-q8 E. design build 2 3 IJ98 CITY CLERK N; CITY OF AMES,IOWA� July 22, 1998 Honorable Mayor Tedesco and City Council City of Ames 515 Clark Avenue Ames, IA 50010 Dear NIxoyor Tedesco and Council, As the City of Ames prepares to enact a revised Chapter 29 of the Ames Municipal Code, I am prompted to address many issues and concerns about the proposed revision. My comments are based on information from a draft copy(dated July 6, 1998) of Chapter 29, a list of"red flags" identified by the Council which require further discussion and analysis, as well as verbal information from City staff and peer developers and builders in Ames. I have been developing and building here in Ames for almost five years now. As a young developer, I plan to continue working for many years as a team player with the Council, City staff and fellow developers and builders. I desire to see Ames grow and prosper, but all the members of the "team" are currently not involved in this process of rewriting an entire chapter of the Ames Municipal Code. The following items are general concerns with the proposed ordinance: 1. The current Chapter 29 is 59 pages long. The proposed chapter is 248 pages long, more than four times the size of the original. Also, the wording in the proposed chapter is often difficult to interpret. If this is an attempt to "streamline"the ordinance, it is not very successful. 2. More rules, regulations and definitions require more staff to interpret the code and enforce the rules. Is the City willing to hire additional personnel? Currently, City staff is often too busy to review items in a timely manner. 3. The information required from developers and builders for development submittals is currently adequate, if not excessive. The proposed ordinance requires developers to "prove their case" with an overabundance of drawings and specification documents. 4. With increased rules, regulations and definitions and more requirements for information, the cost to develop property in Ames will clearly increase. This increase is difficult to quantify; however, I would estimate at least a 5-10% increase in cost. Why do we want to make it more difficult to develop in our city? The following items are specific concerns with the proposed ordinance: 1. The allowable area of buildings and paved surfaces on any given lot will be 60% of the total lot area. Only one of the apartment projects we have built in this city would meet that requirement; the remaining dwellings would not be allowed underthe proposed change. (See attached table.) Combined with the new requirement of one parking space per bedroom,the number of units built on each lot will decrease (resulting in a lower density), causing development costs to increase. Higher development costs increase purchase prices and rents. Jensen Design Build, Inc. 235 Alexander Avenue Ames, Iowa 50010 Tel:515.232.2128 Fax:515.232.6206 2. A goal for the Compustown area is to increase density, yet, the proposed ordinance requires 1.25 parking spaces per bedroom (0.25 more than standard). The density of units is actually decreased when developers are required to pave additional lot area for parking. The 60% maximum lot coverage rule (mentioned above) limits density,too. There is a contradiction between the goal and the means to that goal. 3. The number of persons allowed per unit is not outlined in the new chapter. I have been told that those regulations are now found in another chapter(the Rental Housing Code)that has not been presented to us with this draft copy. Why do we have to search more than one chapter to find basic information? 4. The neighborhood between South Walnut and South Sherman and South 2"1 Street and South 4th Street is currently zoned R-4, except for a couple of lots which are zone planned commercial. The new draft calls for this area to be zoned commercial. Property owners in this area cannot develop their lots under the new zoning if the size of their lot is too small for commercial development. (What if a house burns down? What about the houses in the neighborhood that are old enough to be torn down? How can property owners reclaim the value of their land? They will not be allowed to build a single-family home again.) Also, I believe that many people who currently own property in this neighborhood are unaware of the proposed changes. (There are other neighborhoods where property owners are unaware of the proposed zoning changes as well.) Should mailings be sent to them before we change the value of their property, or should we assume they are reading the proposed document? 5. Proposed overlay zones have no clear regulations. Before we adopt a revised ordinance, should we not be aware of all the rules? I don't want to approve overlay zones that are not clearly defined. 