Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-09-2005 Board of AdjustmentAGENDA IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING WEDNESDAY, February 9, 2005 — 5:00 PM EMMA J. HARVAT HALL A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Consider the January 12 Meeting Minutes D. Special Exceptions: 1. EXC05-00001 Discussion of an application submitted by Craig Farlinger for a special exception to allow for the separation of two non conforming parcels into two residential lots for property located in the Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS- 5) zone at 1518 Crescent Street. 2. EXC05-00002 Discussion of an application submitted by Allan Berger for a special exception to allow the operation of a small animal veterinary clinic on property located in the Commercial Office (CO-1) zone at 3030 Northgate Drive. E. Other: 1. Consider an extension of the expiration date for EXC04-00016 a special exception to permit Transient Housing in the Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Southgate Avenue and Waterfront Drive 2. Board of Adjustment Orientation/Training F. Board of Adjustment Information G. Adjournment NEXT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING — March 9, 2005 MINUTES DRAFT IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 12, 2005 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL-IOWA CITY, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Karen Leigh, Vincent Maurer, Michael Wright MEMBERS ABSENT: NONE STAFF PRESENT: Robert Miklo, Sarah Holecek OTHERS PRESENT: William Gorman, James Clark, Tim Holman, Glenn Siders CALL TO ORDER: Vice chairperson Maurer called the meeting to order at 5:07 PM. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Alexander nominated Maurer as the chairperson. Wright seconded the nomination. All in favor. Wright nominated Alexander as the vice chairperson. Leigh seconded the nomination. All in favor. CONSIDERATION OF THE DECEMBER 8. 2004 BOARD MINUTES MOTION: Alexander moved to approve the minutes from December 8, 2004. Wright seconded the motion. Motion passed 4:0. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: EXC04-00028 Discussion of an application submitted by Systems Unlimited, INC. for a special exception to permit a school of specialized private instruction on property in the General Industrial (1-1) Zone at 2433 South Scott Boulevard. Miklo said that the proposed use is a school of specialized private instruction which is noted as a special exception in the 1-1 Zone. He said that the special exception must be in accordance to the general standards. Miklo said that the specific proposed exception should not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. He added that the proposed exception should 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. Miklo mentioned that operations at the Systems Unlimited facility consist of a combination of administrative office functions, staff training and vocational and life skills training for persons with disabilities, including some training for light industrial work. He added that such operations provide beneficial services to the community and pose no danger to the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Miklo continued by saying that the establishment of the specific proposed exception should 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. He said that the proposed school Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes January 12, 2005 Page 2 would not affect the industrial uses in the zone. He added that the opposite might be a concern, but the applicant is aware that going into an industrial zone, those conditions are present. Miklo stated that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. He said that the existing facilities are enough to provide service to the new building. Miklo said that adequate measures should be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. Miklo said that staff recommends a condition that driveway location be approved by the City at the time of site plan review to ensure adequate site distance and safe turning movements onto Scott Boulevard, an arterial street. He added that only one access point will be allowed for this lot. i Miklo said that except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is located. He mentioned that it will be required to conform to all requirements when they seek the building permit, so it would be in conformance with the 1-1 requirements. Next, Miklo said that the proposed use should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. He said that the General Industrial Zone is specifically written to allow for schools of specialized instruction as long as the proposed use does not interfere with the primary uses intended for this zone. He added that as stated above, the impact of the proposed use, traffic, and congestion anticipated for the proposed facility is unlikely to negatively affect other uses permitted in the zone. Miklo said that staff recommends that EXC04-00028, a special exception to permit a school of specialized private instruction on property in the General Industrial (1-1) Zone at 2433 South Scott Boulevard, be approved, provided that the following conditions are met: 1. only one access point to the subject lot from Scott Boulevard is allowed 2. unless the existing direct street access to the US West facility will be used as an access drive for the proposed use, this existing access must be closed 3. to ensure adequate site distance and safe turning movements to and from Scott Boulevard, the location of any new access drive must be approved by the City. Public Hearing Opened Bill Gorman, 1556 South 1st Avenue, Suite 1, Iowa City, said that they are comfortable with the conditions set forth by staff. He added that they had a similar exception approved in July 2001 in the same zoning classification. He said that the new site at 2433 South Scott Boulevard came available and would provide a better match for the type of use they have. He added that there would be fewer industrial neighbors around, so the noise would be less. Public Hearing Closed MOTION: Wright moved to approve the special exception EXC04-00028, a special exception to permit a school of specialized private instruction on property in the General Industrial (1-1) Zone at 2433 South