Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOA Packet 6.15.16.pdfMINUTES PRELIMINARY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APRIL 13, 2016 – 5:15 PM EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Gene Chrischilles, Connie Goeb, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: Becky Soglin STAFF PRESENT: Susan Dulek, Sarah Walz OTHERS PRESENT: Brian Flynn, Pat Barta, Aaron Doubet CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM. ROLL CALL: A brief opening statement was read by Baker outlining the role and purpose of the Board and the procedures that would be followed the meeting. CONSIDERATION OF THE MARCH 9, 2016 MEETING MINUTES: Chrischilles moved to approve the minutes of March 9, 2016. Weitzel seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-0. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM (EXC16-00002): Discussion of an application for a special exception submitted on behalf of Joe's Place to allow a Rooftop Service Area for property located in the Central Business District (CB-10)zone at 115 and 117 IowaAvenue. Walz began the staff report showing an aerial view of the property indicating the zoning designations of the surrounding properties. Joe’s Place consists of three store fronts and the proposed rooftop service area is above two of those, 115 and 117 Iowa Avenue. The opposite side of Iowa Avenue and Clinton Street is the P-2 zone, which is the University of Iowa. Other surrounding areas are CB-10 zones. Walz explained this is the first application the Board has received under this new ordinance to allow rooftop service areas. The subject property is in the Downtown District and CB-10 zone. The purpose of the CB-10 zone is to allow for a wide range of retail, service, office and high density residential uses and to support a healthy and vibrant commercial area and allow the development of a mix of uses often with residential or office uses above store front commercial uses. Walz noted that in 2015 the Zoning Code was amended to allow rooftop service areas (RSA) as an accessory use in a number of zones and each of those zones has its own criteria Board of Adjustment April 13, 2016 Page 2 of 12 for the standards it has to meet to be allowed. In the CB-10 zone RSAs are allowed provisionally for hospitality oriented uses (hotels), commercial recreational, and eating establishments (restaurants). RSAs for drinking establishments (bars) are allowed under the special exception process. Joe’s Place is a drinking establishment. RSAs are an accessory use—an outdoor gathering space on the rooftop, or upper floor terrace of a building that is open to the public. If the RSA is an accessory to an establishment that is licensed by the State to sell alcohol it is considered a type of outdoor service area, so that brings in additional regulations that have to do with the serving of alcohol. So there can be a RSA that doesn’t serve alcohol, but when it is a rooftop service area that does serve alcohol a number of other provisions apply. The applicant, Joe’s Place, is seeking a special exception to allow a rooftop service area above the existing drinking establishment. Walz showed photos and sketches of the building and where the RSA would be and the views of the surrounding areas. The applicant is proposing to construct a wooden deck on the rooftops of 115 and 117 Iowa Avenue to provide a little over 1200 square feet of open air seating. The proposed area will be elevated slightly above the existing roof, so that the floor area will be even across the rooftop of the two buildings. They will be using some of the 2nd floor area of the building at 115 Iowa Avenue to create the necessary restrooms, and the service area of the bar (where the employees would be) is in the interior of the building as well (so it can be locked up at night) but all the area where the customers will be served is on the exterior of the building. The proposed RSA would serve concession style food and beverages and the proposed hours of operation would be 3 pm to 2 am with no amplified sound after midnight. Amplified sound is permitted on the exterior of the building for rooftop service areas by temporary permit only and live music is not permitted. Walz next discussed the specific standards. The RSA shall meet all building and fire code requirements, be ADA compliant, include elevator service, and have accessible restrooms provided. There will be an elevator to make the RSA handicap accessible. The route back to the elevator from the ground floor will be inspected at the time the building inspections are done to confirm it is an accessible route. Access to the second floor will be via an interior stairwell and the elevator. In terms of emergency egress there is an outdoor stairwell that would go down by the exterior beer garden at the back of 119 Iowa Avenue. Customers won’t have access to the interior of the building but it is possible if there was an emergency there is an additional stairwell that is shared by a neighboring building that could be accessed