HomeMy WebLinkAboutA010 - Council Action form dated Septemer 26, 2006 J
ITEM #:
DATE: 9/26/06
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO FLOOR AREA RATIO REQUIREMENTS IN THE
"G-I" (GENERAL INDUSTRIAL) ZONING DISTRICT.
BACKGROUND:
Floor Area Ratio for Office Uses in the G-I Zone. The Zoning Ordinance, Table
29.901(3) of the Municipal Code, requires a minimum floor area ratio of.35 for"office"
use, only, in the "G-I" (General Industrial) zone. Floor area ratio is defined as: `the
amount of floor area in relation to the amount of lot area, determined by dividing the gross
floor area of all buildings on a lot by the area of that lot". This means that a one-story
building would be required to occupy a minimum of 35 percent of the total lot area.
Proposed Minor Site Development Plans for Offices in the G-1 Zone. The City has
recently received two applications for approval of Minor Site Development Plans for lots
located in the Ames Community Development Park. One development is proposed at 224
S. Bell Avenue as an office building for the Hawkeye Renewables LLC corporate
headquarters. The office building includes 11 ,317 gross square feet of floor area and the
lot includes 180,043 gross square feet (4.13 acres). This proposal has a floor area ratio
of .06 (11,317/180,043), which does not meet the minimum floor area ratio of .35.
The other request for approval of a Minor Site Development Plan is an office building to be
located at 2905 S.E. 5th Street for the Todd and Sargent corporate headquarters. The
office building includes 20,680 gross square feet of floor area and the lot includes 129,011
gross square feet (2.96 acres). This proposal has a floor area ratio of .16
(20,680/129,011), which does not meet the minimum floor area ratio of .35.
Minor Site Development Plans, such as those proposed for Hawkeye Renewables LLC
and Todd and Sargent, are to be approved by City staff, without action required by the
Planning and Zoning Commission or by the City Council. City staff must follow the adopted
zoning standards in approving Minor Site Development Plans. Since neither of these two
site plans for office development in the "G-I" (General Industrial) zone meet the
minimum required floor area ratio of.35, staff is not authorized to approve these site
plans.
Request for Chanqes to Minimum Floor Area Ratio Requirements. The owners and
developers of both properties are requesting that the City Council consider changes to the
Zoning Ordinance standards for floor area to allow the construction of the proposed office
buildings that will be the location of their corporate headquarters. The developers of
these two projects believe that the minimum floor area ratio requirement of .35 for
office uses make it very difficult and not economically feasible to construct office
buildings in the "G-I" (General Industrial) zoning district.
The case can be made that the proposed locations for the two office buildings is
appropriate, given other building projects that have been approved in the Ames Community
Development Park and in other "G-I" (General Industrial) zones. Various types of
businesses have chosen to locate in the Ames Community Development Park, including
light industrial, service, and office uses, among others. Only one manufacturing business
(GC Woodworking) has located in this Development Park.
Original Adoption of the Standard for a Minimum Floor Area Ratio for Offices in the
G-I Zoning District. The City Council adopted an entirely new Zoning Ordinance for the
City of Ames that went into effect in May, 2000. Drafts of proposed zoning regulations
were proposed by City staff and considered by the community, including the City Council,
during the time period beginning in the year 1998 and ending with adoption of the new
Zoning Ordinance in May, 2000. During that time period, it was determined by the City
Council that a minimum standard would be included in the Zoning regulations for
the "G-1" (General Industrial)zone to require that office uses in the "G-1"zone be of a
substantial size, such that no office development would be allowed to occur in the
"G-I" zone that would have a floor area ratio of less than .35. The proposal by City
staff, at the time, was to limit office uses in the "G-1"zoning district to a maximum of 20,000
gross square feet of floor area for office uses not directly supporting on-site industrial
activity.
It is the recollection of City staff that there was a concern, at the time the new zoning
regulations were being considered, that the amount of industrial land, available for
development in the community, was very limited. The Chamber of Commerce and the
Ames Economic Development Commission shared this concern. The .35 minimum
requirement for office uses in the "G-I" zone, limits substantially the likelihood of office
development that would occupy land zoned as "G-I". Office uses are also allowed in
commercial zoning districts. This requirement would then allow office uses in "G-I",
but only if the offices were of a substantial size, thereby not consuming industrial
land with commercial land use and instead reserving the limited amount of land in
the "G-I" zones for industrial uses.