6. Parcels of land that are 40 acres or more in size must be developed as a village under the new ordinance. Why are we developing Ames based on an unproved design concept? a. Ames is not a large city. Any point is accessible in Ames with a 10-15 minute drive. b. Denying the use/value of automobiles is naive. The automobile is an important figure in our society. The proposed changes demand more provisions for parking, yet all major developments in Ames will be villages where in theory, no one needs a vehicle. There is a lack of consistency in the parking and vehicle regulations. c. The village concept may work, but are we going to base the growth of Ames on a concept that has not been well embraced by our community? Is Somerset progressing as expected? Why hurry ourselves to become a community of villages when our first village is still in its infancy? d. The design constraints for a village are extensive. It takes a lot of time to develop these constraints as well as enforce them. Again, more time equals increased costs. Who ultimately pays for these costs? Residents of Ames. Some of my previous experiences with City staff and the Council cause me to question the validity of a new zoning code. Current rules and regulations in our zoning code have failed to offer adequate solutions to some development issues: 1. We are currently working on developing single-family attached housing in west Ames. With the existing ordinance, the only way to build zero lot line homes is by submitting a PUD. But if a developer submits a PUD, he or she must provide "amenities"that are not ordinarily provided in a standard development. We are providing an opportunity to provide single-family attached homes that will be owned and not rented, which is clearly a desirable"amenity" in our community. (We desire to offer single-family ownership of a quality, 1400 square foot home with a double garage for approximately $1 15,000. For Ames, this is affordable and also a nice "amenity.") Which would you rather have in your backyard...rental duplexes or owner-occupied single-family attached dwellings? But because of all the regulations that a PUD imposes, our development may be a neighborhood of rental duplexes. In this case, City staff is becoming too caught up in the rules and is unable to understand the big picture. 2. Concerning Dauntless Subdivision in west Ames, the developers were told that the City would pay for much of the infrastructure (as directed by the new Land Use Policy Plan). This includes some utilities and the paving of Mortensen Road. The developers were told to trust the staff and the Council:the City would follow through with their promise. Currently, the City is basically refusing to talk about the issue (by demonstrating a lack of action), hoping that their promise will be forgotten once more development continues. (See attached letters.) 3. Affordable housing has always been an important issue for the Council. On more than one occasion we have attempted to be proactive in developing more affordable housing for our community, but each time the process is derailed by a general lack of interest by City staff or an excess of governmental red tape at all levels. We have requested that the City staff be more proactive in their quest for affordable housing in this community, but our willingness to act as a team player goes unnoticed. (See attached letter.) In conclusion, I offer the following comments: 1. I propose that Chapter 29 be streamlined to 60 pages or less. 2. If the revised ordinance is approved, I propose the City hires more staff to interpret and enact the new plan so development can continue in a timely manner. 3. 1 propose a study be done to determine the increase in cost of this new ordinance. 4. 1 propose the minimum landscaping area be decreased to 25% in RM districts and to 20% in RH districts. 5. 1 propose we offer a satellite parking provision similar to the current ordinance. 6. 1 propose we are allowed more compact parking space in multifamily areas (50%of all spaces rather than 20%). 7. 1 propose that the Compustown area not have excess parking requirements. One parking spot per bedroom is adequate for this area. 8. 1 propose we inform all property owners who may be receiving a zoning change before we pass this ordinance in order to get their input. 9. 1 propose we see the zoning map(as well as the overlay zones and their associated rules) before we pass this ordinance. 10. 1 propose that any new subdivision brought into our city for development is either a village or suburban residential. Developers should not be forced to select one style of development over the other. Both methods of planning are equal options. 11. City staff should have the authority, desire and eagerness to encourage development in Ames. Development will continue in central Iowa. Why not encourage growth in Ames instead of making it difficult? I hope you will take my proposals seriously and try to respond to each one favorably. I recognize that many issues in this ordinance will be passed, and I will not agree with them; however, I have pointed out the items that I believe need to be addressed. The new zoning ordinance is an important document that City staff, Council, my company and the citizens of Ames will be using for the next 30 years. Let's make certain that everyone in Ames is happy with the new document. Sincerely, P� A Yvt4 . Dickson D. Jensen, President Jensen Design Build, Inc. DDJ:md Enclosures JEN EN design build Building and Paved Surface Coverage of Lot Apartments built by Jensen Design Build, Inc. Apartment Name Address No. of Units Year Built . Lot Size BI g.!Paved Area Percent Coverage Pin Oaks 216&224 S. Kellogg Av. 8 per bldg. 1996 26,160 19,943 76.23% 428 S. 4th 428 S.4th St. 5 1996 