HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-10-2004 Board of AdjustmentAGENDA
IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
WEDNESDAY, November 10, 2004 — 5:00 PM
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
A. Call to Order
B. Roll Call
C. Consider the October 13, 2004 Board Minutes
D. Special Exceptions:
1. EXC04-00025 Discussion of an application submitted by Gary Schooley for a
special exception to reduce the required front yard from 20 feet to 12 feet for
property located in the Low Density Single -Family (RS-5) zone at 1817
Grantwood Drive.
2. EXC04-00026 Discussion of an application submitted by Merle Miller for a
special exception to reduce the required front yard from 20 feet to 0 feet to
allow a parking space in the front yard for property located in the Low Density
Single -Family (RS-5) zone at 1401 Ridge Street.
E. Appeal:
APL04-00004 Discussion of an application submitted by Wesley Foundation
for an appeal of a decision of the Building Official that an auto and truck
oriented use has lost its non -conforming status for property located in the
Central Business Support (CB-5) zone at 130 N. Dubuque Street.
F. Other:
Consider a request from Verizon Wireless care of Selective Site Consultants
to reconsider the October 13, 2004 vote regarding EXC04-00022, a request
to locate a telecommunications tower in the Interim Development Single
Family (ID-RS) zone at 637 Foster Road.
G. Board of Adjustment Information
H. Adjourn
NEXT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING — DECEMBER 8, 2004
STAFF REPORT
To: Board of Adjustment Prepared by: Robert Miklo
Item: EXC04-00025, 1817 Grantwood Drive Date: November 10, 2004
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant: Gary Schooley
1817 Grantwood Drive
Iowa City, IA 52240
Phone: 351 7727
Requested Action: Reduction of required front yard setback from 20
feet toll feet.
Purpose: To allow an addition to the east side of an existing
house and an existing accessory building to be
closer to the street right-of-way.
Location: 1817 Grantwood Drive
Size: Approximately 11,000 square feet
Existing Land Use and Zoning: Single-family residence, RS-5
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Low -density, single-family residential, RS-5
South: Low -density, single-family residential, RS-5
East: Low -density, single-family residential, RS-5
West: Low -density, single-family residential, RS-5
Applicable Zoning Code sections: 14-6D-2E-4a (minimum front yards in RS-5)
14-6Q-4B (special exceptions possible)
14-6W-2B (spec. exception review standards)
Comprehensive Plan: Residential
File Date: October 13, 2004
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
This property is located at the corner of Grantwood Drive and the right-of-way of an un-named
street. When Mt. Prospect subdivision was originally platted the right-of-way was planned to
extend to the south. However when Mt. Prospect, Part VI, was platted the actual street
configuration was redesigned and this right-of-way became a driveway to the Grantwood
School property where Safety Village is located. The area to the south will not be developed
with residential lots as originally conceived. Because the area remains as street right-of-way, a
2
20-foot front yard set back is required on both Grantwood Drive and the un-named right-of-way.
The applicant would like to construct an 18-foot wide addition to the east side of his house. The
addition would extend 8 feet into the front yard along the un-named street. There is an existing
accessory building, a storage shed, located in the required front yard adjacent to the un-named
street right-of-way. If this special exception is approved staff recommends that it also apply to
the accessory building.
ANALYSIS:
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
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 may grant relief
from the requirements of the Zoning Chapter through a special exception if the action is
considered to serve the public interest and is consistent with the intent of the Zoning Chapter.
Specific Standards: 14-6Q-4-B, Exceptions to Established Setbacks
Subsection 6Q-4-B of the Zoning Chapter states that a special exception may be granted by the
Board of Adjustment modifying yard requirements when the owner or lawful occupant of property
demonstrates that such person's situation is peculiar to the property in question, that there is a
practical difficulty in complying with the dimensional requirements of the Chapter, and that the
conditions of Article W of the Zoning Chapter (Board of Adjustment Powers and Procedures) can
be met.
Peculiar Situation:
Because of changes in the subdivision design, the un-named street adjacent to this property will
not be extended to the south as a street. It functions as an entrance way to the Grantwood
School property and rarely carries traffic. The fact that this right-of-way will not be extended
and really does not function as a street, makes this a peculiar situation. The zoning ordinance
requires a 20-foot set back from streets in the RS-5 zone to assure that homes have a
minimum front yard for open space and landscaping. If the area east of the applicants property
were not a street right-of-way a side yards of only 5 feet wide would be required.
Practical Difficulty:
The applicant could construct an addition to the south side of his house and not encroach into any
required yards. However the internal configuration of the house would make such an addition less
accessible to the main rooms of the house less useful to the occupants.
General Standards for the Granting of a Special Exception:
In addition to determining whether the situation is unique and if there is a practical difficulty in
complying with the Zoning Ordinance, the Board must find that the applicant meets several
standards spelled out in chapter 14-6W-2B. The applicant's statements regarding each of the
seven general standards are included within the attached application, and Staff's findings are
below.
A. The specific exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,
comfort or general welfare. Staff finds that the proposed exception will have no negative
effects on public health, safety, comfort and welfare. The addition and existing accessory
building would be permitted if the adjacent property was not platted as street right-of-way.
B. 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 does not feel that the proposed addition or the continued
presence of the accessory building in the area that would otherwise be front yard will
3
substantially alter the neighborhood.
C. 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. The other properties in this neighborhood
are already developed. The reduced yard should not affect them.
D. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are
being provided. The proposed exception will not increase the population density or affect the
use of municipal utilities.
E. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed
so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. The un-named street provides a
service access to the Safety Village located on the Grantwood School property. Reduction of
the front yard adjacent to this right-of-way should not affect the school's use of this access.
F. Except for the specific regulation 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. The existing
storage shed does not meet the 20-foot front yard set back. Approval of this special exception
will bring it into conformance. If the special exception is not approved the shed will need to be
moved 20 feet back from the street right-of-way.
G. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as
amended. The Comprehensive Plan designates this area as appropriate for single-family
residential. The proposed special exception is consistent with use of this property as a
residence.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that EXC04-00025, an application for a special exception to reduce the
required front yard from 20 feet to 12 feet to allow the construction of an addition the location of
an accessory building for property located at 1817 Grantwood Drive in the Low -Density Single -
Family Residential (RS-5) zone, be approved.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Application Documents
Approved by:
Karin Franklin, Dire or
Department of Planning and Community Development
LO
ti Q� AflO
r J�v O
6 GP P
.r O
POP N� �VOIa It
as NOINn W
TFT1
o
�;z
0
OdOa Nd31s3M N� a:�BWb
Ij
0
0
0
1S OOOM 1NVK O
� U
o JH
> > o
z z
0 0
[ N Z
Q 4
Q J of
J U U W
CD CL
W �
0 Y
� N U
� Y �
Q Z
Qab8wM �
= Hlo a3wwd
L TT�
is 3aOWVOJ.S
o
m O
Q
O
o o s aoN
J cu� J
Q
U L'
0
1S NVIisl?3' r'
co
> � T
4
U W
z T
w issna o ..
