Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009 Board of Adjustment DecisionsDoc ID: 021357920002 Tvoe: GEN Recorded: 01/16/2009 at 10:42:47 AM Fee Amt: $12.00 Paos i of 2 Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5230 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter Countv Recorder DECISION BK4381 PG797-798 IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2008 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Edgar Thornton, Caroline Sheerin, Karen Leigh, Ned Wood, Terry Hora MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Sara Greenwood Hektoen, Sarah Walz, v, OTHERS PRESENT: Dwight Dobberstein, Dick Noble ,3 SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: ? �.n 1. EXC08-00016 a public hearing regarding an application submitted by the University of low'd' Community Credit Union to allow a drive -though banking facility in the Commercial Office (CO -1) zone at the southwest corner of Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is located in the CO -1 zone at the corner of two arterial streets—North Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard. The Board finds that the transportation planning staff studied vehicle traffic counts for the location and concluded that these roads have adequate capacity for the traffic levels generated by the use. The Board finds that the location for the entry drive for the development was a requirement of the rezoning of the property and was recommended by staff to ensure safety for turning traffic and to minimize conflicts with traffic stacking at the intersection of Scott and Dodge. The Board finds that submitted site plan shows the location of the drive-through facility is more than 200 feet from the nearest residential property, and that cars waiting for access to the drive-through will face west and north, away from residential property. The Board finds that the south and east boundaries of the parking area will be screened to the S3 (high) standard and that the bank building will screen the parking and drive-through area from adjacent residential properties to the north. The Board finds that the proposed drive-through provides at least 16 stacking spaces. The Board finds that the applicant has agreed to provide pavement markings and signage to designate pedestrian walkways that cross through the drive-through area and entrance drive. The Board finds that a final site plan, including lighting, must be reviewed by the building department to insure compliance with all requirements of the code. The Board finds that utilities and access roads have been provided, and that the drainage for the site will be reviewed by the Building Department as part of the site plan process for the bank development. Conclusions of Law: Because the existing arterial street system is designed to support the level of traffic generated by the drive-through banking facility, and because the facility is designed with sufficient stacking spaces and includes pavement markings and cautionary signage to mark pedestrian areas, the Board concludes that the specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health safety, comfort, and general welfare. For these same reasons and because the vehicle access point for the development will be located away from the Scott Boulevard and North Dodge intersection, the Board concludes that adequate measures have been taken to provide ingress and egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. Because the site plan illustrates the required S3 (tall) landscape screening and locates the drive-through away from adjacent residential property so as to buffer the residential neighborhood from noise or glare generated by vehicles using the facility, the Board concludes that the proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The Board concludes that by locating the drive-through behind the building and out of view from Dodge Street, the proposed exception will comply with the Comprehensive Plan, which calls for enhancing the appearance of this corridor as a main entrance to the city. Disposition: By a vote of 5-0 the Board approves EXC08-00016 an application submitted by The University of Iowa Community Credit Union requesting a special exception to allow a drive- through banking facility in the CO -1 zone, located south of Dodge Street and west of Scott Boulevard, subject to substantial compliance with the site plan submitted on November 12, 2008, including cautionary signage and pavement markings for the pedestrian crossings in the area of the drive-through and bank entrance. TIME LIMITATIONS: All orders of the Board, which do not set a specific time limitation on Applicant action, shall expire six (6) months from the date they were filed with the City Clerk, unless the Applicant shall have taken action within such time period to establish the use or construct the improvement authorized under the terms of the Board's decision. City Code Section 14-8C-1 E, City of Iowa City, Iowa. Appro ed by: Ned Wood, Chairperson-77/Vo q City Attorney's Office t STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY I, Marian Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, do hereby certify that the Board of Adjustment Decision herein is a true and correct copy of the Decision that was passed by the Board of Adjustment of Iowa City, Iowa, at its regular meeting on the 10th day of December, 2008, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this day of A 200 Mariam. Karr, City Clerk CORPORATE SEAL JAR 3TWQ: FF O' F.,� I IIIIIII IIIIII III VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII Doc ID: 021391130003 TVDe: GEN Recorded: 02/24/2009 at 10:46:32 AM Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5230 Fee Amt : $17.00 Pace 1 of 3 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter County Recorder DECISION BK 4398 PG487-489 IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TUESDAY, JANUARY 20, 2009 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Barbara Eckstein, Edgar Thornton, Ned Wood, Terry Hora, and Caroline Sheerin MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Sara Greenwood Hektoen, Sarah Walz 1 K r FF_B 2 3 nnq OTHERS PRESENT: Tim Krumm, Greg Geerdes, other unidentified members of the public APPEALS APL08-00001 – An application submitted by Michael and Jan Dahlen appealing a decision of the Building Official to grant a building permit to Shelter House for property located in the CI -1 zone at 429 Southgate. 