HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-14-2010 Board of Adjustment1!/;'''pl
CITY OF IOWA CITY
IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
5: 15 P.M.
Emma). Harvat Hall
STAFF REPORTS
CITY OF IOWA CITY
Department of Planning
& Community Development
AGENDA
IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 — 5:15 PM
CITY HALL — EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
A. Call to Order
B. Roll Call
C. Consider the March 10, 2010 Board Minutes
D. Special Exceptions:
EXC10-00001: An application submitted by Jeff Clark for a special exception to allow
off -site parking in a municipal parking facility to satisfy the minimum parking
requirements for a mixed use building to be constructed in the Central Business
(CB-10) zone at 225 South Gilbert Street.
EXC10-00002: An application submitted by Quality Associates for a special
exception to reduce the minimum off-street parking requirements for a business
located in the General Industrial (1-1) zone at 2630 Independence Road.
EXC10-00003: An application submitted by Yasser Gaber for a special exception to
allow a Vehicle Repair use to be located in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone
at 1911 Keokuk Street.
E. Board of Adjustment Information
F. Adjourn
NEXT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING: May 12, 2010
STAFF REPORT
To: Board of Adjustment Prepared by: Sarah Walz
Item: EXC10-00001 Date: April 14, 2010
225 South Gilbert Street
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant: Jeff Clark
414 East Market Street
319-631-1867
Property Owner: Three Guy's Holdings, LLP
414 East Market Street
Requested Action: Off site parking for property in the CB10
Purpose: To provide off -site parking for residents of a
new mixed use building.
Location: 225 S. Gilbert Street
Size: 6,000 square feet (75 x 80)
Existing Land Use and Zoning: Vacant, CB-10
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Mixed Use (commercial/residential)
CB-10
South: Mixed Use (commercial/residential)
CB-10
East: Robert A. Lee Recreation Center, P1
West: Mixed Use (commercial/residential)
CB-10
Applicable code sections: Minimum Parking Requirements (14-5A-4);
Alternative to Minimum Parking
Requirements: Off -Site Parking (14-5A-4F-1),
General Criteria for Special Exceptions (14-
46-3).
File Date: March 15, 2010
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The applicant is proposing to construct a five -story, mixed use building in the Central Business (CB-
10) zone. Off -Street Parking is required for residential uses located in the CB-10 zone. The
residential portion of the building will consist of 16 apartments. Based on the number of bedrooms
per apartment, the minimum for the building is 24 spaces. The applicant is able to provide 8 parking
spaces on site, and is requesting that the remaining 16 spaces be provided in the Chauncey Swann
municipal ramp. The ramp is located on College Street approximately 500 feet to the northeast of
the subject property.
There are 475 spaces in the Chauncey Swann Ramp: 400 permits are issued for spaces and 75
remain open. Not all permitted spaces are used regularly. Nearly all permits expire on an annual
basis. The number available for renewal or sale is based on an analysis by the Director of
Transportation Services. The Chauncey Swann Ramp is only rarely filled to capacity.
Prior to 2009 there were no parking requirements for residential uses in the CB-10 zone, and
developers who wanted to provide parking on site could do so only through the special exception
process. The restrictions on private parking in the code at that time were intended to discourage the
development of private parking in the district in order to encourage more intensive and valuable land
uses. However, as the demand for downtown apartments grew, parking was simply not provided and
so residents competed with shoppers and other commercial users for available downtown parking or
spilled over into the residential neighborhoods adjacent to the downtown.
The zoning code was amended in December 2008 in order to provide management of the growing
demand for residential development in the downtown. In order to encourage both residential and
commercial uses in the Central Business District, the City established minimum parking
requirements for residential uses. The goal of the code amendments was not to limit residential
development in the downtown, but to ensure that adequate parking be provided for these uses. For
this reason the code allows that parking spaces may be provided on or off -site, including a provision
to allow 100% of parking for small developments to be located in municipal parking structures.
The Board of Adjustment may grant a special exception to allow off-street parking to be located on a
separate lot, provided that the conditions listed in the zoning code are met.
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 of Adjustment may grant the requested special exception to allow establishment of the
off -site parking in the CB10 zone if the requested action is found to be in accordance with the
regulations of the Sections 14-5A-4F-1 as well as and the general standards for special exceptions
as set forth in Section 14-413-3A.
Specific Standards: Alternatives to Minimum Parking Requirements (14-5A-41)
Off-street parking may be located on a separate lot from the use served according to the following
rules. When the proposed off -site parking is located in a Residential Zone or in the CB-10 Zone or
intended for a use in the CB-10 Zone, the Board of Adjustment may grant a special exception for the
proposed parking, provided the conditions contained in subparagraphs a. through g. are met.
a. Special Location Plan
A special location plan must be submitted with the application for off -site parking. The location
plan must include a map indicating the proposed location of the off -site parking, the location of
the use or uses served by the parking, and the distance and proposed walking route between the
parking and the use(s) served. The map must be drawn to scale and include property boundaries
of any Intervening properties. In addition, documentation must be submitted providing evidence
deemed necessary to comply with the requirements herein.
Staff finds that the applicant has satisfied the criterion for the following reasons:
• The applicant has submitted an aerial view showing the location of 225 South Gilbert in
relation to the Chauncey Swann Ramp.
• The ramp is located approximately 500 feet from the entrances to the proposed building.
• Residents would travel approximately one half block north on Gilbert, crossing the street at
the controlled intersection of College and Gilbert. The ramp entrance is located approximately one
half block east of Gilbert on College Street.
b. Location of Off -site Parking
In Residential and Commercial Zones, no off -site parking may be located more than 300 feet
from an entrance of the use served, except as allowed in subparagraph e, below, for parking in a
municipal parking facility.
Staff finds that the criterion does not apply to this application for the following reason:
• The proposed off -site parking is located in a municipal ramp. (See item a below.)
c. Zoning
Off -site parking spaces must be located in the same zone as the principal use(s) served, or
alternatively, off-street parking may be provided on a separate lot within the parameters of the
following pairings.
Staff finds that the criterion does no apply for the following reason:
The proposed parking is located in a municipal parking facility. (See item a below.)
d. Shared Use of Off -Site Parking
Staff finds that the criterion does no apply for the following reason:
• The applicant is not proposing to "share" parking with another use.
e. Off -Site Parking Located in a Municipally -Owned Parking Facility
In instances where a use is within 600 feet of a City -owned parking area, up to 50 percent of the
required parking spaces may be provided in the parking facility. When a use abuts a City -owned
parking area, up to 100% of the required number of parking spaces may be provided in the
parking facility. In the CB-10 Zone, up to 100 percent of the required parking number of parking
spaces may be provided in a City -owned parking facility regardless of the distance between the
use and the parking facility. When an applicant requests to provide off-street parking in a City -
owned parking facility, the Director of Planning and Community Development in consultation
with the Director of Transportation Services and the City Manager or designee must substantiate
that with the addition of the requested number paring spaces the capacity of the parking facility
will not be exceeded. In the CB-10 Zone, said parking requested to meet minimum parking
requirements for residential uses may only be approved by special exception and only if there is
capacity.
Staff believes the applicant has satisfied this requirement for the following reasons:
• The subject use is located in the CB-10 zone.
• Although the 600-foot distance requirement does not apply, the subject property is located
approximately 500 feet from the municipal ramp where parking has been requested.
• The applicant has requested 16 spaces for long term rental, and the Director of
Transportation Services has indicated in writing that these 16 spaces are available for long term
rental and that the capacity of the ramp will not be exceeded (see attached letter).
• There are 475 spaces in the Chauncey Swann Ramp: 400 permits are issued for spaces and
75 remain open. Not all permitted spaces are used regularly. Nearly all permits expire on an annual
basis and the number available for renewal or sale is based on an analysis by the Director of
Transportation Services. The Director has indicated that there is available capacity in the ramp at
this time and that more spaces may be made available in the ramp by the time the proposed
building is constructed.
4
f. Approval Criteria
In assessing a special location plan for off -site parking, the Board of Adjustment or Director of
Planning and Community Development, as applicable, will consider the desirability of the
location of off-street parking and stacking spaces on a lot separate from the use served in terms
of pedestrian and vehicular safety; any detrimental effects of adjacent property; the appearance
of the streetscape as a consequence of the off-street parking; and in the case of non -required
parking, the need for additional off -site parking.
Staff believes that the proposed location for off -site parking is appropriate for the following reasons:
• It is in close proximity to the residential use (approximately 500 feet walking distance) with
sidewalks and a controlled intersection connecting the two sites.
• The proposed site is in a municipal ramp in which the parking is designed to provide safe
vehicle access and ingress and egress from the ramp are designed with good visibility.
The ramp is already constructed there will be no change to the area.
g. Covenant for Off -Site Parking
A written agreement between the owners of the parking and owners of the property for which the
parking will serve must be submitted with the application for off -site parking. The agreement
must assure the retention of the parking and stacking spaces, aisles, and drives and be properly
executed, binding upon their successors and assigns, and must be recorded as a covenant
running with the land. The agreement must provide that it cannot be released, and its terms and
conditions cannot be modified in any manner whatsoever, without prior written consent and
approval from the City. The written agreement must be reviewed and approved by the City
Attorney.
The applicant has provided a letter from the Director of Transportation Services indicating that the
16 spaces he has requested will be available for this use on a long-term basis, and the general
terms for the leasing of the space.
Because the off -site location being requested is a City -owned facility, staff recommends that the
applicant submit the required written agreement as part of the building permit application based on
the number of spaces approved by the board. Staff also recommends that the agreement indicate
that the parking permits be offered to residents of the subject property at a rate not to exceed the
market rate determined by the Director of Transporation Services at the time of leasing.
General Standards: 14-4B-3, Special Exception Review Requirements
1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health,
safety, comfort or general welfare.
Staff believes that this criterion is satisfied based on the following:
• The proposed off -site parking is located in a municipal facility that is in close proximity to the
residential use. Pedestrian access (sidewalks) are already established between the two sites and
the crossing at Gilbert and College Streets is a controlled intersection. Ingress and egress from the
parking ramp is designed to be safe and has good visibility to and from adjacent streets.