Other Office Developments Approved In G-1 Zones Upon investigation by staff, it has
been determined that site plans of three (3) other office buildings in "G-I" (General
Industrial)zoning districts,which do not meet the minimum required floor area ratio
of .35, have inadvertently been approved by City staff. Please refer to the attached
table of "Office Projects Approved Since July 1, 2000". It should be noted that these
buildings are considered to be "nonconforming", in that the site development does not
meet the minimum Zoning Ordinance standard for floor area ratio.
Vacant Land and Lots Occupied by Office Uses in the "G-l"(General Industrial)
Zonin_q District. Please refer to the attached map showing the location of land, zoned as
"G-1"that is vacant, and land in the "G-I" zone that has been developed with buildings that
are occupied exclusively by an office use.
There are 210.4 acres of vacant land, zoned as "G-I", shown on the attached map.
There are 29.5 acres of land shown on the attached map, zoned as "G-I", and
occupied exclusively by an office use.
Options to Consider in Addressing Requirements for F.A.R. in the "G-I" Zone The
following options have been identified for the City Council to consider as changes are
contemplated for office uses in the "G-I" (General Industrial) zoning district.
OPTION #1: Remove the Floor Area Ratio (F.A. R.) Requirement for Office Uses in
the "G-1" (General Industrial) Zoning District.
This option would allow office uses to occupy land in "G-1" zoning districts, without
minimum size restrictions being placed upon office buildings in that zone. The City's
adopted regulations would restrict the maximum size of buildings by the requirements for
building setbacks, off-street parking, landscaping and storm water management. This is
the case for other zoning districts, as well.
An amendment to the Zoning Ordinance (Table 29.901(3)of the Municipal Code)would be
required. The Planning and Zoning Commission would review the proposed change to the
text of the Zoning Ordinance. The City Council would be required to conduct a public
hearing and three readings of the ordinance to adopt the text change. The City Council
may suspend the rules to waive the second and third readings of the ordinance to expedite
the approval and adoption process.
This option is the most expeditious method of resolving the conflict between the
existing zoning requirements and the two proposed office developments.
OPTION #2: Retain the Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) Requirement for Proposed Office
Uses in the "G-1"(General Industrial)Zoning District), and Designate Office Uses that
do not Meet This Standard as "Permitted Uses".
This option would resolve the "nonconforming" situation for office buildings that have
been constructed, which do not meet the minimum required floor area ratio of .35.
However, this option would not allow the two proposed office buildings to be
constructed in the "G-I" (General Industrial) zoning district.
An amendment to the Zoning Ordinance (Table 29.901(2) of the Municipal Code) would
be_required. The Planning and Zoning Commission would review the proposed change
to the text of the Zoning Ordinance. The City Council would be required to conduct a
public hearing and three readings of the ordinance to adopt the text change. The City
Council may suspend the rules to waive the second and third readings of the ordinance
to expedite the approval and adoption process.
Non-conforming office buildings that were approved as the result of errors by staff
would now be permitted uses; however, no additional office buildings (including the two
proposed offices buildings) could be constructed without meeting the .35 F.A.R.
3
OPTION #3: Retain the Current Requirements for a Minimum Floor Area Ratio
(F.A.R.) for Office Uses in the "G-1"(General Industrial) Zoning District.
This option would preclude most, if not all, future office developments from the "G-I"
zoning district. The two current proposals for office development would not be
approved, and the office developments that were approved in error would remain as
nonconforming to the Zoning Ordinance requirements.
This option does not resolve the situation faced by the proposed office
developments. City staff cannot approve the Minor Site Development Plans for
the two proposed office buildings, if this option is selected by the City Council.
OPTION #4: Exempt Office Buildings, with Approved Site Plans Prior to
November 15, 2006. from the Requirement to Meet the .35 Minimum Floor Area
Ratio (F.A.R.) in the "G-I" (General Industrial) Zoning District.
