The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutA6 My name is Sandra McJimsey. I live at 2236 Storm Street. I swear to tell the truth. I am speaking on behalf of the South Campus Area Neighborhood organization. I serve as Secretary of SCAN's Board of Directors and am speaking in the absence of SCAN president, Barbara Pleasants., who is out of town. I believe you received an email earlier this week from Barbara, setting out SCAN's objections to the appeal before you. Unless you wish that I read those comments into the record, I will instead emphasize several points and share a few photos. While many SCAN residents have lived compatibly with the subject property in its current non- conforming rental configuration for many decades, the request before you represents a potential breach in the mutual accommodation. The owner's reconfiguration of interior space designated for bedrooms is an attempt to house more occupants. Using the measurements on the floor plan submitted by Appellant, I estimate conservatively that the proposed reconfiguration enlarges bedroom square-footage capacity from 546 sq ft to�at least 745.5 sq ft, a 36.5%enlargement. [Show calculations.] This increased square footage would add 0 3 new bedrooms. If another first-floor space labeled "Living" were to be used instead as a bedroom, the total square footage used for bedrooms would increase to 909 sq ft, then a 66.6 %enlargement. By either count, this is an enlargemenlbedroom space and n of the number of bedrooms, which is the specific aspect of rental property that triggers increased code standards across the city of Ames. One of these standards is parking. If located in a different residential zone, this dwelling would be required to provide on-site parking based on the number of bedrooms in the structure, in this case;up to 9, which looks impossible given the size of the lot. It is unreasonable to think that a non-conforming rental property in a low-density residential zone should be exempt from these requirements. If you grant the appeal and then it is found that the parking standard needs to be met by the property owner, the owner may be unable to comply. Barbara Pleasants' email outlined SCAN's difficulties with parking in the neighborhood. I have some photos that illustrate the situation. [Note: These were taken in early April, well before SCAN knew about the request before you this evening. Parking issues this past schoolyear have generated repeated calls to the Police Dept. requesting enforcement. In heavy snowfalls during winter, the situation is worse—with snowed-in cars on both sides of the street, so that Lynn is barely passable for not to mention emergency vehicles.] Adding cars from potential overflow ossepai4s of the Knapp reconfiguration would certainly make these problems worse. I also have a few photos of the residential properties near the subject property. They are located in the same low-density residential zone. Very little can be done to buffer these properties from the impacts of the higher-density non-conforming use of the Knapp Street property. With more occupants in the dwelling, the negative impacts would intensify. These photos illustrate a further point: The SCAN neighborhood has housing stock as large or larger than the subject property. Many of these homes are owner-occupied. If these homes became rental property today, they would be limited to no more than three unrelated occupants. Even without the interior reconfiguration, the nonconforming designation assures the property owner an advantage. Finally, I will speak to a neighborhood concern that Barbara's letter does not address in detail— the occurrence of large parties at rental properties surrounding Iowa State. At SCAN's April annual meeting, the Ames Police Department representative noted that rental properties that were once owner-occupied homes generate more calls and problems than the larger apartment buildings being built in the appropriately zoned areas to the south and west of ISU. The police department finds that the porches and outdoor spaces of the houses offer gathering areas that, thanks in part to social media, can quickly overflow with partying students. If reconfigured to have more bedrooms, thereby more easily maximizing the number of occupants, the Knapp Street property could indeed become a troublesome nuisance for neighborhood, the City, and for ISU if the occupants are students. Apart from financial incentives for the property owner, there is no justification for granting the appeal. The existing configuration has been accepted by previous owners of 2304 Knapp Street and the neighborhood since 1928. And, it is consistent with the City's precedents regarding nonconforming rental housing. Granting this appeal would be a serious and unwanted departure. Thank you. Square footage* allotted to bedroom space Existing Floor Plan I" floor: 12 ft 3 in x 7 ft = 85.75 sq ft 13 ft 6 in x 12 ft 11 in = 175.00 Subtotal = 260.75 sq ft 2nd floor: 11 ft 7 in x 9 ft 4 in = 107.30 sq ft 13 ft 6 in x 12 ft 11 in = 175.00 Subtotal = 285.30 sq ft TOTAL 546.05 sq ft Proposed Floor Plan 1 S` floor: 12 ft 3 in x 7 ft = 85.75 sq ft I I ft 7 in x 14 ft 3 in = 163.88sgft Studio:** 11 ft 3 in x 14 ft/ 3 = 55.38 sq ft Subtotal = 303.07 sq ft 2"d floor: 11 ft 7 in x 13 ft 6 in = 156.25 sq ft 13 ft 2 in x 9 ft 4 in = 123.50sgft 11 ft7inx9ft4in = 107.30sgft Studio:** 11 ft 3 in x 14 ft 3 in/ 3 = 55.38 sq ft Subtotal = 442.43 sq ft TOTAL = 745.50 sq ft *Best estimates, using Appellant's floor plans ** Studio: my calculations takes "living" space and allots a conservative 1/3 for "bedroom" NOTE: If the additional first-floor space labeled "Living" were to in fact be occupied as a 3rd bedroom, the additional square footage would be 164 sq ft (I I ft 7 in x 14ft 3 in), bringing the total to 909.5 sq ft or a 66.6% increase in the space allocated to bedrooms t r ILI, �! �. ,. ;1 st — " r $r 9 a _ st+' r , sit •, r d IV M ,.., a �'• �'' r + "flow. : �°u, �� '' /'i B le +t ( 4 w 4 h, �* i�.� ° e � +1 1,IN 4 iiy ar,• , r :�, y.► R 1l ,vF y R�ti err 1 w .,g ; �� ;'a A p �� ➢ 7,� 'y ,03 �j c�7 1i8 .. Alf *A 46, e a.w.7 ,r�i f� . } '� +�•,�ftr../+,vu,.,A"\`"`�,\ll►� ,y �J t.. 'h's u *\r . � ►"'�U. a h+ +kv$i 4 -7T* r Y, F°'1 7" ;l i��FF �'1�►�� a � `4 '� —il�` ypa� ' r °` d -.! i Aar. t ' Ay;� y ` :t' •Fb 3 a. j � 1. �,- it °h^, •'_-•� 1 � 7 __ �� , .. _ x �t w .. 6 .ram-. •p 'i' i� NmE 31 MOV, 41 44 R Y . ,� �� i aft;J d•.�¢ '+dE -.i.. 1 � I 1 .4 uw� Al at 4 41 y , '�� f ,�g •1 ' '� oil y� a y�•1�,� ,i� k / ;x r y' ..1 11 1 ! r L •:�A"' '•�� t !� ''�. I r tea, A MN •i� ,..dam h D. f: -... f-- ::' �s ��,� 1 fir• i•s�'Ih "IT s � t I�t 11 x A. 14 4.. 41 � , � A � Jam'•.� i+, ` a Y � ,�'" } , • 4 4 yam ..- -�. M.y.,, ,�/,, ,. �� , 'M' I �r _. +s• yr ' .kip Cam. I. 3l' f?