as well. The RSA shall be designed in an attractive manner that will not detract from adjacent uses, and will prevent nuisance and safety issues. The site plan that was provided shows the layout of the proposed RSA and Walz showed some views of the outside of the buildings and explained how the RSA would be constructed and laid out. The RSA will be setback 40 feet from the front of the building and there will be 4 foot tall metal panels so it won’t be visible from the street. The 5- foot metal panels will also be installed on the parapet wall so the RSA will be screened from the views of the buildings to the east. Along the remaining perimeter area, railings 4 feet in height will prevent customers from falling or entering onto other rooftop areas or adjacent structures. Walz also noted that the property at 113 Iowa Avenue has no upper floor use. The RSA shall be located directly adjacent to or above the use to which it is accessory and there shall not be other uses located on floors in between the RSA and the use to which it is accessory. This RSA is directly above the bar area at 115 and 117 Iowa Avenue and there are no other uses located between. Board of Adjustment April 13, 2016 Page 3 of 12 The RSA must be set back from adjacent upper floor uses and the edge of the roof and screened and completely enclosed within a decorative fence or wall. Walz confirmed that is the case on the eastern wall of the building that will face towards the Basta building. The proposed RSA must be set back a minimum of 10 feet from the street facing edge of the roof. Walz confirmed it will be setback more than 40 feet from the street facing edge. The lighting must comply with the Outdoor Lighting Standards. Walz noted typically this is included in the special exception because it is a requirement of the special exception. The lighting plan has not been submitted yet but will be as part of the building permit process and it must comply with the City standards. No signs shall be allowed in or on the exterior wall or fence of the RSA that are within public view. Walz explained that no signs are being proposed for the RSA, the applicant has indicated that there may be television screens in the area around the bar but those should not be visible from the public street or the adjacent residential. For RSAs that are also outdoor service areas there must be an RSA management plan in place and at least one employee must be designated to monitor the safety and compliance of the RSA during hours of operation. Walz showed the Board the management plan that was submitted with the application and it indicates the hours of operation, no amplified sound after midnight, all customers will be carded at entry to the bar, all customers will only be able to access the rooftop from the interior stairs or elevator, and at least two to eight employees will staff the upper bar at all times and there will be a floating crowd control manager that monitors the entire bar. To ensure that the RSA is managed appropriately over time, the City Code states that if nuisance or safety issues arise, the City may require immediate changes to the management plan and/or the number of monitors to remedy the situation and reserves the right to suspend or revoke the RSA permit. Staff recommends reiterating this as a condition of the special exception. This is important so that the condition is clear to the current owner, but also any future owner as the RSA is allow to transfer with ownership. In the CB-10 zone, where the building containing the RSA abuts or is directly across a public alley from a property containing upper floor residential uses or hotel rooms that have windows facing the RSA there are limits on the hours of operations. In this case the alley to the rear is not a public alley, it is a private alley. If alcohol is being served, food service must be provided. Prior to approval of an RSA, the applicant must submit evidence indicating how this requirement will be met. In this situation the applicant intends to sell food concession style, so people would order at the bar area, food would be available in RSA but not in the lower floors of the bar. Dulek explained the noise conditions, starting with amplified sound. The way the ordinance reads is amplified sound is not allowed at all, only by a temporary use permit. Therefore from the Board’s standpoint, the Board cannot limit amplified sound, because it does not exist. Non amplified sound is allowed, but there must be a plan by the applicant to address the noise. The temporary use permit will be a City Staff decision, and it will be an annual permit review that Staff can revoke at any time if there are nuisance issues. The Board has no jurisdiction over that. Goeb asked if amplified sound is permitted by the temporary use permit, why live music is not allowed. Dulek said that was discussed during the ordinance approval process last year but did not know the specifics. Board of Adjustment April 13, 2016 Page 4 of 12 Walz continued and discussed other noise outside of