HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-09-2011 Board of Adjustment
IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
Wednesday, March 9, 2011 - 5:15 PM
City Hall- Emma J. Harvat Hall
AGENDA
A. Call to Order
B. Roll Call
C. Consider the February 9, 2011 Board Minutes
D. Special Exception
EXC10-00013: Discussion of an application submitted by Center City LLC for a special exception to
allow above ground structured parking and off-site parking for a proposed mixed use building to be
located in the Central Business (CB -10) zone at 328 East Washington Street.
E. Other
F. Board of Adjustment Information
G. Adjourn
NEXT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING: APRIL 13, 2011
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
FEBRUARY 9,2011 - 5:15 PM
CITY HALL, EMMA HARVAT HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Barbara Eckstein, Brock Grenis, Will Jennings, Caroline
Sheerin
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Walz, Sara Greenwood Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT: John Cress
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
None.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM.
ROLL CALL: Grenis, Sheerin, Jennings, and Eckstein were present.
A brief opening statement was read by the Chair outlining the role and purpose of the Board and
the procedures that would be followed in the meeting.
CONSIDERATION OF THE NOVEMBER 10, 2010 MEETING MINUTES:
Eckstein and Jennings offered several typographical corrections.
Jennings moved to approve the minutes as amended.
Eckstein seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-0.
SPECIAL EXCEPTION:
EXC10-00012: Discussion of an application submitted by Cress Investments for a special
exception to add one gas pump island to the existing Quick Vehicle Service facility on
property located in the Neighborhood Commercial (CN-1) zone at 340 Scott Court.
Board of Adjustment
February 9, 2011
Page 2 of 6
On an overhead display, Walz pointed out the subject property located on the corner of Scott
Boulevard and Court Street. She explained that in 1996, this property was granted a special
exception to install four gas pump islands; however the property owner only installed three of
the gas pumps. Walz said that because 15 years had passed since the initial special exception
was granted, the property owners must come back before the Board to seek a special exception
in order to install the fourth gas pump. This fourth gas pump island would extend and additional
25 feet south toward Court Street.
Walz noted that a Neighborhood Commercial (CN-1) zone is intended to house businesses
which serve the neighborhood in which they are located. The zone is not intended for
businesses that generate a lot of traffic from outside the surrounding neighborhoods, and it
limits the size of businesses for uses permitted in the zone.
Walz said that in evaluating uses in this zone, things such as screening and the impact of
lighting, traffic, and activity associated with the use on surrounding residential uses are
considered. Safe vehicle and pedestrian access to and from the property as well as proper
traffic circulation are also considerations.
Walz stated that screening along Scott Court, the cul-de-sac that serves the commercial area,
does not meet the current standards. Walz said that additional screening in that area in order to
meet the S2 screening standard would be recommended. That screening basically provides
separation from the pedestrian areas and the vehicle areas, and screens on-site activity from
the surrounding area. Walz said that staff would also recommend that gaps in screening along
the Court Street side of the property and the car wash area on Scott be filled in.
Walz said that there is adequate on-site parking. Because of the controlled access off of Scott
Court, which serves only that commercial area, traffic from the site does not interfere with the
busy intersection at the corner of Scott and Court. Walz said that transportation planners
reviewed the application and confirmed that the site does not present concerns for vehicle
safety in terms of facility access.
Staff recommends approval of the application subject to the following conditions:
1) Perimeter screening along Court Street, Scott Court, and Scott Boulevard must be filled
in to satisfy current zoning code requirements;
2) Approval of a final site plan and canopy lighting by the Building Inspector to ensure
compliance with all the requirements of the zoning code.
Walz offered to answer any questions the Board might have.
Eckstein asked if the screening requirements for the site were substantially different than they
would have been when the gas pumps were originally approved in 1996. Walz said that
screening requirements were different.
Eckstein said that she was interested in the way that Walz had described the nature of the CN-1
zone given that Scott Boulevard and Court Street are much different streets than they would
have been in 1996. She asked if Walz could give the Board a sense of context about the traffic
volume on that corner and how it might have changed over time. Walz said that there is clearly
more traffic in that area now than there was in 1996, as the area has developed substantially
since that time. Walz said that the intersection would not be one that is considered congested,
though there is a fair amount of truck traffic along Scott Boulevard. Walz said that in the next
Board of Adjustment
February 9, 2011
Page 3 of 6
several years there will be a new truck route along Taft Avenue which will alleviate some of that
truck traffic from Scott Boulevard. Walz said that the truck traffic is primarily from the industrial
zone to the south. One goal of the Southeast District Plan is to improve Taft Avenue, giving
those trucks an alternate route out to Interstate-80 or Herbert Hoover Highway. At that point,
Walz said, the traffic at that intersection will be mostly residential traffic. She said that both
Court Street and Scott Boulevard are arterial streets and she would not describe the area as
"congested;" while there is a good deal of traffic at peak times of day, it moves along pretty
swiftly. Walz said that if Eckstein was asking if that zoning designation should be changed, that
was something that is, in most cases, instigated by the property owners. Walz said that it is a
rather small commercial area that is very close to residential uses. She said that a use such as
a very large retail would not be the kind of use you would associate that zone.
Grenis asked if the screening shown in the Powerpoint slides would be examples of S2
screening and she said that it would be. She said that S2 screening reaches up to four feet in
height at maturity in order to screen headlights.
Jennings said that the application is for an exception to build the fourth pump; however, the
screening discussions involve the entire site. He asked if it was the application for the special
exception that triggers those additional screening requirements. Walz explained that additional
screening could not be required of the property owner unless that owner is proposing
substantial changes or improvements to the property. Walz said that presumably if there is a
need for an additional pump, then there is more traffic that will be coming to the site, which
would seem to indicate the need for additional screening. Jennings noted that the screening
being proposed involves areas nowhere near the new pump. Greenwood Hektoen explained
that the entire site would need to come into compliance with current screening standards.
Jennings asked if he was correct in understanding that the application for the special exception
is what triggered the enforcement of the current zoning standards for the entire site; Greenwood
Hektoen said that was correct.
Jennings asked for clarification on whether the gas pump canopy would be extended 25 feet
further south from its present location or from the location proposed in 1996. Walz said that it
would extend 25 feet from its present location; the same specifications and locations for the
fourth pump are being requested now as were requested in 1996.
There were no further questions for staff and Sheerin invited the applicant to speak.
John Cress, 4506 Dryden Court, introduced himself as the applicant and noted that this
commercial area is a private subdivision for which each property owner pays association dues.
