Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes 5-23-2007MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AMES, IOWA MAY 23, 2007 The Ames Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) met, pursuant to law, in regular session at 7:00 p.m. on May 23, 2007, in the Council Chambers of City Hall with the following members present: Lucy Martin, Bradley Miller, and Thomas Weber. Denise Link and Mary Ann Lundy were excused. Staff members Judy Parks, Dominic Roberge and Steve Osguthorpe were also present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Moved by Martin, seconded by Weber, to approve the minutes of the meeting of May 9, 2007. Vote on Motion: 3-0. Motion carried unanimously. CASE NO. 07-12 SPECIAL USE PERMIT – CPMI-CRE CORALVILLE LTP, PROPERTY OWNER; JEFF HUNTER, THE BASIL, BUSINESS OWNER; 2321 NORTH LOOP DRIVE Public Hearing on application for a Special Use Permit to allow a banquet and catering use in a Planned Industrial (PI) Zone at 2321 North Loop Drive Planner Osguthorpe stated that this site is located within the Iowa State University (ISU) Research Park, and the building was built as a cafeteria and auditorium. The request is to utilize the existing facility for banquets hosted by businesses both inside and outside the Research Park, for public and quasi-public banquets for special groups or community organizations, occasional private parties, and open house food events for the general public. Daily catering activities would include on-site food preparation for local businesses, Iowa State University, ISU sororities or fraternities, and others. Mr. Osguthorpe stated that the existing building contains the necessary equipment and an industrial kitchen, so no modifications to the structure are proposed. He explained that the cafeteria/auditorium was constructed as an addition to the principle building occupied by Engineering Animation, Inc. (EAI), after the Ames City Council approved an amendment to the Planned Industrial (PI) Plan in 1998. Mr. Osguthorpe reported that CPMI and the ISU Research Park Board of Directors believe that a quality, commercial banquet and catering service is a necessary support service for promoting the Park and supporting the businesses located within it. A resolution adopted at the Research Park Board meeting on April 5, 2007, states that “subject to compliance with the requirements of the City of Ames zoning ordinance pertaining to accessory uses, the Board finds that (use of the cafeteria portion of the building...by the building owners as a banquet, catering and cafeteria facility for the use and benefit of the buildings’ tenants as well as other businesses and occupants of the Park) provides a necessary, ancillary service to the primary purpose of the Research Park as set out in the Park’s Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions (as amended).” Mr. Osguthorpe pointed out that the cafeteria use is already permitted and could continue to be operated at this location without any additional permits. However, the request being made with this application is to allow banquet and catering services that would also be available to groups or businesses not associated with the Research Park, as well as the general public. He pointed out that the Research Park Board’s resolution of support referred specifically to the “building’s tenants” and “other businesses and occupants of the Park.” The applicable law, Mr. Osguthorpe explained, is contained in Section 29.1503(4)(a) of the Ames Municipal Code. He summarized the criteria and explained that staff found two of the seven standards for approval were met: the property is adequately served by essential public facilities and services, and the proposed use of the building would not be detrimental to anyone or to the general welfare of the community. However, staff did not find the standards of the remaining five subsections to be met. They concluded that: · banquet and catering uses would not fulfil the objectives outlined in the Land Use Policy Plan (LUPP) of diversifying the economy, assisting in the creation of a regional employment and market base, or helping expand research and technology development in Ames; · on-site events and off-site catering would change the nature of the operation from a secondary support of the Research Park into a commercial venture in its own right; · the change in use would be inconsistent with the intended purpose of the cafeteria, as it would attract not only tenants of the building or occupants of the Park, but also the general public; · the banquet and catering activity was inconsistent with the Park’s purpose of promoting industrial development; and · a banquet/catering use goes beyond what is necessary to serve the industrial uses of the Park. Mr. Osguthorpe said that this application was reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the Commission’s recommendation is not the same as the staff’s. Chairperson Knight concluded that the support services being proposed by The Basil would support the Research Park and make it a viable operation, and he noted that the Research Park Board indicated that it both wanted and needed to have the public visit the Park. The Commission ultimately determined the banquet and catering use was an appropriate and necessary use of the existing building. Mr. Osguthorpe said that the planning staff continues the maintain the position that this proposal does not conform to the standards and applicable law. In response to questions from members of the ZBA, Assistant City Attorney Judy Parks stated that the original structure did not have the cafeteria/auditorium on north side, but the company housed there had approximately 500 employees who needed better food than was available from vending machines. A full-service, commercial grade kitchen and auditorium were added to accommodate the