Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes 10-24-2012MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AMES, IOWA OCTOBER 24, 2012 The Ames Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) met, pursuant to law, in regular session at 7:00 p.m. on October 24, 2012, in the Council Chambers of City Hall with the following members present: Patrick Brooks, Shelby Ebel, Elizabeth Erbes, Sandra McJimsey, and Gary Taylor. Staff members Charlie Kuester, Bob Kindred, and Judy Parks were also present. ELECTION OF VICE CHAIR: Moved by McJimsey, seconded by Brooks, to nominate Gary Taylor as Vice Chair of the Board. Vote on Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Moved by Taylor, seconded by McJimsey, to approve the minutes of the meeting of August 8, 2012, as written. Vote on Motion: 4-0-1. Voting Aye: Brooks, Erbes, McJimsey, Taylor. Voting Nay: None. Abstaining: Ebel. Motion carried. CASE NO. 12-21 SPECIAL USE PERMIT - TIM GRANDON, GRANDON FUNERAL HOME AND CREMATION CARE, 414 LINCOLN WAY Public Hearing on application for Special Use Permit to allow the addition of a Human Cremator to an existing Funeral Facility on property located at 414 Lincoln Way City Planner Charlie Kuester explained that the applicant wishes to add a cremator to the existing funeral facility at 414 Lincoln Way. He stated that in 2007, a Special Use Permit was granted by the Board to open a funeral home at this location. At that time, it was not the applicant’s intent to add a crematorium. Mr. Grandon currently offers cremation services, but must use facilities in other communities. Mr. Kuester presented a map of the existing facility in accordance with adjacent businesses and buildings. He explained the physical improvements that would be needed for the proposed use. He indicated that what is shown as the long, narrow out building would be removed and a similar addition would be built in its place. A floor view of the proposed site with the new addition was also depicted. Planner Kuester stated that staff is not aware of any complaints or issues with the facility since its initial approval in 2007. Mr. Kuester reviewed the seven general standards and three Commercial Zone standards from the staff report. He explained that the applicant will need to obtain a construction permit from the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), and that it will issue a permit only after an ambient air quality assessment is made to determine the impacts of the proposed facility on surrounding air quality. In conclusion, Planner Kuester stated that based upon staff’s analysis, the standards have been met and the Planning and Housing Department recommends that the Special Use Permit be approved. Tim Grandon, 2851 Monroe Drive, Ames, was sworn in and testified under oath. Mr. Grandon reported that he has been assisting families in the community since 2007, and it has become more and more apparent that the Ames area is in need of a crematorium. He explained that, initially, the Planning Department indicated that it was not sure how a crematorium would work in the Highway- 2 Oriented Commercial District. Mr. Grandon reported that, in regards to the ambient air issue, the IDNR will not issue a permit until it actually performs an air quality test. Discussion ensued regarding the air standards testing by the Department of Natural Resources. Upon questioning by Board Member Taylor, Mr. Grandon explained that the tests will be performed prior to the cremator being operational. Board Member Brooks asked when the actual permit will be issued. Mr. Grandon responded that the permit will issued before the cremator is actually put into place. More discussion took place regarding the issuance of permits and if the Board should approve of the Special Use Permit subject to IDNR approval. Mr. Grandon indicated that after tonight’s Board meeting, he will be submitting his permit request to the Department of Natural Resources. Upon being questioned by Chair Erbes, Mr. Grandon stated that, in this industry and from all studies he has seen, odors and smoke have not been problems. He described the cremation process, and said that the after burner atomizes any particulate matter, so anything that is emitted is very limited. Al Joensen, 2602 Yorkshire Street, Ames, stated that he was concerned with the lack of information on the application regarding Item (f), “not involve uses, activities, process, materials, equipment, or conditions of operations that will be detrimental to any person,..” Mr. Joensen reported that the answer to the statement of evidence to the use (the device is UL listed; manufacturer provides safety devices, such as automatic gas shut-off), prompted him to come before the Board. Mr. Joensen stated that he wanted to review the following concerns: 1) equipment; 2) combustion control; and, 3) the actual information on the plan that was submitted by the applicant. He offered a diagram of an actual cremator and described how it is similar to a waste incinerator. He said that this equipment has a much higher consumption of natural gas, and the applicant provided no information about the gas line to this facility. Mr. Joensen further indicated that there is a lack of information regarding the electric service. Mr. Joensen went on to say that the key to operation of these units calls for a combustion controller, which measures the temperature. It controls the burning process in all of the chambers. He said that the applicant needed to provide more information on the actual combustion process. In reference to the proposed floor plan of the building, Mr. Joensen had great concern about the construction of the chamber itself and the access, or lack