2. The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in
the neighborhood.
Staff believes that this criterion is met based on the following:
• The location of the off -site parking being requested is within a municipal ramp that is within close
proximity (approximately 500 feet from the property). The use of this facility does not require the
construction of additional parking or facilities or changes to public rights -of -way. While parking
spaces within the municipal facilities are intended primarily for customers and employees of
downtown businesses, the Director of Transportation Services has indicated that there is adequate
capacity for long-term leases for this use.
3. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in
which such property is located.
Staff finds that the application satisfies this criterion based on the following:
• The Director of Transportation Services has reviewed the application and has indicated to staff
that there is more than adequate capacity in the Chauncey Swann ramp to provide the requested
16 spaces without compromising space available for shoppers and other visitors to the downtown.
4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being
provided.
All utilities, access roads, drainage and other facilities are in place to serve the parking facility and
the development of the proposed building.
5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to
minimize traffic congestion on public streets.
Staff believes that the criterion is satisfied for the following reason:
• The municipal facility in which the off -site parking is being requested has safe ingress and egress
to adjacent public streets and is designed to minimize congestion of public streets.
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 municipal parking area meets all applicable standards in the zoning code and is
designed to provide safe and accessible parking. All other aspects of the residential development will
be reviewed by the Building Official as part of the building permit process.
7. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended.
The Comprehensive Plan, drafted in 1997, has the following to say about residential parking demand
in the downtown.:
"Higher density housing in and around the downtown is an issue to be addressed in this district. The
logic of promoting higher density residential development in the Downtown Planning District rests in
the concept that people who live in and near downtown will walk to work (or classes in the case of
University students), will patronize downtown businesses, will add to after hours vitality, and create a
sense of safety in the downtown. Higher density development in the downtown also reduces
pressure on the less dense older neighborhoods surrounding the downtown. However, some
downtown merchants and business owners feel the residential population burdens the parking
system in the district to the detriment of the businesses. The issue will need to be debated and
resolved, setting a clear policy for housing, parking, and redevelopment in the Downtown Planning
District."
Prior to 2009, residential uses in the CB-10 zone were not required to provide parking. In response
to concerns regarding the growing competition for parking in the Central Business District, the City
Council approved the current minimum parking requirements in the zoning code, including the
present special exception criteria to allow off —site parking in a municipal ramp.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of EXC10-00001, an application submitted by Jeff Clark for a special
exception to allow up to 16 parking spaces in a municipal parking facility to satisfy the minimum
6
parking requirements for a mixed use building to be constructed in the Central Business (CB-10)
zone at 225 South Gilbert Street, subject to the following conditions:
• All approved spaces will be provided in the Chauncey Swann Ramp according the terms set
by the Director of Transportation Services; and
• The applicant must submit the required covenant for off -site parking prior to securing a
building permit. The covenant shall include a stipulation that the off -site parking be made available
to residents of the subject property at a cost not to exceed the market rate determined by the
Director of Transportation Services at the time of leasing.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location map
2. Location plan supplied by the applicant
3. Application materials
4. Letter from the director of Transportation Services
Approved by:
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner,
Department of Planning and Community Development
DATE:
APPLICATION TO THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SPECIAL EXCEPTION
PROPERTY PARCEL NO. 1® J Q 4q qQ
PROPERTY ADDRESS: Z ZS s.-, ,% ►, t S F -
PROPERTY ZONE: C J3 --11)
PROPERTY LOT SIZE: 1 X 90
APPLICANT: Name: c'y- k
Address: q 14 E a dav-ke r Si
Phone: 3 ("t - & 3 1 -19 7'
CONTACT PERSON: Name:
(if other than applicant) ? z
Address:
(7)
Phone: -
7:
PROPERTY OWNER: Name: I k1ree. Guy'S H I j i nt,� L L P
(if other than applicant)
Address: Al 9, Mrke.� S{
Phone: 319 - (�3!- 1 � }'
r.�
uI t
Specific Requested Special Exception; please list the description and section number in
the zoning code that addresses the specific special exception you are seeking. If you
cannot find this information or do not know which section of the code to look in, please
contact Sarah Walz at 356-5239 or e-mail sarah-waiz@iowa-city.org.
Purpose for special exception: -h!,rl'-Si .e
yevj mixed uje k"11ji'"w ho C o1'1Ar-w41 fed -
Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any:
-3-
D. General Approval Criteria: In addition to the specific approval criteria addressed in
"C", the Board must also find that the requested special exception meets the
following general approval criteria or that the following criteria do not apply. In
the space provided below, or on an attached sheet, provide specific information,
not just opinions, that demonstrate that the specific requested special exception
meets the general approval criteria listed below or that the approval criteria are
not relevant in your particular case.
1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the
public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare.
ukie Ck �cs -iK lt$Z- Mc- 4
�5e S,4k
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.
11w
� v P"to—, tL iJtc:v,z4i1 cAriCi
c" ' Ll� wt ca t s ►7 {T>Mpt, y 4 1-k- -� i a, 11,,,E O r-e ci ,
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 district in which such property is located.
��+YiY�zil=�4�cf1i% ftF CLv1C1 v—C S+V''O--J'vs
willr..a
�e7
4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary fables -pave'
been or are being provided.
/iG uAcih 'fz �vt�S .SEe► i -+V Ilk Vek_ ct v1 cp !lect�S ;y
-4-
5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress
designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets.
A{.., u /e C
4 % 1tR� C'r f y %J
/� 12 ;!7 cG
I hJ7 r &-s eel"-' 'I)'--es-5
(A? s
icU �t�Y21 fD %%'ilV►ri2�r2.�
p
/`MC-
cdiG . hoc, .
6. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the special
exception being considered, the specific proposed exception in all other
respects conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in
which it is to be located. [Depending on the type of special exception
requested, certain specific conditions may need to be met. The applicant
will demonstrate compliance with the specific conditions required for a
particular use as provided in the City Code section 14-413 as well as
requirements listed in the base zone or applicable overlay zone and
applicable site development standards (14-5A through K))/j -rt
a. SptCikj ,ota tClrl '�Itr% � u_% �7hnfzN _Ck%"Vl l�� �'�11��vtc; IIu.�.{1fJ�ul�c��w.)
r.'"r /-S Ct �U r i� � SO G7 • t1 f C E� �Iu1t- i. 5i`. S,4r v +.f ,
e.. T y /(a ��1�`� aY1� fV bt �Zr\kih�
I { i6cir to -�►u I wJ t4 0 n y . 4 2 Y1 I rYIn j V-tc can
YM r t a{ ids
J �
ovx -aid. +o, i..G.sts crL 'X" bX .scc -.,Aj
rC �D v� t�Qr y iSCtu�clllryC ) 1h Jk[)y "t Zoo .
7. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the
City.
�Z'S , 110 iiC-CcJ L-s e 6H14,js� are c£rty cvC.j Ct.VLJ
� n k1r1jt a b6 i i, -rkL C i e+ o cv,dY'.fv-O, ce re—c
OM pWN'LI IV CErArij rx M-xed LSz �auriGi�Ky lcl!{�1 ��iv
c 6,5ve _
Cc�r�mcz cis j n Y, .
hJ
a
—21
b A e
xf..cf.a:.
—71
i�
-Ysr
t
•Cry
M
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 14-8C-2C-4, 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 14-8C-1 E, 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
14-8C-1F, 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.
A�
Date: I I6Lrc-� Q 2010
Date: , 20 _
ppdadminlapplication-boase.doc
Signature(s) of Applicant(s)
Signatures) of Property Owner(s)
if Different than Applicant(s)
n.a
c
r
c-:1
ti
Johnson, County GIS Online
Pag( of I
Johnson County GIS Online
I 16A- N N, 11
X Overview
�� - i- - « •:•Y- � A 31-
if 1511 01:
25T
5 '4 7� 113 5211 '621
7 2' 1'
513 '�, wr. I
02
n 7 1 B 5174422
213
1�14
3
4 1 , -,q F r, r , I I -
tllz . m 'A,. I -j � 15 602-z'
15
2 1 4 12 1,13 22
U1
02
r. n 1 7�j
220 21 2-8 20 328 4 41,0'
204 1 - - P,
't 3
12C U) 0214.
3� 20
z
AS&
ON 3
E
WASHING"I
529"
7 ine
32 5 511 521-
2,07- 2Y!
1212 12.2 3
223
V3
13 40 8
20
2&
r
505 507 521 t.5
■ 3 iPT 7.
226
2 2 3
5 10 522 227
2 2
mmw R rjj
015
15,
IW429 315 z
26 W. OL
I
3 11" 314
so
2 1.
V320
222 1 331
501 R � � .fi t+
'0
4 0 3
404 2;8
401
------ 4V2
!� 4091.:
0A fli- 2-412..
2j f
7
C05 3
41 Y
08
414
z
4 44 �J 53 19 z
I
F
2 i C '��27 4,L
M 2711ma ;U
r42'97 z
32•
'a 439
433 36
E HARRISON '77 -
4 44
503
5 0 1
-Do 21
5
51
,®4-
12
09
kft* 52
B 0
W 52
'Joh n'son Cou,,n 21
2
4 2 b
3 0
432
34
36
44,
Legend
Legand
Highlighted
Feature
Selected Features
the Buffe r
the Buffe rTa r:g-e t
Political
BGun,daries
Centerlines
Centerline Labels
(7)
htto://www.iohnson-county.com/servlet/com.esri.esrima-P.Esrima-P?ServiceName=icma-DOv&ClientVersi... 3/1 - -21010
to
Alley
-IC
Jeff Clark
414 E. Market St.
Iowa City, IA 52245
Phone (319) 631-1867
E-mail- jeffm .19'(3@yahoo.com
Fax (319) 339-8442
March 3, 2010
Dear Mr. Chris O'Brein (Iowa City Transportation Services Director),
I am requesting to obtain 16 parking stalls in the Chauncey Swan parking ramp. These
stalls will be needed prior to my occupancy in July 2011 for the new commercial and
residential building I am constructing at 225 S. Gilbert Street. I will need these stalls
long term, or as I believe it states in the Iowa City zoning ordinance" in perpetuity". if I
could get a letter back stating that this is ok or not, that would be greatly appreciated, as
I still need to obtain special exception approval for the Iowa City planning department
for the off -site parking. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Jeff Clark
March 24, 2010
Mr, Jeff Clark
414 E. Market Street
Iowa City, IA 52245
Dear Mr. Jeff Clark,
j r
C � ffl
CITY OF IOWA CITY
410 East Washington Slrcct
Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826
(319) 356.S000
(319) 356.5009 FAX
www.ICgov.org
The City of Iowa City has reviewed your request for sixteen (16) parking spaces at the
Chauncey Swan Parking Facility. These spaces were requested in perpetuity to accommodate
Iowa City zoning parking requirements for your proposed development at 225 S. Gilbert Street.