1. Findings of Fact: A. The Board finds that Shelter House did not submit a shelter management plan. The Board finds that Shelter House applied for a special exception in July of 2004. The Board also finds that the Zoning Code was amended in 2005 to include the requirement of a shelter management plan when applying for a special exception for a shelter use. B. The Board finds that the site plan approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission shows 21 parking spaces on the site -19 outdoor spaces and 2 garage spaces. The Board finds that a maximum of 14 employees will be present at the site at any time and that Shelter House can accommodate up to 70 residents. C. The Board finds that Shelter House submitted its application to the City for a major site plan review on October 1, 2008 and posted notice of its intention to develop the site on October 2, 2008. The Board finds that the City provided the posted notice to Shelter House. D. The Board finds that Shelter House provided the City with the name and address of the owner of record at the time it submitted its application for the site plan review. The Board finds that there is a 30' drainage easement running along the south boundary of the site. E. The Board finds that it issued a Special Exception to Shelter House on July 14, 2004. The Board finds that it did extend the expiration date of this special exception upon request from Shelter House in February 2005. The Board finds that Shelter House was given six (6) months from the date any litigation based on the special exception was finally concluded to take action to establish the use permitted by the Special Exception. The Board finds that the litigation concluded on April 9, 2008, when the Supreme Court of Iowa entered its final order on the litigation. The Board finds the Shelter House applied for site plan approval on August 27, 2008, and continued to diligently work with the City to revise the plans to meet the requirements set forth by Code and the Special Exception by engaging in on-going discussions with City staff and prompt submission of revised plans, including submission for major site plan review on October 1, 2008 when it was determined by the City that this was required. The Board further finds that Shelter House diligently applied for a building permit and worked with the City to respond to its requested revisions. The Board finds that the Planning and Zoning Commission approved the site plan on November 6, 2008 and the Building Official issued the Building Permit on November 26, 2008. Conclusions of Law: A. The Board concludes that the Building Official did not err in issuing the building permit despite the fact that Shelter House did not submit a shelter management plan. The Board concludes that, in 2004, at the time Shelter House applied for a special exception, the specific criteria enumerated in the Iowa City Code of Ordinances did not require the submittal of a shelter management plan. The Board concludes that the zoning code was amended in 2005 to require such a plan at the time a person applies for a special exception, but that such requirements are not retroactively applied. The Board therefore concludes that Shelter House was not required to submit such a plan to the City prior to issuance of the building permit. B. The Board concludes that it was not an error to issue the building permit despite an alleged deficiency in required parking. The Board concludes that there is no deficiency in the minimum parking required, as the site plan approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and reviewed by the Building Official prior to issuance of the building permit meets the minimum parking standard set forth in Iowa City Ordinance 14-5A-4, Table 5A-2 for Community Service -Shelter uses (i.e. 21 spaces are required by code, and 21 spaces are provided on the site plan). The Board finds that neither the Code nor the 2004 Special Exception differentiate between indoor and outdoor parking spaces for purposes of satisfying the minimum parking requirements. The Board further finds that neither the Code nor the 2004 Special Exception distinguish or dictate how such spaces are to be used for purposes of satisfying the minimum parking requirements. C. The Board concludes that Shelter House properly provided notice to the public of its intention to develop on the site in satisfaction of Iowa City Ordinance 18-2-1C. The Board concludes that, under City regulations, Shelter House was not required to submit the site plan or any revisions thereof to the neighbors or other parties for review or approval. The Board concludes that Shelter House was not required to post notice every time it submitted a revised site plan to the City and submitting a revised site plan just prior to consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission does not violate the City's ordinance requiring notice of intent to develop a site. D. The Board concludes that it was not an error to issue the building permit despite an alleged boundary dispute, as the Building Official is not in a position to resolve such a dispute between private parties. The Board concludes that neither state nor local law requires Shelter House to prove clear title to the land at the time it applied for site plan approval. The Board further concludes that it would be a violation of Shelter House's due process rights to deny a building permit based on an alleged boundary dispute unless there was an injunction. The Board concludes that no such injunction has been issued in this matter and therefore