��]ssna Z
r
m
oCf
N
U as iKo DNde
'777
Q
W a
is SAVO >
} a ]
Y
N N t ,
� Z I♦�1,
Z �
Q m
APPEAL TO THE E`c°"-wmas
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SPECIAL EXCEPTION
TITLE 14, CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE W
DATE: fa' 13 - o`er 7 PROPERTY PARCEL NO.
APPEAL PROPERTY ADDRESS:.1&2 6014 fi ..'9d Pr: :roLop-
APPEAL PROPERTY ZONE: d .5 _ e APPEAL PROPERTY LOT SIZE: x • 1
APPLICANT: Name: &4r, Y A •
Address: lQ17 ��i�h'1�►i`U`�--��""�
Phone:lq--
CONTACT PERSON: Name: (Sit r Y A
Address: %S/?
Phone:
PROPERTY OWNER: Name: (36�r Y jai • Sc-�o4�-2
G-�
Address: 9:;VArffWOO- .ilr
PhAe:6?i /-'?-=rz'7
Specific Requested Special Exception; Applicable Section(s) of the Zoning Chapter:
6)
r-
--a
M
cs�
Purpose for special exception:Caw S f7^u c httan O iP a L.�'✓i'r1 �1 �OD�!'t
Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any: d aec-'
-2-
INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANT:
A. Legal description of property: I.�f®.�1c`ica r �'`'�-C/�'�_ _i_4
s�rw7r PrdS/k�' /Ed�liti'o�! Tp Zb c.�i"i�.Zoe.�•• , vicesrd,n1 Tb' s.& F/.vf' 7-iyr-oca� i'rt
%°/,tt Eoolf- u,
s
B. *Plot plan drawn to scale showing:
1. Lot with dimensions;
2. North point and scale;
3. Existing and proposed structures with distances from property lines;
4. Abutting streets and alleys;
5. Surrounding land uses, including the location and record owner of each
property opposite or abutting the property in question;
6. Parking spaces and trees - existing and proposed.
[*Submission of an 82" x 11" bold print plot plan is preferred.]
C. Review. The Board shall review all applicable evidence regarding the site, existing
and proposed structures, neighboring uses, parking areas, driveway locations,
highway and street access, traffic generation and' circulation, drainage, sanitary
sewer and water systems, the operation of the specific proposed exception and
such other evidence as deemed appropriate. (Section 14-6W-2131, City Code).
In the space provided below or on an attached sheet, address the areas of Board
review which apply to the requested special exception. in this narrative statement,
set forth the grounds offered as support for the special exception.
D. The applicant is required to present specific information, not just opitwions, tkiat the
-general standards for the granting of a special exception (Section 14-6W-2132, City
Code), enumerated below, will be met:
The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the
public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare.
'ap'a� Kc�'stib orl� ood Ca�►c o.^�' or tie rs �c�;f limit l
Wst
PUJOliy 5n6et a &,, t rte-t ke, aidarwr"ed bec.e,*tsa ne Si�
w;/f 6A- c'r za,+ed
APPLICATION OF GARY A. AND LOU SCHOOLEY
Attachment to C --- Address the areas of Board review which apply to the requested
special exception.
This special exception is to construct a family room and porch on the South side
of 1817 Grantwood Drive.
This addition will face Grantwood Drive and will extend 18 feet going east of the
existing structure. The current right —of--way facing Grantwood Drive is 51 feet, which
results in an even 51 feet from the center of Grantwood Drive to the house. Although
specific measurements are not available at the time of this application, visual inspection
leads one to believe that every house on the block between Grantwood Drive and Palmer
Circle impedes the required setback.
The proposed additions requiring this special exception will not extend into the
required setback of any further than the existing structure on the North side. This addition
will significantly enhance the property and will comply with all additional codes and
zone requirements.
This addition is essential to a full Living Room with French doors leading out on
the south side for possible porch or deck built in the future.
The requested special exception will not impact abutting properties in any way,
r...3
� e�Ay
because the location of this addition faces Grantwood Drive —not abutting prope gs, No:
community infrastructure will be negatively impacted, including Grantwood Drive)
traffic, site distance from any cross street ( we have a dead end which will not bey' ; c
J
developed into a street) , ingress/egress, water, sewer, or storm water management —
There are no alternative locations for this addition on the existing structure for the
following reasons:
1. West — existing driveway and garage with no alternatives to re -locate and it will
not accommodate relocation of the living room to access dining room and
kitchen.
2. South —not adjacent to the dinning room or kitchen
The requested special exception will in no way negatively impact the neighborhood. The
benefits resulting from the special exception include:
1. Significant owner occupied residence enhancement in an originally platted Iowa
City neighborhood which has a history of non -owner occupied rental property
2. Increased tax base.
3. an architectural sensitive design maintaining the historic integrity of the east side
Neighborhood.
4��
(. n
-3-
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.
-7A-c� agi_d acre abro H wi'l l hot' be.. ana
QYI i o v rr►Ln� b� vt b\i{�r `rr j �QC� �ti, �1+
yetiond 7'i�o. his-/-,nQ 5firucit><rn..
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.
74f, pr& /eosin A�•�; arc Wit( rtdf ldn*o.e" 7Ti't%rmal dag S NUMO v
IK-Fr;cSer&n1, /)o' i's ;f' eneen Glee, %D eer r Surre�tAdLu r►✓ As4t D_
4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have
been or are being provided.
,7—A,r- Ig eapa s e d a)CC.re f't ' e cI w i ! t h« alp l+cct" off `tkt QC�
n erifionad �•/� raS/rw�turc.�-
5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress
designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets.
/�leY wnio/,Cai�L "---fAZ 0200sed S4C-P-4ti'e 1 4224 OIAU 042 4.1 l'
On or, egre�c -
a ,
�✓..� E5 ,
-4-
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. [Depending on the type of 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 City Code Section 14-61-4, Special Exception Enumerated
Requirements; Section 14-6N-1, Off -Street Parking Requirements; Section
14-6Q, Dimensional Requirements, or Section 14-611, Tree Regulations, as
J appropriate.]
+GS. /Loe-, 0.4'� Vlo joy-6 nosed CLn4 P,_c T) ?ewer&- llYLt,S_ t
7. The proposed use will be consistent with the short-range Comprehensive
Plan of the City.
1112-
E. List the names and mailing addresses of the record owners of all property located
within 300 feet of the exterior limits of the property involved in this appeal:
/��rY{t
-b �ha1 ►..
j&mLoriv
it.ccrrvro4rbdc�st
ADDRESS
1 Oct zc'vack'C t-n'
8,01 6n►�`�"� aid dlr' -16'o s
S
Cam`
C�7
-5-
NOTE: Conditions. In permitting a special exception, the Board may impose appropriate
conditions and safeguards, including but not limited to planting screens, fencing,
construction commencement and completion deadlines, lighting, operational controls,
Improved traffic circulation requirements, highway access restrictions, Increased
minimum yard requirements, parking requirements, limitations on the duration of a use or
ownership or any other requirement which the Board deems appropriate under the
circumstances upon a finding that the conditions are necessary to fulfill the purpose and
Intent of the Zoning Chapter. (Section 14-6W-2B3, City Code).