Scott Boulevard, be approved, provided that the following conditions are met: 1. only one access point to the subject lot from Scott Boulevard is allows Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes January 12, 2005 Page 3 2. unless the existing direct street access to the US West facility will be used as an access drive for the proposed use, this existing access must be closed 3. to ensure adequate site distance and safe turning movements to and from Scott Boulevard, the location of any new access drive must be approved by the City. Alexander seconded the motion. Alexander said that she would vote in favor of the application. She said that that it will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, the proposed exception would not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The establishment of the specific proposed exception would 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, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Adequate measures would be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. She mentioned that adequate utilities, drainage and access are in place, and it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Maurer said that he would vote in favor of the application. He said that all general standards have been met and have been indicated in the motion. Leigh said that she would vote in favor for the reasons already stated. She said that Systems provides a great service for the community. She said that the general standards are met. Wright said that he would vote in favor. He said that it meets the general and specific standards. Motion passed 4:0. EXC04-00029 Discussion of an application submitted by James Clark for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-20) zone at 932 East Washington Street. Miklo suggested that since this and the next item on the agenda is similar that the board will deal with them at the same time rather than independently. EXC04-00030 Discussion of an application submitted by James Clark for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-20) zone at 924 East Washington Street. Miklo said that the applicant is seeking a special exception to allow balconies and entrance porches to be applied to these two buildings. He presented illustrations with the location of the buildings, and the proposed plan. He said that the buildings are currently fairly close to the property line, and the applicant is seeking a reduction of the front yard to allow the additions. He said that for a special exception such as these, the Board needs to find that there is a peculiar situation, and a practical difficulty to comply with the ordinance as written. Miklo mentioned that staff does believe that there are two peculiar situations associated with these properties. He said that they are both very large building comparing with most of the surrounding properties. He added that the large scale of the buildings make them somehow peculiar in that neighborhood. He added that the right of way is much wider than usually found, Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes January 12, 2005 Page 4 and this ads to the peculiar situation. He said that with these two peculiarities the staff believes that the proposed exception do meet the specific standards. He said that these buildings could be left as they are, but the Comprehensive Plan supports modifying these buildings to make them more compatible with the smaller buildings in the neighborhood. Miklo said these two properties are located in a Conservation District Overlay zone that requires the Historic Preservation Commission to approve exterior alterations. Miklo continued by saying that the establishment of the specific proposed exception should 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. He said that the surrounding properties are currently developed. He added that many buildings in that block are located closer to the sidewalk than the proposed additions to these buildings, and staff found that neighboring properties should not be negatively affected. He added that most importantly it meets the test of complying with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Miklo said that staff recommends that EXC04-00029 and EXC04-00030, applications for special exceptions to reduce the required front yard from 10 feet to 6 feet 4 inches in the areas indicated on the site plans for additions to the existing buildings in the Neighborhood Conservation (RNC-20) zone located at 924 and 932 Washington, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plans submitted with the application and subject to approval of the elevation drawings by the Historic Preservation Commission. Public Hearing Opened James Clark, 414 East Market Street, said that they are trying to get rid of the stereotype of the apartments' mansard roofs. He said that by having the additional 3 foot they could put porch, and balconies. He said that the new look would open the apartments for people. The patios are small, and they can not have parties out there. He added that they are more for design than for being functional. Public Hearing Closed MOTION: Alexander moved that EXC04-00029 and EXC04-00030, applications for special exceptions to reduce the required front yard from 10 feet to 6 feet 4 inches in the areas indicated on the site plans for additions to the existing buildings in the Neighborhood Conservation (RNC-20) zone located at 924 and 932 Washington, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plans submitted with the application and subject to approval of the evaluation drawings by the Historic Preservation Commission. Leigh seconded the motion. Wright would vote in favor of the applications. He said that it does meet the general standards, He said that that specifically, he does not believe that it will be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, the proposed exception would not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The establishment of the specific proposed exception would 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, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Adequate measures would be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. He mentioned that adequate utilities, drainage and access are in place, and it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes January 12, 2005 Page 5 Alexander would vote in favor. She said that it is a unique situation in the fact that these are big buildings surrounded by smaller size buildings and that there is a large right-of-way so that the buildings are currently set back further from the street than usual. Maurer would also vote in favor. He said that the general standards have been met, and these changes would enhance the value of these properties. Leigh said that she would vote in favor for the reasons already stated. Motion passed 4:0. EXC04-00031 Discussion of an application submitted by James Clark for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-12) zone at 517 Fairchild Street. Miklo said that it is similar to the previous application to install porches and balconies. He presented photos with the area, the location of the building, and the proposed changes. He said that the building is located 10 feet from the front property line. He added that there is a peculiar situation in the sense that it is a fairly large apartment building located within an area of smaller single-family homes. He added that the applicant's proposed remodeling would help provide more architectural articulation and thus break up the mass of the building to make it more compatible in appearance with the existing buildings in the neighborhood. Miklo said that the property did not conform to all of the requirements of the zoning code as required for special exceptions. He said the property lacked screening of the parking lot and a public sidewalk. Miklo recommended that this be required as a condition for approval. Staff recommended that EXC04-00031, an application submitted by James Clark for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-12) zone at 517 Fairchild Street, be approved, subject to general conformance with the elevation drawings and site plans submitted with the application and installation of a hedge along the east side of the parking lot and a sidewalk adjacent to North Market Square. Public Hearing Opened Clark, said that the properties to the north are almost to the sidewalk. He said that when the project would be done these buildings would look wonderful in comparance with how they are now. Leigh asked if the new additions would give all the apartments access to one balcony. Clark answered that all apartments would have a balcony attached. Tim Holman, 420 Fairchild Street, said that he has concerns about nine balconies being only about 6 feet from the sidewalk. He said that he lived in the neighborhood for 10 years, and he spent a lot of time walking in the neighborhood. He said that with 9 balconies on a warm evening there would be a lot of parties in the balconies. He said that it would be possible to have parties on most of the balconies, which represents a detriment to the neighborhood because there would be noise and litter. He added that he is also concerned about stuff falling down from those balconies. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes January 12, 2005 Page 6 Clark said that they have a clean-up crew that goes everyday and cleans the buildings. He said that there are already balconies on the back of the building, so it should be a similar situation. He said that they control the balconies. He added that there could be at most 3 persons on the balconies at the same time. He said that if there would be a problem, neighbors should call and complain, and measures would be taken. Holman said that Clark might not always own the building, and be in control of it, and being so close to the sidewalk might be a danger for people. He said that he would prefer to have the litter and the noise inside the apartment rather than on the outside. Public Hearing Closed MOTION: Leigh moved that EXC04-00031, an application submitted by James Clark for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-12) zone at 517 Fairchild Street, be approved, subject to general conformance with the elevation drawings and site plans submitted with the application and installation of a hedge along the east side of the parking lot and a sidewalk adjacent to North Market Square. Alexander seconded the motion. Wright would vote in favor of the application. He said that in terms of the specific standards, these would be small balconies, and would not endanger the public health, safety, comfort and general welfare. He said that he appreciates the concerns raised. The balconies are small and should not increase the noise. He said that the proposed exception would not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The establishment of the specific proposed exception would 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, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Adequate measures would be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. She mentioned that adequate utilities, drainage and access are in place, and it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Alexander would also vote in favor. She said that it is weighing the improvements versus the potential concerns about increased noise and party level. She said that she agrees that it would not have a particular effect. Maurer said that he would vote in favor. He said that this would enhance the value of the property, and the addition of the sidewalk would be a plus. Leigh would also vote in favor. She said that she truly appreciates the concerns. She said that she also had a concern about things falling from the balconies. However the balconies would be very small and would improve the appearance of the building. Motion passed 4:0. EXC04-00032 Discussion of an application submitted by James Clark for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-12) zone at 333 East Church Street. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes January 12, 2005 Page 7 Miklo said that the application is similar to the previous in the sense that the property is 10 feet from sidewalk. The applicant would like a reduction, and the resulting front yard would be 8 feet 8 inches if the setback reduction is allowed. He added that there is a peculiar situation in the sense that it is a fairly large apartment building located within an area of smaller single-family homes. He said that this building could not be remodeled with balconies if the special exception is not approved, and the Comprehensive Plan supports remodeling of these types of buildings to try to get them to fit into the surrounding neighborhood. Staff recommends that EXC04-00032, an application for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-12) zone at 333 East Church Street, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plans submitted with the revised elevations drawings. Public Hearing Opened Clark said that he would like to improve that building. He said that these four building were the last four that would need improvement. Public Hearing Closed MOTION: Alexander moved that EXC04-00032, an application for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-12) zone at 333 East Church Street, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plans submitted with the revised elevations drawings. Leigh seconded the motion. Alexander would vote in favor of the application. She said that it is a peculiar situation, a big building in a neighborhood with small buildings. There is a practical difficulty in trying to meet the needs of the City's Comprehensive Plan by trying to make the buildings fit better in the character of the neighborhood. She said that that it will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, the proposed exception would not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The establishment of the specific proposed exception would 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, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Adequate measures would be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. She mentioned that adequate utilities, drainage and access are in place, and it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Maurer said that he would vote in favor for the reasons already stated. Leigh would vote in favor. She said that she believes that there is a peculiar situation and a practical difficulty. Wright would vote in favor for the reasons already stated. It is a peculiar situation, it meets the general and specific standards, and it would be beneficial for the neighborhood. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes January 12, 2005 Page 8 Motion passed 4:0. EXC04-00033 Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard setback from 20 feet to 9.5 feet to allow an addition to an existing building located in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 1905 Broadway Street. Miklo said that this application is somehow similar to the others in the sense that it is also done for aesthetic reasons as the shopping center is being remodeled. He said that it is a peculiar situation there is an extra wide right of way, and even with the reduction of the yard this building would set back at considerable distance from the Highway 6 pavement, as well as the trail which is located in front of the property. Staff recommends that EXC04-00033 an application for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard setback from 20 feet to 9.5 feet to allow an addition to an existing building located in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 1905 Broadway Street, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plan dated December 16, 2004. Public Hearing Opened Glen Siders, PO Box 1907, said that he would be available if there are any questions from the board. Public Hearing Closed MOTION: Wright moved that EXC04-00033 an application for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard setback from 20 feet to 9.5 feet to allow an addition to an existing building located in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 1905 Broadway Street, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plan dated December 16, 2004. Leigh seconded the motion. Leigh would vote in favor of the application. She said that it meets the general standards. She said that that it will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, the proposed exception would not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The establishment of the specific proposed exception would 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, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Adequate measures would be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. She mentioned that adequate utilities, drainage and access are in place, and it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Maurer would also vote in favor for the reasons already stated. Alexander would also vote in favor for the reasons already stated. Wright would vote in favor of the application. He said that it is a peculiar situation, and it meets the specific and general standards. Motion passed 4:0. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes January 12, 2005 Page 9 OTHER: NONE ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 6:17 PM. Board Chairperson Minutes submitted by Bogdana Rus. s:/pcd/minutes/boa/2005/01-12-05.doc Board Secretary O O N N O\ O N O O O 0000 O M r O 00 O O tn O M O ON O M O O N O N O 00 O l- 110 ON �( O \ O \ O \ O \ O \ O O O O O •�, Iwo �cod z od0�a... 0 z > rTl �xoo ; STAFF REPORT To: Board of Adjustment Item: EX05-00001. 1518 Crescent Street GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Requested Action: Purpose: Location: Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Comprehensive Plan: Applicable Code requirements: File Date: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Prepared by: Robert Miklo Date: February 9, 2005 Craig Farlinger 113 3rd Street West Liberty, IA 52776 Phone: 631-4793 Approval of a special exception to divide an existing lot of record of from an adjacent parcel To allow the construction of a single family home on a lot of record previously combined with an adjacent property due to single ownership. 