the Building Official did not have the authority to withhold the building permit based on the alleged boundary dispute. The Board concludes that Shelter House satisfied the all requirements for providing information on ownership of the property when it provided the name and address of the owner of record of the property, as required by Iowa City Ordinance 18-2-2. KT FFR 23 7099 E. The Board concludes that Shelter House, by applying for site plan approval and diligently working on plan revisions, had taken action to establish the use within the term of the special exception and therefore the Building Official was not in error in issuing the building permit. The Board concludes that Shelter House's action to establish the use was in accordance with Iowa City Ordinance 14 -8C -1E, the 2004 Special Exception, the August 2004 letter from Senior Planner Bob Miklo, and the deadline extension granted by the Board of Adjustment in February 2005. The Board finds that the language in 14-8C-1 E stating that an applicant shall "take action to establish the use ... such as obtaining a building permit and proceeding to completion in accordance with the term of the permit," merely provides an example and is not restrictive, and does not require the applicant to actually obtain a building permit before it can be considered to have "taken action to establish the use". Disposition: By a vote of 1-4, the Board denies the appeal and upholds the decision of the Building Official to issue a building permit. TIME LIMITATIONS: All orders of the Board, which do not set a specific time limitation on Applicant action, shall expire six (6) months from the date they were filed with the City Clerk, unless the Applicant shall have taken action within such time period to establish the use or construct the improvement authorized under the terms of the Board's decision. City Code Section 14 -8C -1E, City of Iowa City, Iowa. / V % e/"Zp a12o/89 Approved by Chairperson City Attorney's Office o2 /i/o9 STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY I, Marian Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, do hereby certify that the Board of Adjustment Decision herein is a true and correct copy of the Decision that was passed by the Board of Adjustment of Iowa City, Iowa, at its January 20, 2009, meeting, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this Z3 day of F� 0- , 20C�ol ;�7kLlX � Marian . Karr, City Clerk CORPORATE SEAL 23 711119 c4SboblVlE 2Ebr ozoesYcxa o, w I IIIIIII IIIIII III VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII Doc ID: 021391180002 Tvoe: GEN Recorded: 02/24/2009 at 10:50:48 AM Fee Amt: $12.00 Pace 1 of 2 Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/3565230 Johnson County Iowa Kim Painter Countv Recorder DECISION BK4398 PG492-493 IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 14, 2009 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Barbara Eckstein, Edgar Thornton, Ned Wood, Terry Hora, and Caroline Sheerin ' H ,!_ (D I I : 35a Kr MEMBERS ABSENT: None. FFR 2 3 M09 STAFF PRESENT: Sara Greenwood Hektoen, Sarah Walz, Doug Boothroy City c -rk OTHERS PRESENT: Frank Gersch, Gregg Geerdes, Lori Dahlen, Joyce Barker, Craig Dahlen, Janet Dahlen, Tim Krumm, Tom Werderitsch, Mike Dahlen, Chrissy Canganelli SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: EXC08-00017 a public hearing regarding an application submitted by John Hartson and Frank Gersch for a special exception to allow conversion of a non -conforming use from medical office to general office for property located in the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone at 1027 Rochester Avenue. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property was established as a commercial use in the 1920s and has continued as a commercial use throughout its history. The Board finds that the building is a traditional, storefront building designed for commercial use with large display windows at the front, and that the interior of the building is divided into approximately 1,500 square feet of offices and exam rooms with a basement area used for filing, kitchen, and storage space. The Board finds that the off-street parking requirements for the general office use are less than those for medical office use—that medical office uses rely on regularly scheduled meetings with clients/patients, whereas the general office use does not rely on regular appointments with clients. The Board finds that while the property does not provide off-street parking, it is credited with ghost parking in accord with the standards for medical office use and that there is available on -street parking in the neighborhood. The Board finds that the new owners do not plan to expand the building and would be precluded by the zoning from adding addition square footage of office space as this would constitute and enlargement of the use. The Board finds that this area is fully developed and that all utilities, access roads, drainage and facilities are already provided. The Board finds that the Comprehensive plan does not address non -conforming uses but considers opportunities to reduce the demand for on street parking in the Central Planning District. Conclusions of Law: Because the subject structure is a traditional store front with an interior space divided into offices, the Board concludes that the proposed use is suitable for the structure and site. The board concludes that because the general office use requires less parking than the medical office use, that is therefore a less intense use and for this reason, the conversion to the new use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare; will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood; and will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which the property is located. Because the property does not provide off-street parking, the change of use will have no impact on ingress and egress. For all the above reasons, and because no expansion of the building or use is proposed the Board