amplified sound. Given the distance of this RSA and other adjacent upper floor uses, the screening to the east, and that the CB-10 zone is a zone where a certain amount of noise is anticipated, it will not create a significant disturbance to the neighborhood. Dulek noted the ordinance states the design of the RSA must minimize the area of noise, so it must be designed with that in mind. Chrischilles asked if there were apartments above the Basta restaurant. Walz confirmed there were, and that is why the screening will be mounted on the parapet wall on the east of the RSA. Walz noted additional special exception approval criteria for nonconforming drinking establishments. An RSA accessory to a nonconforming drinking establishment may be allowed by special exception provided it meets the general approval criteria and the additional approval criteria The RSA shall be located directly above and contiguous to the licensed drinking establishment. This RSA meets that requirement, it is directly above the bar. There shall be no horizontal expansion of the licensed drinking establishment.The proposed RSA is located above the existing bar area. There is no horizontal expansion of theuse. There shall be no increase in interior floor area or interior occupant load. This is met, all of the customers, except those using the restroom (which is an allowable exception) will be on the exterior of the building as shown on the floor plan. Walz noted the general standards follow through from the specific standards, and can answer questions about those if needed. She noted general criteria number 3: the establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located. That is not just for what is currently there, but what could be in the area in the future. The subject property is located in the Central Business District of the Downtown District and it is intended to allow for high density mixed uses and to be an entertainment area in Iowa City. The zone is intended to provide a healthy and vibrant commercial core with a mix of uses. RSAs were added as an allowed use in the zone in order to obtain more diverse seasonal opportunities similar to what the City has with sidewalk cafes. Staff believes with appropriate controls and amplified sound administered through a temporary use permit the proposed use would be compatible with surrounding development and would be an attractive development to the downtown environment. Walz stated that this is addressed in the Comprehensive Plan, that this be a vibrant area. Downtown is a growing area with lots of activities and as the population grows and the university grows, providing new and unique venues is a good thing for downtown. Staff is recommending approval of EXC16-00002, a special exception to allow at Rooftop Service Area in the Central Business (CB-10) zone located above 115 and 117 Iowa Avenue subject to the following conditions: •Substantial compliance with the site plan submitted. •No solid roof shall be constructed over any portion of the outdoor service area. •Amplified sound is allowed by temporary use permit only. •No live music or live performance permitted. •A lighting plan must be in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and approved by the Building Official prior to issuance of a building permit. •Handicapped accessible routes must be maintained between the front entrance and elevator and between the elevator and second floor restrooms. Board of Adjustment April 13, 2016 Page 5 of 12 •Substantial compliance with the management plan, requiring no fewer than 2 employees present on the rooftop at all times, and one crowd control manager for the entire bar/business. •As per City Code, if nuisance or safety issues arise, the City may require immediate changes to the management plan and/or the number of monitors to remedy the situation and may suspend or revoke the Outdoor Service Area permit. •Food service must be provided during all hours of operation. Baker noted for the audience that the Board has no preparation meetings, so this is the only opportunity the Board has to ask questions about the report in front of them. The Board is not allowed to talk to the public or each other regarding this application outside of this meeting. Chrischilles asked about the railings that will be 4 feet in height, what material will they be composed of and how are they constructed. Walz showed on the applicant’s packet a rendering of the material and fencing that will be used for the railings. Goeb asked how the hours of the RSA are decided upon and Walz explained those are the allowable hours for a bar under the ordinance, and the currently hours of operation for Joe’s Place. Goeb asked if Joe’s Place was to change their hours of operation, would that also change the hours of operation for the RSA. Walz said yes, if the Board does not restrict the RSA. Dulek noted that 10 am is the earliest a RSA can be open and 2 am is the latest under the Code. Chrischilles asked if the RSA would be a non-smoking area. Walz confirmed it would be