HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-13-2012 Board of AdjustmentIOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
Wednesday, June 13, 2012 — 5:15 PM
City Hall — Emma J. Harvat Hall
AGENDA
A. Call to Order
B. Roll Call
C. Consider the May 9, 2012 Minutes
D. Special Exceptions
EXC12-00009: Discussion of an application submitted by Beth Bewley -Randall and Tom Randall
for a special exception to convert a non -conforming use in the Medium Density Single Family (RS-
8) zone at 1018 Walnut Street to another non -conforming use (a Building Trade Use).
2. APL12-00001: Discussion of an application submitted by NCS Pearson to appeal a decision of the
Iowa City Housing & Inspection Services Director denying a building permit on the grounds that a
proposed 145-foot wind turbine is not an accessory use.
E. Board of Adjustment Information
F. Adjourn
NEXT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING: July 11, 2012
STAFF REPORT
To: Board of Adjustment
Item: EXC12-00009
1018 Walnut Street
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
Requested Action
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning
Applicable code sections:
File Date:
BACKGROUND:
Prepared by: Sarah Walz
Date: June 13, 2012
Beth Bewley -Randall and Tom Randall
1020 Kirkwood Avenue
Iowa City, IA 52245
319-594-8438
Special exception for a non -conforming use that is
located in a structure designed for a use that is not
allowed in the zone to convert to another non-
conforming use.
To establish a Building Trade Use on property
located in a residential zone.
1018 Walnut Street
15,360 square feet
RS-8, non -conforming storage and other unknown
uses.
North: Residential (RS-8); Railroad right-of-way
South: Residential (RS-8)
East: Residential (RS-8)
West: Residential (RS-8)
14-4E-5B, specific criteria for change to a non-
conforming use; 14-4B-3A, general criteria for
special exceptions.
May 15, 2012
The subject building was originally constructed in 1933 as an automotive dealership (DeSoto).
The building consists of more than 8,000 square feet of warehouse type space. At various times
the building has been used for workshops, storage, and, at least once, as the practice site for a
local rock band. The last known use of the property was for non-commercial storage and
restoration/repair of automobiles and artist studios. These and other prior uses were never
officially sanctioned by the City.
The property is located in the Medium Density, Single -Family Residential (RS-8) zone at 1018
Walnut Street. Commercial uses are not permitted in the zone, and it is impractical to convert
the existing building to a conforming use in the residential zone. Though the building is of some
historic interest, it has no historic designation and is not subject to historic preservation
standards.
The zoning code includes a provision under the Non -Conforming Use Regulations (Chapter E)
that allows a building constructed for a use no longer permitted in the zone to be converted to
another non -conforming use in a different use category or subgroup so long as the new use is of
the same or lesser intensity as the existing use, provided that certain conditions are met.
The applicants, Beth Bewley -Randall and Tom Randall are proposing to convert the property to
a Building Trade Use. The code definition of the Building Trade Use is attached to this report.
Specifically the applicants would like to use the property for administrative office and central
storage for their electrical contracting company. The business has 12 employees and 6 fleet
trucks. Hours of operation are typically 7 AM until 4 PM. While some employees come to the
building for trucks and supplies, according the applicants, most go directly from home to the
work site. The Randalls have indicated that a small amount of material assembly would take
place within the building, but that this activity is quite limited and does not generate significant
noise. The applicants wish to use the building to store electrical supplies and equipment as well
as their truck fleet. They also plan to run their administrative office from the site-2-3 people
would be on -site working in the office. Construction of the office space within the building will
require a building permit.
The applicants have been using the property for storage and parking for some time, unaware of
the zoning restrictions on the property. Their desire to convert a portion of the building for their
office use, which requires a building permit, is what triggered the special exception.
The property is configured with a continuous curb cut along the front of the lot, approximately
110 feet in width. Nearly the entire area in front of the building is paved —about one third is
concrete and the remaining parking area is gravel. Two overhead doors provide vehicle access
to the interior of the building. The interior of the building provides ample space to store all 6
work vehicles. The parking requirement for a Building Trade Use is 1 parking space per 750
square feet of floor area. Thus 11 spaces would be required. The zoning code allows required
parking to be provided within the building.
Any rights granted by special exception run with the property and are not limited to the present
applicants but extend to future property owners/users. Any conditions attached to the special
exception also run with the property and similarly apply to future owners/users of the property
until such time as the property is granted a new special exception to convert to a less intensive
use. Once a new use has been established for 7 days, the property may not revert to a more
intensive use. The property has no rights to an automotive use because that use has been
absent from the site for more than a year.
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 14-4E-56 pertaining to the conversion of non-
conforming uses in addition to the general approval criteria for special exceptions as set forth in
Section 14-4113-3A.
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-E-5B)
The Board of Adjustment may grant a special exception to allow a nonconforming use, which is
located in a structure not designed for a use allowed in the zone , to be converted to another
non -conforming use in a different use category or subgroup that is of the same or lesser intensity
as the existing use, provided the following conditions are met:
a. The proposed use will be located in a structure that was designed for a use that is
currently not allowed in the zone, for example a storefront commercial building located in
a single-family residential zone.
FINDING: The subject building was originally constructed as an automotive show room and
repair space. No use allowed in the residential zone has been established on the site and the
building has not been modified for a conforming use. It continues to be principally open
warehouse space.
b. The proposed use is of the same or lesser intensity and impact than the existing use.