He said that he does not foresee anything large or out of scale ever coming into that area as
every lot is now filled in with a mix of businesses. Cress explained that when the site was built in
1997, the footing and piping for the fourth pump were actually installed. Cress said that now it is
simply a matter of adding the actual gas pump to make for better business flow on-site during
peak times of the day. Cress said that while he understood the need for some additional
screening, he did hope that it would not need to be anything that grew taller than four feet. He
said he had a bit of a concern about screening all of Scott Boulevard as he did not feel that
there was a screening issue on the northern part of the property. It is his desire to leave that
area somewhat open for people walking along Scott Boulevard and for the visibility factor at the
intersection.
Sheerin asked what visibility Cress was concerned about and he replied that he wanted the site
Board of Adjustment
February 9, 2011
Page 4 of 6
to be visible to pedestrians and to make sure that the corners remained visible for safety
reasons. Walz said there would be a requirement to keep things set back from the corners to
maintain the vision triangle. She said that there would be no requirement for screening along the
building itself on the Scott Boulevard side, as the building served as a screen from lighting
concerns. Walz said that the Building Official would review with him any specific screening
requirements for the northern area. Cress asked if the screening would be fairly low-growing
and tolerable to snow and Walz replied that Cress would be able to choose the species, though
a certain percentage of the screening would have to be evergreen.
Jennings asked what the peak times for his business were. Cress said that they vary, but that
they generally include times when there are shift changes for Proctor & Gamble and Lear. He
said that there are peaks from 3 PM to 4 PM, and then again from 4 PM to 6 PM. Cress said
that there are some drive-time peaks when people are going to and from work, but that the
biggest peaks were generally in the late afternoon. Cress noted that the flow of traffic at the
intersection of Court Street and Scott Boulevard has been much smoother since the City
installed turning lanes and stoplights a few years ago. Cress noted that he lives on the east
side of town.
Sheerin opened the matter for public comment. No one wished to speak to the issue, so Sheerin
asked for a motion.
Eckste.in moved recommend approval of EXC10-00012, an application submitted by
Cress Investments for a special exception to add one gas pump island to the existing
facility on property located in the Neighborhood Commercial (CN-1) zone at 340 Scott
Court.
Jennings seconded.
The public hearing was closed, and Sheerin invited findings of fact.
Eckstein addressed the specific standards. Eckstein found that under the current conditions the
screening does not meet current zoning code and that criteria will need to be met in order for
the applicant to move forward with the proposal. The vehicle stacking spaces are adequate as
are the parking facilities. The setback is appropriate, being at least 10 feet from any street right-
of-way and 100 feet from any residential zone. The lighting is in compliance with the code and
the screening will be improved in order to meet current code requirements. The current light
sources are within the 15 foot range required by the code.
Jennings addressed the general standards. He found that current public roads providing access
to the property are designed to accommodate the levels of traffic generated by CN-1 uses.
Scott Boulevard and Court Street are both arterial roads. Scott Court provides access only to
the commercial properties within the CN-1 zone. Screening is an issue and must be brought
into compliance with zoning requirements in order to ensure that the specific proposed
exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other properties in the immediate
vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The
impact of the filling station on neighboring properties is minimized by the fact that the gas
pumps are facing the interior of the commercial zone, toward Scott Court instead of Court Street
or Scott Boulevard. Additionally, distance and landscape screening will minimize views of the
gas pumps from residential properties. The canopy lighting will be reviewed by the Building
Official to ensure compliance with current code requirements.
Board of Adjustment
February 9, 2011
Page 5 of 6
Sheerin stated that at this time the proposed exception would impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding property; however, if the screening is brought
into compliance then that criterion will be satisfied. There are adequate utilities, facilities and
drainage in place, and Scott Court is designed to support the levels of traffic generated by the
subject use and surrounding uses in the zone.
Sheerin stated that the specific proposed exception satisfies the requirements for ingress and
egress because vehicle access to the subject property is restricted to Scott Court. The specific
regulations and standards will be met once the application has been submitted for a building
permit and the Building Official has reviewed the site plan. The use is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan which identifies the property as appropriate for Neighborhood Commercial
uses.
Sheerin noted that the screening is currently not sufficient along Scott Court and Court Street,
and the present light is mounted at 14'6".
Sheerin called for a vote.
A vote was taken and the motion was approved 4-0.
Sheerin declared the motion approved and stated that anyone wishing to appeal the decision to
a court of record may do so within 30 days after the decision is filed with the City Clerk's Office.
EXC10-00013: Discussion of an application submitted by Center City LLC for a special
exception to allow off-site parking for a mixed use building for property located in the
Central Business (CB-10) zone at 328 E. Washington Street.
Walz stated that the staff was deferral until the next meeting as there was a discrepancy with
the interpretation of the zoning code. Walz explained that the applicant is required to go
through a special exception process for a related issue and staff recommended deferral so that
both matters could be considered by the Board simultaneously. The applicant has agreed to
defer. Greenwood Hektoen advised the Board to make a motion and vote on deferral.
Eckstein moved to defer EXC1 0-00013 until such time as the applicant wishes to move
forward with it.
Grenis seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-0 (Plagge absent).
Eckstein stated that throughout the staff report numbers there are 19 parking spaces discussed;
however, the application is for 20 parking spaces. Walz said that was an error on the applicant's
part, noting that a new staff report will be prepared when the matter is considered.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION:
None.
ADJOURNMENT:
Jennings moved to adjourn.
Eckstein seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 4-0 vote.
I-c
ffio::
~o
I-U
cnw
:::)0::
"'Wr
Cur
<CZO
LL<cN
Oc
CZ
o::W
<c1-
O~
m
qo
r
-
N
""'"
0')
-
""'"
""'"
N
""'"
-
0
""'"
qo
""'"
-
0')
0
""'"
-
CIO
M
""'"
-
I'-
CIO
-
(CI
""'"
""'"
-
LO
M
""'"
-
qo
0')
-
M
0') X X X I X
-
N I
en ..q- <0 L() N C'f)
:EW T"" T"" T"" T"" T""
o::~ 0 0 0 0 0
N N ~ N N
WD.. -- -- -- --
1-)( T"" T"" T"" T"" T""
W 0 0 0 0 0
c: c:
'CD 'C
+-' Q)
en ~ ~
..:.:: .!Q Q)
<..) c: ..c
W ~ c: en
c: CO
~ <.? c: a.. Q)
W Q) c:
CO ..:.:: E
:E .0 <..) .. 0
<( .... e CO ....
CO ~ "0 CO
Z CO CO <( 0
E
:::J
....
o
:::J
-00
0) 0
~ Z ....