non- smoking. Chrischilles noted that on page 4 of the report, item number 2, it refers to “The portion of the outdoor seating area located above 115 Iowa Avenue is set back approximately 30 feet from the rear of the building. Screening is not indicated in this area, which overlooks a private alley.” And wondered why there would be no screening back there. Walz said that portion of the roof will have railings, and a large portion of the area will be screened by the elevator structure. She also noted there is only a small part of seating in that area, most of the roof in that area will be preserved for the HVAC units. Goeb questioned the sturdiness of the roof with all the extra weight. Walz explained that will the construction of the decking on top of the roof, it is almost as if they are constructing a whole new roof that will support the additional weight. Chrischilles asked about the standard that states “Amplified sound may be restricted or prohibited during public events, festivals or concerts” and who determines if it will be restricted. Dulek said the City could restrict amplified sound during times like Jazz Fest and will be noted in the temporary use permit. Chrischilles asked how that would be enforced. Dulek said they temporary use permit holders would be notified when the City is restricting or prohibiting their amplified sound. Chrischilles noted that City Staff are the only ones that can issue the temporary use permit for amplified sound, and questioned then if City Staff could alter the permit to allow amplified sound past midnight, or make if end at a time earlier than midnight. Dulek said that the ordinance approved by Council says that midnight is the latest, but a temporary permit could be issued that states amplified sound must end prior to midnight. Chrischilles asked if the Board felt that Board of Adjustment April 13, 2016 Page 6 of 12 midnight was too late, do they have any authority to enforce that. Dulek said the concern can be noted in the minutes, but cannot be part of the exception. Goeb asked how it came about that sidewalk cafes that serve alcohol have more leniency than what is being issued to the RSA. Walz commented that the sidewalk cafes do have restrictions placed on them in terms of hours of operation and amplified sound, and are on an annual permit system. Dulek noted that sidewalk cafes are on City right-of-ways and not on private property so they are regulated through an annual easement agreement and they pay for the use of that space. Walz noted the RSA will require the property owner to make a significant financial investment into their property and therefore it was decided they should not be on a yearly permit basis. Baker asked why amplified sound is allowed but not lived music. Dulek answered that was a decision the Council made in passing this ordinance. Baker asked about other live performance. Dulek confirmed that the Code only says “no live music” and Walz said they added the condition of no live performance given the scale of the RSA in this application. The Board can decide to remove that condition. Baker asked if they could install televisions on the RSA, and Walz confirmed they may. Baker asked if the volume of the televisions would be a separate issue than the volume of the amplified sound. Walz said that would be considered amplified sound. Baker asked if the televisions would be wired into the sound system. Walz said either way it is considered amplified sound. Dulek said the volume of the televisions will be enforced through the temporary use permit. Baker pointed out under the design criteria “The RSA shall be designed in an attractive manner that will not detract from adjacent uses, and will prevent nuisance and safety issues. The applicant shall submit a design plan with the application for an RSA that, at a minimum, specifies and illustrates the proposed size, dimensions, setbacks from adjacent buildings and roof edges, occupancy load, layout, landscaping elements, access routes, elevator, and accessible bathrooms. RSAs shall meet the following minimum standards. If a special exception is required, the board of adjustment may impose additional or more restrictive conditions to mitigate any anticipated externalities, including, but not limited to, restrictions on hours of operation, lighting, size, occupancy load, and setback and screening requirements.” Baker questioned why the Board has purview to change all other conditions except sound amplification. Dulek confirmed that the ordinance is written such that the Board is not allowed to consider amplified sound, that the City Council wished for that to be an administrative decision. Chrischilles asked about the temporary use permit, and when that would be issued. Dulek said that after the Board makes a decision, regardless of the decision, no amplified sound is allowed. If the RSA applicant wishes to have amplified sound, they must apply for a temporary use permit. Other examples of temporary use permits used around Iowa City are for the fall Regina Fun Festival, or for