This letter is to inform you that we will be able to accommodate your request for sixteen (16)
spaces at the Chauncey Swan Parking Facility to begin in July of 2011. The rate for these
spaces will be the market rate at the time of leasing. Should any rate increases occur, they will
be applied to these sixteen (16) spaces as well. Final arrangements will be made at the time of
leasing. Thank you for your request and please feel free to contact me if you have any
additional questions.
Sincerely,
Chris O'Brien
Director of Transportation Services
City of Iowa City
STAFF REPORT
To: Board of Adjustment
Item: EXC10-00002
2630Independence Road
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
Contact:
Property Owner:
Requested Action:
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
Applicable code sections:
File Date:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Prepared by: Sarah Walz
Date: April 14, 2010
Quality Associates
5121 Fishwick Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45216
Geoff Franzenburg
Septagon Construction
3500 J. Street SW
Cedar Rapids, IA 52404
319-365-6948
Russell A. Gerdin, Trustee
901 North Kansas Avenue
North Liberty, IA 52317
Reduction of minimum off-street
parking requirements.
To reduce the required parking for
the site from 211 spaces to 142
spaces.
2630Independence Road
33.50 acres
General Industrial (1-1)
North: Industrial (1-1)
South: Industrial (1-1)
East: Industrial (1-1)
West: Industrial (1-1)
Minimum Parking Requirements (14-
5A-4); Alternative to Minimum
Parking Requirements: Parking
Reduction for Other Unique
Circumstances (14-5A-4F-5)
March 17, 2010
The applicant, Quality Associates, is in the process of establishing a packaging facility within a
350,000 square foot building located at 2630 Independence Road. The applicant will use 145,
000 square feet of the building for production area and another 100,000 square feet for
warehouse space. The remaining 105,000 square feet is used as warehouse space for Procter
and Gamble, the company for which the applicant provides packaging services.
The applicant has space on site to provide the 211 spaces and has submitted a site plan
showing that they are able to provide all the parking required. This would require some redesign
of the current site, which is set up primarily for warehouse use. The applicant contends that
approval of this special exception will save the expense of installing parking spaces that would
not be used.
The minimum off-street parking standards in the zoning code require 193 parking spaces for the
production use and an additional 9 spaces for each warehouse area (18) for a total of 211
parking spaces. The applicant is requesting a reduction in the parking requirements from 211 to
142 spaces.
The zoning code provides flexibility to reduce the parking requirement for unique circumstances
according to section 14-5A-4F-5.
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 specific criteria included for Section 14-5A-4F-5 pertaining to Parking Reductions for
Other Unique Circumstances in addition to the general approval criteria for special
exceptions as set forth in Section 14-4B-3A.
The applicant's comments regarding each of the specific and general standards are included on
the attached application form. Staff comments related to the specific and general approval criteria
are set forth below.
Specific Standards (14-5A-4F-5).
Where it can be demonstrated that a specific use has unique characteristics such that
the number of parking or stacking spaces required is excessive, the Board of Adjustment
may grant a special exception to reduce the number of required parking or stacking
spaces by up to 50%.
Staff finds that the application satisfies this criterion for the following reasons:
• The applicant has provided a statement indicating that at peak capacity, the packaging
facility will rely on two shifts of employees, with 95 workers on first shift and 85 workers on
second shift with a one-half hour offset between shifts to control congestion.
• The applicant has indicated that Procter and Gamble's space is for inventory only and
therefore has a limited number of employees present in the facility only on an occasional
basis.
This information indicates that the proposed 142 parking spaces should be sufficient for the
proposed use of this property.
General Standards: 14-413-3, Special Exception Review Requirements
1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public
health, safety, comfort or general welfare.
Staff finds that the application satisfies the criterion for the following reasons:
• Because the proposed reduction will provide nearly 50% more spaces than the maximum
number of employees anticipated during a single shift, and because work shifts are staggered
by one half hour to minimize overcapacity on the site.
• There is sufficient space on site to construct all required parking should the use expand in
the future.
Staff recommends that the applicant be required to land bank this additional space. Land
banking means that the area necessary to locate the parking is set aside and not occupied by
structures so that it is available in the future should the demand for parking on the property
increase. The land banked parking would not have to be paved, striped or landscaped;
therefore the applicant saves the expensive of actually constructing the parking.
2. The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of
other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair
property values in the neighborhood.
Staff believes that the application satisfies this criterion for the same reasons states above under
general criterion 1.
As noted above, staff recommends that the applicant land bank space on the site for future
parking should the use expand such that additional
3. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and
orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in
the zone in which such property is located.
Staff finds that the application satisfies this criterion for the reasons states above under general
criterion 1.
4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or
are being provided.
Staff finds that the necessary utilities, access roads, and drainage are already in place to serve
this industrial area, including the subject site.
5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed
so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets.
Staff finds that the application satisfies this criterion for the following reasons:
• Independence Road is designed for industrial uses and provides access to Highway 6 via a
signalized intersection.
• All access drives for the site are designed to support this level of traffic.
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.
A final site plan for the proposed parking area has not been reviewed by the Building Official to
verify that the proposed 142-space parking area is in compliance with all requirements of the
zoning code. Approval of a final site plan is required in order for the applicant to secure an
occupancy permit for the building.
Staff recommends that approval of the final site plan be a condition of the special exception
7. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended.
The Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as appropriate for industrial uses, however the Plan
does not address specifically the issue of parking reductions or parking requirements.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that EXC10-00002, an application by Quality Associates for a special
exception to reduce the number of required parking spaces within an 1-1 zone from 211 spaces
to 142 spaces, located at 2630 Independence Road, be approved subject to the following
conditions:
• The applicant must land bank an area sufficient to provide the additional 69 spaces that
would ordinarily be required. This area should be indicated on the final site plan.
Final site plan approval by the Building Official for the proposed 142-space parking area.
The parking reduction is limited to Quality Associates and the proposed use of the
property as described in this application.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location map
2. Aerial views of the property
3. Proposed Site Plan
4. Application materials
Approved by: /4�
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner,
Department of Planning and Community Development
o
o
�C
W
0,
N
t"
N
f
f�
f
i
{ I
08 30N30N3dJUNI
.�
tCi
U
_a
af
m
�
'd
'lo w003383
Till
Z
Oavn3anoe isoos
CL
w
H
"
Aerial view of the site.
r��15a�ylgi p ,
��� e�j � i.'... � IIII � �•1 ! 't � •• I a i�h� ;ail !t
1 . fill,
iit a
iil I .I
a
U)
o
a� I
DATE: 3-16-10
APPEAL TO THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SPECIAL EXCEPTION
TITLE 14, CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE W
PROPERTY PARCEL NO. 0919377006
APPEAL PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2630 Independence Rd
APPEAL PROPERTY ZONE: 1-1 APPEAL PROPERTY LOT SIZE: 33.50 acres
APPLICANT: Name: Quality Associates
Address: 5121 Fishwick Drive Cincinniati, OH 45216
Phone: 513-242-4477
CONTACT PERSON: Name: Geoff Franzenburg
Address: 3500 J St SW Cedar Rapids, la 52404
Phone: 319-365-6948
PROPERTY OWNER: Name: Russell A Gerdin, Trustee
Address: 901 N Kansas Ave North Liberty, la 52317
Phone: 319-626-3600
Specific Requested Special Exception; Applicable Section(s) of the Zoning Clatter:
14-5A-1 -�
Purpose for special exception: Reduction in number of required parking sgr`s.
r.
Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any: r n
y:
Dear Geoff...
Quality Associates, Inc appreciates and values our relationship w/ Septagon and the Iowa City community
at large. We are excited by the possibilities and look forward to leveraging the skilled and knowledgeable
workforce in the area. We intend to have all our supplier relationships handled locally from the
outstanding businesses like yours with proven track records and experience. It is paramount we start-up
on time; March 29`h, without delay as we demonstrate to our clients that we made the right to decision to
locate in Iowa City.
We anticipate our initial parking needs for our start-up to go from 40 to 65 spots over the first 4 to 6
months. When we hit peak capability we expect to hit 95 spots. We anticipating running a multiple shift
operation staggering our workforces and demand flow into the lot. ►,,,
_
Should you require further detail or dialogue please do not hesitate to give me a call
!�
Thank -you in advance, _3
F�,;i
ll f` AIR..
Todd Schreibeis
-2-
INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANT:
A. Legal description of property: portion of Lot 33 and 34, Scott -Six Industrial Park
B. *plot plan drawn to scale showing:
1. Lot with dimensions;
2. North point and scale;
3. Existing and proposed structures with distances from property lines;
4. Abutting streets and alleys;
5. Surrounding land uses, including the location and record owner of each property
opposite or abutting the property in question;
6. Parking spaces and trees .existing and proposed.
[*Submission of an 8 Y2" 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-261,
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.
please see attachment
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:
The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the
public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare.
please see attachment
-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 exception is consistent with surrounding uses and similar exceptions
have been approved for adjacent uses.
