Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes 6-13-2007MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AMES, IOWA JUNE 13, 2007 The Ames Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) met, pursuant to law, in regular session at 7:00 p.m. on June 13, 2007, in the Council Chambers of City Hall with the following members present: Denise Link, Mary Ann Lundy, Lucy Martin, Bradley Miller, and Thomas Weber. Staff members Jeff Benson, Judy Parks, Seana Perkins, 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 23, 2007. Vote on Motion: 3-0-2. (Martin, Miller, and Weber voting aye; Link and Lundy not voting.) Motion carried. CASE NO. 07- 15 SPECIAL USE PERMIT – AMES COMMUNITY PRESCHOOL CENTER, INC., 525 6TH STREET Public Hearing on application for a Special Use Permit to allow construction of a playground on the property at 525 6th Street Planner Roberge stated that this application was for the revision of an existing Special Use Permit for a day care facility operated by Ames Community Preschool Center (ACPC), which has its main office in the church at 611 Clark Avenue. ACPC owns the lot in question, as well as the lots on both sides. Improvements on the lot to the west include a playground, swing set, and miniature house which are used as a play area. Children are cared for in the home to the east and in the church building at 601 Clark. The church has playground space, but new state regulations for childcare centers forced them to remove a climber and a swing set, so now there is no equipment. There is inadequate space to replace them in the original location, so the most economical solution is to build on the property at 525 6th Street, which is now vacant. Mr. Roberge said that staff believes the criteria for approval under General Standards have been met. Ames Community Preschool Center already owns the property on both sides of this lot, so the proposed playground will not disturb the surrounding neighborhood. No utilities are needed and there will be no expense to the City. The only activity taking place on the site will be the playground for the daycare, and it is compatible with the existing use and the existing Special Use Permit. With respect to Residential Zone Standards, Mr. Roberge said the number of children being cared for will not change, and the number conforms to the existing Permit. There should be no increase in traffic and the Center’s hours of operation will not change. The playground will be built on private property, but ACPC has indicated that the site will be open to the general public, and this would serve to enhance the neighborhood. 2 Mr. Roberge explained the proposed lay-out, noting that in the future a spray station might be installed; the applicant would return to the ZBA for another amendment to the Special Use Permit, should that be the case. Mr. Roberge stated that Staff recommended approval of the permit, with the stipulation that the old driveway approach be removed from the parking (between the curb and the sidewalk). He reported that the Planning and Zoning Commission concurred with this recommendation at its meeting on June 6. Sue Wuhs, 2920 Monroe Drive, stated that she has been the Director of ACPC for more than 20 years. Ms. Wuhs reported that the original dream was to renovate the old house on the property at 525 6th Street in order to serve additional children. The house was demolished last January, however, after the Board of Directors received received professional advice on the cost of renovation. Ms. Wuhs said the garage and the driveway were also removed at that time, but because snow covered the ground, they did not realize the approach to the driveway remained. There is not enough room in the former playground area to install new equipment, and since the Center does not have adequate funds to construct a new building yet, this request is to allow them to create new play space in the empty lot by seeding, doing minimal landscaping and putting up a swing set. Moved by Lundy, seconded by Link, to ADOPT ORDER 07-15 granting a revision to the existing Special Use Permit to allow construction of a swing set and seeding on the property located at 525 6th Street, subject to the condition that the driveway approach in the landscape strip between the curb and sidewalk be removed, and with the understanding that all prior conditions for the original Special Use Permit be retained. Martin stated that she would abstain from voting because she is a client of ACPC. Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Link, Lundy, Miller and Weber voting aye; Martin abstaining.) Motion carried. CASE NO. 07-17 VARIANCE – OREN & JILL GEISINGER, 201 WASHINGTON AVENUE Public Hearing on application for Variances to allow construction of a deck and enclosure of a porch within designated setbacks at 201 Washington Avenue Planner Benson stated that this request is for a property located in the South Lincoln Mixed Use District (S-SMD) and the applicant would like to build a deck and enclose a porch. He explained that the lot is on the corner of Washington Avenue and South 2nd Street. The neighborhood is a mix of older residential structures, along with some commercial properties. The zoning code contains setback requirements that were intended to help maintain the residential aspect of the neighborhood; however, this particular lot has a 25-foot setback in the two front yards (on the corner), a 20-foot setback in the rear yard, and a ten-foot setback on the south side. The problem here is that the lot is 41.5 wide and 170 feet deep; therefore, once all the setback requirements are taken into account, there is only 8.5 feet of space left where the house could be built. 