Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes 06/24/2020 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AMES, IOWA JUNE 24, 2020 The Ames Zoning Board of Adjustment met, pursuant to law, in regular session at 6:05 p.m. on June 24, 2020, via Zoom communication with the following members present: Amelia Schoeneman, Leila Ammar, Ronald Schappaugh, Rob Bowers, and Chad Schneider. Also present were Assistant City Attorney Jane Chang and City Planners Benjamin Campbell and Justin Moore. Board Chair Schoeneman stated 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. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Moved by Schappaugh, seconded by Ammar, to approve the Minutes of the meeting of June 10, 2020. Vote on Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried. CASE NO. 20-30 SPECIAL HOME OCCUPATION – NIANHAI SHEN & LIXIA ZHU, 1648 REAGAN DRIVE Public Hearing on application for a Special Home Occupation Permit to allow online purchase of merchandise, merchandise storage, and online merchandise resale for the property located at 1648 Reagan Drive City Planner Benjamin Campbell introduced the request, reviewed the site plan, and project description. He stated that the applicant is requesting allowance for Meta Electronics to operate as a home business from the residential property at 1648 Reagan Drive. The business purchases merchandise online, has the merchandise shipped to the home, and then re-sells the merchandise online. The merchandise includes small office electronics and home printers. The business does not fall under the classification of mail order businesses where products are shipped directly from the supplier to the customer, which is a permitted home occupation, as the products are shipped to and from the subject property. The City received a complaint concerning the business for frequent deliveries to the property. The applicant then applied for the Special Home Occupation after being contacted by Staff. The applicant purchased the property in June 2015. The subject property contains a one-story single-family home with a basement. The Story County Assessor lists the square footage of the house as 1,354 square feet. The house has a two-car garage, recorded as 508 square feet by the Assessor. Merchandise storage will take place in the garage. No modifications to the home are proposed for use by the business. The applicant has indicated that office space inside the residence will be used for the business. The applicant has stated that the storage space in the garage will not preclude two automobiles from parking in the garage. The applicant has stated the following regarding the use: 2 - There are no employees outside of the household. - No customers will visit the site. - An office space inside the dwelling occupies approximately 35 square feet. - A space in the garage of less than 100 square feet will be used for storing merchandise. The space needed will not replace a car stall. - There will be regular package deliveries, estimated at up to five per weekday. The packages will be small, less than 28 inches for any side, and can be carried. No special equipment is required to move the packages; they can be lifted or moved with a dolly. Staff sent out public notices. The proposed online purchase, on-site storage, and online re-sale business will not exceed the allowed 10 visits per day based upon the applicant’s statements. The space used for the business will occupy less than the maximum allowed 25 percent of the total floor area of the residence. No customers visit the property, but deliveries happen regularly. Delivery vehicles do park on the street but for a short time. The UPS, FedEx, and USPS vehicles are standard home delivery trucks; large truck deliveries are not proposed. Due to the nature of the business as described in the application, it can be concluded that the proposed use will not alter the normal residential character of the area. Mr. Campbell stated that based upon the application as described, the board may conclude that the application does meet all applicable material in the Code. Applicant Nianghai Shen, 1648 Reagan Drive, Ames, Iowa, was sworn in and testified under oath. Mr. Shen stated that Mr. Campbell had mentioned all necessary details, but he would answer any questions from the Board. Mr. Schappaugh asked the applicant for his definition of a dolly. Mr. Shen stated that it is just a two wheeled cart that is tilted back to move. Mr. Campbell stated that the dolly was discussed, and that the applicant will not use a forklift. Judy and Bruce Vance, 1636 Reagan Drive, Ames, Iowa, were sworn in and testified under oath. Ms. Vance stated that there were a few things in the report that were not accurate. She stated that she has seen different companies than the ones provided delivering packages to the applicant’s home. Ms. Vance said that the business is a nuisance due to the traffic created. She said their street is unique because it is a loop rather than a through street, and when a truck comes in, it has to go out the same place causing what feels like double the traffic. She said the report listed zero to five packages being delivered per day, but it did not directly address the number of delivery vehicles per day. She questioned how all of the merchandise could fit in 100 square feet of garage while still utilizing the two spaces for vehicles as she had never seen both cars parked inside the garage. Mr. Vance stated that 90 percent of the time the trucks go by their house, drop off or pick up a package, and then turn around and go back by. He said the frequency of the vehicles makes him feel like he is not in a peaceful neighborhood. William Nutty, 1629 Reagan Drive, Ames, Iowa, was sworn in and testified under oath. Mr. Nutty stated that this is a quiet cul-de-sac neighborhood, and for the applicant to state that the character has not changed, is not true. He