This option would allow the construction of the two proposed office buildings in the
"G-1" zoning district, and would bring all other existing office buildings in the "G-I" district
into conformance with the zoning regulations, as it relates to floor area ratio. Although
this option resolves the situation for the current office proposals, all future proposals for
office buildings would still be required to meet the .35 minimum F.A.R. in the "G-I"
district, which may not be feasible
An amendment to the Zoning Ordinance (Table 29.901(3) of the Municipal Code) would
be_required. The Planning and Zoning Commission would review the proposed change
to the text of the Zoning Ordinance. The City Council would be required to conduct a
public hearing and three readings of the ordinance to adopt the text change. The City
Council may suspend the rules to waive the second and third readings of the ordinance
to expedite the approval and adoption process.
OPTION #5: Remove the Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) Requirement for Office Uses in
the "G-1" (General Industrial) Zoning District, and Replace it with a Requirement
that Limits the Size of Office Uses In the "G-I"District to 20,000 gross square feet
of floor area.
This option would allow construction of the two proposed office buildings in the "G-I"
zoning district, since both have less than 20,000 square feet of gross floor area, and it
would bring other existing office buildings into conformance with the zoning regulations.
However, the office building at 416 S. Bell Avenue would become nonconforming,
since it includes 60, 480 square feet of gross floor area.
An amendment to the Zoning Ordinance (Table 29.901(3) of the Municipal Code) would
be_required. The Planning and Zoning Commission would review the proposed change
to the text of the Zoning Ordinance. The City Council would be required to conduct a
public hearing and three readings of the ordinance to adopt the text change. The City
Council may suspend the rules to waive the second and third readings of the ordinance
to expedite the approval and adoption process.
4
The two proposed office buildings could be constructed if this option is selected;
however the ordinance change does not address any need identified by staff, or others,
as it relates to current office development in the "G-1" zoning district.
OPTION #6: Rezone the Ames Community Development Park to Another Current
or Proposed Zone.
This option could allow construction of the two proposed office buildings, and bring
other offices uses in the Development Park into conformance with the zoning
regulations. However, other uses in the Development Park may become
nonconforming with the change in zoning.
An amendment to the Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 29 of the Municipal Code) would be
required. Additional research would be necessary by City staff to determine if there is
an appropriate zoning district that exists, which could be applied to this area of the
community, or if a new zoning district would be to be created. The Planning and Zoning
Commission would review proposed changes to the text of the Zoning Ordinance. The
City Council would be required to conduct a public hearing and three readings of the
ordinance to adopt the text changes. The City Council may suspend the rules to waive
the second and third readings of the ordinance to expedite the approval and adoption
process.
This option could resolve the situation faced by the two proposed office
developments; however, the time necessary to draft new zoning regulations
would likely exceed the time available for the two businesses to wait until
construction of the their office buildings must begin.
CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of the situation, given the two proposed office buildings and the
minimum floor area ratio requirement in the "G-I" zoning district, leads the staff to the
following conclusions:
• Consistent enforcement of the zoning requirement for"offices uses only" in the "G-I"
district can be very difficult. Enforcement requires that the developer know, at the
time of site plan approval, that the entire building will be occupied by an office use. It
is very possible that a variety of permitted uses are planned for a particular building,
prior to construction and occupancy, and as the space is leased to tenants, the entire
building becomes occupied by business offices. Once the building is constructed,
and occupied entirely by offices uses, it is too late to require the construction of a
larger building to meet the .35 floor area ratio.
• Since adoption of the .35 minimum F.A.R. in May, 2000, Minor Site Development
Plans have been approved by City staff for three (3)office buildings in "G-1" (General
Industrial) zoning districts which did not met the F.A.R. requirement.
• Development of a variety of industrial and commercial uses in "G-1" (General
Industrial) zoning districts has progressed, since adoption of the new F.A.R. zoning
requirements for the "G-1" district, in May, 2000.
