Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Building Board of Appeals Minutes 10/05/2015 (2) 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS AMES, IOWA JULY 6, 2015 Call to Order The regular meeting of the Building Board of Appeals was called to order by Brad Heemstra, acting Chairman, at 4:03 p.m., July 6, 2015, in Room 235 in City Hall, 515 Clark Avenue. Present from the Building Board of Appeals were Brad Heemstra, David Carnes, Larry Brandt, Chuck Haselhoff, and Dan Nutini. Staff members present were Seana Perkins, Scott Ripperger, Adam Ostert and Charlie Kuester. Motion made by Brandt to approve the minutes of November 3, 2014, with correction to page 1, paragraph 3, last sentence changing “metal cable” to “Romex”. Seconded by Nutini. Vote on Motion: 5-0 Motion passed unanimously. Old Business None New Business A. A proposed text amendment to Chapter 5 of the Ames Municipal Code recommended by the City Council to require the installation of certain missing infrastructure with new development. Kuester was introduced to the Board and Perkins gave a background on the recommendation from City Council. Perkins provided an updated Right of Way (ROW) Improvement handout that had been updated since the board packet was distributed and Kuester re viewed the specifics of the proposed text amendment. It was noted that Council has proposed this as a mechanism to catch missing infrastructure items starting in the site plan process; specifically easements and ROW items as well as sidewalks and shared use paths, street lighting and street paving. New construction or substantial improvement projects of $100,000 or greater requiring a building permit would “trigger” this requirement. These items could also be “triggered” by the Development Review Committee (DRC). These proposed requirements would begin August 1, 2015 for any new site plan that is submitted to DRC; for building permits for tenant/owner improvements at the aforementioned threshold the date will be November 1, 2015. If the proposed improvements exceed 20% of the value of the project one may apply for a hardship grant. The Public Works Director will approve such grants and will prioritize the infrastructure requirements. Heemstra and Carnes both asked for clarification regarding the prioritization of the infrastructure requirements in regards to the hardship grant. Kuester elaborated and gave examples. 2 Perkins and Ostert gave a recent permitting example regarding the threshold as an example of what may initially trigger the proposed recommendation could change through the plan review process. Kuester indicated that Inspections will be doing the project valuation which will determine the threshold and Public Works would determine the estimated cost of infrastructure improvement. Kuester noted there is also a set of amendments that apply only to the subdivision code, specifically in regards to sidewalks and streetlights. Heemstra inquired about and discussion was had regarding the Bell Avenue zoning and its plat requirements as it applies to the sidewalks. Kuester stated the next step following the Building Board of Appeals meeting is for the amendments to be posted on the Planning website and notification to go out to their developers. This item is intended to go on the Council’s agenda Tuesday, July 14, 2015 for the first reading of the ordinance. If it is approved the first phase would be effective middle of August. Heemstra asked Kuester to continue to summarize Section 22 , specifically the last 3 pages. Kuester gave a general overview of the contents noting this is new Division 6 as part of Chapter 22, Section 22.31. Discussion was had regarding occupancy contingencies. It was indicated that the PW Director will make the determination regarding significant hardship requests and is applicable only to substantial improvements. Hardship requests will be approved by the PW Director and the City Clerk. Heemstra asked for clarification regarding the Shared Use Path. Perkins noted that, in relation to the significant hardship requests, the definition of “substantial improvement” isn’t the same as the definition that is in the IBC meaning it’s only applicable to this specific section of the code. Kuester stated public outreach will continue both before and after the first reading of the ordinance. Heemstra asked for examples of where specifically within the city of Ames these types of situations could surface. Kuester gave the example of roughly 4000 parcels within the city of Ames that do not have sidewalks. Kuester identified the redevelopment along Duff Avenue, Freel Drive and potentially Bell Avenue and Carnegie Avenue. Discussion was had regarding missing links in the Shared Use Paths, specifically along South Duff Avenue. Haselhoff inquired as to where this code will reside. Kuester explained it applies to the Ames Municipal Code only. Heemstra asked for the requirements that trigger site plan review. Kuester explained and gave specific examples of how this amendment would and would not apply. Perkins noted a need to establish internal processes between Inspections, Planning and the Public Works Departments as well as a need to establish an outreach/education program. 3 Motion made by Brandt to recommend today’s document be submitted to the City Council for approval. Second by Carnes. Vote on Motion: 5-0 Motion passed unanimously. Board Comments None Adjournment The Board adjourned at 4:43pm ____________________________ Kathy Reichert, Recording Secretary