1518 Crescent Street 12,500 square feet (6,250 square feet per lot) Residential; RS-5 North: Residential; RS-5 South: Residential; RS-5 East: Residential; RS-5 West: Residential; RS-5 Residential, 2-8 dwelling units per acre. 14-6T-5, Regulation Lots: 14-6W-2 B2 review standards. January 5, 2005 of Nonconforming special exception Raymond Alberhasky owns a single-family dwelling located at 1518 Crescent Street. The property consists of two nonconforming lots of record. Both parcels measure 50 feet by 125 feet and contain 6,250 square feet. However, both parcels are located within the RS-5, Low Density Single - Family Residential Zone, which requires a minimum of 60 feet of lot width and 8,000 square feet of lot area. The lots do not meet the dimensional requirements of the RS-5 zone. City Code section 14-6T-5C states that when a nonconforming lot of record becomes in single ownership with an adjacent parcel, both parcels are considered to be a single parcel in terms of 2 the enforcement of the Zoning Chapter, and they cannot be legally split or sold separately. Since both lots are currently under the same ownership the two lots of record are now considered to be one 12,500 square foot lot for zoning purposes. The intent of this provision is to discourage the development of lots that do not meet the dimensional requirements of their respective zones and are not large enough to accommodate development. There is a provision within the nonconforming lot regulations (14-6T-5D) by which the two lots could again be split into separate parcels to allow the construction of a single-family home, if approved by the Board by special exception. The applicant, Craig Farlinger, has offered to purchase this property from the current owner, subject to the City approving the reestablishment of two zoning lots. The applicant is requesting approval of a special exception to split the nonconforming lots of record located at 1518 Crescent Street to re-establish two lots and to allow the construction of a single-family home on the vacant parcel. The existing home at 1518 will remain. 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 the requested special exception only upon finding that the request meets the general special exception standards contained in City Code section 14-6W-2B, as well as any specific standards contained within the Zoning Chapter pertaining to the regulation of nonconforming lots of record — 14-6T-5. 14-6T-5, Regulation of Nonconforming Lots: As discussed above, the property located at 1518 Crescent Street is a nonconforming lot of record which fails to meet the current requirements of the RS-5 zone in terms of lot width and lot area. Since it is held in single ownership with the adjacent parcel, the two lots are considered to be one parcel in terms of enforcement of the Zoning Chapter, and cannot be sold or built upon as if they are separate parcels. This is due to section 14-6T-5C, which applies to nonconforming lots and reads as follows: If two (2) or more abutting lots or portions thereof become in single ownership, the land involved shall be deemed a single parcel for the purposes of this Chapter, and no portion of said parcel shall be sold or used in a manner which diminishes compliance with lot frontage, width and area requirements. The next provision of the nonconforming lot regulations (14-6T-5D) then provides for the possibility of re-establishing a lot of record through the approval of a special exception, as follows: In cases where a lot of record has become a single parcel as set forth in subsection C of this Section, the Board of Adjustment may grant a special exception to permit a single- family dwelling and accessory buildings to be installed on the lot of record, notwithstanding a failure to meet the requirements of the zone for lot area or lot width, provided the granting of the specific requested exception results in appropriate, compatible development with surrounding residential development, the lot of record is at least forty feet (40') in width, and the request meets all of the requirements of this Chapter, including set -back and frontage requirements. (Ord. 98-3834, 6-16-1998). Therefore, for the Board to approve this application, the applicant must meet the specific standards contained within Section 14-6T-5D: 1) the special exception applies only to the construction of a single-family dwelling and accessory buildings; 2) the applicant must 3 demonstrate that the resultant development will be appropriate and compatible with its surrounding neighborhood; and 3) the applicant must demonstrate that all other requirements of the zoning Chapter can be met on the lot. 1) Single -Family Dwelling: The applicant has indicated that if this application is approved he intends to sell the newly established lot to Habitat for Humanity who would build a new single- family home. The existing home at 1518 Crescent Street would be retained by the applicant who plans to repair it and sell it at a latter date. Both lots would comply with the requirement that the lots be used only for single-family homes and permitted accessory uses. 2) Appropriate, Compatible Development: The applicant has submitted building plans of houses that Habitat for Humanity has built in other locations in Iowa City. The plans demonstrate how a single-family dwelling could be designed to fit within this neighborhood. The proposed house is a ranch style house similar to many of the existing houses in the surrounding neighborhood. To allow more flexibility in the event that the lot is sold to another party, the Board's approval could be subject to staff review of alternative plans to ensure neighborhood compatibility. Staff recommends that if the submitted plan is not built, that alternative building plans be reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning and Community Development prior to the issuance of a building permit to ensure that the new single-family residence is appropriate and compatible within this neighborhood. 3) Other Zoning Chapter Requirements: The applicant has submitted sample building plans which indicate that a single-family home can be constructed on this lot while still meeting the required setbacks. With the exception of lot area and lot width, it appears that all other requirements can be met on the property. 14-413-413, General Special Exception Standards: As stated above, before granting a special exception, the Board must be satisfied that the general special exception standards contained in City Code Section 14-46-413 will be met. The applicant's statements regarding this standards are contained in the attached special exception application. Staff generally agrees with the applicant's statements, and offers the following comments: 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 addition of one single-family dwelling in this neighborhood should have little or no impact on nearby properties. There are a number of other lots in the area of a similar size. 