Orders. Unless otherwise determined by the Board, all orders of the Board shall
expire six (6) months from the date the written decision is filed with the City Clerk,
unless the applicant shall have taken action within the six (6) month period to
establish the use or construct the building permitted under the terms of the
Board's decision, such as by obtaining a building permit and proceeding to
completion in accordance with the terms of the permit. Upon written request, and
for good cause shown, the Board may extend the expiration date of any order
without further public hearing on the merits of the original appeal or application.
(Section 14-6W-3E, City Code).
Petition for writ of certiorari. Any person or persons, jointly or severally, aggrieved
by any decision of the Board under the provisions of the Zoning Chapter, or any
taxpayer or any officer, department or board of the City may present to a court of
record a petition for writ of certiorari duly verified, setting forth that such decision
is Illegal, in whole or in part, and specifying the grounds of the illegality. (Section
14-6W-7, City Code). Such petition shall be presented to the court within thirty (30)
days after the filing of the decision in the office of a City Clerk.
Date: , 20 Z
Si ature(s) of Applicant(s)
Date: , 20
ppdadminlappboase.doc
Signature(s) of Property Owners)
if Different than Applicant(sl
r
U
tM-
.1 loo
14 1
w
Ti
r7l�l
j
71
FTI
CZ)
-.j
To: Board of Adjustment
Item: EXC04-00026, 1401 Ridge Street
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
Contact Person:
Phone:
Requested Action:
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
Applicable Zoning Code sections:
Comprehensive Plan:
File Date:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
STAFF REPORT
Prepared by: Robert Miklo
Date: November 10, 2004
Merle D. Miller
2010 Keokuk Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Sara O'Donnell
3546506
Reduction of required front yard setback from
twenty feet to zero feet.
To allow a parking space in the area that would be
normally be a front yard.
1401 Ridge Street
5150 square feet
Single-family residence, RS-5
North: Low -density, single-family residential, RS-5
South: Low -density, single-family residential, RS-5
East: Low -density, single-family residential, RS-5
West: Low -density, single-family residential, RS-5
14-6D-2E-4a (minimum front yards in RS-5)
14-6Q-413 (special exceptions possible)
14-6W-213 (spec. exception review standards)
Residential
October 14, 2004
This property is located at the corner of Highland Avenue and Ridge Street. It is a narrow,
substandard lot. The applicant would like to relocate the driveway and off street parking space
from the Highland Avenue side of the property to the Ridge Street side of the property. The
zoning ordincance does not allow a parking space to be located in a front yard in a residential
zone unless it is located in an aisle or driveway leading to a garage or parking space located
2
outside of the front yard. There is a maple tree located on this lot which would need to me
removed if a parking spaces was to be installed 20 feet back from the Ridge Street property line
so that it is located outside of the front yard. The applicant is requesting a reduction of the
front yard to allow the installation of one parking space within the first 20 feet of the lot.
ANALYSIS:
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
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 may grant relief
from the requirements of the Zoning Chapter through a special exception if the action is
considered to serve the public interest and is consistent with the intent of the Zoning Chapter.
Specific Standards: 14-6Q-4-B, Exceptions to Established Setbacks
Subsection 6Q-4-B of the Zoning Chapter states that a special exception may be granted by the
Board of Adjustment modifying yard requirements when the owner or lawful occupant of property
demonstrates that such person's situation is peculiar to the property in question, that there is a
practical difficulty in complying with the dimensional requirements of the Chapter, and that the
conditions of Article W of the Zoning Chapter (Board of Adjustment Powers and Procedures) can
be met.
Peculiar Situation:
The applicant has a small lot for the RS-5 zone. Dimensional requirements for RS-5 are 8,000
square feet of lot area and a minimum lot width of 60 feet. This particular property measures
50 feet wide by 103 feet long (5150 square feet), and is therefore substandard in both width
and overall area. The fact that this property is a corner lot complicates the size problem
because there are two front yards (on the north and east) — both of which require 20-foot
setbacks. There is a large maple tree located just beyond the required 20-foot front yard in an
area that otherwise would be available for the location of an off street parking space. The
current driveway and parking space is located on Highland Avenue and has a steep grade
which makes in an undesirable location for a driveway. Highland Avenue is also the busier of
the two streets. In Staffs opinion, this combination of factors is a unique situation, which makes
full compliance with the front yard set back requirements difficult for this property.
Practical Difficulty:
As noted the applicant could comply with the 20-foot setback if the maple tree was removed to
provide an area for a parking space beyond the front yard. However this would result in the loss
of a mature tree which provides shade and beauty for this lot and adjacent lots. In Staff's opinion,
there is a practical difficulty in complying with the 20-foot setback.
General Standards for the Granting of a Special Exception:
In addition to determining whether the situation is unique and if there is a practical difficulty in
complying with the Zoning Ordinance, the Board must find that the applicant meets several
standards spelled out in chapter 14-6W-2B. The applicant's statements regarding each of the
seven general standards are included within the attached application, and Staff's findings are
below.
A. The specific exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,
comfort or general welfare. Staff finds that the proposed exception will have no negative
effects on public health, safety, comfort and welfare. Approval will allow for the location of a
driveway and parking space on the less traveled of the two streets which provide access to
this property and will allow a mature tree to remain in place. If the tree was removed and a
parking space where installed beyond the front yard, the zoning ordinance would allow a
3
parking space in the driveway leading to the conforming space, so the net effect on the
neighborhood would be the same or even less beneficial if the yard reduction was not
approved.
B. 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 does not feel that the proposed addition of one parking
space within an area that would otherwise be front yard will substantially alter the
neighborhood.
C. 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. The other properties in this neighborhood
are already developed. The installation of the proposed driveway and parking space should
not affect them.
D. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are
being provided. The proposed exception will not increase the population density or affect the
use of municipal utilities.
E. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed
so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. The relocated driveway will
improve ingress and egress as it will move the access from a more highly traveled collector
street to a lower volume local street.
F. Except for the specific regulation 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. This parcel
will still be substandard in many respects. The lot is narrower than required in the RS-5 zone,
and lacks the required square footage. The existing house does not meet the 20-foot front
yard set back from Highland Avenue. However these are all legal nonconformities that are
grandfather in.
G. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as
amended. The Comprehensive Plan designates this area as appropriate for single-family
residential. The proposed relocated driveway should enhance the residential use of this lot.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that EXC04-00026, an application for a special exception to reduce the
required front yard from 20 feet to 0 feet to allow the installation of a driveway and one parking
space for property located at 1401 Ridge Street in the Low -Density Single -Family Residential (RS-
5) zone, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plan submitted with the
application.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Application Documents
Approved b
Pp Y
Karin Franklin, Dire for
Department of Planning and Community Development
SAInterns\Urban Planning\EXC04-00018, 1906 G st.
w
>
Q
40-111
I�LJ
w
>
Q
O
0
0
is Too
1S 1N13S]�d3
W
>
Q
is. 1�o�e A
O
N
O
0
0
4
O
U
X
W
yo-
APPEAL TO THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
-SPECIAL EXCEPTION -
TITLE 14, CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE W
DATE: I01 1312 H PROPERTY PARCEL NO. 1 014 3!� 3601
APPEAL PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1 y O I
APPEAL PROPERTY ZONE: _L_ APPEAL PROPERTY LOT SIZE: 50 X Ln3
APPLICANT: Name: %QXle, D . W119j
Address: `2010 V-Q0 Ll-, Ord-- -TCwzn
Phone: _35L4 - K 6(P or 330 - 19190
CONTACT PERSON: Name: Jam () Dn"n I I
Address: _1010 IWVuric, -We+l �vYrnL%�'vl
Phone: �)5L4 - k -7
PROPERTY OWNER:Name:
Address: 1010 :ravm ('. ' —7i
Phone: _35 L4 - (01�0(p
Specific Requested Special Exception; Applicable Section(s) of the Zoning Chapter:
Purpose for special E
Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any:
t�
c 7t
LAW
7
r
-2-
INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANT:
A. Legal description of property: :13&L US+ (n 2 '�Z .��' O-F- ( .Off' I4 i ►n
1. Lot with dimensions;
2. North point and scale;
3. Existing and proposed structures with distances from property lines;
4. Abutting streets and alleys;
5. Surrounding land uses, including the location and record owner of each
property opposite or abutting the property in question;
6. Parking spaces and trees - existing and proposed.
[*Submission of an 82" x 11" bold print plot plan is preferred.]
C. Review. The Board shall review all applicable evidence regarding the site, existing
and proposed structures, neighboring uses, parking areas, driveway locations,
highway and street access, traffic generation and circulation, drainage, sanitary
sewer and water systems, the operation of the specific proposed exception and
such other evidence as deemed appropriate. (Section 14-M-2131, City Code).
In the space provided below or on an attached sheet, address the areas of Board
review which apply to the requested special exception. In this narrative statement,
set forth the grounds offered as support for the special exception.
s ..I .ice . A,! lop
0-xQ& W U Wu Vie,. Wt., 4D `�v� SO --10 old
D. The applicant is required to present spe ific information, ndt just opinion hat~:he
general standards for the -granting of a special exception (Section 14-6-W--;',2'-Ow2, ity
Code), enumerated below, will be met: -
1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or eo-4nger'"the Trl
public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare. ;� ' -' -
Fz
ln.`.�}�l� un �AA�AL CL Sa-Fey F Dy¢, usejcLb y
-3-
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.
/.� ,, P• W A
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.
'R\-L wct.4o AN rn w� 1 l c bt�l .-Ni/'1./1 tii s n o �-) yt4, � ^-
^t7nJ tii 'M LVIA U A -�h 0VDWP +D USQ_ . 1 V1,L
4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have
been or are being provided.
S. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide Ingress or egress
designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets.
-4-
E.
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. [Depending on the type of 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 City Code Section 14-6L-1, Special Exception Enumerated
Requirements; Section 14-6N-1, Off -Street Parking Requirements; Section
14-6Q, Dimensional Requirements, or Section 14-611, Tree Regulations, as
appropriate.]
T. The proposed use will be consistent with the short-range Comprehensive
Plan of the City.
r-,
List the names and mailing addresses of the record owners of all pr6perrty ld-dated7
within 300 feet of the exterior limits of the property involved in this appeal:
NAME ADDRESS
Mo
1�I IWIWOMMM
'kin�.
i1 . l..• 1� �G' i
O o
-5-
NOTE: Conditions. In permitting a special exception, the Board may impose appropriate
conditions and safeguards, Including but not limited to planting screens, fencing,
construction commencement and completion deadlines, lighting, operational controls,
Improved traffic circulation requirements, highway access restrictions, increased
minimum yard requirements, parking requirements, limitations on the duration of a use or
ownership or any other requirement which the Board deems appropriate under the
circumstances upon a finding that the conditions are necessary to fulfill the purpose and
Intent of the Zoning Chapter. (Section 14-6W-2B3, City Code).
Orders. Unless otherwise determined by the Board, all orders of the Board shall
expire six (6) months from the date the written decision is filed with the City Clerk,
unless the applicant shall have taken action within the six (6) month period to
establish the use or construct the building permitted under the terms of the
Board's decision, such as by obtaining a building permit and proceeding to
completion in accordance with the terms of the permit. Upon written request, and
for good cause shown, the Board may extend the expiration date of any order
without further public hearing on the merits of the original appeal or application.
(Section 14-6W-3E, City Code).
Petition for writ of certiorari. Any person or persons, jointly or severally, aggrieved
by any decision of the Board under the provisions of the Zoning Chapter, or any
taxpayer or any officer, department or board of the City may present to a court of
record a petition for writ of certiorari duly verified, setting forth that such decision
Is illegal, in whole or In part, and specifying the grounds of the illegality. (Section
14-6W-7, City Code). Such petition shall be presented to the court within thirty (30)
days after the filing of the decision in the office of the City Clerk.
.. III /_'. MMM
Date: , 20
ppdadminlappboase.doc
Signature(s) of Applicant(s)
Signature(s) of Property Owner(s)
If Different than Applicant(s)
l
71
C1 r ,f
PO
pyc
31
Wv, sly'ut
T
11
m
ca
U
N
Q.
Q.
cz
2
V
0
0
U
STAFF REPORT
To: Board of Adjustment
Item: APL04-00004 130 N Dubuque Street
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
Applicant's Contact Person and Attorney:
Requested Action:
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
Comprehensive Plan:
File Date:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Prepared by: John Yapp
Date: October 13, 2004
Wesley Foundation
120 N Dubuque Street
Iowa City, IA 52245
Bob Downer
122 S Linn Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Phone: 338-1179
Appeal a decision of the Building Official
regarding the nonconforming use
provision
To reestablish an auto and truck
oriented use (repair garage) on the
property
130 N Dubuque Street
6,000 square feet
Vacant; CB-5
North:
Gas and convenience store;
CB-2
South:
Wesley Foundation; CB-5
East:
Commercial; CB-5
West:
Religious Institution; PRM
Mixed -use
September 24, 2004
The applicant, the Wesley Foundation, has submitted an appeal of a decision of the Building
Official regarding the reestablishment of a non -conforming use. The application was initially
made for a variance to allow an auto -oriented use in the CB-5 zone, and was subsequently
converted to an appeal of a decision of the Building Official. On September 17, 2004 the
building department denied a building permit related to the reestablishment of a repair garage
on the property. The repair garage business that previously occupied the property (Johnson's
Wspecial exceptions\appeal 130 dubuque street.doc
E
Auto) ceased operating at this location approximately 18 months ago, and had moved from this
property by the time it was rezoned from CB-2, Central Business Service Zone to CB-5,
Central Business Support Zone.