employees and to provide catering services to other tenants within the Research Park. The University would also lead tours to the Research Park and meals could be served there. Banquets were not part of the original proposal, although it would have been acceptable to hold a banquet for the use of the residents of the Park. While that may have been somewhat broader than the 3 original intent, it was adjunct to the promotion of the Research Park and conformed with the intent of the zone. The Board questioned who was being protected by keeping restaurants out of industrial areas, and Planner Osguthorpe said it is a matter of protecting the City’s ability to direct specific uses to certain zones. He stated that the City Council and Ames Economic Development Commission reviewed an industrial study done in 2002 and found that the City is using land more quickly than had been anticipated, and there is now a need to look to expanding industrial lands within the city limits. This raises questions as to whether the City, private developers, or some other party should carry that cost. Furthermore, if money is invested in an industrial zone, should we preserve it for use by industrial tenants or allow any use to locate there? In this case, the question relates to which uses are really necessary to make the Research Park viable. Mr. Osguthorpe said that the applicant has tried to convey its concern that the food service business cannot rely solely upon the income earned from the Research Park. He maintained that this dilemma stems from the basic cafeteria concept – when a business is running a cafeteria for its employees, it is not relying on outsiders to make it function as a separate business. This application is for a separate business, and therefore needs a larger market base than the Park may provide. Mr. Osguthorpe said there is certainly a lot of investment in this building, but economic hardship is not a criterion here; the Zoning Board has to determine if there is a compelling reason to approve this and whether or not it complies with the criteria in the code. He said the Board should also consider the future implications of approving this application. Other businesses may come along and claim their services are essential; the board would need to set out parameters that show why this use is necessary for the viability of the Research Park. Richard Janssen, representing the building owner, CPMI-CRE Coralville Venture, 2321 North Loop Drive, stated that he feels the key issue has been sidetracked because of history. He explained that the Research Park was originally developed in 1988 under a 28E agreement between the City of Ames, the Research Park Foundation, and Iowa State University. A portion of the agreement states that “...the Foundation may create the ISU Research Park Corporation and assign its interests in this project to that organization;” therefore, the Corporation has been essentially put in charge of developing and marketing and making this a successful project. Mr. Janssen said he felt that the zoning imposed in 1988 was for Planned Industrial for the lack of any other designation, but was understood as being joined to the Research Park. What has happened since then is that we have separated the Research Park’s responsibility for marketing and have looked strictly at the City’s zoning ordinance. He said he does not believe that one may do this, because in 1988 all three parties agreed that the special use for this piece of planned industrial land would be a research park. He stressed that what is allowed to go into the Research Park was going to be determined by the Research Park Corporation. As a result, the Research Park Corporation developed protective covenants, and Mr. Janssen believes that those covenants should determine what will or will not occur. Mr. Janssen said that even if the City were to allow something – a large industrial complex, for example – the Research Park Corporation has the ability to veto it if it does not fit into the concept of a research park. 4 Mr. Janssen said that CPMI represents the largest single owner of the park. He related background information about the development of Engineering Animation, Inc. (EAI), subsequent buy-outs, and a later agreement with Marriott for catering and special functions, as allowed with special permission from EAI. He said CPMI took the building over from Graphic Solutions about a year ago and decided to make multiple tenant facility. After they had The Basil cater an event, the idea came to base the food operations there. He said the issue was discussed and approved by the Research Park Board, then CPMI negotiated a lease with The Basil. After concluding the negotiation, they became aware that a Special Use Permit was required from the City. Mr. Janssen said the industrial restaurant has to be an on-going concern and the Research Park Board’s resolution was not intended to exclude outside businesses, although it is being interpreted that way. The cafeteria function would still be limited to tenants of the Park and of the building. They have no intention of having a walk-in restaurant, nor would they invite people in for functions that would be inappropriate. However, other businesses within the Research Park need banquet facilities, ISU uses them, and they believe that there will be marketing opportunities when individuals not associated with the Park come to organized functions or food events. The next tenant in the Park could be someone who learns about it while attending an event held there. Mr. Janssen emphasized that CPMI would not have come to the Zoning Board of Adjustment unless they felt that the banquet/catering function was necessary in developing and growing the Research Park, as well as for maintaining the viability of the structure. He said that CPMI has spent money to put mechanical