The Board of adjustment will make a determination regarding the relative intensity of the
proposed use by weighing evidence presented by the applicant with regard to such
factors as anticipated traffic generation, parking demand, hours of operation, residential
occupancy, noise, dust, and customer and/resident activity. The Board of Adjustment may
also consider qualitative factors such as whether a proposed use will serve an identified
need in the surrounding neighborhood.
Staff believes it is necessary to consider the following in evaluation this criterion:
FINDINGS:
a) As stated above, it is clear that the property is not designed for a use that is allowed in
the zone.
b) Due to the sheer size of the building and its open nature, the property is inviting to a
number of other non -conforming uses that could create a disturbance to or detract from a
healthy residential neighborhood. These would include assembly or other uses that
generate noise, commercial uses that generate traffic or parking demand, or multiple
uses that may have irregular hours or changing users.
c) The building does not have a clear history of use. Prior to the applicants' purchase of the
property, the most recent use of which staff is aware was as non-commercial automobile
storage and repair and artist studio space.
d) While the proposed use would likely mean more consistent, day-to-day activity on the
site, especially the vehicle parking, the proposed use does not generate customer traffic
and is limited to one use being applied for —the building trade use. The applicants have
indicated that employees pick up trucks and supplies in the morning and drop them off in
the late afternoon and that all fleet vehicles, equipment, and supplies are stored in the
interior of the building. The dumpsters now present on the site are for cleaning out the
building and will be removed. Dumpsters for the proposed new use would be stored
inside the building. On -site construction or assembly of electrical supplies and equipment
are quite limited and take place inside the building. The administrative (office) aspect of
the use will be on the property throughout the business day.
4
e) Staff recommends conditions to limit the intensity of use on the site, including a reduction
in the width of the driveway entrance and setback and screening of the parking area;
limiting hours of operation for the use; confining fleet parking, storage and assembly to
the interior of the building, and limiting lighting and signage to the standards for single-
family zones. These conditions are explained under the general criteria below.
It should be emphasized that granting this special exception will establish a baseline against
which any future use will be compared. Any rights granted by the special exception run with the
property and are not limited to the applicants but extend to future owners/users of the property.
Similarly, any conditions tied to approval apply to all future owners/users of the property.
c. The proposed use is suitable for the subject structure and site.
FINDINGS:
1. The structure was originally designed for an automotive use and provides overhead doors
and ample space to store vehicles and equipment in the interior of the building, which is open,
warehouse -type space (8,000 square feet).
2. The site is located one block off Summit Street and one block from Kirkwood Avenue such
that trucks are not required to drive a great distance on residential streets to get to the site.
d. The structure will not be structurally enlarged in such a way as to enlarge the non-
conforming use. Ordinary repair and maintenance and installation or relocation of walls,
partitions, fixtures, wiring, and plumbing is allowed as long as the use is not enlarged.
FINDING: While the applicants propose to convert a small area within the southwest corner of
the building to an office, no aspect of the building or use is proposed for enlargement.
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.
FINDING: The site presently has a continuous curb across nearly the entire front of the 109-foot
lot width and nearly the entire area in front of the building is paved with gravel or concrete. There
is no separation between the parking area and the public sidewalk, which abuts the street. This
creates a safety concern with vehicles entering and exiting the site across the sidewalk and is
uncharacteristic of the surrounding residential neighborhood.
In Staff's view, the conditions described below will create a safer vehicle and pedestrian
environment by controlling and slowing vehicle entrance to the site and separating the vehicle use
from the sidewalk and will conform with the overall development character of the residential
neighborhood.
a) Limiting driveway access to the site: The Access Management Standards indicate a
maximum single driveway width of 34 feet measured at the property line and 42 feet at the
curb for non-residential uses. If the applicants would prefer a two -drive access in order to
align driveways with the overhead doors, the width of the driveways should be reduced to
24 feet measured at the property line and 32 feet at the curb line.
b) Creating separation between vehicle parking and the adjacent right-of-way: The Off -
Street Parking Standards in the code indicate that parking areas must be set back from
rights -of -way and abutting properties and properly screened from view as specified in the
applicable base zone regulations. However, because the base zone in this instance is
residential (IRS-8), there are no site development standards for commercial uses listed.
In situations like this staff considers comparable requirements in commercial zones or for non-
residential uses allowed in residential zones as provisional uses or by special exception. In
commercial zones a 10-foot setback and S2 screening (low hedge) are required unless the
use abuts a residential zone, in which case 20-foot setback is required. For uses such as
schools and churches, which are allowed by special exception in single-family residential
zones, a 10-foot buffer with S2 screening is required between the parking area and any right-
of-way. Given the existing development on the site and the desire to preserve some space for
employee parking, Staff believes it is reasonable to require a 10-foot setback for separating
the parking area from the right-of-way. By creating the streetside setback and screening the
applicants can narrow the driveway widths to the standards described above.
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.
FINDING: Building Trade Uses have certain aspects that may by injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other properties in the neighborhood, including vehicle parking and use of outdoor
areas, lighting, signage, dust, etc. Staff therefore recommends the following conditions in order to
reduce the intensity of the Building Trade Use and to minimize noise, dust, and other aspects of
the use that may conflict with or detract from the surrounding residential neighborhood:
• The special exception is for a building trade use only; no additional uses are permitted
on the site.
• The parking area should be set back and screened to minimize views of the parking and
to create separation between vehicle parking and the right-of-way (see note below) and
between the parking area and adjacent residential properties:
0 10-feet from the front property line with S2 screening
0 10 feet from the west property line with S3 screening
0 5 feet with no screening from the east property line
• Limited hours of operation from 6 AM to 6 PM weekdays.
• Fleet vehicles must be stored inside the building during non -work hours, including
weekends.