said delivery drivers aren’t concerned with speed limits. He said that he has lived on Reagan Drive for 27 years and that the neighborhood was 3 marketed as a quiet neighborhood, He said he feels that if this permit is passed, others will want to do the same and therefore he is opposed to this permit. Joshua Elliott, 1635 Reagan Drive, Ames, Iowa, was sworn in and testified under oath. Mr. Elliott stated that he moved to the neighborhood eight months ago. He stated that his concern is for his children. His children like to play out front, riding their bikes in the street, and he wouldn’t want to see that changed. Vicki Gross, 1520 Reagan Drive, Ames, Iowa, was sworn in and testified under oath. Ms. Gross stated that she and her husband live at the entrance to the circular drive. She stated that her concerns are the increase in traffic and the safety of small children in the neighborhood. Craig Forney, 1618 Reagan Drive, Ames, Iowa, was sworn in and testified under oath. Mr. Forney stated that his concern was the increase in traffic, particularly as the applicant’s business becomes more successful. He said that even a single semi-truck driving up and down the road with small children present is an unnecessary risk for parents to worry about. Ms. Vance stated that when she and her husband bought their house, they could not have known that there was a business on the street because there was no paperwork that had been filed yet. She said that there was not a permit on file which precluded them from knowing that there was a business on this street. Applicant Mr. Shen stated that they never had a delivery that came from a semi-truck, only deliveries from UPS, USPS, Fed-Ex once. He said that some deliveries were for their personal use rather than for the business due to COVID. Ms. Schoeneman asked the applicant if he receives five packages per day or if there are five trucks that deliver per day. Mr. Shen stated that there are on average five packages per day that might come on separate trucks. Ms. Schoeneman asked Mr. Campbell if the 10 visits per day would be just to the home or to the home and back. Mr. Campbell stated that he didn’t think this had ever been addressed before. He said that one visit would be to the home and back. Mr. Shen stated that due to COVID, his business shipments were temporarily coming to his home. He said normally the packages would be shipped to their storage facility. He stated that USPS delivers mail to the entire neighborhood every day. Ms. Schoeneman asked Staff if the type of vehicle is limited by the Standard. Mr. Campbell stated that there is nothing in the Standard that says semis can’t make deliveries. Ms. Schoeneman said that the Standard says that the business shouldn’t generate traffic levels greater than normally would be expected in a residential area. Mr. Campbell didn’t believe a semi delivery would fall under traffic volume, but possibly could be addressed as out of character for a residential area. Ms. Ammar questioned the use of the storage facility. She asked the applicant to clarify where 4 packages were received. Mr. Shen stated that prior to the pandemic, packages were received both at home and at their storage facility. He also stated that since the onset of the pandemic, all packages ship to the home. Mr. Campbell read the Q&A Comments section for the Zoom meeting to the Board. Mr. Forney’s comment stated, “Deliveries are made by class of deliveries (priority packages are delivered by certain times of day; other deliveries are delivered enmasse later).” Judy and Bruce Vance’s comment stated, “If they get delivery at the rental storage place. Ronald is right. It seems that the drop-off truck is not the same truck as the pickup truck. So if three semis came, they would be out of code. But if 10 Fedex trucks came they would be in code?” Mr. Campbell stated that the maximum deliveries per day would be 10 regardless of type of vehicle. Ms. Schoeneman asked the applicant if it would be possible for him to choose the type of delivery vehicle that comes to his property. Mr. Shen stated that his business size is very small. He said he didn’t believe that a business would deliver the few packages he orders on a semi- truck. Ms. Schoeneman asked Mr. Shen if he would be open to a condition that no semi-trucks make deliveries. Mr. Shen said he could make sure that no semis make deliveries. Mr. Schappaugh asked Mr. Shen if he knew what his pre-COVID 19 orders were as compared to current orders. Mr. Shen said that currently deliveries were less frequent bringing one to two packages per day. Mr. Schappaugh asked staff and Ms. Chang if the board would be within their authority to put a “no semi” condition in the motion. Mr. Campbell said it could be put in the motion, but he thought it would be difficult to enforce due to the semi being in the public right- of-way. Ms. Chang said that if semi-truck traffic were classified as not being the normal type of traffic that comes through a neighborhood, then it shouldn’t be a problem saying that semi-truck deliveries on a normal basis would not be allowed because this is a residential neighborhood. Ms. Schoeneman asked Mr. Campbell to point her to the residential standard in the report. He stated that the residential standard can be found under (3)(a)(i) of the report. She stated to the board that if they desired to add a condition, a motion could be made and seconded. Then with discussion, the Board could amend Staff’s Findings to add a condition due to public testimony. Moved by Schoeneman, seconded by Ammar, to adopt ORDER NO. 20-30, thereby approving the request to allow the online purchase of merchandise, merchandise storage, and online merchandise resale as a Special Home Occupation at 1648 Reagan Drive by amending Staff’s Findings and Conclusions and adding the condition that deliveries shall not occur through semi- truck traffic. Ms. Schoeneman