finds that the special exception conforms to the applicable regulations and standards of the zone in which it is located. Because the change in use would likely reduce the demand for parking associated with the property, the Board concludes that the conversion to a general office use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Disposition: By a vote of 5-0 the Board approves EXC08-00017, an application submitted by John Hartson and Frank Gersch for a special exception to allow conversion of a non- conforming use from medical office to general office for property located in the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone at 1027 Rochester Avenue. APPEALS APL08-00001 — Public hearing regarding an application submitted by Michael and Jan Dahlen appealing a decision of the Building Official to grant a building permit to Shelter House for property located in the Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone at 429 Southgate Avenue. The Board voted to defer its decision to a public meeting held on Tuesday, January 20, 2009. TIME LIMITATIONS: All orders of the Board that do not set a specific time limitation on Applicant action shall expire six (6) months from the date they were filed with the City Clerk, unless the Applicant shall have taken action within such time period to establish the use or construct the improvement authorized under the terms of the Board's decision. City Code Section 14-8C-1 E, City of Iowa City, Iowa. p!� atwoy Approved by: �/ �/ 4z,✓ Chairperson CityAttorney's Office al"107 STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY I, Marian Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, do hereby certify that the Board of Adjustment Decision herein is a true and correct copy of the Decision that was passed by the Board of Adjustment of Iowa City, Iowa, at its regular meeting on the 14th day of January, 2009, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this Z-'- ``t day of -e loYt(a i z1 , 2009 2? u Marian K. Karr, City Clerk CORPORATE SEAL FEB 2 3 7909 CObbOViE 2Edr acsz�- h- OQQ Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, DECISION IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, JUNE 10, 2009 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL C(T Iowa City, IA 522"^, I IIIIIII IIIIII III VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII Doc ID: 021546330004 TVDe: GEN Recorded: 07/07/2009 at 04:07:09 PM Fee Amt: $24.00 Pace 1 of 4 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter Countv Recorder BK4471 PG132.135 MEMBERS PRESENT: Ned Wood, Caroline Sheerin, Barbara Eckstein, Terry Hora MEMBERS ABSENT: Edgar Thornton O T3 STAFF PRESENT: Sara Greenwood Hektoen, Sarah Walz, n y c r OTHERS PRESENT: Roger Lusala, Sue Schmucker, Diane Funkin P SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: :<m m s o� 1. EXC09-00003: A public hearing regarding an application by the Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program for a special exception to establish a General Community ServiCfb Use in the Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone for property located at 1200 South Gilbert Court. Findings of Fact: The Board finds the subject property is located in the CI -1 zone and that there are other General Community Service Uses in the immediate vicinity. The Board finds that the applicant has indicated that most clients will be transported to the site by bus or van service and that normal activities related to the agency are conducted indoors during regular business hours (weekdays between 8 am and 6 pm). The Board finds that adequate access roads, drainage, and utilities are already in place for the property, however the existing parking area on the site is non -conforming and must be brought into conformance with the Off -Street Parking standards in order to establish a new use. The Board finds that the proposed site plan demonstrates that the parking area can be redesigned to provide adequate parking for staff and transportation vans, and provide the screening, pedestrian access routes, parking terminuses, and curb cuts as required by code. The submitted site plan also shows the construction of a four -foot sidewalk along Highland Court. The Board finds that the applicant must submit a final site plan as part of the building permit process, and that the Building Official will review the site plan to ensure compliance with all zoning code standards. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the proposed use will not alter the overall character of the zone nor inhibit future development of uses for which the zone is primarily intended for the following reasons: 1. Most clients will travel to the agency by bus or be delivered by van service, thus minimizing the amount of vehicle traffic to and from the site; 2. Other general community service uses are already established in this commercial neighborhood; 3. All program activities are indoors; and 4. The hours of operation for the agency are primarily limited to the regular work day. T M 0 The Board concludes that the proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare because the applicant will redesign the parking area to bring it into conformance with the zoning standards and provide sidewalks within the Highland Court and Gilbert Court rights-of-way as demonstrated in the site plan. Because most clients are transported to the site by bus or van and because the applicant can provide on-site parking for its vehicles and all staff members, the Board concludes that the specific proposed exception will not significantly alter vehicle traffic in the area and thus will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The Board concludes that by minimizing the curb cuts and the reducing the entrance drives to 22 feet and by providing the other required elements for the parking area, that the applicant will have taken adequate measures to provide ingress and egress designed to minimize congestion on public streets. For these same reasons, and because the applicant's site plan demonstrates the required improvements to the parking area, the Board concludes that the proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which the property is located. The Board further concludes that granting a special exception to allow this community service use for this property is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and conforms to the applicable regulations of the CI -1 zone in all aspects other than those previously discussed above. Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves an application for a special exception to allow a General Community Service Use to be located in the Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone at 1200 South Gilbert Court subject to general compliance with the site plan submitted, including compliance with the off-street parking standards and installation of sidewalks along Highland Court and Gilbert Court rights-of-way. 2. EXC09-00004 —A public hearing regarding an application submitted by the First Mennonite Church for a special exception to allow expansion of a daycare facility located in the Medium -Density Single Family Residential (RS -8) zone at 405 Myrtle Avenue. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the existing daycare is already approved for up to fifty children and, while currently licensed for just thirty-two children, the special exception does not seek to increase the number of children allowed at the daycare. The Board finds that most children are transported to the daycare by van, and that the church parking area exceeds the required parking for the daycare and provides space for pick up and drop off., The Board finds that Greenwood Avenue and Myrtle Avenue provide access to the daycare facility and are both 25' wide but do not permit parking on either side. The Board finds that the existing daycare facility provides more than the required indoor space for fifty children and that the outdoor play area provides space for up to twentxfivec' children. The Board finds that the daycare has indicated that no more than twenty-five children are present in the play area at any given time. O ^ -77 The Board finds that the parking area for the church is non -conforming in that it laeks some of the screening required by code and that the church lacks a direct sidewalk connection from the adjacent right-of-way. The Board further finds that one parking space should be removed adjacent to the outdoor play area to provide for a more distinct pedestrian area for passage to the indoor facility. The Board finds that the proposed one-story addition is designed to complement the existing church in its architecture and materials. Conclusions of Law: The Board finds that the church is subject to the Multi -Family Design Standards and that the current parking lot and pedestrian access do not conform thereto. Because most children are transported to the site by van service, and because the proposed site plan demonstrates sufficient parking as well as space for pick up and drop off for the daycare facility, the Board concludes that the expansion of the day care space will not significantly alter traffic or the intensity of the use and thus it will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare. For these same reasons the proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood, nor will it impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone. The Board finds that adequate utilities, drainage and facilities are provided. The Board finds that Myrtle and Greenwood Avenues provide adequate access to the site The Board finds that the drop off/pick up are in a location that is convenient to the facility. The Board concludes that additional pavementstriping in the parking area between the daycare and the outdoor play area is necessary to provide for safe pedestrian circulation. The Board further concludes that the sidewalk from the front door of the church to Myrtle Avenue must be completed to provide safe pedestrian access on the site. The Board finds that adequate measures have been taken to provide ingress and egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets since parking is not allowed on either side of Greenwood and Myrtle Avenues. Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves the special to allow expansion of a daycare facility located in the Medium -Density Single Family Residential (RS -8) zone at 405 Myrtle Avenue, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval of an amendment to the zoning code to allow Religious/Private Group Assembly and Daycare Uses along streets with a pavement width narrower than 28 feet; 2. Required S2 screening of the parking areas as determined by the building official; 3. Striping the parking lot and removal of one parking stall adjacent to the outdoor play area to allow a designated pedestrian route between the daycare facility and the outdoor play area; and 4. Completing the sidewalk connection between Myrtle Avenue and the front entrance to the church building. _,-, TIME LIMITATIONS: -�<r a M - m 3 All orders of the Board, which do not set a specific time limitation on Applicant action, 4II - expire six (6) months from the date they were filed with the City Clerk, unless the App9pant sl:�Il have taken action within such time period to establish the use or construct the improvement 'O authorized under the terms of the Board's decision. City Code Section 14-8C-1 E. City of Iowa City, Iowa. Ned Wood, Chairperson STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY Approved by: Jua,A.,�O . City Attorney's Office (01 ,Zrl al I, Marian Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, do hereby certify that the Board of Adjustment Decision herein is a true and correct copy of the Decision that was passed by the Board of Adjustment of Iowa City, Iowa, at its regular meeting on the 10th day of June, 2009, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this rlp day of Qk14 20 4"Y Maridn K Karr, City Clerk CORPORATE SEAL o a D -i .