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.
please see attacment
4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been
or are being provided.
All utilities are existing and adequate for the use.
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 existing access points will be utilizied.
-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: , 20
Date:
20
t Sorr12z1/3z 1 1
SignatVMN of Applicant(s)
Signature(s) of Property Owner(s)
if Different than 4plicarg�p)
1
V � q
RWIMSFORMSTILINMIowa City\Appeal to the Board of Adjustment Special Exception.doc
QUALITY ASSOCIATES IC PROJECTED PARKING
6:30am-3pm
3:30pm-12am
1st shift
2nd shift
Staff
16
Visitors
3
Floor Mgr,
1
1
TL's
9
8
Whse. TL's
1
1
Quality Leads
1
1
Mechanics
3
3
Bldg/GMP
2
2
QI's
5
4
SUBTOTAL
41
20
DL-QA Packers
35
25
D L-Temps
60
60
SUBTOTAL
`95
85
Note: There will be a offset in first and second shift to manage hours and to control congestion
STAFF REPORT
To: Board of Adjustment
Item: EXC10-00003
1911 Keokuk Street
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Prepared by: Sarah Walz
Date: April 14, 2010
Applicant: Yasser Gaber
3410 Shamrock Drive
Iowa City
319-351-1907
319-631-3433
Contact: Hatem Moustafa
1803 Grant Wood Drive
Iowa City
319-631-4921
Property Owner:
Requested Action:
Location:
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
Applicable code sections:
File Date:
BACKGROUND:
Yasser Gaber, Hatem Moustaffa, and Mohammed
Hassanain
Special exception to allow vehicle repair in a CC-2
zone
1911 Keokuk Street
1.46 acres
Vacant (CC-2)
North: Gas Station (CC-2)
South: Commercial (CC-2)
East: Pepperwood Shopping center (CC-2)
West: Commercial (CC-2 and CI-1)
14-46-3A, General Criteria; 14-413-413-23 specific
criteria for Vehicle Repair uses in the CC-2 zone.
March 18, 2010
The subject property is located in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 1911 Keokuk Street.
This property formerly served as an automobile sales lot (Community Motors). The site has been
vacant for more than twelve months and thus any new use locating on the property constitutes a
change of use. A change of use requires the owner/applicant to bring the site into compliance with
all requirements of the zoning code.
The applicant proposes to use a portion of the lot for a vehicle repair service. Vehicle repair uses are
allowed in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone by special exception. The applicant plans to add a
vehicle sales area and convenience store (food mart) in addition to the offices for the Five Star Taxi
service. All three of these uses are allowed by right in the CC-2 zone.
The purpose of the CC-2 zone is to provide for major business districts to serve a significant segment
of the total community population. While CC-2 zones are typically characterized by indoor operations,
the zoning code does provide flexibility for limited outdoor activities, such as those associated with
vehicle repair uses, provided that outdoor operations are screened or buffered to remain compatible
with surrounding uses.
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 specific
criteria included for Section 14-413-413-23 pertaining to Vehicle Repair uses in the CC-2 zone in
addition to the general approval criteria for special exceptions as set forth in Section 14-46-3A.
The applicant's comments regarding each of the specific and general standards are included on the
attached application form. Staff comments related to the specific and general approval criteria are set
forth below.
Specific Standards (14-46-4E-5).
a. The property containing the Vehicle Repair Use must be located at least 100 feet from any
Residential Zone boundary, except in the CB-2 zone.
Staff finds that the application satisfies this criterion for the following reason:
• The nearest residential zone, which is the RM-12 zone located south of Southgate Avenue, is
located more than 600 feet from the subject site.
b. No vehicle shall be stored on the property for more than 45 continuous days.
Staff believes that the application satisfies this criterion for the following reason:
• The applicant has stated in his application that no vehicles will be stored on the site for more
than the allowed 45 days. Storing vehicles beyond 45 days would be a violation of the zoning code
and would be subject to enforcement by the Building Official.
c. The site must be designed to minimize views of the vehicular use areas from the public right-of-
way and from adjacent properties:
(1) Outdoor storage areas, including storage of vehicles to be repaired, must be concealed
from the public view to the extent possible. If it is not feasible to conceal the storage
areas behind buildings, the storage areas must be set back at least 20 feet from any
public right-of-way, including public trails and open space, and screened from public view
to at least the S3 standard. (Descriptions of screening requirements are attached.)
Staff believes that the application satisfies this criterion along the Keokuk Street right-of-way for
the following reason:
• The site plan submitted with this application shows that the storage area for the
Vehicle Repair Use is located to the rear of the property, behind a portion of the building.
Staff believes that the application does not satisfy this criterion north of the vehicle storage area
where the parking stalls are located for the following reasons:
The vehicle storage area is in view of the Highway 6 right-of-way and the adjacent
property; and
Parked cars are not always present to provide the sense of separation of screening
between the storage area and the adjacent property and Highway 6, and S2 (low) landscape
screening is insufficient to screen the vehicle storage area.
Staff recommends that S3 (tall) landscape screening be provided in this area in order to satisfy
the criterion.
(2) Other vehicular use areas that abut the public right-of-way, including parking and stacking
spaces, driveways, aisles, and service lanes, must be set back at least 10 feet from the
public right-of-way and landscaped according to the S2 standard.
Staff believes that the application satisfies this criterion for the following reason:
The submitted site plan shows the required 10-foot setback from the public right-of-
way on both sides of the entryway drive along with the appropriate S2 and S1 landscape
screening within the setback area. (The code requires S2 screening in the setback to the
north of the drive entrance in order to screen the parking are; S1 screening is required south
of the drive entrance for screening in the area of outdoor display area.)
(3) All outdoor storage areas that abut the other properties must be fenced to the S5
standard and screened to at least the S3 standard. Landscape screening must be located
between the fence and the abutting property. The landscape screening may be waived by
the Board of Adjustment (in the case of a special exception) or by the Building Official,
upon presentation of convincing evidence that a planting screen cannot be expected to
thrive because of intense shade, soil conditions, or other site characteristics. The
presence of existing pavement, by itself, shall not constitute convincing evidence.
City staff has requested that the applicant omit the required S3 (tall) landscape screening along
the west (rear) property line, which is in the precise area where a sanitary sewer and easement
are located. If City crews need to maintain or repair the sewer, any evergreens would need to be
removed. Therefore, staff recommends that the Board waive the requirement for the landscape
screening, on the condition that a 6-foot high S5 opaque fence or wall along the west side of the
vehicle storage area will provide adequate screening for this area.
If the applicant installs the required S5 fence/wall within the sanitary sewer easement, Staff
recommends that the Board require the applicant enter into an agreement that the City would not
be responsible for repairing or replacing any portion of the fence that might be damaged during
maintenance or repair the sewer line. In lieu of such an agreement the applicant should be
required to install the fence outside the sanitary sewer easement.
Staff believes that the application satisfies this criterion in the area along the west and south
property lines for the following reason:
The submitted site plan shows the required S5 solid fence/wall screening along the
west and south sides of the vehicle storage area where it abuts neighboring properties.
• The addition of S3 (tall) landscape screening along the parking stalls to the north of
the vehicle storage area will provide effective screening from the neighboring property and
right-of-way.
General Standards (14-413-3)
1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health,
safety, comfort or general welfare.
Staff believes the application can satisfy this criterion based on the following:
The applicant is required to bring all areas of the site into compliance with the zoning code, including
the landscaped 10-foot setbacks to separate the vehicle use and display areas from the public right -of
way; design of drives, aisles, and required parking; pedestrian access from the public right-of-way, and
curb cuts for the vehicle entrance to the site. The purpose of these requirements is, in part, to ensure
the safe movement of vehicles and pedestrians on and across the site.
• Staff believes that the submitted site plan shows compliance with most of the elements of the
zoning code, but that a final review by the Building Official will ensure that all areas of the site are in
compliance with code requirements. Staff recommends that the approval of a final site plan be a
condition of the special exception.
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.
Provided that the applicant provide the recommended S3 (tall) landscape screening along the property
line to the north of the vehicle storage area, staff believes that the applicant satisfies this criterion for
the following reasons:
• The vehicle storage area is located to the rear of the site and behind the building, effectively
screening it from view from the Keokuk right-of-way.
• The submitted site plan shows the required S5 opaque fencing necessary to screen the vehicle
storage area from adjacent properties to the west and south. Staff recommends that the fence be
a minimum of 6 feet in height.
• By providing the recommended S3 (tall) landscape screening along the parking area located on
the north side of the vehicle storage area, the applicant can effectively screen the use from the
adjacent property and from the Highway 6 right-of-way.
• In order to establish the change of use on the property, a final site plan must be reviewed by
the Building Inspector to ensure compliance with all elements of the zoning code. Bringing the
property into compliance with the code requirements helps to separate vehicle areas from
pedestrian areas for safe movement across the property; and provides for sufficient on -site parking
to serve the use.
3. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which
such property is located.
Staff believes that the applicant has satisfied this criterion for the reasons sited under items 1 and
2 above.
4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being
provided.
Adequate access roads, drainage, and other necessary facilities are already in place to serve this
entire commercial area.
5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to
minimize traffic congestion on public streets.
Staff believes that the applicant has satisfied this criterion for the following reasons:
• The transportation planners have reviewed the site and have verified that there are no traffic
concerns associated with this site. The site plan shows that the entrance drive will be in
compliance with the maximum curb cut standards, and there is adequate space for vehicles to
stack when exiting the site.
6. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being
considered, the specific proposed exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable
regulations or standards of the zone in which It is to be located.
Staff recommends that the Board waive the requirement for landscape screening along the west
(rear) property line, which is the precise area where a sanitary sewer and easement are located. If
City crews need to maintain or repair the sewer, any evergreens would need to be removed. Staff
recommends that the required S5 opaque fencing along the west side of the storage will satisfy the
special exception requirement for screening. Staff recommends that the fence be at least 6 feet in
height. Should the applicant decide to install the fence within the easement, staff recommends that
the applicant be required enter into an agreement that the City would not be responsible for repairing
or replacing any portion of the fence that might be removed to maintain or repair the sewer line.
7. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended.
The Future Land Use Scenario for the South District Plan shows this and surrounding properties as
General Commercial and does not anticipate major changes to the area. The zoning code allows
flexibility in the types of commercial uses allowed in this zone based on the specific criteria, which
are focused on screening outdoor storage areas from surrounding property.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that EXC10-00003, a special exception request, submitted by Yasser Gaber, to
allow a Vehicle Repair Use in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 1911 Keokuk Street be
approved subject to the following conditions:
• The applicant must secure a building permit to establish the change of use on the property;
• Approval of a final site plan by the Building Inspector to ensure compliance with all
requirements in the zoning code;
• The required S5 opaque fence or wall along the west and south side of vehicle storage area
should be a minimum of 6 feet in height to screen the Vehicle Storage area;
• S3 (tall) landscape screening shall be provided along the property line north of the vehicle
storage area, between the parking and the adjacent commercial property, in order to screen the
use from the Highway 6 right-of-way;
• If fencing is to be installed within the sanitary sewer easement, the applicant must provide a
signed agreement stating that the City will not be responsible for repairing or replacing any
portion of the fence that is damaged when the City maintains or repairs the sewer. The
agreement must be on file prior to the City issuing a certificate of occupancy.
Staff recommends waiving the requirement for S3 landscape screening in the area of the sanitary
sewer easement, based on the City's need to maintain access to this area.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Screening requirements
2. Location map
3. Aerial view of the proposed location
4. Submitted site plan
5. Application materials
Approved by: .
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner,
Department of Planning and Community Development
r. r:
low,
40
$
� '� •ems '. i1 '� u� ' ' �
r
-
'PAW
t �
y
3
wm
i a 4v a
low
ow
y�
r,d
7
low
Am"q� j
/ I ivawa
faa�{S .FF0g
inO gJnO ,96
o�yi%fs� iID{H1gti
�DManIJQ�
�. = =� —
l �.BF _
/
al 'll AA
is_
Puolsl lS IS
,6lx Zl IS f� is IS IS Is
/
/
Is I
a�JUV1 d N
o
I I
3 /
uo I m a o
/
I
oaa
1
N
/
ai v o
a0
o
i t
I I
rn
I v
,0.9
IIoM aauN I IIoM aauN
I I
I r
L o /
u sl (lit
�n /
soa i
III
D
II II
~ c
D
a
I
� _
�,('�} /
�Ila
o+
m
N
/
O COI
U
/
Nyo
/ /
4
M
SSOJ
I
M
,YYF, bo
/
ajaJDuoo
n A7
I II�,2
--
/ / Puolsl
I
I
glx,6
]$a
a
� C
y
�
4
ho
/ N o' N
II
II
r
II_
1
4
I
a
3iauaS (J>l=——
luawa�so
6
—uO-SucOcDlSS
.---
------
550J�
_ a
N
O�
rs es
- - — -3O- — — — — —
- 3,,91,9ZJON
a
lanoJO
,L£'OOZ //
/
I
I
/
/
I
I
I I
PAGE 5F-3 14-5F
Screening and Buffering Standards
Table 5F-1; Minimum
spacing between plantings and other
features (in feet)
Large Tree
Small Tree
Shrub
Urge Tree
30
24
4
Small Tree
24
16
3
Shrub
4
3
See spacing requirements
in Table 5F-2
Building ;
14
8
2
Sidewalk
41
41
31
Curb l Pavement
41
41
21
1 The minimum distance between trees and sidewalks or pavement also applies to the anticipated location of a
future sidewalk or paved surface
14-5F-5 Protection and Maintenance
A. The provisions of this section apply to all plantings required by this Title, whether newly
planted or preserved.
B. Required planting areas must be separated from abutting vehicular use areas, including
parking spaces, drives, aisles, alleys, vehicle display and loading areas, etc., by an
unmountable curb or barrier that is a minimum of five inches in height. The curb or barrier
must be constructed in such a manner that saltwater run-off will not damage trees or
plantings.
C. The property owner must keep all plantings properly maintained, pruned as needed, and
free from trash and litter. It is the responsibility of the property ownento maintain and
replace trees and plantings required by this Title. Required landscaping must be
continuously maintained in a healthy manner. Plants that die must be replaced. Improper
maintenance, pruning, or removal of plantings may be subject to municipal infraction
proceedings, up to and including environmental infraction proceedings.
D. Any trees that overhang the public right-of-way must be maintained in accordance with
the provisions of Title 10, Chapter 8, Trees and Plant' Materials, of the City Code.
E. To prevent interference with pedestrian traffic, plantings must be located appropriately
and maintained so that foliage does not grow any closer than 1 foot to the edge of a
sidewalk or pedestrian trail. This 1-foot setback must be maintained for at least the first 9
feet of plant height.
P. Maintenance of trees within street rights -of -way is the responsibility of the City.
14-SF-6 Screening Standards (S-Series)
The screening and buffering standards listed below will be applied throughout this Title, where
they will be referenced with the numbers S1, S2, S3, etc. The plant varieties listed in listed in
Table 5F-2 are to be used to satisfy the requirements of these various standards. Deviations
from the listed plants are allowed if the replacement shrubs are similar if form or hardiness to a
permitted variety and are approved by the City.
Title 14: Iowa City Zoning Code Revised 2-20-07
PAGE 5F-4 14-5F
Screening and Buffering Standards
A. General Buffering, S1
1. Intent
The S1 standard is a basic transitional buffering standard, where planting areas
separate uses from the public right-of-way, define edges and separate vehicular use
areas from pedestrians, yet allow views to easily penetrate, as for outdoor sales
display lots and for general landscaping on commercial properties.
2. Requirements
A grass lawn must be maintained within the landscaped area, with groupings of low -
growing shrubs and ground plants. Approximately half the landscaping plants must
be of an evergreen variety to provide texture and color throughout the year.
Plantings should be arranged to achieve the desired buffering effect, but there is no
established minimum or maximum height.
Figure 5F.1 - Genera/ Buffering, S1
General 5u f fer ing, 51
EleVativn
PLbHc RD.W.
Plan view
B. Variable Height Screen, S2
various uses such as
oucloor sales display lots
1. Intent
The S2 standard is a buffering treatment that uses distance and low-level screening
to separate uses from the public right-of-way, from other zones, to define edges and
separate vehicular use areas from pedestrians. The standard is applied where
moderate screening is necessary to soften the impact of uses or paved areas, but
where some visibility between areas is more desirable than a total visual screen.
2. Required Materials.
The S2 standard requires enough shrubs to form a landscape screen ranging
between 2 feet and 4 feet in height. At least a third of the shrubs must grow to no
less than 4 feet in height.
a. Alternative materials (Option A): Low berms or planters may be used to elevate
shrubs as long as the overall height of the screening ranges from 2 feet to 4
feet. At least a third of the shrubs must grow to no less than 4 feet in height.
Title 14: Iowa City Zoning Code Revised 2-20-07
PAGE 5F-5 14-5F
Screening and Buffering Standards
b. Alternative materials (Option B): A continuous or semi -continuous 2- to 3-foot-
high masonry wall. Breaks in the wall are permitted for sidewalk access and to
accommodate required street trees. One (1) shrub per 10 linear feet of wall, on
average, is required. Shrubs may be grouped, but long stretches without any
shrubs should be avoided. At least a third of the shrubs must grow to no less
than 4 feet in height.
Figure 5F.1 - Variable Height Screen, S2
VarlIble Height Screen, 52
E levatlon
Plan view
Yana?_; H lceht 5creen Alternative, 62
Elevation
rkg
Plan viow
0
Title 14: Iowa City Zoning Code Revised 2-20-07
PAGE 5F-6 14-5F
Screening and Buffering Standards
C. High Screen, S3
1. Intent
The S3 standard is a buffering treatment that uses dense landscape screening to
provide a visual and physical separation between uses and zones. It is commonly
applied between residential uses and commercial and industrial uses and to screen
outdoor work or storage areas.
2. Required Materials
Enough shrubs and small evergreens to form a continuous screen or hedge at least 5
feet to 6 feet in height and more than 50 percent solid year round. Screening
materials must be at least three 3 feet high when planted. At least half the shrubs
must be evergreen varieties.
a. Alternative materials (Option A). A berm may be used in conjunction with a
hedge to achieve an overall height of 6 feet.
b. Alternative materials (Option B): A continuous or semi -continuous 5 to 6-foot-
high masonry wall or solid fence. Breaks in the wall or fence are permitted for
access and to accommodate required street trees. One (1) shrub per 10 linear
feet of wall, on average, is required. Shrubs may be grouped, but long stretches
without any shrubs should be avoided. At least a third of the shrubs must grow
to no less than 5 feet in height.
Figure 5F-3: High Screen, S3
Hieh 5craon, 53
1=lavation
Plan Vlaw
Industrwi Use
Resldentlal Zone
D. Open Pattern Fence or Wall, S4
1. Intent
The S4 standard provides a tall, semi -opaque visual separation. The standard is
applied where separation is required, but where visibility between areas is more
desirable than a total visual screen. This standard provides for instances where
security may be an issue and where landscaping is not a practical option.
2. Required Materials
A 4- to 6-foot-high fence of 50 percent or greater opacity constructed of wood, brick,
Title 14: Iowa City Zoning Code Revised 2-20-07
PAGE 5F-7 14-5F
Screening and Buffering Standards
metal, masonry or other permanent materials.
E. Opaque Fence or Wall, S5
1. Intent
The S5 standard provides a complete visual separation. The standard is applied in
instances where complete screening is needed to protect abutting uses. This
standard provides for instances where security may be an issue and where
landscaping is not a practical option.
2. Required Materials
A 4 to 8 foot -high fence, completely opaque, constructed of wood, brick, metal,
masonry or other permanent materials. When used for dumpster or utility enclosures,
the material must match the primary building material or be complementary to it. The
height of the fence or wall will be determined based on the activity, materials, or
equipment being screened. In general the fence or wall should be of sufficient height
to screen the activity, materials, or equipment from public view.