In 2003, the property was rezoned from CB-2 to CB-5 at the request of a local realtor and the
property owner. Representations were made in the rezoning application that the request for
the rezoning was to enable the property to be developed with a mixed -use
commercial/residential building on the property. The CB-5 zone is more conducive to mixed -
use development due to lower parking requirements, no setback requirements, and higher
allowable building density. As part of the rezoning analysis, city staff recommended the entire
block be rezoned from CB-2 to CB-5, due to the CB-5 zone being more in conformance with
the Comprehensive Plan for this area, which encourages mixed -use, pedestrian -oriented
development. The rezoning to CB-5 was approved by the City Council on May 20, 2003.
After the property was rezoned, the Wesley Foundation leased the property. It is their long-
range plan to, according to the application materials, develop and utilize the properties on the
west side of the block (including the Wesley Foundation and United Methodist Church) as a
cohesive unit. In the short-term, however, they wish to sub -lease the property to an auto -repair
business. Auto -and -truck oriented uses are not permitted in the CB-5 zone, and the non-
conforming use status for an auto -and -truck oriented use on this property expired on May 20,
2004, one year after it was rezoned.
ANALYSIS:
The purpose of the Zoning Code 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
appropriate use of land. It is the intent of the Zoning Code to permit the full use of property in a
manner that does not intrude upon adjacent property.
Section 14-6W-2A of the Zoning Code grants the Board of Adjustment the power to hear and
decide appeals where it is alleged there is error in any order, requirement, decision or
determination made by the City Manager or designee in the enforcement of the Zoning
Chapter or any ordinance adopted pursuant thereto. In this case the applicant is appealing the
determination of the Building Official that the auto -and -truck oriented use cannot be
reestablished because it has ceased for more than one year, and has, therefore, been
discontinued as a non -conforming use of this property. The issue for the Board of Adjustment
is whether the Building Official erred in making this determination.
In making his determination, the Building Official relied on City Code Section 14-6T-3D
Discontinuance of Nonconforming Use, which states "A lot or portion of a lot devoted to a
nonconforming use which is discontinued for a period of one year shall revert to a conforming
use."
Since the auto -and -truck oriented use ceased operating more than one year ago, it is clear that
the Building Official did not err in making this decision.
The applicant makes two arguments in support of their appeal. First, the applicant denies that
the nonconforming use of an auto -and -truck oriented use has been discontinued, and that said
use may be continued by a new tenant. Staff finds that while an auto -repair business may
occupy the existing building on the property, there is a distinction between the building and the
Wspecial exceptions\appeal 130 dubuque street.doc
3
use within the building. While non -conforming buildings may be permitted to remain under City
Code, a non -conforming use may not be reestablished if it has ceased for more than one year.
This is to encourage redevelopment of properties such that they conform to the zone in which
the property is located.
An argument the applicant makes [in their variance application] is that they are "stymied" by
restrictions as a religious institution by not being able to lease the property to businesses that
generate income from alcohol, tobacco or gambling.
Intent of the C13-5 Zone
The CB-5, Central Business Support Zone, is intended to allow for the expansion of the Central
Business District of Iowa City, and to enhance the pedestrian orientation of the central area of
the City. The CB-5 Zone is intended to accommodate mixed land uses. Permitted uses
include a range of retail establishments, restaurants (including carry -out restaurants), offices,
and personal service businesses. There are a wide range of uses that could occupy the
property that do not involve the sale of alcohol or tobacco. Part of the rationale for rezoning
the property to CB-5 18 months ago was that the CB-5 zone had less stringent parking
requirements, and more area of this relatively small (6,000 square feet) lot could be utilized for
a building, than under the CB-2 Zone. In other words, the lot may be utilized more fully under
the CB-5 zone. There are many examples of old service station structures in other cities as
well as in Iowa City being used for uses like restaurants or offices, that do not rely on income
generated from alcohol, tobacco or gambling. Some examples/photos of converted service
station structures are attached.
The intent of the non -conforming use provisions is to phase -out uses that are no longer
appropriate or compatible with the zone in which they are located. In this case, the property
was rezoned (at the property owners request) which made the auto repair use non-
conforming. Allowing an auto -and -truck oriented use on the property would be contrary to
the rezoning decision made by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council.
The applicant makes the statement that an auto repair business fits into the neighborhood
because there is a gas station/convenience store across the street. While there is a gas
station/convenience store on the property across Market Street, it is in the CB-2, Central
Business Service Zone, a zone that allows such uses. Other uses in this area include video
rental, ice cream, pizza, and book sales, a Laundromat, restaurants and other retail uses.
The CB-5 zone is intended for the expansion of the Central Business District and allows a
wide range of retail and personal service uses.
FINDINGS:
Staff finds that:
The property at 130 N Dubuque Street was rezoned from CB-2, Central Business Service
Zone, to CB-5, Central Business Support Zone, on May 20, 2003.
The previous auto repair business that occupied this property had relocated to 315 E. Benton
Street by the time the property at 130 N Dubuque Street was rezoned to CB-5 on May 20
2003.
The property has been unoccupied by a business for a period of approximately 18 months.
Wspecial exceptions\appeal 130 dubuque street.doc
4
The CB-5 Zone is intended for the expansion of the Central Business District, and
accommodates a wide range of retail, office and personal service uses.
The applicant acquired a lease interest in the property with knowledge of the CB-5 zoning
requirements that apply to the property.
The non -conforming use provision of the City Code states that once a non -conforming use has
been discontinued for a period of more than one year, the property shall revert to a conforming
use.
CONCLUSION:
Based on the above findings, staff concludes that the Building Official correctly applied City
Code Section 14-6T-3D Discontinuance of Nonconforming Use, which states "A lot or
portion of a lot devoted to a nonconforming use which is discontinued for a period of one year
shall revert to a conforming use."
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends APL04-00004, an appeal of the Building Officials decision to deny a building
permit application on the basis that the use of the premises of an automobile repair facility has
been abandoned for approximately 18 months, be denied, and the Building Officials
determination be upheld.
1. Location map
2. Application materials
3. Photos of service station structures that have been reused
Approved by: G
Kari Franklin, Director,
Department of Planning and Community Development
Wspecial exceptions\appeal 130 dubuque street.doc
Service station converted to Bar-B-Que restaurant in Virginia
Service station converted to coffee ship in Wisconsin
Wspecial exceptions\appeal 130 dubuque street.doc
rormer service station at Linn Street / Burlington Street, Iowa City of Iowa City
Former service station at Dodge Street / Iowa Avenue, Iowa City
Wspecial exceptions\appeal 130 dubuque street.doc
MEARDON, SUEPPEL & DOWNER P.L,.C.
