Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes 05/13/2020 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AMES, IOWA MAY 13, 2020 The Ames Zoning Board of Adjustment met, pursuant to law, in regular session at 6:03 pm on May 13, 2020, via Zoom communication with the following members present: Leila Ammar, Amelia Schoeneman, Ronald Schappaugh, Rob Bowers, and Chad Schneider. Also present were Assistant City Attorney Jane Chang and City Planner Justin Moore. Board Chair Schoeneman announced that it is impractical to hold an in-person meeting due to the Governor of Iowa declaring a public health emergency because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, limits have been placed on public gatherings, and this meeting is being held as an electronic meeting. Ms. Schoeneman stated that there was a request to discuss having video for future meetings. She asked the Board if they would like to amend the current meeting agenda or add the item to the next meeting agenda. Moved by Schneider, seconded by Schoeneman, to add discussion of video use to a future Zoning Board agenda. Roll Call Vote: 5-0. Motion declared carried. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Moved by Schappaugh, seconded by Bowers, to approve the Minutes of the meeting of April 22, 2020. Roll Call Vote: 5-0. Motion declared carried. CASE NO. 20-21 SPECIAL USE PERMIT – CATHERINE & TODD EDSALL, 2316 CAMDEN DRIVE Public Hearing on a Special Use Permit for Guest Lodging to allow a Vacation Lodging use, for the property located at 2316 Camden Drive, located within the “F-VR” Village Residential Floating Zoning District. Planner Moore stated this item was continued by the Board, at the request of the applicant, at the meeting on March 25, 2020. Mr. Moore stated that the applicant has since withdrawn the application. CASE NO. 20-16 SPECIAL USE PERMIT – UT PROSIM REVOCABLE TRUST, SUSAN HURD, 700 DOUGLAS AVENUE Public Hearing on a Special Use Permit for Guest Lodging to allow a Vacation Lodging use within the apartment building located at 700 Douglas Avenue, in the “RM” Residential Medium Density Zoning District and Single-Family Conservation Overlay District. Planner Justin Moore introduced the request and reviewed the site plan, project description, applicable law, and Findings of Fact and Conclusions. The requested Special Use Permit for Guest Lodging is to allow a Vacation Lodging use in an Apartment Building (3 or more units) located at 700 Douglas Avenue. The site is located within 2 the Residential Medium Density (RM) Zoning District with the Historic District Overlay (O-H) and Single-Family Conservation Overlay (O-SFC). The property contains a four-unit apartment building (conversion of a single-family home) with no other buildings or parking onsite. Mr. Moore stated that there are four criteria that do not meet the standards. All items have to do with the lack of compliant onsite parking. The applicant is requesting approval of a four-unit apartment dwelling with one one-bedroom unit as guest lodging for two adults allowed as guests. The request for two adults is consistent with the occupancy standards of the Ames Municipal Code. The owner indicates in their application that parking for the site exists on a neighboring site. Remote parking for residential uses is not allowed by the Zoning Ordinance for establishment of new uses, such as Guest Lodging. Additionally, there is no improved parking on this site. Since compliant parking has not been proposed, the Guest Lodging code requirement for Vacation Lodging has not been met. The total required parking spaces for the apartments and proposed Guest Lodging is six spaces. Staff and the owner have been discussing the need for parking with a Minor Site Development Plan since February. Staff has suggested a parking design that involves building a garage to meet parking and setbacks standards. Any new garage constructed here would need approval by the Historic Preservation Commission in addition to a Minor Site Development Plan. Surface parking to meet the Guest Lodging and Zoning standards is challenging given the location of the front yard along 7th Street as parking is not permitted in front yards. Based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, it is the recommendation of the Department of Planning and Housing that the Zoning Board of Adjustment act in accordance with Alternative Two, which is to deny the request. Ms. Schoeneman asked about the process of receiving a variance request. She asked staff if the applicant could submit another application for guest lodging after receiving a variance if their request was denied at the current meeting. Mr. Moore stated that the 1,000-foot separation rule does not apply to apartment buildings, and that the applicant would be able to apply for a guest lodging permit at a later date. Ms. Ammar asked for clarification on the decisions that the Board could make at the current meeting. She asked staff to clarify that this case could either be denied or continued to a later meeting. Mr. Moore confirmed that either scenario was a possible outcome. Ms. Ammar asked if the request for guest lodging and the request for a variance could be on the same agenda. Mr. Moore stated that the two items could be on the same agenda, but the request for a variance would have to be presented first. Mr. Schneider asked Mr. Moore if there was a variance for parking when the property was first approved to be a rental property. Mr. Moore stated that the site was given a Letter of Compliance (LOC) many years ago with the understanding that the parking was offsite. At that time, onsite parking was not required by the Inspections Department. Mr. Moore said that there have not been any zoning actions in recent history, and this property had been a rental since at least the 1990s. Mr. Schneider asked if contiguous parking is not allowed as onsite parking. Mr. Moore 3 stated that offsite parking is not permitted in residential zones. Mr. Schneider asked if there are any apartment complexes that sit on more than one lot making parking technically on a separate lot. Mr. Moore said there may be some throughout the city, but when considering zoning permits or new site plans, staff has to bring zoning standards into compliance. Mr. Schneider then stated that he assumed the same issue would be addressed with 708 Douglas. Mr. Moore confirmed that the issues are similar. Ms. Schoeneman asked Mr. Moore if staff’s finding was that the request for guest lodging would intensify the parking issue and cause traffic concerns. Mr. Moore said that was one of staff’s findings, because parking would either be pushed offsite or onto the street. Ms. Schoeneman asked how separation standards apply