Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-10-2004 Board of AdjustmentAGENDA IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING WEDNESDAY, March 10, 2004 — 5:00 PM EMMA J. HARVAT HALL A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Consider the February 11, 2004 Board Minutes D. Appeal: 1. APL04-00002: Public hearing regarding an appeal submitted by Steve L. Droll of a decision of the Senior Housing Inspector regarding the maximum occupancy or number of roomers permitted at 428 E. Jefferson Street in the Residential/Office R/O zone. E. Special Exception: 1. EXC04-00002: Public hearing regarding an application submitted by Regina Catholic Education Center for a special exception to permit expansion of a religious institution, specifically a school, for property located in the Low - Density Single -Family (RS-5) zone at 2140 Rochester Avenue. F. Other G. Board of Adjustment Information H. Adjourn NEXT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING April 14, 2004 STAFF REPORT To: Board of Adjustment Item: APL04-00002 428 E. Jefferson St. GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Contact Person: Phone: Requested Action: Location: Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Comprehensive Plan: File Date: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Prepared by: Robert Miklo Date: March 10, 2004 Steve Droll 1580 Mall Drive Iowa City, IA 52240 C. Joseph Holland 123 N. Linn Street Suite 300 Iowa City, IA 52245 3540331 Appeal a decision of Housing Inspector maximum occupancy. 428 Jefferson Street 3320 square feet Duplex, R/O North: residential R/O South: residential R/O East: residential R/O West: residential R/O Mixed -Use February 6, 2004 the Senior regarding The applicant, Steve Droll, has submitted an appeal of a decision of the Senior Housing Inspector regarding the expansion of a non -conforming use at 428 E. Jefferson Street (see attached November 26 letter form the Inspector). The property is zoned Residential/Office, R/O. It contains a duplex. The R/O zone permits dwellings as provisional uses provided that there is a minimum of 1800 square feet of lot area per dwelling or 3600 square feet for a duplex. This property contains 3,320 square feet and therefore the existing duplex is nonconforming in terms of minimum lot area. The property is also non -conforming in regard to parking. A total of 4 off street parking spaces are required for a duplex. The property contains only 1 parking space. Prior to being zoned R/O in 1993 this property was zoned Central Business Service, CB- 2. Because the CB-2 zone did not allow residential uses on the ground floor, the property was also non -conforming under the previous zoning designation. The property was zoned R3A in 1976 at the time it was converted to a duplex. The R3A zone required 2500 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit for a duplex. There was an error when the property was converted because the property did not contain the minimum lot area of 5000 square feet required for a duplex. In any event the Senior Housing Inspector is recognizing this property as a nonconforming duplex in the current R/O zone. However because the property does not contain sufficient lot area or parking, it is the Inspector's position that the roomers are not allowed. The roomers are not considered a nonconforming use because they are a provisional use that was never legally established on this property. The applicant wishes to rent the second floor duplex unit to 2 persons. He wishes to rent the ground floor unit to 3 unrelated persons (based on the definition of family in the zoning ordinance this arrangement would constitute a family and one roomer). The Senior Housing Inspector has determined the applicant has the right to rent each unit to a family, which may include 2 unrelated persons. However, because the right to have roomers, a provisional use, was never legally established on this property, roomers are not permitted. In order for a property to take advantage of the provisional use allowing roomers it would need to comply with lot area and parking requirements. The issue of over occupancy of this property has come to light because of a recent directive of the City Council to improve enforcement of City ordinances. City Council has passed an ordinance requiring a Informational Disclosure and Acknowledgement Form for each rental property and directed the Housing and Inspection Service Department to establish the maximum permitted occupancy for rental units based on building, zoning and housing codes. The applicant is now appealing the determination of the Senior Housing Inspector. 