• Outdoor storage of equipment, materials, or dumpsters is not allowed.
• All assembly, repair, or construction associated with use must be conducted indoors.
• Signage should be limited to a facia or awning sign in compliance with the zoning code
standard for non-residential uses located in residential zone.
• All outdoor lighting should comply with the zoning code standards for residential zones.
• The applicants shall paint and maintain the front facade of the building in a manner that
does not detract from the residential character of the zone as proposed in the submitted
elevations.
• The parking area, including driveways, should be paved with a hard surface according to
the parking area standards in the code.
Note: The site already provides a 10-foot setback and tall shrubs (S3-type screening) along the
west property line. A 5-foot setback along the west property line would preserve enough space for
up to six cars to park in front of the building, depending on the parking layout. The applicants have
indicated that, due to the slope of the property, snow removal and drainage are an issue. Typically
they plow snow to the east property line to allow it to melt and drain to the rear of the site along
the ravine. For this reason they would prefer to have no shrub screening along the east side of the
parking area. Because there is also a change in grade between the parking area and the
adjacent residential property, it may be reasonable not to require any screening within this
setback. The applicants own the residential property to the east and have indicated a willingness
to install landscape screening on that property.
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.
FINDING: Again, Building Trade Uses include aspects that have the potential to detract from the
surrounding residential neighborhood. The conditions outlined above limiting outdoor activities
and storage and requiring setbacks, screening, and paving of the parking area are intended to
improve the safety and aesthetics of the site. This along with the recommended conditions for
limited hours of operation, signs, and lighting will reduce the potential for conflicts with the
residential neighborhood.
4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or
are being provided.
FINDING: This neighborhood is fully developed with all roads and drainage. Water from the site
is drained to the back of the property along the ravine. Staff recommends limiting the drive -way
on the property according to the access standards in the code (see general criterion #1 above).
5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed
so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets.
FINDING: The proposed use is not one that generates customer traffic. As noted above,
workers will come to the site early in the morning (approximately 7 AM) returning in the late
afternoon to return trucks. This block of Walnut Street, east of Summit Street, is just one block
long and has limited 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.
FINDING: Because the proposed use is a non -conforming use within the residential zone,
neither the single-family site development standards nor the commercial site standards are
specifically required by code. However, in order for the application to satisfy the specific and
general criterion, Staff believes it is appropriate to condition approval on the provision of
setbacks and screening for the parking area and the reduction in driveway widths as outlined
above. These requirements are consistent with what would be required for the use in a
commercial zone as well as what would be required for non-residential uses allowed in
residential zones by special exception.
7. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended
The Comprehensive Plan encourages the re -use of existing buildings so long as their use does
not interfere with the function and character of the neighborhood in which they are located. The
"Housing and Quality of Life" section in the Central District Plan calls for "an attractive and
functional transition between residential areas and adjacent commercial areas through the
management of traffic, landscape buffering and screening, outdoor lighting that provides for safety
but avoids over -lighting and glare, effective management of outdoor service, work, and storage
areas, etc." While the term "area," in this statement, refers more specifically to "zones," staff
believes it applies to this situation of a commercial use is located within a residential zone.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION : Approval of EXC12-00009, a special exception to allow the
non -conforming use that is located in a structure designed for a use that is not allowed in the
zone to convert to another non -conforming Building Trade Use for property located in the
Medium Density Single -Family (RS-8) zone at 1018 Walnut Street, subject to the following
conditions:
• The special exception is for a building trade use only; no additional uses are permitted
on the site. A building permit is required to establish the use.
• The parking area should be set back and screened to minimize views of the parking, to
create separation between vehicle areas and the right-of-way, and to reduce driveway
widths in compliance with access standards in the code:
o 10-feet from the front property line with S2 screening
o 10 feet from the west property line with S3 screening
o 5 feet with no screening from the east property line
Site plan to be approved by staff.
• Hours of operation are limited to 6 AM to 6 PM weekdays.
• Fleet vehicles must be stored inside the building during non -work hours, including
weekends.
• Outdoor storage of equipment, materials, or dumpsters is not allowed.
• All assembly, repair, or construction associated with use must be conducted indoors.
• Signage should be limited to a facia or awning sign in compliance with the zoning code
standard for non-residential uses located in residential zone.
• All outdoor lighting should comply with the zoning code standards for residential zones.
• The applicants shall paint and maintain the front fagade of the building in a manner that
does not detract from the residential character of the zone as proposed in the submitted
elevations.
• The parking area, including driveways, should be paved with a hard surface in
compliance with the parking area standards in the code.
• The applicants will secure a building permit to establish the change of use on the
property.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Zoning code description of Building Trade Use
2. Location maps
3. Aerial views of the site
4. Photos of the site
5. Staff proposed modifications to the parking area
6. Application materials
7. Correspondence (letters from neighbors)
Approved by. ✓A416-
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner,
Department of Planning and Community Development
PAGE 4A-8 144A
Use Categories
2. Examples
This category includes uses from the two subgroups listed below
a. Generat Veterinary clinics; animal grooming establishments; pet crematoriums.
b. Intensive: Kennels; stables.
3. Accessory Uses
Boarding facilities and pet crematoriums within veterinary clinics; overnight sleeping
accommodations for staff; parking; outdoor animal exercise areas associated with
kennels and stables
4.
Exceptions
a. Pet and pet supply stores are classified as Sales -Oriented Retail.
b. Pet crematoriums may also be considered an accessory use to a mortuary or
funeral home.
C. Building Trade Uses ,-90 Mk* �•�-�
1.