the HyVee lawn centers. These temporary permits are for a use that is not normally allowed in the zoning code, and the zoning code does not allow a RSA to have amplified sound. Therefore the only way to get amplified sound is to obtain a temporary use permit. A temporary use permit is not a special exception, a special exception is permanent whereas a temporary use permit has a finite time limit. Baker asked how the City will measure the grounds for revoking a temporary use permit. Dulek noted she would find the provision in the Code and share it with the Board. Chrischilles asked Board of Adjustment April 13, 2016 Page 7 of 12 about the rooftop at FilmScene and Walz said that was different because it is not a drinking establishment. It is an entertainment venue, not a restaurant or bar. Baker noted also in the standards it notes “Amplified sound may be restricted or prohibited during public events, festivals or concerts” and asked if the applicant is operating the sound system at a level that was approved by the staff in the temporary use permit, why would it be prohibited during these other events. Dulek noted they could say no amplified sound at all during such events as Jazz Fest or Arts Fest. Baker questions then if it can’t be used during those events because it can be heard and interfere with those events, then why allow it at all. Dulek said it will depend on the event and the RSA location as to whether it will interfere with other events. She noted that is why they use the temporary use permit process, because of its flexibility. Baker opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to come forward to address and answer questions of the Board. Brian Flynn (Joe’s Place) began by stating the difference between a drinking establishment (that serves food) and a restaurant (that serves alcohol) is that a drinking establishment is open until 2 am. Restaurant licenses only allow them to be open until midnight. Chrischilles asked if this particular RSA is for a drinking establishment. Walz and Flynn both confirmed that was correct. Walz noted that is why it requires a special exception. Goeb asked about the hours of operation. She noted a drinking establishment can be open from the hours of 6 am to 2 am but wondered what the hours of Joe’s Place are. Flynn responded that currently they open at noon, perhaps earlier on weekends especially on football weekends which can sometimes be as early at 8 am. Goeb asked then what the hours of the RSA would be, it appears in the report to be from 3 pm to 2 am. Walz said that was part of the management plan submitted by the applicant. Flynn noted there are several items in that management plan that do not work for their business operations. The two employees on the rooftop at all times logistically doesn’t work if there isn’t the business on the rooftop to support the need for two employees up there. Goeb asked more specifically about the hours of operation for the RSA and with respect to football game Saturdays. Flynn noted that for special events, such as football games, they might open the RSA earlier than 3 pm. Walz confirmed that if the Board approves this application without restrictions, the applicant can have the RSA open anytime within their normal hours of operation. Chrischilles asked how the applicant would monitor the number of people on the rooftop. Flynn said they use security to make sure they stay within the limits of the occupancy of the area. It will be easily controlled since there is a single set of stairs up to the area. Chrischilles noted that the applicant has done a good job with their proposal and planning. However he is bothered by a couple of items. One being since this is on a roof, there is a safety concern. The other issue is the amplified sound, however the Board has no jurisdiction on that issue. In terms of the safety, he is concerned about the 4 foot railings and they look as if they could easily be climbed over. Flynn noted that is the basic idea of what will be used, however they will likely use something with more screening because the view of the HVAC systems is not attractive. He noted that his establishment 30 Hop in Coralville has never had an issue with someone trying to climb over the rail. Chrischilles noted the clientele is different. Walz noted that the Board can impose conditions on the special exception to state certain materials are used for the railings, or they must be at a certain height. Board of Adjustment April 13, 2016 Page 8 of 12 Chrischilles asked how far is the edge of this RSA with respect to the beer garden below (in terms of throwing things). Walz showed the area, the RSA is directly above the beer garden. Pat Barta (contractor) noted that with regards to the screening, the architect didn’t totally understand where the contractor wanted the perforated fence. The perforated fence is supposed to run across the back of the RSA to screen the HVAC equipment. He also noted there would be a masonry wall behind the bar area. Weitzel asked if they discussed with the