(.) -- 0)
>< g>.o
W:;::;E
'.;::l0)0)
+-' CO)""=
C+-'O)E"::
0) C en C1l
en 5S.o<( 0 +-'
0).0 zo
0:: <( II II Z
II II!:!::!~ II
XOOz
:>:
W
::x:::
STAFF REPORT
To: Board of Adjustment
Item: EXC10-00013
328 East Washington Street
Prepared by: Tabatha Miller, Planning Intern
Date: March 9, 2011
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
Jeff Clark
414 East Market Street
319-631-1867
Property Owner:
Three Guy's Holdings, LLP
414 East Market Street
Requested Action:
Above-grade parking in the CB-10 zone and
Off-site parking for property in the CB-10
Purpose:
To allow 13 on-site parking spaces to be
provided above grade; to allow 19 off-site
parking for residents of a new mixed use
building.
Location:
328 East Washington Street
Size:
8,850 square feet (59 x 150)
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Commercial, CB-10
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North: Parking Structure (CB-10)
South: Commercial (CB-10)
East: Commercial (CB-l0)
West: Residential (CB-10)
Applicable code sections:
Minimum Parking Requirements (14-5A-4);
Alternative to Minimum Parking
Requirements: Off-Site Parking (14-5A-4F-1);
Maximum Parking allowed in the CB-10
zone (14-5A-3D); Standards for Structured
Parking in Multi-family and Commercial
Zones (14-5A-5F); General Criteria for
Special Exceptions (14-4B-3).
File Date:
November 29, 2010
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The applicant is proposing to construct a 5-story, mixed-use building in the Central Business (CB-10)
zone-commercial space on the ground floor with residential above. Off-street parking is required for
residential uses located in the CB-10 zone. The application indicates the residential portion of the
building will consist of 16 units with 3 bedrooms in each. The minimum parking requirement based
2
on the zoning code for 3-bedroom units is 32 spaces (2 spaces per dwelling unit)!. The applicant is
proposing to provide 13 of the required spaces above-grade within the walls of the building, with the
remaining 19 required spaces to be provided in the Chauncey Swann municipal ramp located
approximately 400 feet to the southeast. The above-grade parking and the off-site parking in a
municipal ramp require special exceptions.
Prior to 2009 there were no parking requirements for residential uses in the CB-10 zone, and
developers who wanted to provide parking on-site could do so only through the special exception
process. The standards for private parking in the code at that time were intended to control the
location and design of parking facilities to help ensure that they were compatible with the pedestrian
character of downtown and to preserve land in the downtown for commercial and other active uses.
However, as demand for downtown apartments grew, adequate parking was not being provided.
Residents competed with shoppers, workers and other commercial users for available downtown
parking or spilled over into the residential neighborhoods adjacent to the downtown.
To manage the growth of residential development and parking demand in the downtown, the zoning
code was amended in December 2008 to establish minimum parking requirements for residential
uses. The goal of the code amendments was to ensure that adequate parking be provided as new
dwelling units are built. Where it is not possible to provide the required parking spaces on site, the
code allows that parking spaces may be provided off-site by special exception. In the CB-10 zoning
district, the zoning code allows up to 100% of parking to be located in municipal parking structures
provided that the Director of Planning and Community Development, in consultation with the
Director of Transportation Services and the City Manager, substantiates that the requested parking
spaces can be accommodated without exceeding the facility's capacity. Requests to meet minimum
parking requirements for residential uses may only be approved by special exception and only if
there is capacity in the subject facility for long term parking and leases have been or will be secured
from the City.
The applicant is proposing to provide 13 of the required 32 spaces as above-ground spaces on the
property at 328 East Washington Street. Although the zoning code states underground parking is
preferred over above-ground parking, structured parking above grade is allowed by special
exception. The applicant has indicated that the topography of the site makes underground parking
impractical and has provided a site plan showing that the topography of the site Slopes away from
the rear alley toward Washington and Gilbert Streets.
The applicant proposes to provide the remaining 19 required spaces in the Chauncey Swan publiC
parking ramp. There are 475 parking spaces in the Chauncey Swan ramp: 384 regular permits are
issued for the ramp, 16 additional permits are reserved in perpetuity for apartment tenants at 225
S. Gilbert Street (granted by special exception EXC10-00001), and 75 spaces remain open for use by
the generally public. Not all permitted spaces are used regularly, and nearly all permits expire on an
annual basis. The number of permits available for renewal or sale is based on an annual analysis by
the Director of Transportation Services. With the requested 19 spaces and the previously committed
16 spaces, a total of 7% of the available parking spaces in Chauncey Swan will be dedicated in
perpetuity to long-term private residential parking.
ANAL YSIS:
The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to promote the publiC health, safety and general welfare, to
conserve and protect the value of property throughout the city, and to encourage the most
I The off-street parking standards for the CB-I 0 zone require efficiency and one-bedroom units to provide .5
parking spaces; 2-bedroom units require one space; 3-bedroom units require 2 spaces. Requirements are rounded
up to the nearest whole number such that a building with one or two I-bedroom units would be required to
provide one off-street parking space, while a building with three or four I-bedroom units would require 2 spaces.
3
appropriate use of land. It is the intent of the Ordinance to permit the full use and enjoyment of
property in a manner that does not intrude upon adjacent property.
The Board of Adjustment may grant the requested special exception to allow establishment of the
off-site parking in the CB-10 zone and above-ground on-site parking if the requested action is found
to be in accordance with the regulations of the Sections 14-5A-4F-1 and Section 14-5A-3D-5e as well
as and the general standards for special exceptions as set forth in Section 14-4B-3A.
Specific Standards: Above-ground structured parking (14-5A-3D-5e)
Where parking is located within the exterior walls of a building, the following standards apply:
(1) The proposed structured parking will not detract from or prevent ground floor storefront uses.
Structured parking may be permitted on the ground-level floor of a building, provided that a
substantial portion of the ground level floor of the building is reserved for and built to
accommodate storefront uses. On the ground level floor of the building, parking is not allowed in
the first 50 feet of the building depth as measured from the front building line.
Staff believes this criterion is satisfied based on the following findings:
. According to the submitted site plan, the subject building is approximately 140 feet deep
and 59.5 feet wide (8,330 square feet). The first 50 feet of building depth as measured
from the front building line is reserved for s~orefront uses. A total of 2,648 square feet
have been reserved for storefront uses.
. The code requirement that the first 50 feet of the building be reserved for storefront uses
is based on a review of downtown commercial uses-typically 50- feet of depth is
sufficient space to attract a viable business to the storefront. The City has found that
commercial spaces of this size are in demand in the downtown.