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 and enjoyment 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 Senior Housing Inspector that allowing roomers at 428 E. Jefferson would be the expansion of a nonconforming use. 3 In making his decision the Inspector relied on Section 14-6T-2 A, Regulation of Non - Conforming Uses, General Provisions and Restrictions, Continuance of Unlawful Uses, which states "Nothing in this Chapter shall be interpreted as authorization for the continuance of the use of a structure or land established unlawfully in violation of the zoning regulations in effect prior to the effective date hereof." The Inspector has determined that the provisional use of roomers on this property was never legally established. The property did not conform to the requirements of either the CB-2 zone or the R3A zone. The property currently lacks, as well as previously lacked, lot area and the required number parking spaces. In order to find that the Senior Housing Inspector made an error, the Board would have to find that roomers where legally established on this property under a previous zoning designation. The Inspector has determined that at no time in the past did this property contain the required number of parking spaces, or sufficient lot area needed to permit roomers. The Inspector also relied on Section 14-6T-3 A, Regulation of Non -Conforming Uses, Enlargement or Alteration, which states, "No nonconforming use shall be enlarged nor shall a structure for a nonconforming use be constructed, reconstructed, structurally altered or relocated on the lot." Section 14-613-2, Zoning Definitions, defines enlargement as, "an increase in volume of a building, an increase in the area of land or building occupied by a use or an increase in the number of occupants or dwelling units." In this case the Inspector has determined that roomers at the property at 428 E. Jefferson Street would be the enlargementlexpansion of a nonconforming use. As noted above the single family home on this property was converted to a duplex in 1976 when the property was zoned R3A. The property does not currently contain, nor did it contain, sufficient lot area or parking spaces to allow a duplex under the R3A zoning or under the current R/O zone. Although there is some question as to whether even the duplex status of this property was legally established, the Inspector is recognizing it as a duplex, and is permitting each unit of the duplex to be occupied by a family, which may include two unrelated persons, but roomers are not allowed. In order to find that the use of this property as a duplex with the right to roomers is not an enlargement/expansion of a nonconforming use, the Board would have to find that the roomers were legally established. The fact that the property does not contain sufficient lot area or parking spaces is clear evidence that it is not currently conforming with the R/O zone requirements nor was it conforming to the requirements of the CB-2 zone or the R3-A zone that previously applied to this property. It appears to be the applicant's position that this property has had a history of being rented to 5 unrelated occupants (2 in the second floor unit and 3 in the first floor unit) and therefore the City should continue to allow 5 unrelated occupants. This would only be the case if the use of the property as duplex with roomers was legally established. However, the Senior Housing Inspector has determined that the provisional use of the property for roomers was never legally established and therefore may not legally continue. For this property the maximum permitted occupancy for unrelated persons is two persons per unit. Based on the zoning code this has been the maximum occupancy permitted for several years. Although the actual occupancy over the years may have exceeded what has been permitted by zoning, this excess occupancy is not permitted by the nonconforming provisions of the zoning code. To allow roomers in this case would be an expansion of a nonconforming use contrary to Section 14-6T-3 A. 4 Maximum densities are set by the zoning ordinance to prevent overcrowding, to assure that each dwelling has sufficient open space and to control the level of demand on City services and infrastructure. The R/O zone allows a relatively high level of density for Iowa City of 24 units per acre. The current use of 428 E. Jefferson Street has a density equivalent to 26 units per acre and therefore exceeds the permitted density (in 1976 when this duplex was established, the permitted density was 17 units per acre). In such nonconforming situations, it is important that the limitation on the number of roomers is upheld. To allow additional roomers would compound the nonconforming density situation. Although allowing roomers at 428 E. Jefferson Street may appear insignificant, to do so would grant this property special privileges not enjoyed by other property owners in the R/O zone. Granting of this appeal might also lead to appeals from other property owners throughout the city whose properties exceed the legal maximum occupancy permitted by zoning, housing and building codes. With the recent establishment of Informational Disclosure and Acknowledgement Form, the City and many property owners are discovering that properties have been exceeding the number of occupants legally permitted by City Codes. Such properties are required to come into conformance rather than continue a level of occupancy that is not allowed by codes. To allow properties to exceed these