ROBERT N. DOWNER
LAWYERS
JAMES D. McCARRAGHER
TELEPHONE: (319) 338-9222
122 SOUTH LINN STREET FAX: (31 9)
MARK T. HAMER
338-7250
THOMAS D. HOBART
IOWA CITY. IOWA52240 -1830
MARGARETT. LAINSON
W
WW.MEARDONLAW.COM
DOUGLAS D. RUPPERT
TIMOTHY J. KRUMM
WILLIAM J. SUEPPEL
WILLIAM L. MEARDON
CHARLES A. MEARDON
(I 9 1 9- 1997)
DENNIS J. MITCHELL
DAVID J. BRIGHT
OF COUNSEL:
PETER J. GARDNER
WILLIAM F. SUEPPEL
JEAN BARTLEY
September 24, 2004
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
CITY OF IOWA CITY
410 E WASHINGTON
IOWA CITY IA 52240
Re: Wesley Foundation
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Wesley Foundation has recently filed a Request for Variance covering the
property at 130 North Dubuque Street, Iowa City, Iowa, pursuant to the provisions of
Section 14-6W 2.C. of the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Iowa. The undersigned, as
attorney for the Wesley Foundation and with its authorization, is asking that said
Application for Variance be converted to an appeal of the denial by the building official
of a building permit application on September 17, 2004, on the basis that the use of said
premises as an automobile repair facility had been abandoned for a year and a half.
Wesley Foundation denies that the nonconforming use of an auto and truck oriented
use had been abandoned, and submits that said usage could be continued on said
premises by a new tenant.
Attached is a listing of the parcel numbers, mailing names and addresses
and property addresses of all properties located within 300 feet of the subject property.
RND/bjf
Enclosure
APPEAL TO THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
VARIANCE
Title 14, Chapter 6, Article W
DATE: September 16, 2004 PROPERTY PARCEL NO. 1010307003
APPEAL PROPERTY ADDRESS: 130N. Dubuque Street, 52245
APPEAL PROPERTY ZONE: CB-5 APPEAL PROPERTY LOT SIZE: 6,000 sg- fz
APPLICANT: Name: Wesley Foundation
Address: 120 N. Dubuque St, 52245
Phone: 319.338.1179
CONTACT PERSON: Name: Bob Downer
Address: 122 S. Linn St., 52240
f.
Phone: 319.339.9222
PROPERTY OWNER: Name: Pat Lenoch
Address: 3347Hanover Ct, 52245
Phone: 319.338.3952
C=)
.c-
Specific requested variance; applicable section(s) of the Zoning Chapter:
To allow an auto oriented business in 4-6E-7 Central Business Support Zone (CB-5) and includes permitted uses
Reason for variance request: We seek to continue to allow an auto oriented business at 130 N. Dubuque
while the Wesley Foundation works to develop the property with our other two properties as a cohesive facility.
Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any: Applied for Building Permit 8A2004.
INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANT:
A. Legal description of property:
THE NORTHHALF OF LOT 4 IN BLOCK 67INIOWA CITY, IOWA, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT
THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT RECORD 1, PAGE 116.
B. "Plot plan drawn to scale showing:
C7
C CC?
t„
1. Lot with dimensions;
2. North point and scale;
3. Existing and proposed structures with distances from property lines;
-0
4. Abutting streets and alleys;
_
5. Land uses on and property owners of abutting lots; and
6. Parking spaces and trees - existing and proposed.
o
r-
[*Submission of an 8" x 11 " bold print plot plan is preferred.]
C. List of property owners within 300 feet of the exterior limits of the property involved in this
appeal:
NAME ADDRESS
Julie Hodge, Mike Hodge, Key Properties Ltd 711 S. Gilbert, 52240
Parkhouse LC 711 S. Gilbert, 52240
First English Lutheran (Gloria Dei) 121 N. Dubuque, 52245
Iowa Bnai Brith Hillel 122 E. Market, 52245
Nordstrom Oil (Handimart) PO Box 66, Cedar Rapids, IA 52406
First United Methodist Church 214 E. Jefferson, 52245
St Mary's Catholic Church 220 E. Jefferson, 52245
HCB Properties LC 711 S. Gilbert, 52240
Melinda Miller 525 Emerald Street, 52246
APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION:
Section 14-6W-2C of the Iowa City Zoning Chapter gives the Board of Adjustment power to
authorize upon appeal in specific cases such variances from the terms of the Zoning Chapter as
will not be contrary to the public interest, where owing to special conditions a literal enforcement of
the provisions of the Zoning Chapter will result in unnecessary hardship and so the spirit of the
ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. No variance to the strict application
of any provision of the Zoning Chapter shall be granted by the Board unless the applicant
demonstrates that all of the following elements are present: (emphasis added)
(Please respond specifically to each of the following, explaining your answers.)
2.
Not contrary to the public interest.
a. Explain why the proposed variance will not threaten neighborhood integrity, or
have a substantially adverse effect on the use or value of other properties in the
area adjacent to the property included in the variance.
Planned use is the same as has been at this site since 1920 with the most recent occupant being
Johnson's Auto. With a convenience store across the stree4 auto -oriented business fits this
neighborhood
b. Explain why the proposed variance will be in harmony with the general purpose
and intent of the Zoning Chapter, and not contravene the objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan.
The building use permitted under current zoning has made it difficult to get a renter to utilize
the property. Wesley Foundation seeks to sub -lease the property, developing cash jlow,.Nhile
4
working on a cohesive plan to develop the property in conjunction with 213 E. Market Quid 120
N. Dubuque that will comply with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan.
Unnecessary hardship.
=
a. Explain why the property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if U-96d onlyT
for a purpose allowed in the zone where the property is located.
The current size of building and property and the restrictions as a religious organization in
receiving income from alcohol, tobacco or gambling sales has made it nearly impossible to
sub -lease to a business permitted under CB-5 zoning. We have had many inquiries into
sub -leasing the current structure and property without the ability to secure an agreement.
b. Explain how the owner's situation is unique or peculiar to the property in question,
and the situation not shared with other landowners in the area or due to general
conditions in the neighborhood.
The United Methodist Church basically owns the West Half of this block except for 130 N.
Dubuque. The ability to lease with an option to buy 130 N. Dubuque presents an opportunity to
develop all of the property on the West half of the block as a cohesive unit. Because of the
voluntary nature of religious institutions, several years are needed to fund -raise and develop a
plan that will add value and beauty to the neighborhood This property needs to cash flow itself,
while that plan is developed
C. Explain how the hardship is not of the landowner's or applicant's own making or
that of a predecessor in title.
The previous business vacated the property seven (7) before the Wesley Foundation was able to
lease the property. We began to seek tenants to sub -lease the property immediately but were
stymied by restrictions to who we could get as a tenant because of income generated from alcohol,
tobacco or gambling sales being prohibitive. In the mean time, the nonconforming use period
ended before finding a tenant willing to sub -lease the property and structure.