5
• Office uses constructed in "G-I" (General Industrial) zoning districts have located in
prime locations for visibility from Interstate 35. Such is the case for office uses in the
Ames Community Development Park. Development of the two lots, proposed for
new offices, will use the two remaining vacant lots located between Bell Avenue and
Interstate 35 in the Ames Community Development Park. The high quality of
building design and materials is evident, and the development along Bell Avenue has
more the appearance of an office park than of an industrial park.
After construction of the two office buildings proposed along Bell Avenue, only two
vacant lots for development will remain in the Ames Community Development Park.
These lots are located at the northwest corner of the intersection of S.Bell Avenue
and S.E. 5th Street.
• The two office buildings proposed in the Ames Community Development Park are
consistent with the design, scale, materials, and site layout for other similar building
sites in the Development Park.
• Enforcement of the .35 minimum F.A.R. in the "G-1" zoning district will likely require
multiple-story buildings, with large parking lots, and limited green space, given the
size of lots that have been platted for development in the "G-I" zoning district. This
will result in a much different character of development, since development to date
in the "G-1" district has been almost entirely of a single-story building design.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The City Council can direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance to remove the
Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) for Office uses in the "G-1" (General Industrial) zoning
district for consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission and for a public
hearing by the City Council.
2. The City Council can select any of the "Options" identified in this Action Form, and
direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for consideration by the Planning
and Zoning Commission and for a public hearing by the City Council.
3. The City Council can modify any of the "Options" identified in this Action Form, and
direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for consideration by the Planning
and Zoning Commission and for a public hearing by the City Council.
MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
It seems evident that the consequences for the development of office buildings in the "G-l"
(General Industrial) zoning district, as well as the difficulties in applying the law, were not
anticipated, at the time of adoption of this zoning standard.
In reviewing the issue of floor area ratio in "G-l"zones, staff believes that the minimum floor
area ratio of .35 for office uses does not achieve the construction of large scale office
buildings in the "G-I"zoning district as was envisioned at the time of adoption. To meet the
.35 F.A.R. minimum standard, multi-story buildings, with large parking lots, and limited
6
landscaped area, would be necessary. In addition, approval of site plans for the office
developments requires that the office building be constructed of sufficient size in the first
phase of development to meet the .35 F.A.R. standard. Before deciding to build in this
manner, businesses would first seek to build in an area that does not have such a high
minimum standard for floor area ratio, and would build to meet the .35 standard, only as a
last resort, once all options for other locations have been exhausted.
The two proposed office buildings are consistent with the pattern of development that has
been established in the Ames Community Development Park, and their developments
would add greatly to the appeal of Ames and this Development Park as a place to locate
and conduct a business venture.
The fundamental issue that the City Council was trying to address with the adoption of the
minimum floor area ratio for office buildings in the "G-I" zoning district was valid. At that
time, the City Council was attempting to use a tool that would limit the scale of office
development in the General Industrial zone to conserve the "industrial" land for"industrial
types" of uses. Obviously, the City Council did not want to prohibit office development in
the "G-1" zone, so it was their decision to require office uses to build at a larger scale than
what would be typical for commercial zoning districts where office uses are also allowed.
Although floor area ratio is a useful zoning tool in many circumstances, in this particular
instance it becomes so restrictive so as to make it nearly unfeasible to accomplish.
For these several reasons, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City
Council approve Alternative #1 and set a public hearing for October 5, 2006, to consider
adoption of an ordinance deleting the .35 minimum floor area ratio requirement for office
uses in the "G-I" (General Industrial) zone.
If the City Council agrees with this action, it is also the recommendation of the City
Manager that the City Council pass the ordinance change as quickly as possible in orderto
expedite construction of the two proposed office buildings.
It should be noted that, due to the applicants' urgency in beginning construction,
applications are also being prepared by the developers requesting a variance from the
requirement for a .35 minimum F.A.R. in the "G-1" zoning district, to be considered by the
Zoning Board of Adjustment on October 11. Upon action by the City Council to remove the
.35 minimum F.A.R., it is anticipated that the variance applications would be withdrawn by
the applicants.