� <r a r M ❑ 10 Prepared by Sarah Walz 410 E Washington Iowa City (IA) 52240 319/356 "'"" DECISION IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, May 13, 2009 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Ned Wood, Caroline Sheerin, Terry Hora, Barbara MEMBERS ABSENT: Edgar Thornton STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Greenwood Hektoen, Sarah Walz, OTHERS PRESENT: Tim Waldron, Katherine Wildman, SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: o� I IIIIIII IIIVI III VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII Doc ID: 021546320003 Tvoe: GEN or Recded: 07/07/2009 at 04:06:51 Pr Fee Amt: $19.00 Pao, 1 of 3 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter Countv Recorder 13K 4471 PG129-131 Eckstein EXC09-00001: a public hearing regarding an application by Faith Baptist Church for a special exception to expand its church facility located in the OPD -8 (Planned Development Overlay) zone at 1151 Village Road. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the specific criteria for religious/private group assembly require direct vehicle access to a road with a paving width greater than 28 feet, and that Village Road is a collector street with a pavement width of 25 feet. The Board finds that staff has proposed an amendment to the code that would permit religious/private group assembly uses along collector and arterial streets and that the amendment must be approved by Council. The Board finds that the proposed garage will not generate additional traffic to the facility nor expand the capacity of the church. The Board finds that garages and storage buildings are considered accessory structures and, while not subject to principle building setback requirements, these structures must comply with the Multi -family Design Standards. The Board finds that the townhouses to the north of the church face onto the rear yard of the church. The board finds that there is an established hedge along the south property line, which screens the view from abutting properties. The Board finds that the applicant has proposed a 30 x 48 -foot garage/storage building, and that staff has recommended siding the building in horizontal siding to complement materials used on the building and that the siding should be of a dark color so as to minimize its visibility. The Board finds that the applicant has agreed with staffs recommendation. The Board finds that the existing parking area is non -conforming with regard to the Off - Street Parking Standards and that in order to expand the facility, the code requires that the area meet the perimeter screening standards. The Board finds that in order to obtain a building permit, the applicant must submit a final site plan to the Building Official demonstrating compliance with all zoning and building code requirements. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that because the proposed garage/storage building will not alter traffic to and from the church that the special exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare. The Board concludes that the special exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other C7 �r < O M co EXC09-00001: a public hearing regarding an application by Faith Baptist Church for a special exception to expand its church facility located in the OPD -8 (Planned Development Overlay) zone at 1151 Village Road. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the specific criteria for religious/private group assembly require direct vehicle access to a road with a paving width greater than 28 feet, and that Village Road is a collector street with a pavement width of 25 feet. The Board finds that staff has proposed an amendment to the code that would permit religious/private group assembly uses along collector and arterial streets and that the amendment must be approved by Council. The Board finds that the proposed garage will not generate additional traffic to the facility nor expand the capacity of the church. The Board finds that garages and storage buildings are considered accessory structures and, while not subject to principle building setback requirements, these structures must comply with the Multi -family Design Standards. The Board finds that the townhouses to the north of the church face onto the rear yard of the church. The board finds that there is an established hedge along the south property line, which screens the view from abutting properties. The Board finds that the applicant has proposed a 30 x 48 -foot garage/storage building, and that staff has recommended siding the building in horizontal siding to complement materials used on the building and that the siding should be of a dark color so as to minimize its visibility. The Board finds that the applicant has agreed with staffs recommendation. The Board finds that the existing parking area is non -conforming with regard to the Off - Street Parking Standards and that in order to expand the facility, the code requires that the area meet the perimeter screening standards. The Board finds that in order to obtain a building permit, the applicant must submit a final site plan to the Building Official demonstrating compliance with all zoning and building code requirements. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that because the proposed garage/storage building will not alter traffic to and from the church that the special exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare. The Board concludes that the special exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values for the following reasons: • The applicant has agreed to locate the garage/storage building near the southwest corner of the parking lot, away from the adjacent townhouses, in an area where established landscaping is already tall enough to screen views from the nearest residential uses. • The applicant has agreed to construct the building with horizontal siding to complement the church building, and will use a colored siding to minimize the impact of the large structure. • The applicant has agreed to include additional landscaping around the building in order to break up views of the blank walls from adjacent properties to the west and north. • The applicant is required to bring the parking area into conformance with the perimeter screening standards. For these same reasons, the Board finds that the proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the district in which such property is located. The Board concludes that the special exception must be subject to Council approval of a zoning code amendment regarding minimum street widths, and that all adequate utilities, drainage, and other necessary facilities are already being provided. The Board concludes that the proposed building will have no impact on ingress or egress and that appropriate traffic control measures for the site are already in place. The Board concludes that other than the requested special exception and in the event Council amends the zoning code to allow religious/private group assembly uses along streets with a pavement width narrower than 28 feet, the specific proposed exception in all other respects conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is to be located. The Board concludes that with the recommended conditions regarding location, screening, and materials for the proposed garage/storage building, the proposed exception will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, which encourages the location of churches in residential neighborhoods so long as they are designed to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Disposition: By a vote of 4-0, the Board approves EXC09-00001 a special exception to allow the expansion of a church facility located in the OPD -8 (Planned Development Overlay) at 1251 Village Road subject to the following conditions. 1) A landscape screen be maintained on the south side of the building in compliance with the code's S-3 screening requirements; 2) City Council approval of an amendment to the zoning code to allow religious/private group assembly uses along streets with a pavement width narrower than 28 feet; 3) Staff approval of a final design of the garage/storage building showing compliance with the Multi -family Design standards with regard to siding materials and landscape screening to minimize views of the building; 4) Location of the garage/storage building at the southwest corner of the part i Flot, v3 adjacent to existing landscape; y -i n< _ CO — G 7. 00 5) Compliance with the screening requirements for non -conforming parking and loading areas. TIME LIMITATIONS: All orders of the Board, which do not set a specific time limitation on Applicant action, shall expire six (6) months from the date they were filed with the City Clerk, unless the Applicant shall have taken action within such time period to establish the use or construct the improvement authorized under the terms of the Board's decision. City Code Section 14-8C-1 E, City of Iowa City, Iowa. Al Wa 7/i409 Ned Wood, Chairperson STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY Approved by: City Attorney's Office Oq I, Marian Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, do hereby certify that the Board of Adjustment Decision herein is a true and correct copy of the Decision that was passed by the Board of Adjustment of Iowa City, Iowa, at its regular meeting on the 13h day of May, 2009, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this day of 20_!�2_ CORPORATE SEAL CIO, MariN-rK. Karr, City Clerk o ^J n� rETI 01 m o� F. > co Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5230 DECISION IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2009 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL f=ee - Doc ID: 021707710003 Type: GEN Kind: DECISION Recorded: 12/18/2009 at 11:52:19 AM Fee Amt: $19.00 Paae 1 of 3 Johnson County Iowa Kim Painter County Recorder SK4540 PG15-17 MEMBERS PRESENT: Caroline Sheerin, Barbara Eckstein, Will Jennings, Terry Anderson MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Sara Greenwood Hektoen, Sarah Walz OTHERS PRESENT: Brian Ramirez, Kapesh Patel, David Bailie, SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: 0 D� =acs .<r rn Duane Muss8� D Horaa, Robert a --� M C-) r EXC09-00005 A public hearing regarding an application submitted by AT&T Mobility for a special exception to allow construction of a 100 -foot cell phone tower in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone at 925 Highway 6 East. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the coverage maps provided by the applicant demonstrate that the proposed tower provides AT&T coverage to an area that cannot be served by an existing tower or industrial property, or by locating antennas on existing structures in the area. The Board finds that the applicant has documented the potential coverage from existing towers located within one half mile of the proposed site, including a U.S. Cellular tower on Olympic Court and towers located on the MidAmerican Property on Lower Muscatine Avenue, and that none of these existing towers provide the desired coverage for AT&T service. The Board finds that there would be canister space for two additional sets of antenna on the proposed tower, allowing for potential co -location by other providers. The Board finds that if the use of the tower is discontinued, the applicant is required to remove the tower and all associated equipment within 12 months of discontinuance of the use and that the applicant has agreed to comply with this requirement. The Board finds that the applicant has proposed a monopole design with internally mounted antennas, and that the pole will have no lighting, guy wires, trusses, or external antennas. The proposed tower will be set back more than 100 feet from the property line, and all equipment that is not located inside the adjacent commercial structure will be screened by an 8 -foot privacy fence, with additional screening provided by the tall evergreen trees established along the property line. The Board