3 Mr. Benson outlined the sections of the code that apply to this lot and stated that the staff’s findings support hardship: on a lot that only has only an 8.5-foot building area, there is no possibility of reasonable return for the owner. Staff also found the lot to be unique in that, not only are there two front-yard setbacks (since it is situated on a corner), but it is the only lot in the vicinity that is this narrow. He said the applicants’ proposals would not alter the essential character of the locality and the spirit of the ordinance would be upheld if the variances were granted. In fact, staff is of the opinion that improving the property will help preserve this compact living area which is situated close to commercial areas, and this is one of the defined purposes of the South Lincoln Sub-Area Mixed Use Zoning District. Mr. Benson said that staff found all criteria for granting the variances were met and they would recommend approval, provided the deck does not extend any farther into the setback area than the existing house. Oren Geisinger, III, 201 Washington Avenue, stated that he wanted to put on a back porch and put windows in the front porch in order to get better use of the space. He had no objection to building the deck in line with the side of the house. Moved by Link, seconded by Weber, to ADOPT ORDER 07-17a granting a Variance to allow construction of a new deck on the back of the house, provided it extends no farther north than the north wall of the house at 201 Washington Avenue. Vote on Motion: 5-0. Motion carried unanimously. Moved by Link, seconded by Martin, to ADOPT ORDER 07-17b granting a Variance to allow the enclosure of the front porch on the house at 201 Washington Avenue. Roll Call Vote:5-0. 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 Perkins stated that this case was carried over because there were not three concurring votes at the previous meeting. She highlighted the major issues contained in the staff report of May 8: · This is an existing building. No new construction is involved, so the Board is specifically dealing with the use of the building. · The applicants would like to have a catering and banquet use, in addition to the cafeteria. · The cafeteria and auditorium use was already approved and both uses functioned in the past; only the catering and banquet uses are being discussed now. · Staff felt that criteria five and six 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). Staff believed the remaining criteria were not satisfactorily met and recommended denial of the application. · The Planning and Zoning Commission discussed the requests at length with the applicant and its representative. The Commission, based on Chair Darryl Knight’s findings and reasoning, 4 came to the conclusion that the uses being requested were appropriate, and recommended Zoning Board approval. Board member Martin asked about signage in the park. The building under consideration is behind the main building, so the Research Park Board decided The Basil could have a sign, as long as it was consistent with the rest of the signage in the Park and a sign permit was obtained from the City’s Inspections Division. Board member Weber asked for clarification about what can be done on the site right now. Ms. Perkins said it is approved for a cafeteria and auditorium use. She said she felt there was an assumption that they could cater to tenants of the business park, but according to the letter of the code, they are only allowed to have food service in the building for tenants of the park. Attorney Parks added that it would not be outside the parameters of the agreement for Iowa State University (ISU) to have people who are visiting the park eat there in conjunction with the visit. Richard Janssen, 2225 Ironwood Court, Ames, stated that he represented CPMI-CRE Coralville Venture, addressed at 300 East Locust, Suite 300, Des Moines. He said he had a written opinion on the historical relationship between the Research Park and the City and Iowa State, and asked that it be entered into the record: In the context of the Research Park’s Planned Industrial Zone classification, Section 29.902 of the Ames zoning code, the City previously approved the space in question for cafeteria use at the request of the prior occupant of the building, Engineering Animation, Inc. According to the zoning code, the purpose of the Planned Industrial (PI) Zone District is to provide a desirable industrial environment, accommodate large-scale industrial land uses and promote a “clustered and integrated development in a park-like setting.” To carry out this purpose, this zoning classification allows for 13 primary permitted uses in five separate categories. Each of these categories allows for accessory uses, in conjunction with the principal or primary use of the facility or area. The cafeteria was determined to be an appropriate accessory use. Section 29.201(5) defines accessory use as a “use incidental to and on the same lot as a primary use.” Subparagraph 93 of the same section defines “Industrial Park” as a “special or exclusive type of planned industrial area designated and equipped to accommodate a community of industries, providing them with all necessary facilities and services in an attractive surrounding among compatible neighbors.” In 1988, the City and the Iowa State University and the Research Park entered into an agreement under Section 28E of the Iowa State Code to lay out the framework for development of the Research Park. Paragraph 3(d)(1) provides that Iowa State University or the Foundation will construct and market research facility sites according to the development plan, and that the structures and other improvements on the land will be done in accordance with the ordinances of the City of Ames, Iowa. 5 In Appendix A of that agreement, the University is shown to have responsibility for planning, including master planning, rezoning, platting, and planned-industrial plan. Accordingly, the Research Park Corporation subsequently adopted restrictive covenants to govern orderly development of the park. A 1992 amendment to these restrictive covenants describes six categories of permitted uses within the Research Park. Subparagraph 5 sets forth the general guidelines for accessory uses within the Park, including “the services which the Board, in its sole discretion, deems necessary to assist those uses permitted in paragraphs 1-3 above, including, but not limited to, accounting, legal, printing, etc.