systems back into use and is now the 22nd-highest user of electricity in the City of Ames. The facility not being used on a regular basis right now. They are inviting customers in and The Basil is catering some special events, but there is nothing going on there that can be relied upon for income. He said it’s not good for CPMI to pay taxes on a building that can’t be used, and it does no one any good to have the building sit in mothballs. Mr. Janssen emphasized again that a 28E agreement is involved and the City should not ignore the fact that the Research Park Corporation has been given a mission to ensure the success of the Park. It should have the authority to determine whether or not a proposed tenant fits into the Research Park covenants. Board member Weber said that he understood the applicants’ goal was to assist in any way they could to make the Park as successful as possible and the arguments being made make sense, but he was having trouble with the word “necessary.” Ms. Martin asked who would approve the clients that were being brought in. Mr. Janssen said that the Research Park Board approves the tenants, and the lease controls what the space may be used for. CPMI would not micro-manage who The Basil invited into the park, but would evaluate the sorts of clients he would bring in under the terms of the covenants. Steve Carter, Director of the ISU Research Park, 2501 North Loop Drive, said that he supports the application. He said that although it was in a PI area, the focus of the Park, as envisioned by the City, University, and State was to encourage new technology companies and attract them to this 5 community. This is not exactly the same as a regular industrial zone. The Park has many one- and two-person companies, as well as others that are larger. Most of the companies have research and development at their core and are connected to the University. The reality, however, is that many scientists have no business experience, so the Research Park itself tries to find services that enhance the environment for the tenants. Services can usually be found outside the Park, but sometimes it is be helpful to have accountants, attorneys or even daycare providers available next door or down the hall. Mr. Carter said that the food service has proven to be a good asset to the Park. The Board feels it is important to their tenants and helps them attract companies, but it may not be workable if it can only serve the companies within the Park. He said the land owner, the Research Park Board, and the Planning and Zoning Commission have all reviewed this proposal and support it because they recognize that it takes more than just a building to support their mission. He said this would not be taking industrial property away from the City; he feels the Special Use Permit would be a reasonable way to manage the situation. Planner Osguthorpe said that some uses that are considered ancillary include daycare facilities, copy and printing services, and offices for accountants or attorneys, because these are considered necessary. Restaurant and entertainment facilities are not considered ancillary unless they are deemed “necessary.” The cafeteria was deemed necessary when it was built, and an amendment to the PI Plan was approved by the City Council. Staff believes, however, that banquet/catering service should be considered “restaurant” (as opposed to “cafeteria”) use and the question is whether the ZBA wants to allow them to expand their services to all of Ames for weddings or other events not related to the mission of the Research Park. He also noted that a Planned Industrial Zone is overseen by the City Council; it is not the same as a General Industrial Zone. Angela Hunter and Jeffrey Hunter, co-owners of The Basil, 6400 W. Lincoln Way, rose to testify. Mr. Hunter said the facility was not open to the public, so he did not believe it qualified as a restaurant. He said he considers it a banquet hall, catering establishment or cafeteria. He did not see why it should be a problem to have groups such as the Lions or Kiwanis use the facility. One never knows who might be on a guest list and someone who attends a function may become an investor in the Park. Mrs. Hunter said they are engaged in a lot of higher-end functions that include ISU graduates who return from the coasts for weddings or retirement receptions. She believes these people could see the beauty of the park and recognize an economic opportunity. Mr. Janssen summed up the applicants’ argument, saying that they did not take this decision lightly and went through a serious process of evaluating it. They believe the banquet and catering use is a supporting function and tenants of the Park agree. The people responsible for promoting the mission of the Research Park believe it is a necessary and useful function to all parties involved and that is why they supported it. He hoped the City could support it as well. He agreed with Mr. Osguthorpe that future tenants should also have to meet certain criteria and gain the approval of all the parties that are directly affected. 