11,040 7,094 64.26% Bur Oak 219 S. Sherman Ave. 14 1997 19,606 15,120 77.12% Red Oak 211 S. Kellogg Av. 5 1996 11,370 8,466 74.46% Crown Point 203&215 Jewel Dr. 8 per bldg. 1996 38,457 22,792 59.27% Dauntless 4's 4501-4541 Steinbeck St. 4 per bldg. 1997-1998 25,280 16,728 66.17% Dauntless 9's 823-841 Dickinson Av. 9 per bldg. 1998 41,857 28,396 67.84% Fieldstone 4305-4345 Maricopa Dr. 66 1996-1998 150,000 95,700 63.80% Average 68.64% Jensen Design Build, Inc. 235 Alexander Avenue Ames, Iowa 50010 Tel: 515.232.2128 Fax: 515.232.6206 January 29, 1997 o � Honorable Mayor and City Council, City of Ames G� 515 Clark Avenue Ames, IA 50010 Dear Mayor and Council, As developers here in the City of Ames, we desire to cooperate with you to grow our city in a healthy and desirable way and benefit the people of Ames and Story County. We have been involved in many discussions over the past two to three years with you concerning the growth and development of Ames. Specifically, all of us have given input to the new and Use Policy Plan to help create a positive direction for future development. Based on the approved LUPP, we have purchased land within the Southwest Growth Priority Area. This new development, called Dauntless Subdivision and located northwest of the proposed South Dakota Avenue and Highway 30 interchange, is the combined effort ofthree developers. As we have designed this new area, we have worked very closely with City Staff and created a plan that follows exactly the requirements of the new LUPP. As members of City St off and Council, you have decided where you want the City of Ames to grow. We are following your lead and desire to meet the requirements you set forth. The following is an excerpt from the City of Ames Land Use Policy Plan, pages 96-97, dated May 13, 1996: Capital Investment Strategy. In conjunction with the designation of priority areas for growth, a capital investment strategy should be initiated that utilizes a concentrated public infrastructure program to attract private investment to the growth area. In attracting a arger share of future development, the strategy should utilize a large-scale, high priority public investment in infrastructure to guide the location, scale and timing of development. As a major partr er in the strategy, private development should be responsible for directing its investment activities to the area in a prearranged manner(e.g. developer agreements). As part of any pre-arrangements, private development should also be responsible for insuring the availability of suitable land. Development Policies for a Capital Investment Strategy. Ames should establish the following policies to guide a capital investment strategy. A. The Southwest growth priority area should be the first priority, followed by the northwest growth priority area subject to there being sufficient demand at the time. B. Adequacy of public facilities/services should be assured through conCLirrency requirements. C. Where there are inadequate public facilities/services involved in a prio ity growth area, it should be the public priority to provide, in a predetermined arrangement for location, capacity and timing, the following: trunk lines for water and wastewater; major transportation improvements; major drainage improvements, and, major parks and open space improvements. (Page 2) D. In assuring that the capital investment strategy is coordinated with and supported by private and institutional development, representatives of each sector should assist the City in establishing the priorities and funding mechanisms. Therefore, as private developers desiring to invest in the Southwest Growt Priority Area, we are asking that the City of Ames assume responsibility for the costs of all off-s[e improvements and the extension of Mortensen Road. This request includes the following: l. Widening of South Dakota Avenue 2. Traffic signals at South Dakota Avenue and Mortensen Road 3. Utilities as required 4. Bike path(s) 5. Paving and utilities (sanitary, water, storm and electric)for Mortensen Road Obviously, we will pay for infrastructure within the subdivision, but not the major corridors and improvements as described above. We are willing to work with you to follow the guidelines and suggestions as stated in the Land Use Policy Plan for this new area. We look forward to working with you on this project. Sincerely, Dickson D. Jensen, President Ev Cochrane, Owner Jensen Design Build, Inc. Ev Cochrane and Associates JEN EN design build 00 June 5, 1997 Honorable Mayor and City Council, City of Ames 515 Clark Avenue Ames, IA 50010 Dear Mayor and Council, In January of this year, Ev Cochrane and I sent a letter to you regarding the development of Dauntless Subdivision in southwest Ames. We asked the City of Ames to assume responsibility for the costs of all off-site improvements and the extension of Mortensen Road (see attached copy of letter for specifics). During a meeting of the Council in February, a decision on our request was tabled, pending further investigation by Council members. In order for us to move forward with our subdivision, we need a decision by the Council. We have discussed the request with City staff, and they are supportive of the City paying for these improvements. We request that