maximums would undermine the intent of the zoning ordinance. FINDINGS: Staff finds that: The property at 428 E. Jefferson is nonconforming with respect to lot area requirements of the R/O zone. The minimum lot area per residential unit in the R/O zone is 1800 square feet or 3600 square feet for two units. The subject property contains only 3320 square feet. The property is nonconforming with respect to minimum number of parking spaces. A duplex is required to have 4 parking spaces. This property has only 1 parking space. The provisional use allowing roomers was never legally established for this property. After considerable deliberation the City Council adopted requirements for Informational Disclosure and Acknowledgement Form and instructed the Housing and Inspection Department to enforce existing zoning, building and housing codes. Uniform enforcement of these codes has led to the identification of properties that are over occupied and are now being required to comply with City ordinances. Special rights should not be granted to certain property owners merely due to the fact that they or previous property owners exceeded the number of lawfully permitted occupants in the past. CONCLUSION: Based on the above findings, staff concludes that in making his determination that the occupancy of 428 E. Jefferson street does not provide for roomers, the Senior Housing 5 Inspector correctly applied Section 14-6T-2 A, Regulation of Non -Conforming Uses, General Provisions and Restrictions, Continuance of Unlawful Uses, which states "Nothing in this Chapter shall be interpreted as authorization for the continuance of the use of a structure or land established unlawfully in violation of the zoning regulations in effect prior to the effective date hereof." The provisional use of roomers on this property was never legally established. The Inspector also has correctly applied Section 14-6T-3 A, Regulation of Non - Conforming Uses, Enlargement or Alteration, which states, "No nonconforming use shall be enlarged nor shall a structure for a nonconforming use be constructed, reconstructed, structurally altered or relocated on the lot." Section 14-613-2, Zoning Definitions, defines enlargement as, "an increase in volume of a building, an increase in the area of land or building occupied by a use or an increase in the number of occupants or dwelling units." Allowing the establishment of roomers on this property would be an enlargement of a nonconforming use. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the denial of APL04-00002 an appeal of the decision of the Senior Housing Inspector pertaining to the occupancy determination of property located at 428 Jefferson Street. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Appeal 3. November 26 letter from Senior Housing Inspector S2�Approved by: ve,4dt� Karin Franklin,/Director Department of Planning an Community Development Cf7 0 9mirl,:11m■m'mffi j - 0 APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ZONING CODE INTERPRETATION PANEL Title 14, Chapter 6, Article W - 2A DATE: February bill , 2004 PLICANT: Name: Steve L. Droll Address: Phone: CONTACT PERSON: Name: Address: 123 N. Linn St., Suite 300, Iowa City IA 52245 1 Pho Specific Requested Action: Reversal of an occupancy determination by the City of Iowa City Department of Housing and Inspection Services regarding 428 E. Jefferson Street. There has been no enlargement of a use at that location. A copy of the occupancy determination is attached. Dated: February �, 2004. GG. H cs GA re e C7 4 Fri 75 \\Server\shared\WPDOCS\LITIGATE\DrollBrennemanAppealtoBdofAdj wl, _qww, , CITY OF 10 WA CITY Department of Housing and Inspection Services 410 Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 November 26, 2003 Holland & Anderson 123 N. Linn St. P.O. Box 2820 Iowa City, IA 52244-2820 RE: 428 E. Jefferson Street Dear Joe: This letter is in response to your request for an explanation of the City's occupancy determination at 428 E. Jefferson Street. 428 E. Jefferson Street is a duplex with 3, 320 sq. ft. of lot area in an RO zone. Section 14-613-12- C-2 of City Code states "dwellings located on the ground floor shall be permitted in buildings constructed prior to January 1, 1993, subject to the dimensional requirements of the RM-20 zone". The RM-zone requires 1, 800 sq. ft. of lot area per unit. Therefore the use is non -conforming due to insufficient lot area. Non -conforming uses are regulated by 14-6T of the City Code. 14-6T-3A states, "no non -conforming use shall be enlarged". Each unit at 428 E. Jefferson Street is permitted a family or two unrelated persons. Increasing occupancy by installing additional parking for roomers, a provisional use, is considered by the City an enlargement of a non -conforming use. Therefore the maximum occupancy for each unit at 428 E. Jefferson Street is a family or two unrelated persons. Cor i ally Norm Cate Senior Housing Inspector 356-5137 norm-cate@iowa-city.org 0 ru C' C7� rn co 71 D� o 0 STAFF REPORT To: Board of Adjustment Item: EXC04-00002, 2140 Rochester Avenue GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Contact Person: Requested Action: Purpose: Location: Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Applicable code sections: File Date: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Prepared by: Jessica Hlubek Date: March 10, 2004 Regina Catholic Education Center 2140 Rochester Avenue Iowa City, IA 52245 Alan Opheim Phone: 337-2580 Approval of a special exception to permit the expansion of a religious institution in the RS-5 zone. To allow the construction of a one-story addition with four classrooms; a two story building with kitchen, multi -purpose room, restrooms, and classrooms; and a 43- space parking area. 2140 Rochester Avenue Property size: 41.21 acres 1-story addition: 3,936 square feet 2-story addition: 17,500 square feet Regina School; RS-5 North: Hickory Hill Park; P South: Commercial & Residential; CN-1, RS-5 East: Residential; RS-5, RM-12 West: Residential; RS-5 14-6D-2D(2), Permitting a religious institution in the RS-5 zone; 14-6L-1 O, Additional regulations for religious institutions February 12, 2004 The applicant, Regina Catholic Education Center, would like to construct a 48' x 82' one-story addition to the current west wing of the facility. This one-story addition will contain four 2 classrooms. In addition, the applicant wishes to construct a 100' x 175' two-story addition to the northwest corner of the existing building in an area currently occupied by a parking lot. This addition will contain a kitchen, multi -purpose room, restrooms, and classrooms. Replacement parking will be provided in the graveled area currently located to the northeast of the existing parking lot. A special exception (EXCO2-00014) was granted for the two-story addition and replacement parking in 2002. At the time this special exception was granted, the dimensions for the proposed two-story building were 100' x 154' (2,100 square feet smaller than the current proposed size). A religious institution, including a school, can only be expanded in the Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5) zone with approval of a special exception. The proposed addition is considered to be an expansion of a religious institution. The Regina Catholic Education Center is therefore requesting approval of a special exception to allow construction of the addition. ANALYSIS: The purpose of the zoning chapter is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare, and 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 chapter 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 relief from the requirements of the zoning chapter through a special exception if the action is considered to service the public interest and is consistent with the intent of the zoning chapter. Specific Standards: 14-6D-21)(2), Permitting a religious institution in the IRS-5 zone 14-61-4O, Additional regulations for religious institutions According to the Iowa City zoning chapter, a religious institution is defined as an organization having a religious purpose which has been granted a federal tax exemption as a Section 501(C)(3) organization under the Internal Revenue Code, including churches, rectories, meeting halls, schools and the facilities related to their use. Section 14-4D-2D(2) provides that a religious institution may be established or expanded in the RS-5 zone by special exception, subject to meeting the additional requirements for religious institutions set forth in Article L of the zoning chapter. The applicant meets these additional requirements as follows: 1. Religious institutions shall have access to arterial or collector streets, or streets having paving wider than 28 feet. The Regina campus has access to Rochester Avenue, an arterial street with a pavement width of 33 feet. The access requirement is met. 2. The code requires a minimum lot area of 40,000 square feet. The Regina property is approximately 41.21 acres in size, well over the minimum size requirement. 3. The minimum setback requirement for religious institutions is "two feet of horizontal distance for each foot of building height measured between the nearest point of any lot line and the nearest point from which the height is measured" (Subsection 14-6L- 1O(2)(b)). The larger proposed addition is at the northwest corner of the existing building near the rear of the property. The setback requirement is clearly met for .this portion of the building. The smaller proposed addition is on the west wing of the building, which extends closer to the lot line than other parts of the building. This addition will be the same height as the existing west wing, or approximately 12 feet. The site plan provided with the application allows a 24' setback that just meets the setback requirement. 3 General Standards: 14-6W-213, Special exception review requirements The applicant's statements regarding each of the seven general standards are included within the attached application. Staff comments on these standards are set forth below, and correspond to the standards as lettered in subsection 14-6W-2B of the City Code. a. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. The proposed expansion of the existing school facilities should not endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare provided that drainage is directed to Ralston Creek and away from the neighborhood located to the west of the property. As noted below future expansions beyond what is proposed today, may create traffic concerns that will need to be addressed. 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. See item a. above. The proposed additions are additions well setback from adjacent residential properties and will only be visible from homes on Woodridge Avenue. 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. See items a. and b. above. d. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. There have been drainage problems in the residential subdivision located to the west of Regina. To help assure that the proposed construction does not create additional problems, staff recommends that as a condition of approval of this special exception, it be required that all drainage be routed to Ralston Creek at the north end of the property. The method of directing storm water run off will need to be illustrated on the site plan prior to the issuance of a building permit. Other than access roads, which are discussed below, all other necessary facilities appear to be adequate. e. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. Regina currently has two driveways that provide vehicular access from Rochester Avenue. The City regularly receives calls from Regina parents and school administrators complaining about the difficulty entering and exiting the Regina property. This occurs particularly during the morning peak traffic period when Regina students from throughout the community arrive at school at the same time that the morning peak traffic rush hour is occurring on Rochester Avenue and First Avenue. The installation by the City of a center left -turn lane on Rochester Avenue was in direct response to a request for such an improvement from Regina officials, and it has improved traffic conditions on Rochester Avenue considerably. However, the intersection of First Avenue and Rochester Avenue continues to be a concern during the 4 morning peak traffic period. As Regina expands and generates additional traffic, these congested traffic conditions will continue to worsen. According to the applicant, the proposed additions to Regina will allow it to serve its current enrollment better, rather than increasing the capacity of the school. If this is the case the approval of this special exception should not result in a significant increase in traffic. However, future expansion of the school is of concern unless there is a plan to address ingress an egress to the property. As noted in D.5 of their application form, Regina is researching the possibility of a future driveway between the school site and First Avenue. However because of topographic conditions it may be difficult to install a driveway to First Avenue. Such a driveway would relieve much of the congestion, which occurs at the intersection of First Avenue and Rochester Avenue, as well as the school driveway intersections on Rochester Avenue. A motorist traveling to Regina from the north on First Avenue would be able to avoid the First Avenue/Rochester Avenue intersection entirely if a driveway was installed between the school site and First Avenue. Such a driveway has been discussed by Regina officials for many years but has never been installed. Staff is recommending approval of this special exception at this time with out the requirement for the driveway, but we wish to emphasize that any future additions to the school that would result in increased traffic should not be approved unless the applicant provides a traffic study (conducted by a traffic engineering specialist) that demonstrates that the additional traffic can be adequately accommodated, and that addresses the issue of the driveway to First Avenue specifically. Staff believes that information should be forthcoming from Regina as to whether or not the driveway between the school site and First Avenue is really feasible or not. f. 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. Parking: Parking required in this case depends on the number of classrooms being added and what grade levels will be using the classrooms. Elementary and junior high classrooms require two spaces per classroom while high school requires ten spaces per classroom. The four classrooms added to the west wing of the existing building will be elementary classes. The five classrooms in the 2-story addition could potentially be either junior high or high school classrooms according to the applicant. The following parking space information is based on staff calculations and information provided by Regina with previous special exception applications: Existing parking: Existing required parking: Existing 'surplus' parking: Parking eliminated by proposal: Parking created by proposal: Parking required by one-story addition 191 spaces (including 6 handicap) 151 spaces (including 3 handicap) 40 spaces 