(2) Vehicular access to parking within buildings must be from a rear alley or private rear lane,
whenever feasible. Garage openings along the primary street frontage are not permitted if
access is feasible from another street or private rear lane. If there is no other feasible
alternative, a garage opening may be allowed along the primary street frontage, if the Board
determines that the opening(s) will not detract from or unduly interrupt pedestrian flow along the
street and traffic and pedestrian safety will not be compromised. Garage openings shall be built
to the minimum width necessary for access.
. This criterion is satisfied because the site plan submitted by the applicant shows access
to the proposed structured parking is located along the rear publiC alley that runs from
South Gilbert Street to Linn Street.
(3) Any exterior walls of a parking facility that are visible from a publiC or private street must appear
to be a component of the fa(fade of the building through the use of the building materials,
window openings and fa(fade detailing that is similar or complementary to the design of the
building.
Staff believes that the criterion is satisfied based on the following findings:
. The east facade of the building will not be visible from public streets as it is screened by
the adjacent building at 330 East Washington Street.
. The submitted site plan shows that west facade will be screened from view form
Washington Street by Ecumenical Towers. However the parking level will be visible from
the north entrance to Ecumenical Towers. Because this entrance to Ecumenical Towers
is most convenient to the building's elevator and provides access to persons with
disabilities, it is heavily used and the area of the proposed parking structure is highly
4
visible to residents and visitors to Ecumenical Towers. Therefore staff recommends
approval of the above-ground structured parking should be conditioned upon Design
Review of the building in order to ensure that portions of the structured parking that are
visible from Ecumenical Towers be designed with appropriate fa~ade elements, such as
windows.
(4) Each entrance and exit to the parking area must be constructed so that vehicles entering or
leaving the parking area are clearly visible to a pedestrian on any abutting sidewalk at a distance
of not less than 10 feet. Stop signs and appropriate pedestrian warning signs may be required.
Staff believes the application satisfies this criterion based on the following:
. The submitted site plan shows that the entrance to the parking is set back 10 feet from
the public alley.
. Because the parking is provided at grade, vehicles entering and exiting the structured
parking will have adequate visibility.
. The site plan shows a double garage entry, allowing adequate visibility for cars entering
and exiting the site.
Staff believes that the location of the dumpster along the alley to the west of the garage has the
potential to obscure visibility; therefore, staff recommends that the final site plan be reviewed by
planning staff in order to ensure that the dumpster enclosure will not obscure visibility for
vehicles entering or exiting the structured parking.
Specific Standards: Alternatives to Minimum Parking Requirements (14-5A-4F-1)
Off-street parking may be located on a separate lot from the use served according to the following
rules. When the proposed off-site parking is located in a residential zone or in the CB-l0 zone or
intended for a use in the CB-l0 zone, the Board of Adjustment may grant a special exception for the
proposed parking, provided the conditions contained in subparagraphs a through g are met.
a. Special Location Plan
A special location plan must be submitted with the application for off-site parking. The location
plan must include a map indicating the proposed location of the off-site parking, the location of
the use or uses served by the parking, and the distance and proposed walking route between the
parking and the use(s) served. The map must be drawn to scale and Include property boundaries
of any intervening properties. In addition, documentation must be submitted providing evidence
deemed necessary to comply with the requirements herein.
Staff believes that the applicant has satisfied the criterion based on the following findings:
. The applicant has submitted an aerial view showing the location of 328 E. Washington in
relation to the Chauncey Swann Ramp.
. The ramp entrance is located approximately 400 feet from the entrance to the proposed
building.
. Residents would travel approximately 100 feet east to northwest side of the controlled
intersection of Washington and Gilbert, before crossing Washington and Gilbert to arrive at the
ramp. The ramp entrance is located approximately 200 feet from the southeast side of
Washington and Gilbert intersection.
b. Location of Off-site Parking
In Residential and Commercial Zones, no off-site parking may be located more than 300 feet
from an entrance of the use served, except as allowed In subparagraph e, below, for parking In a
municipal parking facility.
Staff finds that this criterion is satisfied based on the following:
5
· The proposed off-site parking is located in a municipal ramp. (See item e below.)
c. Zoning
Off-site parking spaces must be located in the same zone as the principal use(s) served, or
alternatively, off-street parking may be provided on a separate lot within the parameters of the
following pairings.
Staff finds that the criterion is satisfied based on the following:
· The proposed parking is located in a municipal parking facility. (See item e below.)
d. Shared Use of Off-Site Parking
Staff finds that the criterion is satisfied based on the following:
. The applicant is not proposing to "share" parking with another use.
e. Off-Site Parking Located in a Municipally-Owned Parking Facility
In instances where a use is within 600 feet of a City-owned parking area, up to 50 percent of the
required parking spaces may be provided in the parking facility. When a use abuts a City-owned
parking area, up to 100% of the required number of parking spaces may be provided in the
parking facility. In the CB-10 Zone, up to 100 percent of the required parking number of parking
spaces may be provided in a City-owned parking facility regardless of the distance between the
use and the parking facility. When an applicant requests to provide off-street parking in a City-
owned parking facility, the Director of Planning and Community Development in consultation
with the Director of Transportation Services and the City Manager or designee must substantiate
that with the addition of the requested number parking spaces the capacity of the parking
facility will not be exceeded. In the CB-10 Zone, said parking requested to meet minimum
parking requirements for residential uses may only be approved by special exception and only if
there is capacity.
Staff believes the applicant has satisfied this requirement based on the following:
. The subject use is located in the CB-10 zone.
. The applicant has requested 19 spaces for long term rental. In consultation with the Director of
Transportation Services, staff has determined these 19 spaces are available for long term rental
and that the capacity of the ramp will not be exceeded.
. There are 475 spaces in the Chauncey Swan ramp; 384 regular permits are issued, 16 permits
are reserved in perpetuity for apartment tenants at 225 S. Gilbert Street, and 75 spaces remain
open. Nearly all regular permits expire annually and the number available for renew or sale is
based on an analysis by the Director of Transportation Services. The Director of Transportation
Services has indicated that there is available capaCity in the ramp at this time. The Director of
Planning and Community Development and the City Manager agree.
With the 19 requested spaces in addition to the existing 16 spaces granted by Special Exception
EXC10-00001, a total of 7% of the Chauncey Swan ramp's capacity will be dedicated in perpetuity
to long-term private residential parking. Although staff believes the requested parking can be
accommodated, it is important to consider the future availability of parking and to exercise caution
in granting future permits in perpetuity for private residential parking. Additional permits of this
nature in the Chauncey Swan ramp could comprise the facility's ability to accommodate future
public parking needs.
f. Approval Criteria
6
In assessing a special location plan for off-site parking, the Board of Adjustment or Director of
Planning and Community Development, as applicable, will consider the desirability of the
location of off-street parking and stacking spaces on a lot separate from the use served In terms
of pedestrian and vehicular safety; any detrimental effects of adjacent property; the appearance
of the streetscape as a consequence of the off-street parking; and In the case of non-required
parking, the need for additional off-site parking.