7
Office Developments in the "G-I" Zone
Address Date of Site Lot Area Building Area Floor Area
Plan (sq. feet) (sq. feet) Ratio
Approval
2500 Ford St. *10/4/77 87,094 5,184 .06
1.99 Ac.
215 Alexander 6/08/94 93,792 12,000 .13
Ave. 2.15 Ac.
240 S. Bell Ave. 10/03/95 337,648 11,300 .03
7.75 Ac.
2730 Ford St. 10/24/95 43,645 9,946 .23
1.00 Ac.
236 S. Bell Ave. 12/16/97 & 179,124 11,100 .06
9/20/05 4.11 Ac.
416 S. Bell Ave. 5/01/98 427,315 60,480 .14
9.80 Ac.
1524 S. Bell Ave. 7/01/05 114,540 18,816 .16
2.63 Ac.
This is the date of issuance of the building permit. Site plan approval was
not required in 1977.
Minor Site Development Plans
Approved for Office Buildings in the "G-I" Zone
May 1 , 2000 to September 26, 2006
Address Date of Site Lot Area Building Area Floor Area
Plan (sq. feet) (sq. feet) Ratio
Approval
*2710 S.E. 5 St. 7/20/01 85,098.87 10, 800 .13
1.95 Ac.
1524 S. Bell Ave. 7/01/05 114,563 18,816 .16
2.63 Ac.
**236 S. Bell Ave. 9/20/05 180,994 11 ,100 .06
4.16 Ac.
* This was submitted for approval as a 6-unit spec. building. The site plan
indicated that the building was planned as office/storage. There were no
known tenants given. Parking provided included 41 spaces. Full use of the
six (6) units would have required 43 spaces for an office, based upon one
(1) space for every two hundred fifty (250) gross square feet of floor area.
Therefore, one can assume that at least one unit was intended for storage.
Each of the units in the building were identical to the others, and each unit
included 1,800 square feet of gross floor area.
** The site plan for this building was approved in 1997, and expired. The
same site plan was resubmitted in 2005 for approval.
\ -.....-._. � ELWOOU UK
\ Z ELWOOD DR...
rMDR ^ RyIVERSI DR �ySl 6 RIVERSIDE- o 1 /�1�
e 0 0 0tl18 m 0) `V n
SJiUSSE4l A% m /�
R�Lp lV^'NOY R�GF P� Ei � � � � �V z
01,c�Op NS HAZNLA N �_
n z STRAWBERRY BYt,-T d o N ^ i.i
0
�� C/ RTh
m r S MAPLE AVE- S MAPLE p � URTI
z ^ ^
a CREEKSIDE DR m CD U J U l
o r a`t S OAK A w _ — _ Y.L ARS'
pua a
m — O
p y FO `9FVtEV* s 7 = � ROO!
qq,yy O � HAIRo OROW,OOD �-. N N .�-E �.
d
F
o
SFOMNAV : KSO
n
9 � EN SWALNUTA CCD
n Q ARK
GOLDEN ASPEN OR 2F m
m---- MIASHING70N
y i
SKELLOGGAVE --- -XELLOGG AVE KEL LO GG AVE x
SKFAWGGy ~ MARKET VE
-S SHERMAN AVE RMA VE DOUGLAS AVE
---BUCKEYE AVE i
CCIf�VER E
- --- DUFF AVE � - ---0UFi AYE
m m DESINE `!' ti
'^ SUMNER M
AVE 16 , CARROLL-AV
�m v u x
!e ;CARDINAL-RD n' I
w
< S&H..WREN ST.. c HIGHAVE EAST AVE z __,.STAFFORD AVE
io
�+ `^ .GRAWFORDAVE
KINC�VBURY;CFER " MA%WELL AVE
z r EE
LARK AVE- S.{yE�p NE SO G
U AVERY
MEA
0
1
-_ RNEGIE�AVE, S
m
S s
04 N
MCC ORMICK AVE
n= SAL
W EY AVE-CAVE H�TN �
~ S
�HOLD > VAST GATE
DR
SDAYTON PL ' O TON AVE ~
WIL
SPRU i
w
z
PEC ALE% RAVE -'
A
7 AV
AVE BELL AVE ❑
215TH ST - 566TH AVE