Characteristics
Building Trade Uses are characterized by firms who undertake activities of a type that
are specialized either to building construction or to both building and non -building
construction projects. These specialized trade contractors may work on subcontract
from the general contractor, performing only part of the work covered by the general
contract, or they may work directly for the owner of the building or project. Building
trade contractors for the most part perform their work at the site of construction,
although they also may have shops where they perform work incidental to the job
site.
2.
Examples
Electrical, plumbing, heating, and air conditioning contractors, painting and wall
papering services, masons, stone and tile setters, glass and glazing services.
3.
Accessory Uses
Off-street parking, workshops, storage.
4.
Exceptions
a. Contractors and others who perform services off -site are included in the Office
Use category if large equipment and materials are not stored indoors or
outdoors on the site, and fabrication, or similar work, is not conducted on the
site.
b. Businesses that repair and install glass in automobiles, trucks and other vehicles
are classified as Vehicle Repair Uses.
C. Uses specializing in heavy construction work, or that include major fabrication or
assembly activities, or that store large quantities of materials on -site will be
classified as Industrial Service, Manufacturing and Production, and/or
Warehouse and Freight Movement depending on the particular characteristics of
the use (See 14-4A-2 Classifying Uses).
d. Artisans and artists that manufacture or assemble goods made of wood, glass,
metal, tile, stone or similar that are intended for sale to the general public are
categorized as Cottage Industries, as defined in Article 14-9A, General
Definitions.
Title 14: Iowa City Zoning Code Revised 1-5-12
1S Q�Wonv ' --
1S immnS
z
Q
ii sdom
1S 71MOH
is >i
N
LJ
V)
c
00
0
O
Q
U
O
W
N
ALKIAL.-P VIEWS
OA�
im
JPT
s ,
II�''tii.,d."1LU�d� s2iieSrY*JC91��L .�•.•..k:�
r i
"I"!;
Vic'
rm
X12
\ J' \
y I � II � II I� �
I �
VNER CIAEll
I I
II
A"
so
l.1
rc �
Ln<
L
C LU
t
QQ
W
(eJ
Sun 30b
2221zE 1nia,I ngtOn SL
bera Clly IA S2240
V-'
319 338 4344
hm
Int,n�sjohidshae'cm;
CONCEPTUAL ONLN
n� -n
nrr� �n
..!
oJ.7��i.�.7 C.�.7
r:
II
I
co
Ld
II
II
r
LCID
J
EXISTING SIDEWALK
I
�
C
I
0
II
y—
-' UJ
a
C
U7
1 JAL cc -E =
I 10'-0" I I
I co
�� R�wslees
IJ
0 U
_ CD
i09.26' — , t Sheet Description:
0
Site Plan
I
EXISTING SIDEWALK/ Job No WSG
,�.�4 FLAT CURB TO REMAIN -- ( Date MAY 2012
Pti ACCESS LANE WALNUT STREET Xit -- ACCESS LANE e rid K Drawn oy MSK
A2 q2 Chcicd by, JFS
� Sheet No
s (44_60� N A2
A2 SCALE: 1"=10'-0' AT 22`x34' PRINT REPERENtE
PRINTING DATE
0' 6' 10' 16' 20' NORTH
F0� r�R11�I N A 05 05.12 or 12
APPLICATION TO THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SPECIAL EXCEPTION
DATE: %�Q,{,/ j , ZDI Z PROPERTY PARCEL NO. 10142 6 5007
PROPERTY ADDRESS: laid w lhUL c --
PROPERTY ZONE: /ZS6
PROPERTY LOT SIZE: W Si�f plah
APPLICANT: Name: J ln/%Piro -RA)CO
Address: /Ci�l�(q��(✓�_.
Phone: 3/9
CONTACT PERSON: Name:
(if other than applicant) jF -
Address:
Phone:
PROPERTY OWNER: Name:
(if other than applicant)
Address:
Phone:
Specific Requested Special Exception; please list the description and section number in
the zoning code that addresses the specific special exception you are seeking. if you
cannot find this information or do not know which section of the code to look in, please
contact Sarah Walz at 356-5239 or e-mail sarah-walz@iowa-city.org.
9E-TC z akk. . o a -
Purpose for special exception: CL1A.-7ae, Grtr
Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any:
C. Specific Approval Criteria:
Property to be converted to a nonconforming use in a different use category or subgroup that is
the same or lesser in intensity than the existing use.
Criteria to be met:
a. The structure was designed for a use that is currently not allowed in the zone. The
property at 1018 Walnut Street originally was a commercial space within a residential
area. It has remained zoned commercial with a nonconforming use as a Auto Usage.
b. The proposed use is of the same or lesser level of intensity and impact. We are
proposing to use this space as a Building Trade use. A portion of the first floor would
house our administrative office and the remaining portion would be used as material
storage and fleet parking. Hours of operation would be a typical work day 7 am — 4pm.
A majority of our employees drive directly to the job sites, however a small portion of
our employees arrive in the morning at 7am, get into fleet vehicles and depart for the
jobsite by 7:10am. Approximately 2-3 employees would remain at the administrative
office during the work day. The type of business that we conduct through the
administrative office does not involve retail customer interaction and thus there would
be no noise or additional traffic during the work day. Comparatively to the existing use,
we will create much less noise and traffic than an Auto Service establishment.