(...).” The question, then, becomes who should determine the appropriateness of an accessory use. In Section 29.501(3)(e) of the Ames zoning ordinance, accessory uses are further defined as “incidental and customary to and commonly associated with the operation of the principal use,” and in tables of various categories of the same section, examples and accessory uses are given, in most cases, with each principal use. In two of the permitted uses under the Planned Industrial Zone, cafeterias are given as an example of an allowable accessory use. No mention is made, in either of these principal use categories, or in Section 29.902, dealing with the Planned Industrial Zone, as to whether or not banquet and catering functions are or not appropriate accessory uses. Thus, the question comes down to whether or not banquet and catering uses are “incidental and customary to and commonly associated with the principal use” authorized in the Research Park. In this case, since there is no specific definition of the terms “banquet facility” or “catering,” the Ames Planning Department has attempted to bring these uses under the general definition of “restaurant.” A “restaurant” is not permitted in the Planned Industrial Zone. “Restaurant” is defined in the Ames Zoning Ordinance in Section 29.201(160) and generally includes the retail sale of food and beverage. “Banquet” and “catering” uses seem to be no closer to the definition of “restaurant” than the present, as allowed, use of “cafeteria.” Taken together, the cited provisions of the Ames Zoning Ordinance, along with the 28E Agreement and the Park’s restrictive covenants (as amended), it is clear that the primary determination and definition of what constitutes an accessory use lies with the Iowa State University Research Park and its Board. The interpretation is not inconsistent with the stated goals of the Ames zoning ordinance, that a Planned Industrial Park should have multiple primary and permitted uses, resulting in multiple accessory uses to accomplish the stated goal of accommodation of large-scale industrial land uses in a “clustered and integrated development” that is “equipped to accommodate a community of industries and provide them with the necessary facilities and services in attractive surroundings.” The Research Park Board has determined that the banquet and catering uses are necessary, incidental uses to the principal uses defined in the covenants, and since such accessory uses are not specifically barred under the Ames Zoning Ordinance, I would ask that you would follow the recommendations of the Research Park Board, rather than the interpretations of City staff. 6 Steve Carter, 2802 150th Street, Ames, stated that he is the Director of the Research Park. He said the Park is a unique sort of development as serves a unique role within Ames. The Park is also a changing community and the kinds of services the Park needs to provide also have to change. The Special Use Permit process should be used to allow them some flexibility and do new things that keep the Park competitive and help create jobs and attract employees. He said the core business of the Research Park is developing space for offices, laboratories, and the like. However, a company that may be interested in coming here now needs greenhouse space, and he said that is an example of the kind of changing need the Park Board must be able to respond to. Planner Perkins stated that when Mr. Hunter came in and asked about a liquor license for this use, she tried to see what category his business would fall into. Since banquet halls and catering facilities are listed under the Restaurant/Entertainment/Recreational Trade category in the Ames zoning code, she believed that category seemed to most closely fit. She added that if the ZBA were to approve a banquet and catering facility that could be used by both those inside and outside Park, they would still not be allowed to have a “restaurant;” this operation would be considered a “restaurant use,” not a “restaurant.” Board member Weber said he still struggled with whether or not this use is necessary for the operation of the Research Park, and asked Assistant City Attorney Parks whether having the Research Park Board Corporation involved makes this case different. Ms. Parks stated that ISU originally wanted development within the Research Park to be more limited than the general uses that may be permitted elsewhere in the city – they did not want a smokestack industry, for example – so an agreement was reached about what kinds of things would be permitted. The agreement stated that when plans changed from time to time, they would need to return to the City Council. This happened when the cafeteria was proposed, for example, and the Council believed the concept was within the parameters of the agreement. Now, a business that exists outside the Research Park wants to come in, and it would be a “restaurant use,” with a banquet and catering aspect. She said this kind of request doesn’t go to the City Council because no structure is being added, they are only changing a use in an existing structure. Board member Link said she worked at Engineering Animation, Inc. (EAI) at the time the cafeteria was added. She said people in the Research Park work long, odd hours and tend to get caught up in what they’re doing. Before the cafeteria was there, many people just didn’t eat, so it was a great addition to EAI. She added that the cafeteria was operated by an outside firm; EAI did not do the cooking. Ms. Link said the idea of opening it up to a banquet and catering facility for the entire park is good because many of the businesses are start-ups. They don’t have the money to have their own place to entertain, and this would provide a professional environment. Board member Miller pointed out that the applicant is also asking to have wedding receptions and events not related to the tenants of the Park. Ms. Link stated that other tenants in the Research Park are allowed to conduct all business related to their business in the Park; she asked why this business that is moving into the park shouldn’t be allowed to conduct all its business from that location. 