between guest lodging uses. Mr. Moore stated that apartments are exempt from the separation standards typically. Applicant Susan Hurd, 3275 400th Street, Roland, Iowa, was sworn in and testified under oath. Ms. Hurd stated that there are a lot of complexities that she became aware of after filing for the guest lodging permits. The process started because of the need to provide one parking space at 700 Douglas, causing the need for a Minor Site Development Plan. She and Mr. Moore felt that a variance would be the best way to bring both properties into compliance. She stated that if the variance could be considered, the possibility of providing surfaced parking that would meet the zoning requirements on that lot would be possible. Ms. Schoeneman asked the applicant if she was hoping to submit the same request for guest lodging with or after the request of the variance. Ms. Hurd said that she would like to submit the same request after the request for a variance because there would be no changes to the guest lodging request. Mr. Schappaugh asked Mr. Moore if the Zoning Board would need to set a date certain if continuing the request for guest lodging. Mr. Moore said that it would be best to have a date certain rather than a date unknown to continue the request. Mr. Schneider asked whether a variance to a property is granted for the land or for the property owner. Mr. Moore stated that typically the variance runs with the land rather than the owner, but he referred the question to Assistant City Attorney Chang. Ms. Chang stated that she would have to look into the question. Ms. Hurd asked if having an easement on her property would be beneficial after the variance is granted. Ms. Chang said that Ms. Hurd would need to check with her attorney. Moved by Schoeneman, seconded by Ammar, to continue ORDER NO. 20-16, thereby continuing this application to the meeting of June 24. Roll Call Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried. CASE NO. 20-17 SPECIAL USE PERMIT – UT PROSIM REVOCABLE TRUST, SUSAN HURD, 708 DOUGLAS AVENUE 4 Public Hearing on a Special Use Permit for Guest Lodging to allow a Vacation Lodging use within the apartment building located at 708 Douglas Avenue, in the “RM” Residential Medium Density Zoning District and Single-Family Conservation Overlay District. Mr. Moore stated that the requested Special Use Permit for Guest Lodging is to allow a Vacation Lodging use in an Apartment Building (3 or more units) located at 708 Douglas Avenue. The site is located within the Residential Medium Density (RM) Zoning District in the Historic District Overlay “O-H” and the Single-Family Conservation Overlay (O-SFC). The property contains a four-unit apartment building (conversion of a single-family home) and an accessory garage in the rear with nonconforming parking and driveway access from the alley. The applicant is requesting approval of a one-unit apartment dwelling with one bedroom available for Guest Lodging and with two adults as guests. The request for two adults is consistent with the occupancy standards of the AMC. The parking areas are not verified as meeting dimensional and surface requirements under current zoning standards. A preliminary site plan layout shown to staff shows the ability to provide 9x19 parking spaces located as paved garage stalls with the possibility of additional outdoor surface parking. The total required parking for the apartments and proposed guest lodging is 7 spaces. The access to the garage is gravel and used informally as parking for her neighboring rental property at 700 Douglas. Staff believes the applicant intends to pave a 24- foot wide driveway from the alley to access the garages and comply with zoning requirements based upon a preliminary plan reviewed by staff. The driveway and parking spaces will be located in the rear yard. Conceptually this improvement would satisfy the Guest Lodging requirement for Vacation Lodging which requires a compliant parking space at a rate of one per bedroom. The site will also be compliant for parking for the rental use with the planned paving improvements. In the report, there are four criteria that do not meet the standards, all relating to parking. The owner has requested a continuation of this permit request to a later date. Staff received a Minor Site Development Plan, but needs more time to review it. Review of the Site Plan would also include the need to provide landscaping. Based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, it is the recommendation of the Department of Planning and Housing that the Zoning Board of Adjustment act in accordance with Alternative Two, which is to deny the request. Mr. Bowers asked if the reason to deny this request is different than the reason to deny the request for 700 Douglas. Mr. Moore stated that the reason to deny this request is because compliant parking has not been shown onsite. Ms. Schoeneman asked if staff had received the Minor Site Development Plan with the variance application. Mr. Moore stated that he had received both. Applicant Susan Hurd, 3275 400th Street, Roland, Iowa, was sworn in and testified under oath. Ms. Hurd stated that the Minor Site Development Plan had not been submitted until the day of the current meeting. She stated that the hesitancy in submitting the development plan was that she and staff weren’t quite sure how the 700 Douglas variance request would impact the 708 parking lot modifications. She said they had been trying to put a plan together that would cover both properties properly. She and staff wanted to get the plans to Mr. Moore knowing that he 5 may not have time to review them before the meeting. She stated that there is adequate space for parking on the property at 708 Douglas Avenue. Ms. Schoeneman wanted clarification that the variance for one property could affect the parking for the other property. She stated that the alternative in the staff report said to postpone the cases to the May 27 Zoning Board of Adjustment hearing, but that would be prior to the variance being heard. She asked Mr. Moore if that was correct. Mr. Moore agreed. He said that the way the cases were submitted was as individual applications, but they were submitted together with the variance intending to be addressed through the site plan at 708 Douglas. Moved by Schneider, seconded by Schoeneman, to continue ORDER NO. 20-17, thereby continuing this application to the meeting of June 24. Roll Call Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried. ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Schappaugh, seconded by Schneider, to adjourn the meeting at 6:55 p.m. _____________________________ _____________________________ Jacque Higgins, Recording Secretary Amelia Schoeneman, Chair