Currently, Randall Electric employs 12 individuals and the owners Tom and Beth Randall
live within the 100 ft of the building.
c. The proposed use is suitable for the subject structure and site. The structure at 1018 is
an ideal space and appropriate for a Building Trade use. 90% of the first floor will be
used as storage and the remaining portion for Administrative offices.
d. The structure will not be structurally altered or enlarged. —There will be no alteration
structurally or the footprint enlarged. Our plans are to improve the exterior facade of
the building and build out administrative offices inside.
r_.J
�rT,j
y
CD
1
D. General Approval Criteria:
1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health,
safety, comfort, or general welfare.
There are no elements of our business that could be considered detrimental or endangering.
2. The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
Property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish and impair property
values in the neighborhood.
The building at 1018 Walnut has not been improved upon for years. For the most part the
building has sat untouched and in the beginning stages of decay. The funds that we are
planning to put into the building will give a much needed face lift to Iowa City's first automotive
dealership.
3. Establishment of the proposed exception for use as the office and shop for an electrical
contracting business (Building Trades) will result in a considerably less intensive and disruptive
use than the current permitted non -conforming use — Automotive. The proposed use will result
in less traffic, no disruptive noise, does not contaminate the premises, site, or neighborhood
with oil or gasoline, produces no off -gassing nor fumes, and limits commercial use to normal
business hours.
4. Adequate utilities, access, and drainage are current provided, reference the attached site
plan.
r •_,
5. Adequate vehicular ingress and egress to the site is currently in place. As mentioned above
the proposed new use will result in a decrease in traffic, and a reduction of anyO_nge`Stion j
public streets.
vm`s�
- c-a
6. The building is located in a residential neighborhood - RS8 - single family. As such,
commercial regulations or site development standards are not applicable in the residential
zone. Due to the fact this is not a residence, the limited site development requirements
regarding single family use do not to apply to the existing or proposed non -conforming
commercial use.
7. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City.
This proposed variance of use of 1018 Walnut Street is consistent with the City of Iowa City's
comprehensive plan in as much as we are maintaining neighborhood integrity by visually
improving the look of the building at 1018 Walnut, along with a lessening the impact on the
neighborhood. By maintaining a commercial building in the residential zone, we are
maintaining a historical tradition of a mixed building use in older neighborhoods. And finally
from a business point of view, we are creating opportunity for a small locally owned business to
flourish and employ citizens.
zi
0 31
row .•+
fm � -1 0 m Ie 0 -1( 0� to
r♦ 1 W 0 a
O
0
O.m
7 U 7'-40 n Sm -Nm
-••m c c �•
c1
(n Q
7 -(.
a. - Irin m -b 0 n -�- m to
n n 3 0 1
n
3 to
A[
OINm3- F-OAA
c03mto
"Ira-
1
of-1n
W- m n n o' a• J 7
1 1 n 0
•cA
Ac•
m VI ,..comma.o 07
aar <111
vo
�. J
on
0'D
w A '_' L. A
rwo
No ° n 70
J m
a2w o ..
c
1 a
n u S S A 7 Xr
c
7 •.
s
o n
-'1m
"'1 . >. '0
AA
n
-�
-•. ro m OI 7 rojO-°
n > O-f
m
S
7 -40 n Om (J m. N7 J
1 n.~•r 1-O
tooO
p T r-• n �. A O0
to a N
c-
to 0
-1 0, a °i. w
EL
c
jam
C a
3 m p CL (rl r•
n 1
O
I
im
I>
m cr
co o N "1 7 ' c: 7
o'oa'��•�'am
m
U.j ..
A
r0 V
ry A
7
1 m - VI m 7
'�
O A -A O m
7 0 7 N
7
m
n.
7
Q ro
rl O 0' A 7
° 1'o''m xl °.. m
m j J
E
n
0
a v
�. 2 ~' n it ro pal n N 0
s v o ° n rp
N
0
�[�
N� m0�a�+ ry
NcaAx3
"
ro
o
nit
w J c' 7 a y� A m S
_ - cow 1 1r*a
J'
7 J 0
a.nm 7
O
to
m
0
., N
ro a _.
0 A N O n n n 7
n cr
1 (� W J
-1.
7
m J
a M 7 ply -i, 0 A c
7a a O -, 21 -1 cr
m
1
c. a. L a n 0 J.
N a' c _a
E
n
7
'
rn r• p' ro p j 0-�..r(7i i
m
n
m�
-°(.o < o
a .cn
H
N�a-0p0°nmro
O a 7 m
c 0 7 S 7 n..a a. 2 c•
co,
E VI r
7• ...E O
p a
C, O (• p O"
m 0 1 3 g 0 n n
O p( U
n n 7 N m
}•
co n
n ••h c• 7 c p 0 7 �. 0
C• S m O 9 3< N O
n
a 3_
CI
a
o o
J cr o
n m7 "c fJ pl `M O O
n°
n•
m a O...
m (O
1P ry
n 7
0 7 � � � :<
0
. m A
... ct
a n "awn - {(C
O n c-
•
7
am
NO NO.nnAx 'I�to
ct
pa 0
4Axa.
° IV
p
nu
3 A -h a.C)N UI
ronm-•m0 vT
n N7a c•
a 1
7 7 m a rl IV
.
�Y-
yFF
oyF
A m
1 I
r 7 ro c r+ -.a D J (n N
N N a• A -• N A l m UI r'•
•ni s O 3 c•
I to
mJ
_r v w,w
SYA'fiT
I
:c
_
�1
0
0
n
n
h
h
b
'v
v
0
•r o/ - .•r- oo - ff�
r r•
�
n
�p
h
1
irY rr• �u{A•J
t �
0
4
%j
�t
t
i
S o/' � [' a o •' E
c
th � - ill
uu
inn
�
nu
Ell
u
'•'•� -.ate..