Title 14: Iowa City Zoning Code Revised 2-20-07
APPLICATION TO THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SPECIAL EXCEPTION
DATE: j/ i G 1 1
PROPERTY PARCEL NO.
PROPERTY ADDRESS: l? )I k- E C4 K G)K—
PROPERTY ZONE: C 2—
PROPERTY LOT SIZE:
APPLICANT: Name:
j a
S-t' C-tL Cr�i"� �
Address:
3 Lv
kd S�w wkcl Q-V.._ W
Phone
y
�'
CONTACT PERSON: Name:
ha &M / �l C7 Lk
(if other than applicant)
Address:
_
Phone: _
c i
i
1 6 3
``fAssC-A- Z(---2
PROPERTY OWNER: Name: R`tEM 0 LLS*A
(if other than applicant)
Address:
Phone:
Specific Requested Special Exception; please list the description and section number in
the zoning code that addresses the specific special exception you are seeking. If you
cannot find this information or do not know which section of the code to look in, please
contact Sarah Walz at 356-5239 or email sarah-walz@iowa-city.org.
Purpose for special exception: Ali i C, jacr'A [ fz-
Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any:
FIVE STARS
TAXI
23a. We are currently a CC-2 zoned building.
b. Vehicles requiring repair in our automotive shop will
not exceed the allotted 45 day storages period.
c. Vehicles stored for repair will be stored/located in the
back of shop/building/property at the required distance
from street/public.
1) Outdoor storage will be contained/concealed to the
required standard of S3.
2) Parking for Grocery/Automotive and Taxi
business/services will be landscaped to the required S2
standard.
3) All outside storage areas next to other businesses shall
meet the required Fence standard of S5 and Ogg
er-.i
standard of S3. - —�
r'n
1911 Keokuk PHONE (319)358-5859
Iowa City IA FAX (319) 354-0008
52240 E-MAIL FiveStarsTaxi@gwest.net
WEB SITE http://www.FiveStarsTaxi.com
S�
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 14-8C-2C-4, 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 14-8C-1E, 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
14-8C-1 F, 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.
r
Date: C) 20
Date: 20 to
ppdadminlapplication-boase.doc
P, - 6, &L—
Si natures) of Applicant(s)
Gap
Signature(s) of Prorgrty OWner(s)
if Different than Apcant(
Co -> .
3
f 3
r)
C.1)
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MARCH 10, 2010 — 5:15 PM
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Robert Anderson, Barbara Eckstein, Will Jennings,
Caroline Sheerin, Le Ann Tyson
MEMBERS EXCUSED: None
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Walz, Sara Greenwood Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT: Jason Hilsman, Scott Ritter
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
None.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Caroline Sheerin at 5:22 p.m.
An opening statement was read by the Chair outlining the role and purpose of the Board and the
procedures governing the proceedings.
ROLL CALL: Anderson, Eckstein, Jennings, Sheerin and Tyson were present.
CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 10T" 2010:
Jennings and Eckstein offered typographical changes to the minutes
Eckstein motioned to approve the minutes as amended.
Jennings seconded.
The motion carried 5-0.
Iowa City Board of Adjustment
March 10, 2010
Page 2 of 12
SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS:
EXC09-00009: Discussion of an application submitted by Ace Auto Recyclers to amend
the requirement of a previously approved special exception for a salvage yard in the
Heavy Industrial (1-2) zone at 2752 South Riverside Drive, to allow a waiver of the solid
fencing requirements along the north, south, and east sides of the property.
Sheerin said her understanding is that there had been a motion at the previous meeting that
now needs to be withdrawn. Greenwood Hektoen said that because the Board Members had
visited the site and the applicant has additional information they would like to provide, she would
suggest withdrawing the previous motion if Board wished to further discuss the matter. Walz
said she believed the motion in question is the one that was based on staff recommendations.
Greenwood Hektoen suggested that whoever made the motion should be the one to withdraw it.
Tyson withdrew the motion to approve the application per staff recommendations as stated in
the February 101h meeting.
Sheerin re -opened the public hearing for the application.
Walz showed an aerial view of the 1-2 zone where the salvage yard is located. She said that the
salvage yard is set back of more than 300 feet from the public right-of-way. To the north of the
property lies a non -compliant salvage yard in the 1-2 zone; to the south is vacant land that is
also zoned 1-2; to the east is Mesquakie Park, public land to which public access is denied due
to hazardous materials in that area. Walz said that the park provides more than adequate
screening from the Iowa River. She noted that the nearby pond is a dredge pond in the
County's jurisdiction, which is also in an area zoned Industrial. Walz said that the applicant
intends to build a new facility on the site. In order to secure a building permit for the facility, the
applicant will be required to install 8-foot high solid fencing along the west portion of the
property. The fencing picked out by the applicant does meet all of the necessary requirements.
Staff has recommended waiving the requirement for solid fencing along the other three sides of
the property. Walz said that her understanding of the Board's previous discussion in the last
meeting was that it made sense to waive the requirement on the north and east sides of the
property, but that some members had concerns about the southern side. Walz noted that the
applicant has already installed the required landscape screening. Walz shared a picture of the
view from the southwest of the property, which highlighted the landscape screening. She also
provided topographic information from the County to help the Board understand the actual
impact that an 8-foot solid screen would have on the view of the salvage yard from the roadway.
Walz said that Riverside Drive is approximately 12 feet higher in elevation than the salvage
yard. Because of this difference in elevation, the fence may not have the desired screening
effect. Walz showed photographs taken approximately every 50-100 feet along the Riverside
Drive approaching the salvage yard from the south. These were intended to help identify the
level of visibility the salvage yard has from the road. Walz said that her own observation is that
the grade along the roadway is such that what one sees from the road are things that are stored
quite a distance from the fence -line. She said her sense is that the 8-foot solid fence would not
provide screening for those objects. Walz noted that there is a 15 foot fire -break inside the
fence, so cars are set back to begin with. She said that in her view it might not be possible to
screen the view of all of the cars in the facility. She noted that the applicant has more
information about the topography and screening.
Iowa City Board of Adjustment
March 10, 2010
Page 3 of 12
Eckstein asked if Walz's images showed where the creek is. Walz said they did. She added
that the building official had asked the applicant to maintain a fence on each side of the creek to
prevent drift from either salvage yard entering into the stream. Eckstein asked if Ace was
flooded in 2008 and Walz replied that it was. She noted that salvage yards are required to
maintain a large number of permits, including permits from the DNR. Walz said that it is her
recollection that salvage yards are required to drain all fluids from cars prior to crushing them.
Anderson noted that there are some images of the projected tree growth included in the staff
report. He asked how far into the future those projections are. Walz advised him to ask the
applicant. Anderson asked if the letter the applicant provided from a certified arborist that gave
tree growth estimations had been reviewed by the City Forrester. Walz said that it had not, and
that given that the letter was signed by a certified arborist that the staff would not go back to the
City Forester unless that had some reason to question his information. She said it is not
uncommon to accept the word of outside experts; just as materials provided by outside
engineers, etc., are not necessarily reviewed by City experts in every case.
Anderson said he had done some research and had come up with less optimistic growth
estimates. Sheerin said she did not believe that Board Members were allowed to do outside
research. Walz stated the same. Anderson asked how far apart the trees are, and Walz said
she believed it was every 20 feet. Anderson asked if there was an expected maximum height
and width for the fully grown trees. Walz said she did not know that information. She said that
she assumes that because they are mixed with spruce she imagines they will be very large at
maturity. Anderson asked if it was known how these trees respond to possible soil
contaminations. Walz said that the reason staff had recommended that a certified arborist
select the plantings was to make sure those factors were taken into consideration. Anderson
said he was trying to gauge how much growth can be expected in such a harsh environment.
Eckstein said she wondered if the Board can stipulate that when the vinyl slatted chain -link
fence is replaced in the future, it be replaced with something different. Walz said her
understanding is that the Board is to determine if the requirement should be waived; if the Board
chooses to waive it now, then that waiver stands in the future as well. Walz said that the staff
recommendation does require the client to maintain at least what is there. Greenwood Hektoen
said that the question before the Board is whether to waive the requirement or not. Eckstein
said that she took that to mean that any future fence then would cease to be an issue for the
Board of Adjustment, and Greenwood Hektoen said that was correct.
Eckstein said she was wondering if the Mesquakie Park is one of historic significance to Iowa
City. She said that her understanding is that the site of the original trading post and Mesquakie
settlement may be in that general area. Walz said that she did not know the answer to that
question. She said that the site was formerly a landfill and that what prohibits people from being
permitted in the area is that there are methane leaks and protrusions of items that were once
buried in the dump. She said she did not know if there was archaeological significance to the
area. Walz said that she assumes that because the park is named "Mesquakie" the tribe may
have had some level of movement through the area, but that she does not know whether or not
it was an actual settlement. Eckstein said that she knows that somewhere fairly near there on
that side of the river there is such a site. Eckstein said that given that, the site seems to have
more significance than is indicated by the staff report. She said she could not tell if it was that
particular piece of ground or not. Walz said she had thought that Napoleon Park was in some
way connected with the original trading post and settlement of which Eckstein spoke, but that
she was not sure. Eckstein said the issue raises concerns for her.
Iowa City Board of Adjustment
March 10, 2010
Page 4 of 12
Sheerin asked if that was part of the criteria that the Board should be considering. Eckstein said
she believed it was relevant because she believed it related to General Standard #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." Sheerin said she did not understand how potential historical
significance of the neighboring property related to that standard. Eckstein explained that if the
site is archaeologically significant, then it would relate. She said her questions concerning the
creek were not really about the fencing around it; rather, it was a question of how the creek
would be treated.