41 spaces (including 2 handicap) 43 spaces 8 spaces (4 elementary classrooms x 2 spaces per classroom) Parking required by two-story addition: 50 spaces (5 junior/senior classrooms x 10 (if all classrooms are senior high classrooms) spaces per classroom) Total Parking required (including addition): 209 spaces Total Parking provided (including addition): 193 spaces 5 The proposed parking is short of complying only if all five classrooms in the 2-story addition are senior high classrooms. If this is the case, the extra parking spaces required will be provided in a 32-space future parking area located adjacent to the currently proposed replacement parking. At the time the building permit is issued the Building Official will make the determination regarding the final number of required parking spaces based on the proposed use of the classrooms at that time. Fire Access: The proposed two-story addition is located in an existing parking area and fire access drive. This will result in the loss of the fire access to the west wing of the Regina facility. In accordance with the Fire Code, emergency vehicle access must be provided for at the time of site plan approval, unless the fire marshal approves an alternative safety plan. The Fire Marshal is working with Regina to design such an alternative plan, which may include a requirement that portions of the building be served with a fire suppression system. As a condition of approval, staff recommends that the Fire Marshal approve an emergency vehicle access plan or alternative fire safety plan prior to the issuance of a building permit. g. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. The Comprehensive Plan designates the Regina property as being appropriate for a school site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that EXC04-00002, a special exception for expansion of a religious use in the Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS-5) zone at 2140 Rochester Avenue, be approved conditioned upon: 1) the Fire Marshal's approval of an emergency vehicle access drive or alternative fire safety plan and 2) the site plan shall illustrate how storm water will be directed north to Ralston Creek. Although staff is not recommending that a driveway to First Avenue be required at this time, we would like to emphasize that any future additions to the school that would result in increased traffic should not be approved unless the applicant provides a traffic study (conducted by a traffic engineering specialist) that demonstrates that the additional traffic can be adequately accommodated, and that addresses the issue of the driveway to First Avenue specifically. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Site plan 3. Applicant letter Approved by: Av_` P11- 41 - Robert Miklo, Senior Planner, Department of Planning and Community Development ®' SITE KEY PLAN KEY 5GEMLE ®��� p b. ®..o,...,�..� ED SI TE ,X0 o - z APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTi a-D P SPECIAL EXCEPTION 2� TITLE 14, CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE W DATE: February 10, 2004 PROPERTY PARCEL NO. APPEAL PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2140 Rochester Avenue APPEAL PROPERTY ZONE: RS-5 APPEAL PROPERTY LOT SIZE: 41.21 Acres APPLICANT: NamcRegina Inter -Parish Catholic Edu 2140 Rochester Avenue Address: Iowa City, IA 52245 Phone: 319-337-2580 CONTACT PERSON: Name: Alan ftheim Phone: G PROPERTY OWNER: Name: Same as Above 7y C� Address: Phone: 7 Specific Requested Special Exception; Applicable Section(s) of the Zoning Chapter: ition Center 7e 14-6L-1-0 14-6D-2 To allow for a 4 classroom one story addition and Purpose for special exception: a new two story building with kitchen, multi-purpo; room, restrooms, and classrooms. Also provides for replacement parking. Site is northwest corner near existing building. Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any: August 14, 2002 -2- INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANT: A. Legal description of property: Lot 1, Regina Subdivision, Iowa City, Iowa, according to the "Corrected Final Plat", in Plat book 32, Page 103 of the records of the Recorder for Johnson County, Iowa. 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 line';= c=a - n 4. Abutting streets and alleys; C-) 5. Surrounding land uses, including the location and record own& -i 6T eaM property opposite or abutting the property in question; 1 6. Parking spaces and trees - existing and proposed. [*Submission of an 8'/z" x 11" bold print plot plan is preferred.] cn 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. The proposed 1001xl75' two story building will be located in a area currently occupied by a parking lot on the northwest corner of the existing building. Replacement parking will be in a current gravel area northwest of the existing parking lot. The one story 48'x82' four classroom addition will be an extention of the current west wing. These buildings and lot will comply with the special exception requirements of the zoning code. The exception allows Regina to continue building usage as a