the Council vote in favor of our request. Sincerely, Dickson D. Jensen, President Jensen Design Build, Inc. Jensen Design Build, Inc. 235 Alexander Avenue Ames, Iowa 50010 Tel: 515.232.2128 Fax:515.232.6206 JEN EN design build COP March 7 7, 1998 To Eden Schmitt, Vanessa Baker-Latimer, Brian O'Connell, Paul Wiegand, Jerry Byg and Steve Schainker, Dickson, Duane and I have met with most of you on different occasions to discuss possibilities for low-income housing in Ames. Most recently, we have had discussions about the property at 701 Ken Moril Road (7.60 acres) and the 4.23 acres immediately to the east. Both pieces of property are currently owned by Caroline Smith and occupied by Gilbert Smith. Duane has had a few conversations with Mr. Smith about purchasing the 12 acres; the land is for sale, and we have expressed interest to buy it. We are interested in pursuing a potential low-income subdivision on this specific property, but we cannot do it without help from the City of Ames staff. Due to the following reasons/situations, we believe that the opportunity will be thrown away: 1. While waiting to meet with Jerry one afternoon to discuss the locations and depths of sanitary sewer lines in the area, Vanessa approached me and asked me when we (JDB, Inc.) were going to find her five lots for low-income housing. I told her I would get back to her because I knew we were working on the property on Ken Maril. I then met with Jerry and discovered that there are sewer lines available, but the depths are minimal. We determined that in order for the sanitary system to be done properly, a new line would need to be brought in from the east. Yes, there were ways to make the current system work, but it would not be desirable. 2. The end of Jewel Drive borders the north edge of this property, so it seems natural that the street should be continued south to connect with Ken Maril Road. But the floodway also runs through this property, and a bridge would have to be constructed for Jewel Drive to reach Ken Maril Road. 3. 1 had a meeting with Eden on Monday, March 16 about the possibility of City staff participating in this project. Her general feelings were that the City is potentially interested in seeing this land developed, but mostly because the current property is not being kept in a way that's pleasing to the neighbors and the City. She also said low-income housing was not listed as a goal for the City of Ames this year. I asked her what would be the next step for us, and she told me that we should request a pre-plat meeting and ask that Vanessa attend. 4. While meeting with Eden, I asked Vanessa if she had found any funds available for this project. (I had a discussion on the phone with Vanessa about a week or so before, and I told her that if she wanted the lots to be reasonably priced, we would need some financial assistance for infrastructure and possibly other development costs.) She told me we should not depend on her for any funding; we would have to develop it as a regular subdivision. If she received funding during the process, it could potentially be used for this project. I told that her we may request a pre-plat meeting, and we would like her to attend. Once again, she said we would have to do this without her assistance. First of all, let me emphasize that I am not writing to criticize or complain about any individual. I am simply saying this: If the City of Ames wants Jensen Design Build, Inc. (or any other developer) to be a part of low- income housing development in Ames, the City must take a more proactive role. JDB, Inc. was asked, "Where can we get some lots?" We have presented an opportunity to develop 20-25 lots for low-income Jensen Design Build, Inc. 235 Alexander Avenue Ames, Iowa 50010 Tel:515.232.2128 Fax:515.232.6206 families and individuals. We believe we can build brand new homes on these lots and sell them with the lots for$90,000 to $100,000 each (as Vanessa requested). Now the City says, "Good luck! We'll run it through just like every other subdivision and if you want to try and build some affordable housing on the lots you develop, we might try to help you out. But don't count on us." If the City of Ames really wanted to help and had no tangible ways to show its support, then we would understand, but we can think of several ways the City could help out. I am disappointed that we, as developers, have to contribute the solutions and ideas while the City waits for low-income housing to "happen." With the cost of the land, and the development of infrastructure, and the cost to bridge Jewel Drive over the floodway, and the clean-up of the property, and engineering/design fees....Jensen Design Build, Inc. cannot develop this property for"standard" housing. It is not economically feasible for a company of our size. But with assistance from the City of Ames, we believe we could work together to develop an opportunity for low- income families and individuals to own a new home in a desirable neighborhood. At this time, we are not going to request a pre-plat meeting. Unless the City staff desires to take a proactive role in this property, we will not waste any more of our time designing a neighborhood that will never happen. Sincerely, P/,74 Mike Despard Jensen Design Build, Inc.