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. Like the other properties in this neighborhood, the new lot would have access to the alley located to the east of Crescent Street. A curb cut onto Crescent Street is not needed. Staff recommends that as a condition of approval future vehicular access to these two lots be restricted to the alley. 7. The proposed use will be consistent with the short-range Comprehensive Plan of the City. The Comprehensive Plan designates Crescent Street and the surrounding area as being appropriate for single-family homes at a density of 2-8 dwelling units per acres. The plan also encourages compact neighborhoods that have housing available in a variety of price ranges. In 4 staff's view this proposal complies with these goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. SUMMARY: The intent of the City's nonconforming lot regulations is to discourage the development of lots that do not meet the dimensional requirements of the Zoning Chapter and would not accommodate development in a manner appropriate for the surrounding neighborhood. However, the Zoning Chapter also recognizes that some of these existing lots could be developed in a manner that is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and provides a process for that to occur. Staff feels that this may be one of those situations. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the approval of EXC05-00001, a special exception to allow the re-establishment of two 50 x 125 foot lots of record located at 1518 Crescent Street subject to the following conditions: 1) The single-family dwelling constructed on the lot substantially conforming with the attached plans provided by the applicant, or, in the event that alternative plans are submitted, the plans being subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning and Community Development to ensure development that is appropriate and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood; and 2) That vehicular access to the two lots be restricted to the alley and no driveways be permitted to Crescent Street. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location map 2. Special exception application. Approved by: Karin FYanklin, Director, Department of Planning and Community Development ppdadm i n\stfrep\exc04-00009.doc =k H O O O O CY m is 1oai�1 — w > W Q = o U W O a� � is ,�bModode Q z 0 � o O u u w a� c U N U co T LO 1T -EA- D5- obw l APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ,� SPECIAL EXCEPTION TITLE 14, CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE W DATE: l — 3 — O \4 PROPERTY PARCEL NO. APPEAL PROPERTY ADDRESS: 15 (? Crl.SC yyf 9+. APPEAL PROPERTY ZONE: 19 Z— S_ APPEAL PROPERTY LOT SIZE: SO C APPLICANT: Name: r rc i A ;;w ti v�Ga ✓ Address: Ili �rol , . Phone: 11-(3( g793 CONTACT PERSON: Name: 0 A wo 3k,\. e_ 0 Address: M-7 Kkok VS+ . „ j� . Phone: (`3 '• 32- �- �� i 5 Q� 3 51 $ yS PROPERTY OWNER: Name: 'IE -iF Address: cri • +- m., Phone: c� Specific Requested Special Exception; Applicable Section(s) of the Zoning Chapter: Purpose for special exception:To SeQe-rC&A:f.. MIL()y �C ►ria l � .(�Sict� 3 �ntd-S 1 e TTiYi'11 7 0 bui of, f, rc s C de kv e 0n UIvf 5 &-'-'hYC4-. /S VOL can�-. Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any: Aj La -2- INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANT: A. Legal description of property: Lo +-S Jt ? . . . u - 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 dines; 4. Abutting streets and alleys; 5. Surrounding land uses, including the location and record o*sk, of -aach 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. ?%.s nx AV'1tii 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. AOK&L Svc 11 in-juje a.,-, lur c�_-q <- sd -z4a�, -4�,p.s OL�P^C-at_ 0 0 la in "W - -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. ItriiL i ra _ _ r\ , _ �, A . . v , - . . .. it H 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. � a�in.hk Q I —Q it Afk4 /�� I. �. �D FAO , . A. n+S • - Ro� !-2 74.� � -0 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. WA 427-SYM V v RHO[ YO ' Sf 0 rope �-F- Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide Ingress iVegress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. 'r _ ..`.1 —, r\3 CD 51 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 14-60, Dimensional Requirements, or Section 14-611, Tree Regulations, as appropriate.] "inn widi T. The proposed use will be consistent with the short-range Comprehensive Plan of the City. av( f 14- /A_S l 'MnCvl J-'0 ko. ,v 2 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 G _ cn (59 JAN-04-2005 TUE 10:34 AM IOWA REALTY I0 FAX NO. 3193546432 P. 02102 01,/0$/2005 MON 14: 12 FAX RC A XURL IOWA CITY Im 002/002 NOTE: Condigoils. In permitting a spacial 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, Ilmltatlon'e 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 14-6W4133, City Code). ,0144M Unless otherwlse 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 Claris, unless the applicant shall have taken action within the six (6) month period to establish the use or construct the building permitted under the terns of the Board`s decision, such as by obtaining a building pemit and proceeding to completion In accordance with the terms of the penult. Upon written request, and for goad cause shown, the Board may extend the expiration date of any order without Anther public hearing on the merits of the original appeal or application. (Section 14-6W-31:, City Code). Mtlon for writ of Cortiora . 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 certlorad duly verified, setting forth that such decision Is illegal, in whole or -in part, and specifying the grounds of the Illegality. (section 14.8W-7, City Code). Such petition shag be presented to the court within thirty (3o) days after the tiling of the decision In the office of the City Clerk, Date..1-5 , 20AS SI r s) of Applicant( Dom: ) " .. 2005 Slgnat (s) of Property tywner(s K Different than Applicant(s) . ppdaddhlappboase.doc t� (7) c - :. CA iso Av 9-�:9b:g 5007/7/7 6MP'Agnn6'FFnq\nnna\ :n 0 13r :Cq pe�Ioaqo WDP u(q uMDup s(q p0u61c0pmi eI 'Allo 1&oI 'uo?