/ A
�': •'�
r
y
e
h'
n
r
hJ
(71
Z75
J
..
O
bihiS CQNSUL'I'AN'IS, INC. —_
la.. Ury. 1— 12744 (3191 .31-"U •—
Sr w.... �. ..a s.
.n...dI
yj
lC
y
It
q
�o.� r eF run-vtr
p
,
y
y
ny.<r rl». A �oA+rie,✓ eF 6[atk 2
■ ■
1Y)
�
\
Iowa City Assessor - General Parcel Info
http://www.iowacity.iowaassessors.com/parcel.php?gid=109806
Hosted by vanguard Appraisals Inc.
1065 Sierra Ct NE Suite D i
Cedar Rapids, IA52402
Iowa
City Assessor
home parcel search advanced parcel search I residential sale
w..
search commercial sale search
Pin
1014265007
y
Deed
RANDALL, THOMAS:�
,.
BEWLEY-RANDALL, BETH A
Contract
#_!'� "
Property
1018 WALNUT ST
_. ..
Address
IOWA CITY Map this Address
Class
COMMERCIAL
Map Area
21800-Com
PDF Name
Commercial
�]
z_
SUMMIT HILL ADDITION THAT PART OF
BLK 2
Legal
DESC AS AP #2001049 IN SURVEY BK 43 PG-'---�
75
e o
Section,
Township,
-
Range,
14 79 6
c.
Lot, &
Block
Property
Card
ACE version PDF version
Reports
Current value as of January 01, 2012 - Taxes payable September 2013 and March 2014
Land Value Dwelling Value
Improvement Value Total Value
62,820 0
85,790 148,610
Prior Year Value Information
Year
Land Value
Dwelling Value
Improvement Value
Total Value
2011
62,820
0
85,790
148,610
2010
36,750
0
60,880
97,630
2009
37,280
0
60,880
98,160
2008
37,880
0
60,880
98,760
2007
37,880
0
60,880
98,760
2006
31,560
0
66,160
97,720
2005
31,560
0
66,160
97,720
2004
31,560
0
55,420
86,980
2003
31,560
0
55,420
86,980
2002
31,560
0
50,670
82,230
2001
31,560
0
50,670
82,230
2000
31,560
0
50,670
82,230
Commercial Building Information
Building or Addition Occupancy Year Built Building/Addition Area
Iowa City Assessor - General Parcel Info http://www.iowacit
y.iowaassessors.com/parcel.php?gid=109806
Building 713 Shop 1933
Addition 713 Shop 1933
Addition 713 Shop 1933
Yard Extra Information
Description Item Count
Paving
Lot
Main Lot
Sub Lot 2
Year Built
1
3,728
2,296
2,296
1970
Land Front Foot Information
Front Rear Side 1 Side 2
104.34 104.32 142.13 142.13
4.92 4.92 107.32 107.32
Sale Information
Sale Amount NUTC
Date
9/1 /2010 175,000 0 Normal
7/2/1997 0 12 Foreclosures,forfeitures,Sheriff and Tax Sales or transfers arising
from default
Sketch
Recording
4647-553
2303-106
--iC
U_t �s
y'.
C
r�
Related Information Links
Tax Information Homestead Application GIS Maps
Iowa City Assessor - General Parcel Info ® http://www.iowa�city.iowaassessors.com/parcel.pbp?gid=109806
Assessor Reports
RMIN
Property Record Card Report R' obc Property Record Card Report (Adobe PDF file)
GIS Map Information
ao�w 6 0'
809 o pi I
812�
160'
O ~
292-02' �!'' 818
AGE ST 125.59,
31; : PT 3 49 49' 58' m ry 26_ 5,
2
2'
CO
i °j un Ln 120-5' a
v W
N w u� �n 60, 64.5' � d71-25'
1 Tq6' . 49' 49' S8'
814 52' 52' t°o PT 11
8 9 102 k PT 1' 2 by 84040�
f 66 PT 5 w
Pt � 826: `� `� 916 ;� r928 w � NqF
306 � !� u+ �n v+ Ln r A-7.00,--�
r 7 PT 7 *; u± u, •r o m P 9 -042
31.6' 54.4' 52' 52' 52' 60' 60' S!4 44' 71' .25' 5.61 j "z5 �8�4�g
41:25' a 2i )48
C_1.0_0' 9
155' 6865.5' 80' 111.3' 51.25' S9.25' 136.5' 160'
906 821 �1 837 8 7 4
CO
905 u!
64n u 9
155' 'Q01 13 -- 80' �a 0 o q b o aPT5 0 nO1i 5 910
132.94 -- Ul
o rn pFT 5 0` U7
5' 10' S 1. 25' v? u_' C" s 160'
_lly' 36' 56' 55.5' 55=c 136.5' �N 5
56' _ PT 2 �r
7717 1.06' 820 N 832 4.25 T 4T 3 g2,14 Ui 7 160'
2 922
40' o N b -4 �„846 910 PT 3 H0' u
812 0 o_ PT 4
922 0 160'
4.25' ,n
77' 76' 133.5' 1 136' 1 S6' 55.5- ,� S65C 80' 60 l 160'
r7
Printer Friendly version
Note: Map information not included
Hosted by yanguaM Appraisals Inc. home parcel search advanced parcel search residentiaf sal6 search I commercial
1065 Sierra Ct NE Suite D sale search
` Cedar Rapids, IA52402 ,. _y
Owner: Catherine C
840 S. Summit St.
Iowa City, Iowa 52:
Use: Residential
Owner: Benjamin Pt
844 S. Summit Strt
Iowa City, Iowa 62;
Use: Residential
Owner: Jeffery Kra
848 S. Summit St.
Iowa City, Iowa 52;
Use: Residential
Owner: Ted Heald
906 S. Summit St.
Iowa City, Iowa 62:
Use: Residential
X12 ALL Roc
A3 WORK E
IN
X13 14
A3 A3
PROPE[
ITYPICF
EXISTING St
TO REMAIN
Iowa Interstate Railroad, LTD
5900 6th Street S.W.