Staff believes that the proposed location for off-site parking is appropriate based on the following:
. The zoning code allows that for properties located in the CB-10 zone, up to 100% of parking may
be provided in a municipal ramp regardless of its location. The Chauncey Swan ramp is
approximately 400 feet from the proposed dwelling units with sidewalks and a controlled
intersection connecting the two sites.
. The proposed site is in a municipal ramp in which the parking is designed to provide safe
vehicle access. Ingress, and egress from the ramp are designed with good visibility.
. The ramp is already constructed, so there will be no change to the area.
g. Covenant for Off-Site Parking
A written agreement between the owners of the parking and owners of the property for which the
parking will serve must be submitted with the application for off-site parking. The agreement
must assure the retention of the parking and stacking spaces, aisles, and drives and be properly
executed, binding upon their successors and assigns, and must be recorded as a covenant
running with the land. The agreement must provide that it cannot be released, and its terms and
conditions cannot be modified in any manner whatsoever, without prior written consent and
approval from the City. The written agreement must be reviewed and approved by the City
Attorney.
Because the off-site location being requested is a City-owned facility, the parking agreement is
subject to approval of the special exception. Staff recommends that the applicant submit the
required written agreement as part of the building permit application based on the number of spaces
approved by the board. Staff also recommends that the agreement indicate that the parking permits
shall only be offered to residents of 328 East Washington Street and shall be offered at a rate not to
exceed the market rate determined by the Director of Transportation Services at the time of leasing.
Staff recommends the agreement require the property manager provide the Director of
Transportation Services with the name, license plate number, and address of all permit holders; and
that permits be granted only to residents with the primary address of 328 East Washington.
In addition, because future demand for parking will likely change and the Chauncey Swan ramp may
not always be the most suitable location to accommodate the requested parking, staff recommends
the agreement allow the Director of Transportation Services to relocate the 19 permits to any other
downtown municipal ramp on an annual basis.
General Standards: 14-4B-3, Special Exception Review Requirements
1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health,
safety, comfort or general welfare.
Staff believes the following findings support this criterion:
. The Chauncey Swan parking faCility is approximately 400 feet from the residential use.
Pedestrian access (sidewalks) is already established between the two sites and the crossing at
Gilbert and Washington Streets is a controlled intersection. Ingress and egress from the parking
ramp is designed to be safe and has good visibility to and from adjacent streets.
. Access to the on-site structured parking is from the rear alley, minimizing conflicts with
pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles.
7
. Access at grade will improve visibility for vehicles entering and exiting the parking.
Staff believes the following findings do not support this criterion:
. The submitted building elevations do not show a prominent entrance from the public street that
is safe and accessible to residents whose parking is located off-site.
. The location of the dumpster as shown in the current site plan may block visibility for vehicles
entering and exiting the structured parking.
Staff believes this criterion may be satisfied if the Board imposes the following conditions:
o The final building design should be subject to Design Review in order to ensure the
residential portion of the building has a prominent entrance from the public street-
an entrance that is safe and accessible to residents whose parking is located off-site
in a municipal facility.
o Final review of the site plan by the Building Official and planning staff to ensure that
the location and design of the dumpster enclosure to ensure that it does not
impeded visibility for vehicles entering and exiting the structure parking.
2. The specific 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.
Staff believes that granting the special exception to allow off-site parking in a muniCipally owned
faCility will allow the applicant to construct a substantially larger and more intensely used building
than would otherwise be possible given the number of parking spaces the applicant can provide on-
site. Staff believes that a larger building will have a greater visual impact on the streetscape,
including adjacent buildings, and has the potential create conflicts with surrounding buildings, such
as noise associated with activity or air conditioning units on residential balconies.
The zoning code does not require a building plan to be submitted for Design Review, and thus there
is no assurance that the new building will be designed to be compatible with the scale and aesthetic
character of the downtown and the adjacent residential building (see items 3 above and 7 below).
Therefore, staff recommends that approval of the application for off-site parking and above-ground
parking is subject to Design Review. The Design Review process helps to ensure that the proposed
building is compatible with the downtown streetscape, and will consider the appropriate design of
entrances for the residential uses as well as the fac;ade of the portion of the building that contains
the parking and is highly visible from the north entrance to Ecumenical Towers.
3. 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.
Staff believes that this criterion is met for the off-site parking based on the following:
. The Director of Transportation Services has reviewed the application and has indicated to staff
that presently there is adequate capaCity in the Chauncey Swan Ramp to provide the requested 19
spaces. However, as future parking needs in the Central Business District change, the Chauncey
Swan ramp may not always be able to accommodate the 19 spaces. Therefore, staff recommends
the special exception include a proviSion to allow the Director of Transportation Services relocate
the 19 permits to other downtown municipal parking facilities as needed on an annual basis.
. A condition that the final building plan be submitted for Design Review, will ensure that the
building is compatible with the surrounding property.
8
Staff believes that this criterion is satisfied for the above-grade parking based on the following
findings:
. The structured parking allows for more than 50 feet of depth (+2,000 square feet) storefront
use.
. The above ground parking will not be highly visible from public streets or sidewalks. To assure
compatibility with the adjacent residential building, staff recommends that the building be
subject to design review.
4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being
provided.
All utilities, access roads, drainage and other facilities are in place to serve the parking facility and
the development of the proposed building.
5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to
minimize traffic congestion on public streets.
Staff believes that the criterion is satisfied for the off-site parking based on following reason:
. All municipal parking facilities are designed to provide safe ingress and egress to adjacent public
streets and to minimize congestion of public streets.
Staff believes that the criterion is satisfied for the above-grade parking based on following reason:
. The parking structure access is through from a public alley that was designed to provide safe
ingress and egress to adjacent streets and minimize congestion of public streets.
. The rear entrance is set back 10 feet from the alley allowing adequate visibility for vehicles
entering and exiting the site.
6. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being
considered, 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.
Municipal parking facilities are designed to meet all applicable standards in the zoning code and are
designed to provide safe and accessible parking.
All aspects of the residential development will be reviewed by the Building Official as part of the
building permit process and by Design Review in order to ensure that all aspects of the code not
specifically considered here are in compliance with the zoning code.
7. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended.