finds that no back-up generator is required for the tower and that all utilities are in place to serve the tower. The Board finds that all necessary utilities, drainage, and access roads are already in place, and that the proposed use will not generate additional traffic to and from the property other than for routine maintenance. The Board finds that all other aspects of the proposal will be reviewed by the building department for compliance with the code. Conclusions of Law: Based on the above findings of fact, the Board concludes that proposed tower meets all specific criteria for the special exception. Because the proposed tower will be set back more than 100 feet from the property line with equipment stored within the building or within privacy fencing, the Board concludes that the special exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare. For the same reasons, and because the tower is designed to be inconspicuous, has no lighting, and because all associated equipment is contained within the commercial building or privacy fencing, the Board concludes that the special exception will not injurious to the use and enjoyment of property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially reduce property values in the area. For these same reasons the Board concludes that the special exception will not impede the normal and orderly development of property within area for uses permitted in the zone. Disposition: By a vote of 5-0 the Board approves EXC09-00005, an application for a communication transmission facility in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone, located at 925 Highway 6 East, subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the site plan and all specifications regarding the tower design and enclosure submitted as part of the application; 0 2. The cell tower will have no lighting of any kind; c M 0 3. The cell tower will have a galvanized gray finish to complement o ghpoles, l� the area or in another color to be approved by staff. c> -C =in J ;<<rn = M o� 2. EXC09-00006- A public hearing regarding an application submitted by Hree,for? special exception for a drive-through facility located in the Community Commerc?A(CC-2) zone at 1720 Waterfront Drive. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the proposed drive-through facility provides one lane Tor pharmacy service and one lane for grocery pick-up. The Board finds that the pharmacy drive-through provides two stacking spaces, and that, based on the experience with similar drive-throughs at other Hy -Vee stores, the applicant does not anticipate a high volume of users for the drive-through. The Board finds that all lighting for the drive-through will be reviewed by Building Official to ensure compliance with the city's lighting standards. The Board finds that the plan for the expansion of the Hy -Vee store will result in a consolidation of curb cuts on Boyrum with an additional direct access point from the Hy -Vee property onto Boyrum Street. The Board finds that the drive-through facility is set back more than the required ten feet from the property line. The Board finds that the applicant has proposed a ten -foot sidewalk between the building and the proposed drive-through area and that the sidewalk is separated from the drive lane by bollards. The Board finds that there are no ATMs proposed for the exterior of the building in the area of the drive-through. The Board finds that the stacking spaces will not stack on to public streets and that adequate utilities and facilities already exist in this area. The Board also finds that these changes will beautify the south side of town and encourage pedestrian traffic and public transportation. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the proposed drive-through will not endanger the public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare. The Board concludes that the special exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of property in the immediate vicinity; will not substantially reduce property values in the area; and will not impede the normal and orderly development of property within area for uses permitted in the zone. The Board concludes that the additional direct access onto Boyrum Street will help to disperse vehicle traffic across the commercial site and will provide safe and efficient ingress and egress from the proposed drive-through facility. The Board finds that all necessary utilities, drainage, and access roads are being provided and that all other aspects of the proposal, including the lighting for the drive-through, will be reviewed by the building department for compliance with the code. The Board also finds that the proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's policy to encourage safe pedestrian traffic. Disposition: By a vote of 5-0 the Board approves EXC09-00006, a special exception to allow a drive-through a drive-through facility located in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone at 1720 Waterfront Drive TIME LIMITATIONS: All orders of the Board, which do not set a specific time limitation on Applicant action, shall expire six (6) months from the date they were filed with the City Clerk, unless the Applicant shall have taken action within such time period to establish the use or construct the improvement authorized under the terms of the Board's decision. City Code Section 14-8C-1 E, City of Iowa City, Iowa. L4_4 Approved by: Caroline Sheerin, Chairperson 'City Attorney's Office yy/�os�0'J STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY I, Marian Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, do hereby certify that the Board of Adjustment Decision herein is a true and correct copy of the Decision that was passed by the Board of Adjustment of Iowa City, Iowa, at its regular meeting on the 14th day of October, 2009, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this /% °l& day of a4ee ,fit✓ , 20O 7e. `6-�ti,) Marian K. Karr, City Clerk N O O _ CORPORATE SEAL C-)-< ;<r rn a rn � N 0