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 62404
Phone 319-298-6400
Use: Railroad
Owner: Tom Randall
1020 Kirkwood Avenue
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Use: Residential
Owner: Harold Rogers
1021 Walnut St,
Iowa City, Iowa 62240
Use: Residential
X1 SATELLITE IMAGE
A3
r E:�,Z� vn
I
III r===-==�1
I II � II II
I II II II
I 4 �I
I
EXISTING STAIRS
I
I
I I
EXISTING LIGHT
-- PARKING SPACE i I I POLE
ITYP.I
s I I I I --
o; I I I I
Y I I I I I
�° I I
19 I I I I
Im
EXISTING CONCRETE I I I EXISTING GRAVEL
- PAVING TO REMAIN I I I I PAVING TO REMAIN �•
I I I I
I I I 109.26r - I- ----�- - - -
'--- I I I I
EXISTING SIDEWALK/
P FLAT CURB TO REMAIN ACCESS LANE - WALNUT STREET X11
— - ACCESS LANE
A2
n Site Plan
A2 SCALE: 1"-10'-0' AT 22"a34" PRINT REFERENCE
0' 6' 10. Y 16. 2n. NORTH
q2
EXISTING SIDEWALK
PRINTING DATE 11
05.05.92
U
a�
U
L-
`�
Sul P, 305
222%_-E Washinglnnsi.
Imva Cily IA 52210
Vac:
314 330 4344
EIIH'7.
pling,jollnfshaY, cm,
k,X 12V I II sh".
.'A ICLD M. Y.0
THIS URAWING IS
CONCEPTUAL ONLY.
DO NUT USE FOR
REGULATORYAPPROMIL
BIDDING. PERMITTING
OR C'.ONSTRUCTION
ItL.
0 CZ
_o Q
m — a�
o LLJ CD
M
Cz
wop
c-
Res
�y U
s%
Sheet Description
Site Plan
JDo No WSG
Dale. MAY 2012
Drawn oy MSK
r'hm.,l h.- We
i
I II II II
1 II II II
I 11 II II
I 11 II 11
I II II II
11
I 1 I I
1 I I I
1 I I I
I I I I
I 1 I I
i I I I
1 I I I
I I 1 I
1 I I I
1 I i 1
1 1 1 I
I I 1 I
1 1 1 I
I I I 1
I 1 I I
I 1 1 I
I I I I
1 1 1 i
I I I I
1 i I 1
I I 1 1
I 1 I I
I I I 1
1 1 I 1
I 1 1 I
1 I I 1
j I
I I
1 1
1 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 1 1
1 I
I
I �
C
j
1
i
I
I
1
i
1
1
I
I
1
I
1
1
I
1
1
1
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
1
I
-L
1
I
1
1
1
I
I
�
-Y
M M
—First Floor Plan w/ Vehicles j����
A5 SCALE: 1 8 77 AT 2227INT 04° PRRpm FEREWN
0' 4' 8' 12' 16' NQPTH
i�
C=.7
AZ
w �
,�,`.
L� "�.
�—�
u�
-=� c�
r--
.-�,
Sarah Walz
From: Susan Bryant <leaderservices@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 1:31 PM
To: Sarah Walz
Subject: Re: Input to Proposed Modifications to Office: 1018 Walnut
Dear Sarah,
Much appreciation for the opportunity to provide input regarding proposed modifications to the
commercial property at 1018 Walnut. Though I am across the railroad tracks to the north, and just
outside the radius for official notification in this regard, I am close enough to be impacted by this
property and its relationship to the neighborhood.
I also appreciated the opportunity to see the proposed plans to renovate the facility as provided by
the community input event. I was very pleased to see the improvements planned for this property.
I moved to Iowa City last fall after a two-year search for the right home. Even though I'm in a different
neighborhood, I am directly across the railroad tracks and was concerned enough about the current
outside appearance of this property to seriously question whether to purchase a home
nearby. Having seen the plans for both the facility's facade and interior, I am reassured that the
neighborhood will be upgraded, and the changes will be positive. These modifications have my
support.
Sincerely,
Sue Bryant
831 Clark Street
Iowa City, lA 52240
5121914-0679 (cell phone)
leaderservices(�yahoo. com
May the road rise up to meet you and the wind be at your back.
And until we meet again, may God hold you in the palm of his hand.
From: Sarah Walz <Sarah-Walz@iowa-city.org>
To: "leaderservices@yahoo.com" <leaderservices@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thu, May 31, 2012 9:29:47 AM
Subject: FW: Input to Proposed Modifications to Office: 1018 Walnut
Susan,
Beth Randall forwarded to me an e-mail from you expressing your support for changes being proposed for 1018
Walnut Street.