NOTE: Conditions. In permitting a variance, the Board may impose appropriate conditions and
safeguards, including but not limited to planting screens, fencing, construction
commencement and completion deadlines, lighting, operational controls, improved traffic
circulation requirements, highway access restrictions, increased minimum yard
requirements, parking requirements, limitations on the duration of a use or ownership or
any other requirement which the Board deems appropriate under the circumstances,
upon a finding that the conditions are necessary to fulfill the purpose and intent of the
Zoning Chapter. (Section 14-6W-2C3, City Code).
Orders. Unless otherwise determined by the Board, all orders of the Board shall expire
six (6) months from the date the written decision is filed with the City Clerk, unless the
applicant shall have taken action within the six (6) month period to establish the use or
construct the building permitted under the terms of the Board's decision, such as by
obtaining a building permit and proceeding to completion in accordance with the terms of
the permit. Upon written request, and for good cause shown, the Board may extend the
expiration date of any order without further public hearing on the merits of the original
appeal or application. (Section 14-6W-3E, City Code)
Petition for writ of certiorari. Any person or persons, jointly or severally, aggrieved by any
decision of the Board under the provisions of the Zoning Chapter or any taxpayer or any
officer, department or board of the City may present to a court of record a petition for writ
of certiorari duly verified, setting forth that such decision is illegal, in whole or in part, and
specifying the grounds of the illegality. (Section 14-6W-7, City Code.) Such petition shall
be presented to the court within thirty (30) days after the filing of the decision in the office
of the City Clerk.
Date: September 16 20 04
Date: September 16
Wdadminlaptwavarpkt.W
2004
CJ&U C'Gw,L_� ,91 ('�6 L-"(�
i J rZ ),iec r-
Signatu (s) of Applicant(s)
Signature(s) of Property Owner(s)
if Different than Applicant(s)
10/2103
P-3
cr-A
71
y
�,
October 13, 2004
To: Iowa City Board of Adjustment
From: Linda Johnson < i. Oiyj 11W�
166 Shrader Road I
Iowa City, IA 52245
Re: Appeal APL04-00004
I find it interesting and a bit odd that the property owner and the current lease holder of
the property at 130 N. Dubuque Street are requesting an appeal of the CB-5 zoning to allow an
auto and truck oriented business at that location. I find it especially odd since the original
rezoning application was pursed with such intensity and resolve by the property owner and a
realtor working with the property owner to convert said property to a project "more in keeping
with the City's vision of a gateway street presence".
My name is Linda Johnson; my husband is Dwayne Johnson, owner of Johnson's Auto
Service. From February 1, 1995 through January 31, 2003 he operated his business at 130 N.
Dubuque Street. On December 16, 2002 he received a letter from the property owner's attorney
which stated his lease "will expire and terminate at the end of the day on January 31, 2003" and
that "the undersigned Landlord intends to have the property re -zoned for multi -family purposes
and to permit the construction of an apartment building thereon." The application for rezoning
was submitted on December 10, 2002 and subsequently approved. To bad for the realtor and
property owner that the proposed deal for construction of an apartment building did not
materialize and an alternative solution had to be sought. Enter the Wesley Foundation. Surely
the officials of that Foundation did not blindly enter a lease agreement without being advised and
knowing beforehand 1) of their restrictions as a religious institution or 2) the CB-5 zoning status
and regulations that applied.
I do not understand how the appeal supports the fact that the auto and truck oriented use
has not been discontinued. Johnson's Auto exited the property on January 31, 2003. Since that
time the business location has appeared abandoned and unsightly.
So here we go from being CB-2 to wanting to be CB-5 back to wanting to be CB-2. It
seems "flip-flop" doesn't apply only to the current Presidential campaign. I hope the Board of
Adjustment isn't caught up in the same and that Appeal APL04-00004 is denied. The fact that it
is "difficult to get a renter" or that "several years are needed to fund -raise" or that "This property
needs to cash -flow itself..." are not problems for the Board of Adjustment to solve.
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 5, 2004
To: Board of Adjustment
From: John Yapp, Associate Planner
Re: EXC04-00022 637 Foster Road
Attached are materials forwarded to us from Selective Sites Consultants, who are acting
on behalf of Verizon Wireless. At your October 13 meeting, on a 2-2 vote, the special
exception application for a telecommunications tower at 637 Foster Road was denied for
failure to garner three votes for approval as required by Iowa law. Since that meeting,
the applicant has obtained new information, specifically, a determination from the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that the proposed tower will not need to be lighted
or marked. The applicant has also offered, in the attached letter, to reduce the height of
the tower.
The applicant is requesting that the Board reconsider your October 13 vote on this issue.
At your November 10 meeting, you may vote to reconsider the issue and place it on the
next meeting agenda. However, the Board should refrain from discussing the merits or
substance of the specific application due to public notice and open meetings
requirements. Your discussion should be strictly limited to whether you wish to
reconsider the October 13 vote based on new information from the applicant.
The motion to reconsider must come from the 'prevailing side' of the October 13 vote,
and in this case, the motion must come from one of the Board members voting against
the initial special exception request (Leigh or Alexander). It is my understanding that
Alexander will be absent at this meeting, so the motion for reconsideration must come
from Karen Leigh. If no motion is forthcoming, a majority of the Board could then vote to
suspend Robert's Rules regarding reconsideration, thereby allowing any member to
move for reconsideration. If no such motions are made or passed, the Board will not
reconsider the application and the prior decision will stand. If the Board does vote to
reconsider this special exception application, the reconsideration will occur at the
December 8 meeting, and staff will notify all property owners within 300 feet and publish
notice of the application as per normal notification procedures.
SELECTIVE SITE CONSULTANTS, INC.
A Site Acquisition, Engineering, and Construction Quality Assurance Company
November 1, 2004
VIA FACSIMILE 0191
Mr. Robert Miklo
Senior Planner
City of Iowa City
Department of Planning and Community Development
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
RE: EXC04-00022 - Special Exception Application for communication tower at 637
Foster Road, Iowa City, Iowa 52245
Dear Mr. Miklo:
I am writing in follow-up to our meeting on Thursday morning, October 14, in regard to the above
application, which received a 2-2 vote by the Iowa City Board of Adjustment on the evening of October
13, 2004.
In our meeting, you indicated that the Board might be willing to reconsider its vote if new evidence was
submitted indicating that no lighting scheme would be required on the tower. Verizon Wireless has
retained an airspace consultant, and the consultant has determined that no lighting or marking will be
required. The consultant's findings are attached to this letter for your review and were provided to John
Yapp last week by e-mail.
The consultant's findings are based upon a tower height of 140', which represents a revised tower height
of 130' (down from 150') and a 10' lightning rod. The revised height accommodates Verizon Wireless'
RF engineering needs and will continue to allow collocation by two additional carriers at 120' and 110'
(or lower) antenna centerlines.
We have modified the tower's height in order to further reduce the visual impact of the tower on the
properties to the South in the hope that this will provide further justification for the Board to reconsider
the matter, since the main objection appears to have been the visual appearance of the tower. With the
submission of this letter, we request that the Board reconsider its decision of October 13, 2004.