Walz noted that with regard to the creek, the fencing requirements were intended to keep
salvage out of the creek. Eckstein said she understood that, but that she was trying to put fairly
complex pieces of information together. She said that one of her questions is whether or not the
site has any archaeological significance; a question she understands that no one present had
the answer to. Her other question is, if in fact the site is of historic importance, what might be
done to move the site toward greater approachability, rather than to dismiss it as a former
landfill that need not be approached.
Greenwood Hektoen said that she believed this was beyond the scope of what was before the
Board. She said she was having a difficult time seeing the relationship of this issue to the
General Standards and Specific Criteria the Board is to consider. Sheerin said that the Board is
not dealing with Mesquakie Park in this application. Walz said that the issue with Mesquakie
Park is that it will not be open to the public. Walz said that the issue of whether or not an
archaeological team could go into the park would be up to the City, but that the City does not
intend to allow the general public into the park because of the hazards that exist there. Eckstein
said that her question is whether or not the relationship between Ace Auto Recyclers and the
creek and the evolving state of the contiguous land known as Mesquakie Park has been
sufficiently dealt with by the staff recommendations. Eckstein clarified that it is not a question
about the fence, rather a question about the relationship to the creek. Walz said that in her
opinion she would say that it has, and that Mesquakie Park is a property unlikely to be
developed. Eckstein concurred that the park was unlikely to be built on. Walz said the park is
significantly wooded and the Ace property is not in view of the Iowa River, so in her opinion the
issue is adequately addressed.
Eckstein said it is not a question about the aesthetics. She said it is a question about the
quality of the land in relation to the water and the approachability of that site in the future. Walz
asked Eckstein to repeat her statement because she had not fully understood it. Eckstein
reiterated that it was not a question of aesthetics. Walz explained that the issue of the fence is
an aesthetic issue. Eckstein said she understood that but portions of the staff report make
stipulations about the creek, and it is the creek which interests her. Walz said that the only
purpose behind the fence requirement by the creek was to prevent salvage from drifting into the
creek. Eckstein asked if the creek was protected from salvage drifting into it even under flood
conditions. Walz said that it was certainly possible that things from both salvage yards and
Mesquakie Park could drift into the creek if a flood reached a certain level. Greenwood Hektoen
said she thought Eckstein's concerns would be more applicable if the matter before the Board
was an expansion of the salvage yard's use, or a rezoning.
Jennings asked if the language in the staff recommendation would require trees that were part
of the landscape buffer to be replaced if they died or were damaged. Walz said that trees that
died would have to be reinstalled.
Iowa City Board of Adjustment
March 10, 2010
Page 5 of 12
Sheerin invited the applicant to speak.
Jason Hilsman, 613 Redbird Run, Tiffin, said that he understood the concerns expressed about
the salvage operation, but that he wanted everyone to know that Ace's goal is to have a
modernized facility. Hilsman said that over the past ten years they have worked very hard and
spent a lot of money trying to make improvements to the site. He said that they are more than a
junkyard; they want the facility to look good as people drive by or stop in. Hilsman said that the
community perception of their facility means a lot to them. He said that they consider
themselves to be a recycling yard, not a junkyard. He said they are trying to get away from the
junkyard image, and are trying to modernize and do things the right way so that they can be
functional and yet still look nice.
Hilsman said that there was a lot of planning that went into the trees and the tree types and the
soil, because Ace worked closely with the City to design an acceptable screen. He said that
Planning staff's main concern had been to have a nice green screen in addition to a fence.
Hilsman said his business maintains the ditches in front of their building and has two acres of
grounds that it keeps mowed and maintained, in addition to the five acres of grounds on which
the screening trees are planted. Hilsman said they have every intention of maintaining things
properly and keeping the facility looking good.
Hilsman said he understood that the Board had some concerns about the south side of the
property. He said that Scott Ritter, an engineer, was present to discuss the elevations on that
side and to answer questions from the Board. Hilsman said that the eight foot solid steel
fencing that they will install on the west side will be very attractive and will be of the same
material as the new building. He said that hopefully over time the trees will grow to provide
additional screening on that side as well.
Hilsman said that they want their recycling facility to be something the community can be proud
of. He said that they recognize that their business is at an entranceway to the city, and they
want their business to be appealing to anyone stopping in or driving by. Hilsman said he was
happy to answer any questions from the Board.
Eckstein thanked Hilsman for the materials he provided concerning I -CARE. She noted that (-
CARE pays particular attention to metals involved in the recycling of cars, and asked what was
done concerning the metals in the electronics found in cars. Hilsman said that their business
processes cars by draining the fluids, selling viable parts, and then crushing the cars. Hilsman
said that the specific metals are separated in magnetic and melting processes after the car goes
to the steel mill. Hilsman said that they mainly deal with the car bodies at his facility.
Anderson asked Hilsman if he had information on the growth rate of the various trees used in
the landscape screening. Anderson said the rate of growth for the Norway Spruce was listed as
two to three feet per season, but that the outside row of trees, the Eastern Red Cedars, has no
projected growth rate indicated. Hilsman said that he believes the Eastern Red Cedar grows at
a rate of 20-24 inches per season. He said that tree growth is always dependent on soil
conditions and rain, and so can be variable. He said that last year was a wet year, so the
natural conditions were conducive to growth. He said that in the past they have had to go out
and water all 115 trees, which is time-consuming and labor-intensive.
Anderson noted that on the site plan the tree -line does not extend all the way to the eight -foot
solid fencing on the southwest corner, and that there appears to be a gap in the screening. He
asked why that was done. Hilsman said that when Ace originally came before the Planning and
Iowa City Board of Adjustment
March 10, 2010
Page 6 of 12
Zoning Commission this was the design that was recommended. He said that visually, the
angle of the trees provides all of the necessary screening for that area. He said that they had
worked closely with Bob Miklo in the Planning Department on that landscape screening plan.
Anderson noted that Ace had provided images that showed projections of what the tree growth
would look like over time. Anderson asked if Hilsman had tree heights and years to go with the
pictures, as all that was provided were the images. Hilsman said that the pictures represented
the present day, two to three years out, and five to six years out.
Scott Ritter, 5060 James Avenue SW, Kalona, of Hart -Frederick Consultants addressed the
Board. He said that in order to do their projections, his firm determined the exact location of
each of the trees. The trees are planted in a staggered pattern every ten to twenty feet. Ritter
explained that the elevation of the road in relation to the salvage site makes a fence irrelevant,
as the view from the road will look over the top of the fence. Ritter demonstrated this with
images showing views from a number of angles. Ritter reiterated that on the south side,
fencing, whether solid or slatted, would not obstruct views of the salvage yard from the road due
to the elevation of the road.
Walz noted that while the City Forester did not explicitly approve this landscaping plan, the
species of spruce that is proposed in the plan is one that is typically proposed by developers
where there is a need to provide tall, dense screening in a relatively short period of time. She
said that Eastern Red Cedar is Iowa's only native evergreen, and it tends to be a rather prolific,
fast-growing tree. She said it may have been selected to account for the somewhat harsh
environment in that area.
Sheerin asked if there was a motion.
Eckstein moved to approve EXC09-00009, an application submitted by Ace Auto
Recyclers to amend the requirement of a previously approved special exception for a
salvage yard in the Heavy Industrial (1-2) zone at 2752 South Riverside Drive, to allow a
waiver of the solid fencing requirements along the north, south and east sides of the
property, subject to the following conditions:
1. All landscaping required as a condition of the previous special exception as well
as the 8-foot wall of concrete blocks installed along the southeast portion of the
salvage yard shall be maintained;
2. The required 8-foot, solid fence must be approved by planning staff and must be
installed from the southwest corner of the property, north to where the new
office/warehouse service building is proposed;
3. When construction is finished on the office/warehouse building, and prior to a
certificate of occupancy, matching 8-foot solid fencing must be continued north to
the existing tear -down warehouse;
4. In order to prevent salvage from obstructing the drainage way at the northeast
corner of the property, a 4-foot chain link fence must be installed and maintained
south of the drainage way as shown in the original site plan approved with EXC06-
00008;
Iowa City Board of Adjustment
March 10, 2010
Page 7 of 12
5. The 6-foot chain link fence with vinyl slats currently installed to the north of the
drainage way should remain in place to provide separation from the adjacent
property;
6. Ace Auto Recyclers may not occupy the new building until all required fencing is
installed;
7. Salvage may not be stacked higher than 6 feet;
8. All other conditions related to the original exception (EXC06-00008) not
specifically amended in this application shall remain in effect.
Jennings seconded the motion.
Anderson said he would like to once again amend the motion to exclude the south
portion of the property from the waiver.
Walz stated that that motion had been defeated at a previous meeting, but then noted there was
now an additional Board member present. She advised the Board that they may want to have
some discussion prior to amending the motion so that they have some idea where each Board
member stands. She said that what happened at the previous meeting was that because the
motion for an amendment did not pass and the Board was divided 2-2, the result could have
been that the Board did not waive any requirement because they did not separate out the
exclusion of the south side from the original motion. Walz said that by holding discussions prior
to offering amendments, the Board can ensure that they do separate out the divisive elements if
there is found to be a real difference of opinion between Board members.
Anderson withdrew his amendment pending further discussion.
Walz advised the Board to discuss what each member was thinking in terms of whether the
fencing along the south property line satisfies the criteria set forth in the waiver, or any other
questions they may have about the matter.
Eckstein said that she had driven up and down the road while looking at the property and that
she would not be inclined to remove the south side from the waiver. She said she would likely
vote in favor of the motion as stated.
Sheerin said she too had driven past the property, and she could not even see it from the road.
She said she sees absolutely no reason to vote against the waiver.
Anderson said that he has driven past the property a number of times, and he can see the
salvage operation from the road. Anderson said that his concern is that while he agrees with
staff that an 8-foot fence may not make a large amount of difference in the view, that fact is not
enough, to his mind, to grant an exception. Anderson said that while it is not in his power to
make the solid screening requirements more onerous, that is not sufficient reason in his mind to
eliminate them or further reduce them. He said he is sympathetic to the costs and the efforts
involved in fulfilling the solid screening requirements, and that he appreciates the materials
provided on the I -CARE program that Ace submitted, though he is not sure what bearing it has
on the solid screening requirements. Anderson said the cost and efforts the applicant must go
to is not a factor the Board is intended to consider as part of its decision making process. He
said that the Comprehensive Plan makes it clear that an entranceway to the city is a primary
Iowa City Board of Adjustment
March 10, 2010
Page 8 of 12
consideration. Anderson said the City has a solid fencing requirement and he sees absolutely
no reason to reduce those requirements and grant this exception.