6 There was considerable Board discussion about terminology in the code and the vagueness of the language, especially the section stating that certain uses were not allowed “except as necessary to industrial uses,” since it is difficult to say what is “necessary.” They noted that some of the functions of recruitment can be done under the existing agreement, since they already have City Council approval; yet, because an aim of the Research Park is the recruitment of new businesses, providing a venue for functions that bring in potential clientele could be interpreted as fulfilling their mission. Also, this particular structure does not seem like an “industrial” building, given the fact that there is already an existing auditorium and kitchen. They noted that a major issue is whether to allow the facility to be used by the greater Ames community, rather than limiting it to the Research Park and the University. They wondered what other industrial/research/business parks have as ancillary uses, and whether disallowing restaurant services would put the ISU Research Park at a competitive disadvantage or not. Moved by Miller, seconded by Martin, to ADOPT ORDER 07-12 granting a Special Use Permit to allow an expanded banquet and catering use in a Planned Industrial (PI) Zone at 2321 North Loop Drive, based on the understanding that this meets the recruitment mission of the Research Park. Roll Call Vote: 2-1 (Miller and Martin voting yes, Weber voting no). Chair Miller noted that this could not be a final decision because the Rules of the Zoning Board of Adjustment specify that no action may be taken without three concurring votes. The matter will be taken up again on a future agenda, when additional Zoning Board of Adjustment members are present. CASE NO. 07- 13 SPECIAL HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT – DANIEL RAINSONG, PROPERTY OWNER AND BUSINESS OWNER, 1914-1916 FERNDALE AVENUE Public Hearing on application for a Special Home Occupation Permit to allow the operation of a lawn care business at 1914 and 1916 Ferndale Avenue Board Chair Miller advised the Board that this case was withdrawn at the request of the applicant. CASE NO. 07-14 SPECIAL HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT – ASHLEY TAPE, PROPERTY OWNER AND BUSINESS OWNER, 712 CRAWFORD AVENUE Public Hearing on application for a Special Home Occupation Permit to allow the operation of a massage therapy business at 712 Crawford Avenue Planner Roberge stated that this application is a request to allow a therapeutic massage business in the home at 712 Crawford Avenue. The house is a single-family residence with about 1700 square feet of finished area. The applicant will offer professional massage services on a part-time basis at the outset, but may eventually offer full-time services. The proposed business hours are Monday through Saturday between 9:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. 7 Mr. Roberge reviewed the standards for approval set forth in the zoning ordinance, and said that staff had found they were all satisfied: · the third bedroom will be used for the business and there will be no structural changes to the property; · the business will be operated in roughly 12% of the total floor area of the residence, which is well below the space allowed by the code; · at this point in time, the applicant does not intend to have a sign. She would like to have one in the future, and the Planning Department can make sure it complies with the guidelines when the time comes; · the only equipment used for the business would be a massage table and a low-volume stereo; · the applicant will be the only employee; · there is adequate space in the driveway for two cars to be parked, and the applicant will not have more than two clients present at any one time; · there will be no classes conducted; and · there are no other home occupations at this location. Mr. Roberge said that staff recommended approval with certain stipulations which outline the operation proposed by the applicant. There was discussion about the allowable square footage of a home occupation and why the Board would restrict anyone to using less square footage than the code allows. Mr. Miller suggested it would prevent someone from changing the structure to accommodate the business and make it less conducive to residential use. Mr. Osguthorpe noted that, in some cases, making it more restrictive may be a means of limiting potential negative impact on neighbors. Mr. Roberge noted that, in this case, 25% of the total square footage would exceed the maximum limit of 400 square feet. Ashley Tape, 712 Crawford Avenue, stated that she is a licensed massage therapist in the State of Iowa. She said the square footage calculation provided in the application includes the office space she uses outside of the massage room. She said that fifteen percent of the home’s square footage gives her plenty of room to work, but she would prefer to be allowed the maximum. She had no problems with the stipulations, and said she would advise clients that they need to park in the driveway, but stated that there are some clients who might have mobility problems. Ms. Tape said her adjacent neighbors are retired and seem excited about her business. Moved by Martin, seconded by Weber, to ADOPT ORDER 07-14 granting a Special Home Occupation permit to allow the operation of a professional massage therapy business at 712 Crawford Avenue, subject to the following conditions: 1. that the hours of operation be limited to Monday through Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.; 2. that no more than 400 square feet of the residence be used for the professional therapeutic massage therapy business; 3. that the number of clients be limited to a maximum of six (6) per day; 8 4. that all clients who are able shall park their vehicles in the driveway in front of the detached garage, and those who are physically unable to safely use the driveway may park in the street; 5. that no more than two (2) clients be on the premise at the same time; and 6. that any signs the applicant may wish to install at a future time shall be reviewed by staff for compliance with all codes prior to installation. Roll Call Vote: 3-0. Motion carried unanimously. COMMENTS: ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:01 p.m. Karen C. Thompson, Recording Secretary Bradley Miller, Chair The next meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment will be a Regular Meeting at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, June 13, 2007, in the Council Chambers of the Ames City Hall at 515 Clark Avenue.