�?PPS p?sxuuns 'g SlooiH '9 v 9 30'I a •01111 POi 0. ^ coNVId 9 1z o N 15 m $ ' m 6 0 o z M o a � o = UZB—LSi (M) DMOI '4110 DMOI 'axj `saxrs�nsxoo S� Hsls :091 10045 ..N o o 0 N L06Z 19C 6l2 XVJ 6t68 /M� 6lC 3NOHd VMOI J 110 VMO1 S-bZZS VI 'xilo vmol 3Ad 1S3KJ3a 609 AIINVwnH IdOd IVIISVH ABIIVA VM01 ��N�QIS�211`d119bH og � 9 STAFF REPORT To: Board of Adjustment Item: EXC05-00002 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: Robert Miklo Date: February 9, 2005 Allan Berger 3005 Highway 1 NW Iowa City, IA 42240 Ralph Stoffer 535 Southgate Avenue Iowa City, IA 42240 3541984 Approval of special exception For a small animal clinic in the Commercial Office (CO-1) zone. 3030 Northgate Drive. 87,120 square feet. Vacant — CO-1. North: Agricultural — ID-ORP South: Vacant — CO-1 East: Agricultural — ID-ORP West: Vacant — CO-1 14-6E-1 D 9, Requirements for small animal clinics in the CO-1 zone; 14- 6W-2 B2 special exception review standards. January 12, 2005 Allan Berger, applicant, requests Board of Adjustment approval to establish a small -animal clinic in the Commercial Office (CO-1) zone at 3030 Northgate Drive. A small -animal clinic is permitted in the CO-1 zone only through the granting of a special exception. If the special exception is approved, Dr. Berger intends to construct a building on this property for his clinic. 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 the requested special exception if the requested action is found to be in accordance with the regulations of the Section 14-6E-1 D 9 pertaining to small animal clinics within the CO-1 zone and the general standards for special exceptions as set forth in Section 14-6W-2B. Specific Standards: 14-6E-1D 9, Permitting Small -Animal Clinics in the CO-1 Zone The Zoning Ordinance allows small -animal clinics in the CO-1 zone by special exception if certain provisions are met: 1) all aspects of the operation of the clinic, including any accessory use, must be conducted completed indoors within a single, soundproofed building, 2) the structure housing the clinic cannot be located within 200 feet of a residential zone, and 3) no odors or noise from the clinic shall be discernible from any lot line. These provisions are all intended to lessen the impact of a small -animal clinic within the low intensity, Commercial Office (CO-1) zone and on any neighboring commercial or residential uses. Provision 1) The application indicates that there will one building constructed on this property for the purpose of the small animal clinic. The applicant is aware that no aspects of small animal clinics are permitted outdoors. The applicant will need to verify with the Building Official that the building will be sound proofed. Provision 2) The secondprovision is clearly met; the structure that is intended to house the clinic is more than 200 feet from a residential zone. Provision 3) The property is approximately 2 acres in size. The clinic is proposed near the center of the property. This should provide sufficient buffer space between the clinic and future office uses that may be built on adjacent properties. General Standards: 14-6W-213, Special Exception Review Requirements The applicant's comments regarding each of the general standards are included on the attached application form. Staff comments related to the general standards are set forth below. 1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. If the required provisions for small animal clinics are adhered to, there should be no adverse effect. 2. The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. If the specific standards for small -animal clinics outlined above, including interior containment of the operation, soundproofing and odor control are met, the small - animal clinic should prove compatible with neighboring businesses. 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. See # 2 above. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Northgate Corporate Park has been designed to provide areas for office development. The proposed small animal clinic presents no unusual characteristics that would not be accommodated by the current infrastructure. 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. See # 4 above. 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. The proposed site plan shows compliance with the dimensional requirements of the CO-1 zone. A conditional zoning agreement requires an 8 foot wide sidewalk on this property. It is shown on the site plan. At the time of site plan approval by the Building Official the applicant will need to demonstrate compliance with street tree and parking area tree requirements. 7. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended. The Comprehensive Plan designates this area as being appropriate for an office research development center. If the specific standards for small -animal clinics outlined above are met, the small -animal clinic should prove compatible with neighboring office -related businesses. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that EXC05-00002, a special exception to permit a small -animal clinic in the CO-1 zone for property located at 3030 Northgate Drive be approved, provided that the applicant demonstrates to the building official that the portion of the building containing the clinic will be soundproofed. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location map 2. Application Approved by: Karin Franklin, Direct r Department of Planning and Community Development aqW APPEAL TO THE Exc�b ' " BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT —SPECIAL EXCEPTION TITLE 14, CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE W za)-- DATE: January 12,40eif PROPERTY PARCEL NO. 1 0736428001 APPEAL PROPERTY ADDRESS: 3030 Northgate Dr.; Iowa City, IA 52240 APPEAL PROPERTY ZONE: CO-1 APPEAL PROPERTY LOT SIZE: 87,120 s.f. APPLICANT: Name: Allan Berger Address: 3005 Highway 1 NE; Iowa City, IA 52240 319-351-4256 Phone: CONTACT PERSON: Name: f-0. Ralph S toffer Address: 535 Southgate Ave.; Iowa City, IA 540 - Phone: 319-354-1984 PROPERTY OWNER: Name: Southgate BP Properties LLC Address: c/o Ms. Teresa Morrow, Vice Presi�nt IA 52246 755 Mormon Trek Blvd.; Iowa City, Phone: 319-337-4195 Specific Requested Special Exception; Applicable Section(s) of the Zoning Chapter: 14-6E-1D.10 Purpose for special exception: Construct a building to be used in part as a small animal veterinary clinic, and operate said clinic. Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any: None. -2- INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANT: A. Legal description of property: 1243--10 HIGHLANDER DEVELOPMEN T 3RD ADDITION LOT 10 (Plat Book 44, Page 215). B. *Plot plan drawn to scale showing: 1. Lot with dimensions; Attached. 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 8'/2" x IV 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-2B1, City Code). The Applicant intends seek a site plan approval and building permit for construction of a freestanding building on this 2.0 acre lot. At least a part of the new building would be occupied by a small animal veterinary clinic, operated by the Applicant. The subject property is zoned CO-1. The Special Exception qualifications on a "small animal clinic" in the CO-1 zone are described in Section 14-6E-1-D.10, and we provide assurance that these qualifications will be met in this project. Specifically, all aspects of the veterinary clinic and accessory uses will be indoors (there will be no outdoor runs). There is no residential zone within 200 feet. The facility will be designed to minimize noise and odor. 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-2B2, 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. We anticipate no public safety concerns from this operation. -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. This 2.0 acre lot provides sufficient space that we do not expect any neighbors or adjoining users will be adversely affected. The building being planned will generally conform to the construction standards of existing buildings on Northuate Drive. 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. This project will not impede development. There are additional vacant lots in the subdivision containing the subject property. All adjacent lots are currently owned and/or managed by Southgate Development Company. Representatives from Southgate Development believe this project will not adversely affect their ability to sell and/or develop the other lots. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Adequate utilities and access exist. Drainage modeling will be performed in a site plan application which would precede application for a building permit. 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. The clinic will have access to Northgate Drive, a city street. This street leads to the newly signalized intersection with North Dodge S treet/Iowa Highway 1. The signalized intersection has adeqg;�te capacity. -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 14-6L-1, Special Exception Enumerated Requirements; Section 14-6N-1, Off -Street Parking Requirements; Section 14-60, Dimensional Requirements, or Section 14-6R, Tree Regulations, as appropriate.] 14-6L-1-L: There will be no animals kept outdoors. There are no dwellings within 400 feet. 14-6N-1-J.2-m,n: Parking will be provided pursuant to the requirements. 14-6Q: Dimensional requirements will be followed. 14-6R: Trees will be provided according to this section. 7. The proposed use will be consistent with the short-range Comprehensive Plan of the City. M.y The clinic is a commercial office use consistent with the short - range Comprehensive Plan. -a 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 Southgate BP Properties LLC c/o Ms. Teresa Morrow, Vice President PO Box 1907 Iowa City, IA 52244-1907 The Dean & Ellen Jones Revocable Trust c/o Southgate Development Co., Inc. PO Box 1907 Iowa City, IA 52244-1907 Paul & Alice Fuhrmeister 3329 Lynden Heights Rd. NE Iowa City, IA 52240 -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-2133, 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: J �" 20 Date: ppoaamimaopboasepcxt. paf 20 _ Signature(s) of Applicants) Signature(s) of Property Owner(s) if Different than Applicant(s) r� 77 — a g O Z w SEC Ma - M I= "0 S 4c II �c + + `* ' a s�eiu► Oulu g g $ � ' ,o r v ' x n*fin v r � g lueuseeva ABNWsdOL 1 8 ' k ao °- -M N --- �-lQ-'� A9 luewen�ed �8Z � � ZE WWI IM)HIHON �i w,� SeWedad uYN � Wd Y d8 GM04PVS IM' City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: February 10, 2005 To: Board of Adjustment From: Robert Miklo Re: EXC04-00016 Shelter House Shelter House has requested an extension of their special exception for transient housing. Section 14-6W-3 E requires that steps be taken to establish a special exception within six months of the Board decision being filed with the City Clerk. For good cause the Board may extend the expiration date. In the attached letter, Shelter House requests that an extension be granted for a period six months following the conclusion of pending litigation. Shelter House Community Shelter & Transition Services FEB — 3 2005 s Vincent Mauer Chairman of the Iowa City Board of Adjustments 410 East Washington Street. Iowa City, IA 52240 February 3, 2005 Dear Chariman Maurer and Members of the Iowa City Board of Adjustments: I am writing to you at this time to request an extension from the Iowa City Board of Adjustments of the decision made by the Board to award a Special Exception to Shelter House as filed with the City Clerk on August 3, 2004. Please accept this letter as written verification of our request. It is the understanding of Shelter House that an applicant may be awarded an extension given good cause. In the case of Shelter House good cause is demonstrated by the fact that the decision made by the Iowa City Board of Adjustments to award a Special Exception to Shelter House is in litigation —specifically Petitions for Certiorari filed by Hilltop Mobile Home Court, Bontrager Auto Service, Inc. and other parties against the Iowa City Board of Adjustment. Shelter House has intervened in this litigation and the litigation is pending. Shelter House would appreciate written confirmation of the granting of this extension and respectfully requests that the extension continues for six months following the conclusion of the pending litigation including any appeals. I thank you for your consideration of this request. Should you have any questions regarding this request, please contact me at (319) 338 -5416 ext. 102. Sincerely, Christina M. Canganelli Executive Director, Shelter House Cc Tim Krumm Bob Miklo 331 North Gilbert Street • P.O. Box 3146 • Iowa City, Iowa 52244-3146 - 319-351-0326