Jennings said that he has driven past the property under a variety of conditions and he concurs
with Board members who fail to see the aesthetics of the salvage yard as problematic.
Jennings said he is in concurrence with staff recommendations. He said his understanding of
the matter is that the Board is to consider this as an aesthetic issue. He said he is sympathetic
to the concerns about entryways to the city, but that it is not within the purview of the Board to
require the business to be moved elsewhere, and staff's recommendations attempt to
accommodate its presence in the best possible way. Jennings said that given the constraints of
location and grade, staff's recommendations address the issues as best they can. He said he is
in concurrence with the staff recommendations.
Anderson said that his understanding is that the landscaping was intended to serve as an
additional screening mechanism to that provided by the solid fence requirements. He said that
the waiver makes it so that vegetation is relied upon as the primary, if not only, screening for the
site. He said that this is particularly risky on a site and in a location where it really must be
taken on faith that the vegetation will perform as projected. He said he is not comfortable with
that.
Tyson said she has struggled with this since it first came before the Board. She said she has
driven past the property under a number of weather conditions in an attempt to convince herself
that the waiver is a good course of action to take. She said she just is not convinced that it is.
Tyson said she did not understand how the three Board members who seem to be okay with the
waiver could not see the salvage site from the rode when driving past. She said the salvage
site is clearly visible from the road, and that the Board has an obligation to their city to do their
best, and not rely solely on a grove of trees for screening.
Jennings clarified that it was not that he did not think the salvage yard was invisible from the
road; rather, that taking into account the salvage yard's legitimate right to be located there and
the issue of the road being at a higher grade than the salvage yard, it was his opinion that a
solid fence on the south side would not make an appreciable aesthetic difference in the visibility
or non -visibility of the salvage yard. He said that within all realm of reasonable action the City
staff and the applicant have addressed the screening issues.
Anderson asked Jennings if he would approve a 6-foot chain link fence with vinyl slats if the
fence were not already in existence and the applicant was requesting it to fulfill their solid
screening obligations. Jennings said that he did not know if could answer that question.
Sheerin said she did not think the salvage yard was invisible from the roadway. However, she
had difficulty seeing when she was driving by. She said that prior to reviewing the application
she had driven past the site countless times and had no idea the salvage yard even existed.
She said that Ace Auto Recyclers was certainly no more of an eyesore than any other business
or structure on that road. She said it was really unfair to make the applicant attempt to make
their property invisible to people driving past it, particularly in light of the fact that it is not that
visible to begin with and will be even less so if staff's recommendations are followed.
Anderson said the Board is not asking anyone to make their property invisible. He said that the
Board is deciding whether or not to grant this specific business an exception to rules that every
other salvage operation in the city has to abide by. Sheerin said that in this case, the solid
fencing will make absolutely no difference as the site will be equally visible with a solid fence as
Iowa City Board of Adjustment
March 10, 2010
Page 9 of 12
it is without one due to the grade of the road. Anderson said that was not really the question at
hand. Sheerin said that it certainly is: the question at hand is aesthetics and the aesthetics
would not be changed by solid fencing being installed on the south side of the property.
Anderson said that to his mind, the question is actually whether or not there is any logical sense
in granting an exception to this applicant. Sheerin said there is no logical sense in forcing them
to build a fence that will make no aesthetic difference. Anderson said there is a visible salvage
yard that needs to be screened. Sheerin said the fencing will not make it invisible. Anderson
said that invisibility was a pretty high standard for requiring the solid fencing. Sheerin said that if
there is not going to be an aesthetic change and the salvage operation will still be equally
visible, she sees no point in making the applicant go to the effort and expense of putting up a
solid fence. Sheerin suggested that Anderson wanted to require the solid fencing on the
grounds of principal. Anderson said that was not the case; rather, he was trying to ignore the
fact that this fence is already in existence, which is the standard the Board is to follow. He said
that the Board is to consider the application as if the applicant had come before them and asked
to erect a 6-foot translucent fence around their salvage operation; to consider the adequacy of
the fence as though it was not a pre-existing structure. Sheerin said that was not how the Board
had to consider the application. Anderson asked for clarification on that from Greenwood
Hektoen. Greenwood Hektoen said that the question is whether to grant an exception to the
solid fencing requirement. Anderson asked if it was not the case that the application was to be
considered as if there was nothing on the site. Greenwood Hektoen said that was not the case.
She said the Board could assume the present conditions in making their decision.
Eckstein said that while the salvage yard exists at an entryway to the city, it is an entryway to
that is zoned Industrial. She said that what is relevant about the applicant's inclusion of the
materials on I -CARE is that there is a very big difference between a junkyard and a recycling
operation. Eckstein said that to have a major recycling operation in an industrially zoned
entryway to the city is something that is a good thing, not a bad thing. Sheerin said she agreed.
Greenwood Hektoen clarified with Eckstein that her indication had been for the waiver per staff
recommendations, and Eckstein confirmed that that had been her intention.
Tyson asked how the portion of the fence that was made of concrete fit into the current motion.
Walz said the consideration is for a waiver of the solid screening requirements. As that portion
of the fence meets the requirements for solid fencing, it is not affected.
Eckstein began the findings of fact for the General Standards. Walz explained that in the staff
report the bold letters are the conclusion, and the paragraphs beneath are what supports that
conclusion. She said that the findings of fact done by the Board need not include those
particular points, may in fact even refute them; however, they needed to include some kind of
support for the conclusion —the conclusion being the standard or criteria that is being met.
Eckstein stated that the specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the
public safety, comfort, or general welfare because staff recommendations address necessary
protections for the stream.
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 because this is an industrial area with another salvage yard and a former landfill
that is closed to the public adjacent to the subject property. Eckstein said that the considerable
distance from the road also aids in screening.
Iowa City Board of Adjustment
March 10, 2010
Page 10 of 12
Eckstein said that the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding
property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located will not be impeded by
the exception for the same reasons.
Sheerin said that adequate utilities, drainage, access roads and necessary facilities are already
in place. The drainageway on the northeast portion of the site may not be obstructed and a 15-
foot fire buffer is required. The proposal by the applicant to maintain the fence north of the
creek and provide an additional 4-foot fence to the south of the drainage way will prevent
salvage from drifting into this area. Ingress and egress and issues of traffic congestion will not
be affected by this waiver at all.
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 applicant is being required to provide
fencing on the south side of the creek to ensure that salvage does not obstruct the drainage
way.
The proposed use will be consistent with the amended Comprehensive Plan because the long-
term use scenario for this area is to phase out residential uses and recommends that industrial
and commercial business be allowed to operate in a reasonable manner. Although this is an
entranceway to Iowa City, the applicant will provide effective screening along Riverside Drive to
block visibility of the salvage yard from the public right-of-way. Along the west side of the
property there will be solid fencing which, along with the required landscaping, will sufficiently
screen the salvage use from the public view along Riverside Drive, which is at a higher
elevation than the salvage yard. The installed evergreen landscape screening and solid fencing
along nearly the entire length of the south property line will adequately screen views of the
salvage yard from the adjacent industrial property and will not deter future development for uses
allowed in the zone. The property to the north is also a salvage yard, and the property to the
south is restricted from public access, so waiving the solid screening requirements will not be in
contradiction to the goals of the Comprehensive Plan.
Sheerin then addressed the Specific Criteria, which allows for a semi -opaque or open pattern
fence in certain situations. This criteria is met because the properties to the north and south are
zoned for industrial uses and the property to the east is public land with restricted access. The
area is also relatively flat. The applicant has installed 6-foot chain link fence with vinyl slats
around the property, which will be replaced on the west side of the yard with 8-foot high solid
fencing. The applicant has installed the required landscaping along the west side and along the
first 60 feet of the south side of the salvage yard, and has constructed an 8-foot high wall of
concrete blocks along a portion of the yard's south side.
Eckstein asked if the condition that the salvage not be stacked higher than 6-feet should be
added, especially given the topography. Walz advised that that condition was present in the
motion under item #7. Tyson asked if anything needed to be added about the maintenance of
the trees and Walz said that it did not because it was already a requirement of the special
exception.
Tyson added to the findings of fact that she finds the trees proposed as a screen are not
sufficient enough to allow the Board to waive the solid screening requirements, especially
because the area is a gateway to the city. She said that while she recognizes that this is an
industrial part of the city, she does not believe that the overall screening is adequate.
Iowa City Board of Adjustment
March 10, 2010
Page 11 of 12
Anderson said that he finds that the proposed waiver of the solid fencing requirement is not
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan given that this is an entryway to the city, as is required
under General Standard #7.
There were no additional findings, and a vote was taken.
The motion carried on a 3-2 vote (Anderson and Tyson voting against the motion).
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION:
Walz said to her knowledge there may be one or two applications for the next Board meeting.
Anderson requested that when discussing cases Board members avoid speculating on the
motivation of other Board members regarding their findings of fact or particular viewpoints on
the case. Sheerin asked if he was making a motion, and Anderson replied that it was merely a
comment.
ADJOURNMENT:
Tyson motioned to adjourn.
Anderson seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0.
The meeting adjourned at 6:39 p.m.
4J
E
4J
a
O
L
O
m
.4
L
s
O
N
O
M
O
CO
O
O�
O%
%O
N
x
x
x
x
x
M
Z
x
x
x
x
o
x
LU
�
x
x
x
E
L
Z
d
O
O
O
O
O
F
W
O
Co
O
O
O
c4J C
=
H Q) L
L �C bq O O
O V
E C u c of a.
Z Q c c H
II II II
w
x O O
w