The Comprehensive Plan, drafted in 1997, has the following to say about residential parking demand
in the downtown:
"Higher density housing in and around the downtown is an issue to be addressed in this district. The
logic of promoting higher density residential development in the Downtown Planning District rests in
the concept that people who live in and near downtown will walk to work (or classes in the case of
University students), will patronize downtown businesses, will add to after hours vitality, and create a
sense of safety in the downtown. Higher density development in the downtown also reduces
pressure on the less dense older neighborhoods surrounding the downtown. However, some
downtown merchants and business owners feel the residential population burdens the parking
system in the district to the detriment of the businesses. The issue will need to be debated and
resolved, setting a clear policy for housing, parking, and redevelopment in the Downtown Planning
District."
Prior to 2009, residential uses in the CB-10 zone were not required to provide parking. In response
to concerns regarding the growing competition for parking in the Central Business District, the City
9
Council approved the current minimum parking requirements in the zoning code, including the
present special exception criteria to allow off--site parking in a municipal ramp. At this time the
Director of Transportation Services has determined that there is adequate capacity within the
Chauncey Swan Ramp to provide the requested 19 spaces.
The Comprehensive Plan notes the need for an ongoing strategy to address the appearance of
downtown. As noted above under general criterion 2, approval of this special exception will allow the
construction of a significantly larger building than otherwise would be possible given the number of
parking spaces that can be accommodated on this property. To help ensure that a larger building is
aesthetically compatible with the downtown, and the adjacent Ecumenical Towers, staff
recommends that approval of the application be subject to design review.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of EXC10-00013, an application submitted by Jeff Clark for a special
exception to allow 13 on-site above-ground structured parking spaces and 19 off-site parking spaces
in a municipal parking facility to satisfy the minimum parking requirements for a mixed use building
to be constructed in the Central Business (CB-10) zone at 328 East Washington Street, subject to
the following conditions:
. The applicant must submit the required agreement for off-site parking prior to securing a
building permit. The agreement shall include the following conditions:
o The permits shall only be available to residents of 328 East Washington at a cost not
to exceed the market rate determined by the Director of Transportation Services at
the time of leasing.
o The property manager must provide the Director of Transportation the name, license
plate number, and address of all permit holders. Permits will only be granted to
residents with the primary address of 328 East Washington.
o The Director of Transportation Services may relocate the permits to another
downtown municipal parking facility on an annual basis as necessary to
accommodate demand for municipal parking facilities.
. The final building plan is subject to Design Review to ensure the building is compatible with
scale and character of downtown; any portions of the structured parking visible from the adjacent
residential building should appear to be a component of the building; the building should feature a
prominent entrance that is safe and accessible to pedestrian residents, conflict with surrounding
uses are minimized, and the dumpster location and enclosure design will not impede visibility into
the alley for vehicles exiting the parking garage.
. The building plan is consistent with the plan submitted as part of this application, indicating
no more than three-bedrooms per unit.
ATIACHMENTS:
1. Location map
2. Aerial views of the location
3. Location plan supplied by the applicant
4. Application materials
5. Correspondence
Approved by: (~~
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner,
Department of Planning and Community Development
\ N M
~ ~ \ ....
\,~ m _.~--- . 0
--""----- 0
:-.. 0
-- , I
r.1 fO ---- -- - 0
....
u
0 ><
1S N3 LLI
'" -::::::::--
~ - ---
It)
(j ".--
---- 11 m
D. c:: /
:J c:: ~ I "f(
C)C) 0
"""..
. (~ (~ r ..,
~
~ -......J ..... ) ... 1~
~ - / ~ LS lCl3t:1 II~
7 0 I-
~ - ...-/ ~~ ~ z -Ie c.n
0
~ I- W
'-' 11 '-'
~ z M ---------~ w
- -1
I -1
~ ,... \,; j. 0 -Ie
"i ~ G ---- (.)
,.. : ~ .....,
~ OJ
OJ
lo-
.....,
~ (j)
-Ie -K c
--"_."-"---"-- 11 .8
D- Ol
c
"-- .-
..c
~ " "---------- (/)
...._,--,._~_.,,"~~,-_.,-_._--- ------"- --------------- co
< s
-Ie .
< i -- ,- -~--., w
:c \ 00
<: I .. N
M
-
..
1S 3nOnSnO /$ z
0
\ I ~ Ioott ~
~ ~ s....
/ -----""----~ co
~_LI Wf"""'tI u E
. . .---------"""-- 0 '"C
-". ---------- .... C
LLI co
--- I- -
1 I 1---1 ====1'-- ;-1(
or ,
W
N
co
m
~
OJ
Ul
:J'"
:J
1.0
r-t'
o
:J
(f)
r-t'
"'""I
(0
(0
r-t'
(f)
n
OJ
(0
......
II
~
q
.:~=r.i!f~
IS uOl6u,ma 3
, : .
'--'
EXClt!J- rJxlX!J13
APPLICATION TO THE ~g~
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT r
SPECIAL EXCEPTION
DATE: 11/2.9/10
PROPERTY PARCEL NO. /010 L13(P 00.3
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 3'''L CO E, ~J (.~t. hI i'\~ton Sh
PROPERTY ZONE: ~ PROPERTY LOT SIZE: 5'1 )<,' i 50
APPLICANT: Name: Jet~ Cit\r\<
Address: 4/1./ E, 1\J1...rk~l- Sh
Phone: 31'l- (.,31-' g (p '":J-
CONTACT PERSON: Name:
(if other than applicant)
Address:
Phone:
PROPERTY OWNER: Name: C t.n\e.r C I fi l-LC.
(if other than applicant)
Address:
Phone:
Specific Requested Special Exception; please list the description and section number in
the zoning code that addresses the specific special exception you are seeking. If you
cannot find this information or do not know which section of the code to look in, please
contact Sarah Walz at 356-5239 or e-mail sarah-walz@iowa-city.org.
Purpose for special exception: Ollow rJtI'-5a'e parkl/1j ..(;,r Q MI')tuA u~
M~j~
Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any:
f'-.)
C)
<::)
:z:
o z
-< Co D
N~' <:
\.0 ,- ~
(J <:0
~::;- ~f f'-.)
=
<;?';; =
o
eN
-3-
D. General Approval Criteria: In addition to the specific approval criteria addressed in
"e", the Board must also find that the requested special exception meets the
following general approval criteria or that the following criteria do not apply. In
the space provided below, or on an attached sheet, provide specific information,
not just opinions, that demonstrate that the specific requested special exception
meets the general approval criteria listed below or that the approval criteria are
not relevant in your particular case.
1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the
public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare.
We..- t~re- ,.....{fJl,,<j;-hYlj ~ LtSe.- pld:d1c
w'" \ <: '" S e c. W\ -\-0 b~ P 'n.\t'"1 S.tAe
.
pc,v-b I'lJ ~ICi\i tfd
2.