You also advised that the Board's final decision would be issued in writing pursuant to Section 14-6W-3
of the City of Iowa City Zoning Ordinance. It is my understanding that you were going to speak with
Sarah Holecek, the Assistant City Attorney, regarding the timeframe for issuance of the written decision,
which will trigger the time in which Verizon Wireless can appeal the Board's decision to the appropriate
court. If you could advise us of how the City intends to proceed with issuance of the decision, I would
appreciate it.
Trevor Wood
November t, 2004
Page 2
Sincerely,
J. Trevor Wood
Cc: Nancy Fulks, Verizon Wireless
Andrew G. Edwards, Verizon Wireless
Velton Viles, Selective Site Consultants, Inc.
Cheri Hardee, Selective Site Consultants, Inc.
Sarah Holocek, Assistant City Attorney
John Yapp, Associate Planner
October 15, 2004
Federal Airways & Airspace
1423 South Patrick Drive
Satellite Beach, FL 32937-1026
Phone:321-777-1266 Fax:321-777-8595
e-mail to:Airspace@AirspaceUSA.com
Ref: 2004-FAA-262-CN
Selective Sites Proposal: Antenna Tower
Attn: Cheri Hardee Lat: N41 °-40'-43.66"
8500 W 110t' St, Suite 300 Lon: W91 °-32'-52.86"
Overland Park, KS 66210 Height: 140 ft AGL 878 ft AMSL
Subject: Airspace Analysis: 2004-FAA-0170-OE
Site Name: Underpog
Dear Ms. Hardee,
We have completed our analysis of your proposed communications tower. The subject
tower exceeds FAR Part 77.13 Notice Criteria and will require notification to the FAA. Our
analysis did not discover any mitigating aviation factors that will prevent construction at the
requested height.
The proposed structure is located within the Conical Surface, FAR 77.25(b), for Iowa City
Municipal (IOW). The height of the conical surface for IOW at the specified location is 940
feet AMSL. The proposed height is 62 feet below this surface. Any height exceeding the
conical surface will receive a "Presumed Hazard" from the FAA. However, the maximum
height the FAA is likely to permit at the requested location is 1113 feet AMSL. This is based
upon the specified 250 feet per nautical mile departure climb gradient for Runway 36.
Marking and lighting are not rreguired at the proposed height. The controlling obstacle
(trees) for this area only permit a clear 24:1 slope to Runway 18. The proposed structure is
below the controlling obstacle slope by 374 feet.
The proposed site is located 1,002 meters from AM radio station KXIC. Proof -of -
Performance study is required.
If you have any questions, please call; (321) 777-1266.
Ciyd�'an, Aerospace Engineer
lmj/enclosure.
1423 S. Patrick Drive, Satellite Beach, FL 32937; Phone: 321-777-1266; Fax 321-777-8595; E-mail: Airspace@AirspaceUSA.com
********************************************
* Federal Airways & Airspace
* Summary Report
********************************************
File: UNDERDOG
Location: Iowa City, IA
Distance: 1.6 Statute Miles
Direction: 1540 (true bearing)
Latitude: 410-401-43.66"
SITE ELEVATION AMSL ...... 738 ft.
STRUCTURE HEIGHT ......... 140 ft.
OVERALL HEIGHT AMSL ...... 878 ft.
Longitude: 0910-321-52.86"
NOTICE CRITERIA
FAR 77.13(a)(1): NNR (DNE 200 ft AGL)
FAR 77.13(a)(2): NR (Exceeds Runway Slope, Maximum: 780 ft.)
FAR 77.13(a)(3): NNR (Not a Traverse Way)
FAR 77.13(a)(4): PNR (Circling Approach Area)
FAR 77.13(a)(4): PNR (Straight -In Procedure. Possible TERPS® impact. IOW)
FAR 77.13(a)(4): NNR (No Expected TERPS® impact CID)
FAR 77.13(a)(5): NNR (Off Airport Construction)
NR = Notice Required
NNR = Notice Not Required
PNR = Possible Notice Required
OBSTRUCTION STANDARDS
FAR 77.23(a)(1): DNE 500 ft AGL
FAR 77.23(a)(2): DNE - Airport Surface
FAR 77.25(a): DNE - Horizontal Surface
FAR 77.25(b): DNE - Conical Surface
FAR 77.25(c): DNE - Approach Surface
FAR 77.25(d): DNE - Transitional Surface
FAR 77.25(e): DNE - Primary Surface
VFR TRAFFIC PATTERN AIRSPACE FOR: IOW: IOWA CITY MUNI
Type: AIR RD: 12649 RB: 178.24 RE: 654
FAR 77.23(a)(1): DNE
FAR 77.23(a)(2): DNE - Height Less Than 200 feet AGL.
VFR Horizontal Surface: DNE
VFR Conical Surface: DNE
VFR Approach Slope: DNE
VFR Transitional Slope: DNE
The structure is within VFR - Traffic Pattern Airspace Climb/Descent Area.
Structures exceeding the greater of 350' AGL, 77.23(a)(2), or VFR horizontal
and conical surfaces will receive a hazard determination from the FAA.
Maximum AMSL of Climb/Descent Area is 1018 feet.
VFR TRAFFIC PATTERN AIRSPACE
Type: AIR RD: 83782 RB:
FAR 77.23(a)(1): DNE
FAR 77.23(a)(2): DNE
VFR Horizontal Surface: DNE
VFR Conical Surface: DNE
VFR Approach Slope: DNE
VFR Transitional Slope: DNE
FOR: CID: THE EASTERN IOWA
329.45 RE: 847
- Greater Than 6 NM.
MINIMUM OBSTACLE CLEARANCE ALTITUDE (MOCA)
FAR 77.23(a)(4) MOCA Altitude Enroute Criteria
The Maximum Height Permitted is 2691ft AMSL
PRIVATE LANDING FACILITIES
FACIL BEARING DISTANCE DELTA ARP
IDENT TYP NAME To FACIL IN N.M. ELEVATION
----- ---------------------------------------------------------
IA92 HEL UNIVERSITY OF IOWA HOSPITALS & 253.89 2.441 +88
No Impact to Private Landing Facility
Structure is beyond notice limit by 9832 feet.
IA16 AIR PICAYUNE 50.49 2.787 +78
No Impact to Private Landing Facility.
DNE 200 ft AGL within 3 NM of Airport.
AIR NAVIGATION ELECTRONIC FACILITIES
No Electronic Facilities Are Within 25,000 ft
FCC AM PROOF -OF -PERFORMANCE
REQUIRED: Structure is near a FCC licensed AM radio
station Proof -of -Performance is required. Please
review AM Station Report for details.
Nearest AM Station: KXIC @ 1002 meters.
Airspace® Summary Version 10.0.28
AIRSPACE® and TERPS® are registered ® trademarks of Federal Airways & Airspace®
Copyright Q 1989 - 2004
10-14-2004
16:28:23
n
ll
A
a
Q
4f
2A
C
d
LL