7 Mr. Janssen stated that part of the lease agreement calls for The Basil to be open to serve lunch for tenants of the building and others in the Research Park, but in order for them to survive economically, they need to be able to serve the outside community. The Research Park Board believes that opportunity will also benefit the Park by drawing business people to functions and increasing exposure. Georganna Hinrichsen, 2026 Greenbriar Circle, stated that she is a member of the Ames Noon Kiwanis and that, of all the facilities they have chosen to use for their meetings and functions, this has provided the best food, best environment, best openness. She said a Morning Kiwanis Club also uses the facility. She feels they are participating in development related to Iowa State University and it is exciting to be part of shared development and various community groups coming together. Moved by Miller, seconded by Link, to ADOPT ORDER 07-12 granting a Special Use Permit allowing the expanded use of the cafeteria site at 2321 North Loop Drive for banquet and catering use. Weber offered a friendly amendment requiring that the cafeteria function be retained, based on the idea that if the cafeteria were not in operation, the banquet and catering activities would have to cease. Jeff Hunter, 1419 590th Street, Roland, Iowa, stated that he and his wife plan to open a cafeteria and have it available to the Park on an everyday basis after they get up and running, but it is impractical to open a cafeteria now, if only five people were to show up each day. He said they have been doing functions for large and small groups and he expects that the cafeteria could open up on an everyday basis in another year or so, once the rest of the building is leased out and there can be most customers. Robert Harvey, 2002 Cessna, stated that he is a Lion and a Mason and they have met at The Basil. He said that he did not feel the Zoning Board of Adjustment should dictate how the business man should do his work; they should simply approve the use. Weber withdrew his first friendly amendment, then proposed another one stipulating that the Special Use Permit be granted for one year and be reviewed again by the Zoning Board at that time to ensure that the cafeteria was operating by then. Friendly amendment accepted by Link. Mr. Janssen asked the Board not to put a time limit on the permit. He said he could not write a feasible lease on a one-year basis. The current lease and the business plan are based on a five-year period. There was discussion about the terms of the lease agreement and its renewal. Mr. Miller said he was inclined to approve the Permit, believing it was necessary to the Park for recruitment and exposure, and because allowing a banquet use would make catering services available to the rest of the park. Miller asked Weber if he would be willing to change the time limit to a five-year 8 term. Weber said he was in favor of granting this Permit for the purpose of reviving the cafeteria, but five years seemed like a long time. He said that if the cafeteria cannot be revived, he is not in favor of granting the Special Use Permit at all. There needs to be an incentive to open the cafeteria, and one year should be ample time. Board member Martin stated her opinion that the Board should approve the expanded use without any time limitation or just deny it. Moved by Link, seconded by Miller, to amend the friendly amendment to grant the Special Use Permit for a five-year time period, at which time the applicant must return to the Zoning Board of Adjustment if an extension is desired. Roll Call Vote on motion to amend to the friendly amendment: 4-1 (Martin, Miller, Link, Lundy voting yes; Weber voting no). Motion carried. Roll Call Vote on motion (as amended) to ADOPT ORDER 07-12, expanding a Special Use Permit to allow a banquet and catering use for businesses and clients both inside and outside the ISU Research Park in the structure that was previously utilized as a cafeteria/auditorium at 2321 North Loop Drive for a period of five years, at which time the applicant must return to the Zoning Board of Adjustment if an extension is desired: 4-1 (Martin, Miller, Link, Lundy voting yes; Weber voting no). Motion carried. COMMENTS: Board member Martin thanked the members staff for their work and commended the public for coming out and participating in this process. Planning Director Osguthorpe stated that it is rare to find Variances as clear-cut as the one discussed at this meeting, which was a clear example of hardship. He pointed out that it showed the value of the function the Zoning Board of Adjustment serves in assisting the public and the staff with reasonable application of zoning regulations. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:43 p.m. Karen C. Thompson, Recording Secretary Bradley Miller, Board Chair The next meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment will be a Regular Meeting at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, July 11, 2007, in the Council Chambers of the Ames City Hall at 515 Clark Avenue.