The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not
substantially diminish and impair property values in the neighborhood.
3.
r--.)
~
C:I
Z
o
<;,
N" c'
'4)0'
:J.c'" "
~)"~ 1--":>
:<: ~
g.
o
(,.)
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 district in which such property is located.
TAl. 1
IS
torrc..c-f
:z:
C)
<:
~
<:'0
71
,..=1
r
=
/'I,'r-(f\,; I cle;nlcrVf\.tlll.t C\.lI\d iMfYOVt"1'W"\t of t-h-e- .fLh'i'"Ol.I-hd :h')
p..--o{)2rN w,n '" or lo..l. i V1/' p-ecl-<.J
4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have
been or are being provided.
p \.
I Llb I(
(t((l')>
pCtY"bY\j tcdd1<j
rOAdS, dV"CtlV\l<~
'3 t ~~ It", \ t'1 lrl", V(
a. 'rid lov (l..LU ~'5 ti. r1
C\. JI? V L-<,,"Th lJ..h \,\1~ 5 (
~cd,.f1"';s PI.-I.lU;c.f.<J
-4-
5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress
designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets.
Th~. fv-k>L~ po.rki""j VampJ f~V'tde. If1jY{SJ aI-lei rlrH
Wh"o-~ f,'(.:.n +0 i'YId1:vnlU'tkfA~ ('oMJ.2s-ho//)..
6. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the special
exception being considered, 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. [Depending on the type of special exception
requested, certain specific conditions may need to be met. The applicant
will demonstrate compliance with the specific conditions required for a
particular use as provided in the City Code section 14-4B as well as
requirements listed in the base zone or applicable overlay zone and
applicable site development standards (14-5A through K).]
Q.&
-fk<.
.A SplCl",1 lOUttlOI'
C ha v. fie 101 ~'v\h(11 Y'Glmp
p\t.rV) wc,j ph"lf-<J -h-om Gr.s onfiYlt;
I> It~ them 'f00 ft'i!f +\.-1:'\1'1 -the t.cJ~ ~"Y,J'.~cl.
e, or am re~,,~a..-hY\j 20 SiD.\\s, I hAv\ Sro\r~ n w ,t\) Chn~ () bt-I{V1
u wh\lt bac..1c. C\V)c.l he. S(.\\tl he. Ct!lIAJ c\l(o\o'l'1od"fe. LtH"\:)-1-tt-I'Vl \-<!de.s
-tc') b< SeLiAr<J pno\"' -+c b\.A\\J~V\~ OCC:''-\PU\L<f in Jv\'1 '2o\'z...
7. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the
City.
Y tS I fY\ f 'X:d US-!- b IA d a I V\ j.J a V'e
\'" +h.L- C-B--IO clovlVl\--o\.o\lV\ aYtA,
C\ 1Y't1')(<d lAS-tl. budQ'V'/j Wit\-) SOIYU
a' low<--c1 a. h cI 'I" +ev"Id {j --\0 ~e
:r ~VI"\ p\<<hn:"'J -to (~nS+v-v.cJ'"
(O\JeV"'<.d rC,y-k~VlJ (' IZ-I'? S....II,)).
......,
c:::I
=
:;z: .z
Of-< 0
~~ () < r,j
\.06Q ~ F
::tJZ 9. <:.0 r'rj
3:i''' 2: ~1
_rj - ,"""
<;? =
o
Co.)
From: Jeff Clark [mailto:jeffmc1973@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 2:28 PM
To: Tabatha Ries-Milller
Subject: Re: 328 E. Washington Special Exception
Tabatha,
Here are the answers to your questions below.
1. Area reserved for storefront uses is around 2500 sq/ft.
2. Area reserved for non-storefront uses is around 4700 sq/ft. This is mostly the parking
area that would be non-storefront uses.
3. Parking is not located in the first 50 feet of depth as measured from the front building
line.
4. The reason for not providing underground parking is topography.
As far as the front entrance, can we use the west side entrance if we can make it access
the stairs. It is very open in the area on the West and accessibility issues are taken care
of as that is where the ADA ramp has been designed. By leaving it on the West, we
also have complete accessibility from the rear parking area to the front sidewalk I
believe I had discussed these issues with Karen Howard a few months ago and if I use
an interior access from the storefront, it takes away the window area for the commercial
space and it does not seem as appealing. Please see the attachment and let me know
your thoughts.
Thanks,
Jeff
Please see MMS-Ron Amelon's comments below, that should help to answer #1
question. To more fully answer to obstacle posed by the topography, the drive would
have to drop at a very significant % in addition to the already sloping land, you could be
looking at a drop from the alley to the underground parking of around 16-20 feet. You
would virtually have no grade level commercial space due to the need to raise the
commercial floor level several feet to accomodate head clearance room for
vehicles. Modifying the alley does not help in this situation due to the severity of
the sloping topography. As the property is shown, the ADA access is very good. In
addition to MMS's attachments, I have also attached a West and South elevation. Let
me know if you have any other questions.
Thanks,
Jeff
mn Forwarded Message ____
From: Ron Amelon <r.amelon@mmsconsultants.net>
To: Jeff Clark <jeffmc1973@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wed, February 23, 2011 12:01:51 PM
Subject: RE: 328 E. Washington Special Exception
Jeff
Attached please find the topography of the site with the proposed building shown. I also
sent a copy of the site plan. As far as the grade into the parking the west side goes
down at 11.43% and the east side goes up at 7.43%. With the elevations of the alley
and the short distance from the alley to the building it would not be possible to lower the
elevation of the parking. Let me know if you need anything else.
Thanks
Ron
Ronald L. Amelon, P.E.
Civil Engineer/Partner
MMS Consultants, Inc.
Office: (319)351-8282 Cell: (319)631-2703
r.amelon@mmsconsultants.net
www.mmsconsultants.net
Your Vision + Our Innovation = Inspired Results
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information Any unauthorized review, use. disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply ernail and destroy all copies of the original message
II..:..: II) IIIII! II mill! ~m
III:: III:: "' 0. ~ .. ii~ H ~65
5~~~~"~ I ~I I~~~
~I I !ii
! I' "1'1
I III: Ii "j i;ll
111 II' ~q II U III ~f. nl!
Inil,i 1111 II !l~ ill!
'I i:';~~~~~"""III','\T ' Iml illi
I I.g" 11 \ 10 .:' "I': JI','j
11 1"-" III i hi hll ild
~
~
o
z
;!