architects the sound ending properties of the screening that is indicated on the drawings. Aaron Doubet (DB Acoustics, Marion, Iowa) said the actual panel in the railing would not control sound very well, but if there are issues an absorbent panel for sound control can be sandwiched between the perforated panels. Baker asked if there would be a maximum sound level set that staff could not go above. Doubet said they would set an adaptive volume level with a maximum, he can put microphones in the space that will measure the ambient noise of the space and that can control individual speakers. So for example if the north end of the RSA is populated heavily the speakers in that area will automatically be raised to a level predetermined above the ambient noise level, but other speakers on the RSA will not change. The system is programmed so staff do not need to worry about changes. There will be an override to turn it off, but not necessarily to turn it back on. Doubet noted that with regards to the televisions, the sound is only controlled through the sound system, it is not controlled at individual televisions. This will control from having a blaring television, it is hard-wired controlled through the sound system. So the same standards and systems that apply to the music volumes will apply to the television volumes. Baker asked if the music upstairs would be the same music as downstairs. Doubet said it doesn’t have to be, it can be completely separate or tie in. Doubet also explained that with the sound system they can direct sound certain ways. Where Basta and the apartments above are, no sound will be directed towards that area, all sound will be transferred away. Baker asked about exit safety from the RSA and if an employee has to access the exterior emergency exit to get people out. Barta explained that the existing outdoor patio has an 8 foot fence that has a crash bar system for emergency exit. On the roof they will have a similar system, there will be a gate to the exterior stairs that will have the crash bar system. Those exterior stairs egress into the private alley. Flynn noted that staff monitors those exits to make sure people aren’t entering through those emergency exits. Baker asked about stairway widths. Barta explained that the Code requires a minimum width for stairways depending on the occupancy. Weitzel asked about monitoring occupancies and the management plan, which states a minimum of two people. Flynn responded that the number of staff on the RSA will depend on the number of occupants. Dulek said the owner/applicant can decide what the adequate management plan is and there is a need for reasonable flexibility. If the reasonable expectations are not met, they may not be able to get the temporary use permit or alcohol permit. Board of Adjustment April 13, 2016 Page 9 of 12 Goeb indicated the part of the staff report where it says “while staff is not aware of any proposed heat sources being proposed at this time, heat sources would berequiredto meet FireCode and Building Code, andwould beinspected” and wanted to verify that if the applicant wanted to add propane heaters to the rooftop it would have to meet the Fire Codes. Flynn noted that at 30 Hop in Coralville they do have the propane heaters and the sprinkler system on the roof covers that area. Walz said this language was added just for assurance that if an heat source or open flame was added, Fire Codes would be followed, the applicant has not indicated they will use propane heaters at this time. Baker asked about the rooftop space and if there would be dancing space on the rooftop. Flynn said that every year when they apply for a liquor license they need to indicate whether or not there will be dancing at the establishment. Barta noted the floor construction would not change if there were to be dancing, the proposed design could handle that activity. Baker closed the public hearing. Dulek replied to the earlier question of revocation and enforcement of the temporary use permit. The outdoor service area, the permission to sell and consume alcohol outside, is completely within Council discretion and if there is a violation or Council has issues with it, Staff can recommend to Council it should be suspended or terminated, and the appeal goes through Council. With the temporary use permit, if Staff feels the permitee is in violation of the terms, Staff will say it should be suspended or revoked, and the appeal of that decision comes to the Board of Adjustment. The Board and Staff discussed the amplified noise with no live music versus live performance issues and also the levels of decibel noise and how it will be regulated by the temporary use permit. Goeb moved for the approval of EXC16-00002, a special exception to allow at Rooftop Service Area in the Central Business (CB-10) zone located above 115 and 117 Iowa Avenue subject to the following conditions: •Substantial compliance with the site plan submitted. •No solid roof shall be constructed over any portion of the outdoor service area. •Amplified sound