thereof, for maintenance purposes. Mr. Joensen stated his final concern is that there should be a certified or trained operator performing the cremations. Planner Kuester reported that the construction of the crematorium will meet the expectations that the vendor requires. The City’s Inspections Division will ensure that the manufacturer’s specifications are met prior to issuing a building permit. He further reported that he spoke with the gas company; there is sufficient gas pressure in this area, however, the only change might be that the facility will need a larger meter to accommodate the increased flow. The Inspections Division has confirmed that there is adequate capacity to provide electricity. All of Mr. Joensen’s concerns will be addressed and brought up to appropriate standards prior to the issuance of any building permits from the City. Board Member Brooks stated that Mr. Joensen’s concerns are the very reason the IDNR does not give any formal approval until there is a final inspection, and, therefore, becomes its responsibility. 3 Mr. Grandon explained that as far as training to operate the cremator, he will be taking the training from the manufacturer; however, there is no Iowa law that states an operator has to have certain certifications for crematory operations. Board Member McJimsey questioned if there were any follow-up inspections or testing once the crematorium is in operation. Mr. Grandon stated that there is nothing further required from the IDNR once it meets the criteria. Upon questioning by Chair Erbes, Mr. Grandon stated that the building does not have a fire sprinkling system in place, however, in meeting with Fire Inspector Tom Hendrickson, it is not a requirement. The crematorium will have a fire “tech” system, which shuts itself down and notifies him when this occurs. Board Member McJimsey asked the applicant who will maintain the unit. Mr. Grandon responded that he has the option to have a service contract, and the cremator is serviced annually. The newer models have the technology to “communicate” with a computer. Therefore, if there is a malfunction, it shuts itself down immediately. Moved by Brooks, seconded by McJimsey, to adopt ORDER NO. 12-21 approving the request for a Special Use Permit to allow the addition of a Human Cremator to an existing Funeral Facility on property located at 414 Lincoln Way, based on the findings of fact and conclusions as stated in the staff report and the applicant’s completed application form; and, to require the filing of the Iowa Department of Natural Resources Permit with the City of Ames. Chair Erbes asked what enforcement measures are in place if the emissions become excessive after it is in operation. Acting Planning and Housing Director Bob Kindred stated that the City doesn’t have any emissions requirement, but this would fall under the State Code with enforcement through the Department of Natural Resources. Roll Call Vote: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. CASE NO. 12-22 SPECIAL HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT - LISA VICTORIA, 2029 PRAIRIE VIEW EAST Public Hearing on application for Special Home Occupation Permit to allow art classes and a studio on property located at 2029 Prairie View East City Planner Charlie Kuester stated that the applicant, Lisa Victoria, resides at 2029 Prairie View East and is seeking a Special Home Occupation Permit. He explained that, currently, she has two permitted home occupations that staff has administratively approved—one is to have an art studio in her home and, secondly, to teach art classes, primarily to children. As permitted, this allows no more than four students in a class. The Municipal Code allows for no more than four students at any one time unless the Board finds that up to six students will not result in any additional traffic. The applicant seeks approval for up to eight students, which would allow for continued, limited growth in her classes. However, if eight students is not possible, Ms. Victoria is asking that the maximum allowable number of six be approved. Mr. Kuester reviewed other details of the business and the applicable standards from the staff report. He reported that the applicant wishes to hold two sessions each day from Monday through Thursday, with hours of operation from 4:00 p.m. until 7:00 p.m. Traffic is a significant impact that is directly addressed in the criteria which a home occupation has to meet. There is one home occupation Code 4 criterion that has gone unresolved, and that deals with the definition of a “vehicular visit.” That criterion is “not more than 10 vehicular visits per day shall be allowed.” He reviewed the scenarios of the comings and goings of a single car with two classes within one day. Staff has interpreted a “vehicular visit” to be defined as two vehicular visits with dropping off and returning later for pick up of a student. In this instance, one class of six students would generate 12 vehicular visits. Two classes would generate 24 vehicular visits a day. Planner Kuester stated that if the Board saw a drop- off and a pick-up occurring an hour later as a single “visit,” then one class of six students would be six visits and two classes would be twelve. He advised that it would take a minimal amount of car pooling or other means of transportation to get the number to 10. He further stated that the scale of this business is quite large for a single-family residential neighborhood. The request of the applicant goes beyond what the Code allows in the number of students, and without a concerted effort on the applicant’s part, the limit of 10 vehicular visits per day will be difficult to adhere to. Planner Kuester also