school for the property in a RS zone as has been the case for over 40 years. D. The applicant is required to present specific information, not just opinions, that the general standards for the granting of a special exception (Section 14-6W-2132, City Code), enumerated below, will be met: 1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare. The exception will not change the use of the property. The building project will be beneficial as it will increase the size of the kitchen prep and serving areas, complying with all safety codes. Classrooms will allow for a permanent home for roaming teachers, and may provide for additional course offerings for our students. -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. The building project would be located on the property such that it would be seen by only a few property owners. The design will be such that the addition will blend with the remainder of the building. 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. The proposed building will not in any way impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property. Most property surrounding is already developed or is parkland. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Architectural and Engineering Consultants are reviewing current codes and requirements. Any needs will be provided. New hard surface parking replaces lost parking as part of the project. _aa 1 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingre5r� or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. cn We are designing driveways and future driveways with this in mind. We will encourage traffic flow which will get traffic on and off the city street as smoothly as possible. A future driveway providing access to an easement with First Avenue access is being researched for future development. -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 14-6R, Tree Regulations, as appropriate.] To our knowledge, we will conform with all other applicable provisions of the zoning ordiance. This includes previous city requirements for setbacks as follows: 2 feet for each 1 foot of building height. 7. The proposed use will be consistent with the short-range Comprehensive Plan of the City. It is our understanding that the proposed project and lot is consistent with the short and long range comprehensive plan of Iowa City. 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: NAME ADDRESS SEE ATTACHED LIST OF PROPERTY OWNERS. ITT c✓ 71 cn -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. Date: 20 ©`/ Date: , 20 ppdad min\appboasepckt. pdf Regina Inter —Parish Catholic Education Center !�-4?el... Signature(s) of Applicant(s) Alan D. Opheim Director — Finance & Operations Signature(s) of Property Owner(s) if Different than Applicant(s) R E G I N A INTER -PARISH CATHOLIC EDUCATION CENTER 2140 Rochester Ave. Iowa City, IA 52245 February 27, 2004 Board of Adjustments % Iowa City's City Hall 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 RE: ZONING EXEMPTION FOR REGINA INTER -PARISH CATHOLIC EDUCATION CENTER Bob Miklo has suggested that I write to provide additional information regarding the additions being proposed to Regina, especially as it relates to traffic flow and use. In many respects, the additions will allow us to ease the overcrowding of our kitchen and cafeteria. It will also allow us to assign mobile teachers to a specific classroom so their desk is not a portable cart. While this does take care of our immediate needs, it is also true that we are looking at what this space allows for the future. Our current Elementary School with three sections allows for approximately 75 students per class. At 7 grades (K-6) our population maximum is 525 students with the current enrollment at 490. For grades 7-12, we still figure our maximum level is 75 students per class or 450. We currently have 408 students in the Jr/Sr High. At our current enrollment we do not percieve reaching the maximum enrollment for the next several years. To help ease some of the concern of traffic on Rochester, the drive around loop will be one-way (after the parking rows), two lanes. This should allow for more cars on our property in the critical time period after school when parents are picking up their students. Two other issues which we acknowledge and have passed information to our architects, Vantage Point, LLC, are the drainage issues connected with the Elementary School addition and the Fire Code issues. We have informed the architects that all drainage must be towards Ralston Creek per direction of Robert Miklo. In addition, Vantage Point has been and continues to be in communications with the Fire Marshall and/or Chief regarding code requirements and acceptable standards. It is the current intent to spinkler the hallway of the Elementary School, in addition to sprinklering the four new classrooms at the end of the existing wing. There will also be an outside fire hose hook-up for fire department use. If there are other concerns we may address, please contact Greg Duffey, TJ Brandt, or myself. Sincerely, Alan D. Opheim `� Director - Finance/Operations