is allowed by temporary use permit only. •No live music or live performance permitted. •A lighting plan must be in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and approved by the Building Official prior to issuance of a building permit. •Handicapped accessible routes must be maintained between the front entrance and elevator and between the elevator and second floor restrooms. •Substantial compliance with the management plan, requiring no fewer than 2 employees present on the rooftop at all times, and one crowd control manager for the entire bar/business. •As per City Code, if nuisance or safety issues arise, the City may require immediate changes to the management plan and/or the number of monitors to remedy the situation and may suspend or revoke the Outdoor Service Area permit. •Food service must be provided during all hours of operation. Weitzel seconded the motion. Board of Adjustment April 13, 2016 Page 10 of 12 Chrischilles moved to amend the motion with an additional condition that the site plan include the perforated metal screening is used in all areas where there is screening to be located, and should be at least 5 feet in height above the floor. Goeb seconded the amendment. Baker and Weitzel both understand the concern, but are not compelled to add in that condition. Weitzel noted it is an unnecessary expense and there has been no proof of a problem. Chrischilles noted that the contractor said it would actually be cheaper since it would be uniformity of product. Chrischilles said he does not want the railing concept shown on the architect’s site plan to be used, he feels it will open up problems of climbing over. Weitzel also noted the Code already indicates what the minimum screening and railing is necessary for safety and asking for the 5 feet is above the requirement. Goeb noted that not only for safety, but for aesthetic reasons it will look better to have a consist product around the whole rooftop. Baker noted that once the Board opens up adding a foot to the minimum standard that then opens up the conversation as to why not add two, and so forth. The safety standards are in place already for a reason. Since the amendment did not receive the support of three members of the Board, it will not be added to the motion. Baker called the question and asked for a finding of facts. Weitzel stated regarding agenda item EXC16-00002 he concurs with the findings set forth in the Staff Report of April 13, 2016 and conclude the general and specific criteria are satisfied unless amended or opposed by another Board member he recommends that the Board adopt the findings in the Staff Report as our findings with acceptance of this proposal. Weitzel specifically noted in the Staff report it was compelling that the specific standards addressed everything that was required by code and other uses in the area will be preserved. Baker noted that the inability of the Board to consider sound mitigation or amplification issues is an issue that needs to be reconsidered. The findings of the Staff, based on the limitations the Board have, he does concur. Chrischilles stated he opposed based on the findings in the Staff Report because he feels they could do a better job with regards to the safety of the project. Goeb seconded the findings of fact. A vote was taken and the motion passed 3-1 (Chrischilles dissenting). Baker stated the motion declared approved, any person who wishes to appeal this decision to a court of record may do so within 30 days after this decision is filed with the City Clerk’s Office. Board of Adjustment April 13, 2016 Page 11 of 12 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION: Walz noted that the Board had drafted a letter to the City Council in January regarding rental properties located in the flood plain and Staff has proposed a remedy for that in which Staff has mapped out all the rental properties in the flood plain and that map will be attached to the rental disclosure form so people can see whether the property they are renting is in a flood plain. Baker stated with regards to the Board not being able to discuss or weigh in on the issue of sound amplification he would like a rationale as to why. Goeb also asked for a clarification on the live music issue. ADJOURNMENT: Weitzel moved to adjourn. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-0. BO A R D O F A D J U S T M E N T AT T E N D A N C E R E C O R D NA M E T E R M E X P . 4/ 8 5 / 1 3 6 / 1 0 8/ 1 2 9 / 1 4 1 0 / 1 4 12 / 1 6 1 / 1 3 2 / 1 7 3 / 9 4 / 1 3 BA K E R , L A R R Y 1/ 1 / 2 0 1 7 XX X X X X X X O / E X X GO E B , C O N N I E 1/ 1 / 2 0 2 0 XX X X X X X XX X X GR E N I S , B R O C K 1/ 1 / 2 0 1 6 O/ E X O / E X X O / E X -- - - - - - - CH R I S C H I L L E S , T . G E N E 1/ 1 / 2 0 1 9 XX X X X X X XX X X SO G L I N , B E C K Y 1/ 1 / 2 0 1 8 XX X X X X X X X X O / E WE I T Z E L , T I M 1/ 1 / 2 0 2 1 -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - X X X KE Y : X = P r e s e n t O = A b s e n t O/ E = A b s e n t / E x c u s e d -- - = N o t a M e m b e r