'"
E--< ~
~ ~~ II
0:::: 1;1 ~ n
E--< ~~~ 0 I Ii
rn. I'~~~~ I' ~ ! I::
fe;l; ~ ~ ~ R' ~ I.~ n
z <r: QfJ~R i H 1,1:: Ill!!
o ~ II I I! ;!!! Ie!;!! Ii
~ E--< 8 ~I~ II! II ;;1: d~!I'11
....:i 0 "I ~~~
0... Z ~ 8~~
~~u ~hg
I--l ~ t:~..:
m rn. ~ ofo;!:,;:;S
<r;o
~ - i~;!
W ~l:Jo
s!f
~&lg
co ~~~
C\1
("')
~.I~+
~
I "" ,':
I '"0" t iii!
!II 1IIIIl!I"'
I: hill!
~ n II
~ ~~ ....
.... t r
sm,
", i
IIIIII
I~~ xll!l
I ~i I! II
h~ II II
.~
(I'
of
I
I
J.'
~'/f
of V I
I
I
II 'I 1 1'1 '~
;11!11 ili:,~j l~ I!W
ilih 1.llih III .;
.1:. I I' ii I'
1111'1 11,lhl! Iii Ii!
I."I!! li';llh ijllq!~
I I I I!!ljl!i 11.1 11;1
"'I-~!l i II hi'
:!l III, II i .11
z
~
a.
w
!:
(/)
z
~ /:
~ z
x 8
~1- /:z
;=:w "g
~ ~ <Z~
~CI) ~~Q
~I i ji1h 1'1
" I -1,,- i
~ I, ihll 'I
U II! lib: !ll
aI! i "ill .,
~~ II '11'Xl 'I'
" i 111111 I!
( ( f--.-..--.--.--~ 1----1 -f--------(~(~(_------+-----+- ~-(-_e
'-~~~ -~~ -c---- [ .fl.331IUS NJ<<>.IJ.~NJD~S"AA'31
8."" I
._-~ I [I
- ," 'I ;! I ,! i, i
~~f=L-~:~ .11.';~1>:~=~-7~:'~
--r-! ,., ~:\ll, -+7~ tiill~ ,--..' . III 4--
s'., 8~ f'-- ,.k
t .t~ ..
t!
1M
~
Ii;
i!!l
d
i!i
1---'-'
i
,-1'
(.-
of
~
/:/
//
<tV
~;
~~
~~
~
-
"~,
I o.
I
\
I
/
.~J
-----~\\---~~\- ~~.'~~ ~l=ot:MS~,-"-~~
'I ',!> I ", ", '., ", ',,;
, , L '. ,'. '. .... / ~~!' /!
~'--~---l-r" ~-~------r---~--il~r '!l---f'~,-_'/.>!~l- _'~"_l_ ....,-
.....
I H~~.!L\S 1NI1Q).!L~INI~IHI$'WM '3]
I-
I; i f
J
r
I '
!-'I"-"-" - :
~ ,t' '~
I 'r=-'-+~
I I
~
I
,.
o
~ ('.u
t~f)tI)IW,
.
,
. ......
.._u
,~~.
t
.
,
Ie, $'
#~
~~ ~
<01 I!
~e,.ff ~
" ~i? t
"..
10"''''''
F
M!I
M!I
~
F
00
F
~
@j)
d
~
;;/
/7
i.
e, r/y
#~
"
~~~
~<:J
'"
y
",rv
~
e
i
,.".
""""
-,
""""
~
,~e, -#
, ~
~ <0
- ~e,
~ ~0~
~~<</
~
'"
""-
I
\
,
~
.,..
.,..
, '
I I /..
-+--1----r---1 r r------tl~1~J.------r-l___+i_______~-1-1~1-1-1~
, ,.',1,'! 9 .':~ ,,~
0""'t1r' '....1 ' -W' ,. '..,.. ,. 0 " ......
81d
f ~ f
I'::
~ I ~
fil fJ fl ~
VI "llD R"Oj '1>'''15 uOlaUlqseJ.\ SZf
>'''0.0'1
SlNtlWDIVdV SflaWJ110J
~jd
f f"
.~ " 3
~f '"
f - f f ~
1 .s ~
r; ~ ,~~
VI '~l!:l ',IIOt ')J.1l1S uOl<9U!qsn,\\ Rtf
,.renJjJl
SlN3WllIVdV SnHWI110:)
~; c~' ." I
t~ e ,,',( :' j ~ ~ t. ,f
15i ~ ~Ei rii ~ t 7~~~
- ~. "i~;" ~~ · < · ~~~;
~ t." \ ill ~~ ~~.' ~ ~ ,"'~'I:
~~m~i~ ' .~~,~d~~F,' "'hi
",'1"1" -~r.~. l(~~'lgl;" !~~
:.~~h~!,.5 .: t~.~ .:~~~~~~1i~::",..tt~~
\
~!,I,~,. J,tl,lll
. 2~ ,...t~ii:.' ~~~~,-,~
" '~~~~::i~! ^~.
~H .. "'~,,-~;.-~ "H.t>
~, ,
~~~ ~ ~
~ii :
;"';' ;
" .'
P'"~~,, *,',
1c"~ '~ '(
~,.,,!, ,"h~
Il'~~"'~!'
,.:\,h!!E;
-IN
;/
~
1
~
I I
~.Jvt-~'r I! ---.~...
./<-'j! .~
-l""
<=:
o
]~
..c::'"
;::; ",
3d
~
~~
4 NEW
~ONEER
. tood Co.op ~
~
3/2/2011
City of Iowa City
Board of Adjustment
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240-1826
Dear Board of Adjustment:
I am writing in reference to a letter our business received from the Department of
Planning and Community Development, dated February 25, 2011. I specifically refer to
the proposed off-site parking indicated in the first sentence: "The Iowa City Board of
Adjustment has received an application submitted by Center City LLC for a special
exception to allow above ground structured parking and off-site parking for a proposed
mixed use building to be located in the Central Business (CB-l 0) zone at 328 East
Washington Street."
Our business has a need to expand our operation in downtown Iowa City and we are
currently exploring relocation options. Our market study analysis indicates that New
Pioneer requires a minimum of ninety (90) parking spaces to support an expansion of our
operations. New Pioneer Coop's interest is not specifically with the proposed structure at
328 East Washington Street. Rather, we want to ensure that the City ofIowa City is
informed of our parking needs when making decisions on the management of current
public parking infrastructure or planning for future infrastructure development.
Sincerely,
Matt Hartz
General Manager
New Pioneer Food Co-op Administrative Offices
22 S. Linn St., Suite 2A · Iowa City, IA 52240 · p: (3~9) 248-6400 · f: (3~9) 338-7036
www.newpi.coop