addressed the issue of parking. He indicated that the driveway only allows for the parking of two cars. There is parking available on the street, however, only on one side. Mr. Kuester stated that if there is a consensus among the Board members that defines “vehicular visits” as one drop-off and pick-up, staff would recommend approval of this home occupation permit, subject to: there being no more than two classes per day with classes limited to six students, and that the applicant demonstrates some form of car pooling, or other means of transportation, so that no more than 10 students per day arrive by vehicle. He further stated that staff would ask the Board to require the applicant to come back in a year to review the existing application in order to ascertain that she is meeting the requirements placed on her by the Board. Much discussion was held regarding traffic generated by “vehicular visits” and the timing in between the drop off and pick up of students. Upon being questioned by Board Member Taylor, Mr. Kuester responded that staff has not had any dealings with other home occupations, other than daycares, so it has been hard to find other situations in the past where this has been an issue – specifically, two classes with six students each and generating that amount of traffic. Lisa Victoria, 2029 Prairie View East, was sworn in and testified under oath. She said her goal of having this special home occupation is to make teaching her primary source of income. She has seen a steady increase in the demand for her style of art instruction. The current permit at her home doesn’t allow her to meet this increased demand, and she has had to turn away students. Ms. Victoria reported that while she would like to increase the number of students in her classes, she doesn’t want to be an inconvenience to her neighbors. She advised that her business has grown by word of mouth. Regarding the vehicle visits, Ms. Victoria stated that when parents drop off their children, they stay about 10-15 minutes. She has a few students who are car-pooling. Upon being questioned by Chair Erbes, she said that she has about 30 students in all. Ms. Victoria didn’t realize that the car visits to her home was an issue. She indicated that she was before the Board to see what she can do, and she would be happy to come back within the year to update the Board on how her business is doing. Board Member McJimsey asked if the applicant would be willing to find commercial space if her business flourishes and becomes well-established. It appears that her business is successful, and that is a dilemma the Board wrestles with when keeping the integrity of the neighborhood intact. Ms. Victoria advised that she wants to be able to do her own artwork in her studio and not make teaching art classes everything in her life. She stated that she wants to keep her current home occupation, so she will do whatever the Board finds acceptable. 5 Discussion ensued regarding the prospect of teaching two classes a day with six-to-eight students in each. Board members discussed several scenarios that might provide a method in keeping with the applicant’s request, subject to conditions placed upon the Home Occupation Permit. The Board addressed the issues of car-pooling, limiting the number of students in classes, limiting the number of classes per day, and the possibility of parking in a nearby church lot and having the students walk to her home. Board Member McJimsey stated her concerns about providing clarity to the “vehicle visits” standard. She further stated that she felt this falls under a “traffic” heading, and traffic and parking are big issues for home occupations. Board Member Brooks explained that the Board needs to take the neighbors into consideration. He advised that the City Council has set these parameters, and it expects the Board to follow them. The Zoning Board of Adjustment must protect all citizens. Board Member Taylor explained that denying the applicant’s request for a Special Home Occupation Permit might be best for Ms. Victoria, rather than putting constraints on her business that would limit her students/classes more than what she now has. That way, she would not be burdened with any type of documentation required by the Board. Upon being questioned by Chair Erbes, Ms. Victoria responded that it may be in her best interest for the Board to deny her application. That way, she could continue with her current arrangements and still be flexible with her students, as their schedules vary widely and classes are quite often switched around. Joe Victoria, 2029 Prairie View East, asked the Board if older students who could drive might be able to park in the nearby church lot and walk to their class. Acting Planning and Housing Director Bob Kindred explained that permission would need to be granted by the church to do this, and that the church is presently being converted to another use. Moved by McJimsey, seconded by Brooks, to adopt ORDER NO. 12-22, denying the request for a Special Home Occupation Permit at 2029 Prairie View East, based upon staff’s analysis and conclusion in the report. Board Member Taylor said this does not preclude the applicant from coming back to the Board at some point if she has arrived at some sort of parking arrangement that might be acceptable. Board Member Brooks stated that Ms. Victoria is providing a valuable service to the community. Roll Call Vote: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. COMMENTS: There were no comments by the Board. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m. ______________________________________________________________________ Jill Ripperger, Recording Secretary Elizabeth Erbes, Chair