HomeMy WebLinkAboutA002 - Council Action Form dated December 14, 2010 ITEM # 34
DATE: 12-14-10
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENTS RELATED TO PARKING
AREA AND PERIMETER LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS
BACKGROUND:
During recent reviews of two separate applications for minor subdivisions creating two-
lot splits, staff encountered a situation common to both proposals that will prove to be
problematic for these current customers, and which has also proven problematic in past
applications. It pertains to proposed divisions of property down the center of existing
paved areas.
Currently, the City's subdivision code requires landscaping along the perimeter of
parking lots and along some defined lot lines. The issue is that when someone
proposes to divide land across an existing parking lot, such a division creates a
landscaping nonconformity because there would not be the required perimeter
landscaping along the new property line. Currently, the only way to address this
is to either remove pavement to facilitate required landscaping, or to divide
ownership of the property through a horizontal property regime.
To address this problem, staff is proposing text amendments that would basically
exempt new lot lines across existing parking lots from the perimeter landscaping
requirements, and making it clear that landscaping requirements only apply to the site
being divided or developed. These amendments would not result in any changes to
properties that would alter the existing physical and visual features of the site, but would
only apply to the legal boundaries of the site. Additionally, it should not create any
health/safety concerns because it does not pertain to above-ground structures that must
otherwise meet setback requirements for fire code and other practical considerations.
The only essential consideration when dividing a lot across an existing parking lot is to
ensure that the divided parking lot functions independently on both new lots, or that
adequate cross-access easements are in place to facilitate existing circulation patterns.
Staff believes it is essential to move this forward immediately to address not only
current applications, but to also ensure that the difficulties encountered over this
issue do not adversely affect our future customers. Staff believes this is in line
with the Council's goals to streamline development processes and to remove
unnecessary impediments to development in the City of Ames.
The amendments proposed are as shown below with proposed new text underlined:
1
• r +
Table 29.403(4)
Minimum On-site Parking Area Setbacks and Perimeter Landscaping
Lot line abutting street 5 ft. @ L2 or 10 ft. @ L1
Lot line abutting a Residentially-Zone Lot 5 ft. L3, except 10 ft. @ L4 in GI
Lot line abutting a Commercially or 5 ft. @ L2 or 10 ft. @ L1
Industrial-Zone Lot
Perimeter landscaping for Grocery Stores See Section 29.403(4)(h) for additional
and Retail and Shopping centers in CVCN landscaping requirements.
and CGS Zones
Perimeter landscaping along new lot lines None required at the time of subdivision
created through existing paved areas However, any expansions alterations or
replacements of the existing paved areas
_must comply with all provisions of this
section.
Recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. At its meeting of
December 1, 2010, with a vote of 4-0, the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended that the City Council adopt these proposed text amendments. Scott
Renaud, the only person present in the audience, spoke in support of the proposed text
amendment and applauded staff for being proactive by addressing an existing situation.
He did, however, request that the City take into consideration a higher review of the
landscaping requirements to allow staff more flexibility.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The City Council can approve the text amendments as proposed above.
2. The City Council can approve the text amendments with modifications.
3. The City Council can decide not to approve the proposed text amendments.
4. The City Council can refer this issue to staff for further information.
MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The proposed amendments provide relief to a current impediment to subdivisions
across existing paved areas without any changes to the existing physical landscape.
Staff believes this type of amendment is in line with the Council's goal to eliminate
unnecessary impediments to development. The amendments also affirm the long-
standing practice to provide landscaping on the subject site of development, and make
it clear that changes pertaining to expansions or enlargements only apply to the site
being altered.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council accept
Alternative #1, thereby approving the proposed text amendments shown above.
2