commented that she amended Staff’s first Finding for the first criteria that based upon public testimony there were concerns about larger truck traffic, so the condition was added to ensure that the home business stays within the residential character of the neighborhood. Mr. Schneider stated that if the neighbors have concerns about the speed of 5 delivery vehicles, those concerns need to be reported to law enforcement as it is not a neighbor issue but a law enforcement issue. Ms. Schoeneman stated that it is hard to enforce the added condition, but if neighbors notice semi deliveries becoming an ongoing issue, then they need to report it to the City. Mr. Campbell agreed stating that documenting things like semi-truck deliveries and alerting Staff is the proper procedure for enforcing City laws. Roll Call Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried. CASE NO. 20-16 SPECIAL USE PERMIT – UT PROSIM REVOCABLE FAMILY TRUST, SUSAN HURD, 700 DOUGLAS AVENUE Public hearing, continued from May 13, 2020, on application for 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 stating that the application was continued from the meeting on May 13, 2020. The Zoning Board received the report with amendments prior to the meeting. Since the May meeting, Staff has received a site development plan from the owner, and after the granting of a variance at the last Zoning Board meeting, Staff has also received a remote parking agreement which is under review by the City’s legal department. The remote parking agreement will need to be approved by the City Council in order to officially grant offsite parking. Mr. Moore stated that the recommendation in Staff’s report is to approve Alternative One with conditions. 1. The Zoning Board of Adjustment can approve the request from the property owner for a Special Use Permit to allow a Guest Lodging Use at 700 Douglas Avenue with the following condition(s): A. Condition: Approval of a Minor Site Development Plan that complies with zoning standards. B. Condition: The gravel parking lot at 708 Douglas Avenue must be paved to City standards according to an approved Minor Site Development Plan. Improvement of the driveway and parking lot is required no later than December 1, 2020. This is similar to a condition approved recently on another site applying for a Guest Lodging license. C. Condition: Approval of a remote parking agreement by the City Council. Mr. Schappaugh asked Mr. Moore why the construction of the concrete parking lot was limited to December completion when the variance was granted for one year. Mr. Moore stated that the condition to get the driveway constructed is so that upon issuance of the Special Use Permit and other items, the property can begin functioning as a guest lodging use under the current zoning standard. 6 Applicant Susan Hurd, 3275 400th Street, Roland, Iowa, was sworn in and testified under oath. Ms. Hurd stated that the approval of the variance was well taken and that she had already begun working on landscaping. She said that she was in the process of finding someone to pave the drive. Moved by Bowers, seconded by Schappaugh, to adopt ORDER NO. 20-16, thereby approving Alternative One with conditions A, B, and C as outlined by staff. Roll Call Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried. CASE NO. 20-17 SPECIAL USE PERMIT – UT PROSIM REVOCABLE FAMILY TRUST, SUSAN HURD, 708 DOUGLAS AVENUE Public hearing, continued from May 13, 2020, on application for 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 Planner Justin Moore introduced the request stating that Staff’s recommendation on this case has been changed to approval. Mr. Moore said that due to the submitted items and the action taken on the variance, this property meets the Standards for a Special Use Permit, and Staff recommends Alternative One with two conditions. 1. The Zoning Board of Adjustment can approve the request from the property owner to approve a Special Use Permit for a Vacation Lodging Use at 708 Douglas Avenue with the following condition(s): A. Condition: Approval of a Minor Site Development Plan that complies with zoning standards. B. Condition: The gravel parking lot must be paved to City standards according to an approved Minor Site Development Plan. Improvement of the driveway and parking lot is required no later than December 1, 2020. This is similar to a condition approved recently on another site applying for a Guest Lodging license. Applicant Susan Hurd, 3275 400th Street, Roland, Iowa, was sworn in and testified under oath. Ms. Hurd stated that she had nothing further to discuss. Moved by Bowers, seconded by Schoeneman, to adopt ORDER NO. 20-17, thereby approving Alternative One with conditions A and B as outlined by Staff. Roll Call Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried. Motion declared carried. Ms. Ammar asked if the next Zoning Board meeting would be held at City Hall. Mr. Moore stated that he was unsure of a decision for Boards and Commissions. Ms. Chang stated that she had no information either. Ms. Ammar asked if it would be possible to turn off the Q&A section 7 for any future Zoom meetings. She stated that because people have to be sworn in, and the public hearing has to be open, she didn’t feel like the Q&A should be part of the procedure. Ms. Schoeneman agreed with Ms. Ammar. Mr. Bowers stated that Ms. Ammar had an excellent point. He said he noticed two questions that came in as the Board was voting, and had that been an in-person meeting, that person would have interrupted the group. Ms. Schoeneman said that the opening statement could be amended to note that the Q&A section would not be monitored. ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Ammar, seconded by Schneider, to adjourn the meeting at 7:07 p.m. _____________________________ _____________________________ Jacque Higgins, Recording Secretary Amelia Schoeneman, Chair