HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Appeal from Decision of Zoning Enforcement Officlal concerning parking lot landscaping at 1620 South Kellogg AvenueMAY - 7 2012
CITY OF AMES, IOWA
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUS
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL
OF ZHENG/YUM PROPERTIES, LLC
FROM THE DECISION OF THE
ZONING ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL,
SECTION 29.403(4)(c)(i), AMES
MUNICIPAL CODE, CONCERNING
PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING
ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
1620 SOUTH KELLOGG AVENUE
FACTS
CASE NO. 12-09
GEOCODE NO. 09-14-126-050
DECISION & ORDER
Yum Properties owns a triangular shaped property that is located just west of South Duff Avenue
and to the northwest of the westbound entrance ramp from that street onto U.S. Highway 30.
While the property is accessed from South Kellogg Avenue, it is zoned HOC (Highway Oriented
Commercial) due to its proximity to these major thoroughfares. The owner sought and obtained
site plan approval for the majority of his site in 2007 and developed the site into a restaurant
business. The restaurant has prospered to the point that the owner needs more parking for it. To
that end, he sought site plan approval for the balance of his land, intending to add more parking
for the existing restaurant as well as constructing a new building and parking for that new
structure. When the site plan was submitted to the City, it indicated a parking configuration
having three contiguous double loaded parking aisles at the far west end of the parcel, just east of
the proposed building. When it reviewed the plan, the City did not approve it as it lacked the
required interior landscaping. Specifically, the City cited lack of compliance with Ames
Municipal Code Section 29.403(4)(c)(i), which provides as follows:
(c) Surface Parking Area Interior Landscaping. All surface parking areas must meet the following interior
landscaping requirements.
0) Interior landscaping shall be required for parking lots, containing 16 or more spaces, that
include three or more rows of parking spaces separated by two or more drive aisles in a single
location. Such interior landscaping shall, at a minimum, include a 9.0'wide and 10' long
landscaped island for every 20 interior parking spaces and a landscaped median, a minimum of
15' wide running the full length of the drive aisle, for every 3 contiguous double loaded
parking aisles. At least one Landscape Tree, as defined in Section 29.403(2)(b), shall be
installed on each landscaped island. A minimum of one Landscape Tree is required per
50 lineal feet of landscaped median. Shrubs or ground cover plants must cover the remainder
of each landscaped island and median.
In this situation, the site plan submitted showed 33 spaces configured in three double loaded
aisles with north -south drive aisles between them, all to the east of a space indicated for a future
building. The site plan had no interior landscaping shown and staff declined to approve it as it
did not comply with the provision above. '"he developer's representative disagreed with stal'i's
interpretation of the code, since a configuration that had only enough roonj 0 �D Z:� fir three double
loaded aisles would not have space cn0U(1h for- retaining all the proposed parking and the
proposed building as well as the landscaping. The owner's revision ron to remove one row of
parking and replace it with landscaping then created a site plan where three C0111.10LIOUS double
loaded aisles Would no longer exist. As this owner read it, the landscaping did not need to be
added unless the parking lot Included parking beyond the three double loaded aisles. Staff has
consistently read it as a ratio rather than a design requirement.
DIXCISION
The Board has authority to hear and decide appeals where It is alleged that there is an error In
any order, requirement, decision or determination made by an administrative official In the
crif'oreci-nent ot'the zoning ordinance. Ill this instance, this appeal alleges that Plallium, staffhas
made in error in interpretation of Section 29.403(4)(c)(1) of the zoning ordinance. As it reads
this provision, the Board does not find it to be ambiguous. Where the parking contiouration leas
zn t,
three C0111k,1110LIS double loaded aisles of` parking, the interior landscaping described ill the code
Must be provided. The manner in which the owner wishes to do this is not dictated by the code
and they Could do this by several nicalls since this is a quantity requirement rather than .I design
reclUji-cluelit. The site could accornilloclate the landscaping and the parking 11' the proposed
building were reduced in size or eliminated, or a row of'parking stalls can be removed. The I'act
that the owner cannot have this intensity of development this plans shows is likely indicative of
too Much being proposed in too small a space, but It does not create a code ambiguity.
ORDER
WHEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the Appeal ol*thc Applicant to the Detcrillination of'thc
Zoning L"jif'orecinent Olticer regarding Interpretation of Section 29.403(4)(c)(1) of the Allies
I
Municipal Code is Denied to allow a parking lot with three C011t](I'LIOLIS double loaded parking
aisles and no median landscaping on the property located at 1620 Kellogg Avenue.
Any person desiring to appeal this decision to a court ol'i-ccord 11lay do so within 30 days after
the filing ol'this decision.
Done this 25"' day of April, 2012.
Br`L`TIC—C
Chair