If you wish for the board to know of your support, I recommend modifying your e-mail to Beth and sending it
to me. The e-mail should address the Board of Adjustment directly. If I have your e-mail to me by June 7, I can
Sarah Walz
From: Ruth Hesseltine <ruthanne904@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 5:01 PM
To: Sarah Walz
Subject: Special Exemption - 1018 Walnut Street
Dear Ms. Walz,
I am writing to you in support of Beth and Tom Randall's application for special exemption of the
property at 1018 Walnut Street for use by their company Randall Electric. My husband, Joe
Hesseltine, owned and opperated the business JH Mechanics in that building for 22 years and I have
connections to this neighborhood dating back to 1964. 1 currently have resided at 904 Clark Street for
the past 18 years.
have visited with the Randall's, toured the building, and reviewed their plans for renovation. It is my
view that this renovation will be a wonderful improvement to our neighborhood. It is very exciting for
me to know they will work hard to benefit everyone's enjoyment of a historic building I'm also think
their business will be a welcome addition.
It is my hope that the Board of Adjustment will approve this application.
Sincerely,
Ruth Hesseltine
Sarah Walz
From: Debra DeLaet <debra.delaet@msn.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 10:21 AM
To: Sarah Walz
Subject: support for renovation of Randall property on Walnut St.
To Whom it May Concern:
We're writing to express our support for the proposed renovation/ changed usage of the building on Walnut St. owned by
Tom Randall and Beth Bewley -Randall.
Historically, the building in question appeared run-down and has been a bit of an eyesore in the neighborhood. The
Randalls already have improved the property and the neighborhood by cleaning up the parking lot and outside of the
building. We have seen the plans for the renovation, and they look beautiful. We are confident that their plans for the
building will improve both the quality of the property and the neighborhood. We strongly support their plans for the
property and urge the city to approve their plans for a change of use.
Please let us know if you have any questions or need additional information.
Sincerely,
Debra DeLaet and Todd Knoop
1004 Kirkwood Ave.
Iowa City, IA 52240
Sarah Walz
From:
kjamoca@mchsi.com
Sent:
Tuesday, June 05, 2012 1:19 PM
To:
Sarah Walz
Subject:
Board of Adjustment
Dear Board of Adjustment,
My name is Katie Iverson and my husband, Bill and I live at 922 S Summit St. I am writing to discuss the proposal for the
change of usage for the building at 1018 Walnut Street.
My husband and I are very excited about the development of the property at 1018 Walnut Street by Randall Electic. Our
neighbors, Tom and Beth Randall, are simply amazing and are valuable assets to the community. Randall Electic does
high quality work and it is the type of small business the town should be encouraging.
We are excited about the proposed plans to renovate the facility at 1018 Walnut St and see it as an improvement to
how the property has been used and has visually appeared since we moved to the neighborhood in 2005.
We know their presence has had and will have a positive impact on the building and neighborhood. Their renovation
and development of this property greatly improves the quality of our beloved neighborhood.
We have seen their plans and are excited that the renovations take into consideration the historical aspects of the
building as well as making some modern improvements especially to the facade.
We ask that you as the Board of Adjustment vote in favor of the proposal regarding 1018 Walnut St. Please contact us if
you have any further questions.
Katie and Bill Iverson
922 S Summit St
Iowa City Iowa 52240
319 3214824
City of Iowa city
MEMORANDUM
Date: June 13, 2012
To: Board of Adjustment
From: Sarah Walz, Associate Planner
Sarah E. Holecek, First Assistant City Attorney
RE: APL12-00001: An appeal of a decision made by the Building Official to
deny a building permit for a wind turbine to be located in the Office Research Park
(ORP) zone at 2510 North Dodge Street.
BACKGROUND:
In an e-mail dated April 5, Building Inspector Loren Brumm informed the applicant that a
requested building permit to install a 142.9-foot' wind turbine on property located in the
Office Research Park (ORP) was being denied because the zoning code does not allow
wind turbines as an accessory use in the subject zone.
At the request of the applicant's attorney, the Director of Housing and Inspection Services,
Doug Boothroy, reviewed the denial. In a letter dated April 12, Boothroy informed the
applicant's attorney that he concurred with the inspector's determination that the use was
not permitted in the zone. Citing the zoning code, Boothroy stated that a wind turbine is not
a permitted accessory use because it is not "... customarily incidental to and commonly
associated with the permitted use" [an office use]. He goes on to note that, at the request of
Pearson, the Planning Department would draft an amendment to the code to allow wind
turbines.
SCOPE OF REVIEW:
Iowa Code gives the Board authority to hear and decide appeals where it is alleged there is
error in any decision made by the zoning official. To that end, the Board may reverse or
affirm the official's decision, in whole or in part, or may modify the decision and may make
such decision as ought to be made, and thus has all the powers of the officer from whom the
appeal was made. In the case of a five -member board, the concurring vote of three
members is required to reverse any decision of the zoning official. Iowa Code §§414.12(1),
414.13, 414.14.
ANALYSIS:
The regulation regarding the determination of principal and accessory uses is
contained in Chapter 4 of the zoning code. Under 14-4A-2A-4, the code states:
"Any use that cannot be clearly classified within an existing use category by the
procedures noted above is prohibited, unless incorporated into the Title by a Zoning
Code Text Amendment.... A specific use that cannot be classified into an existing use
category shall not be listed as permitted, provisional, or a special exception in any zone
without first establishing a new use category within the Article by Zoning Code Text
Amendment."
' Note that wind turbines are measured from the base of the tower to the tip of the turbine blade. In this
case the proposed tower is 115 feet. The turbine blade extends the height of the equipment to 142.9 feet.
June 8, 2012
Page 2
The regulations specific to accessory uses are set forth in Article C: "Accessory Uses
and Buildings," which begins as follows (14-4C-1):
"Accessory uses, buildings or other structures customarily incidental to and commonly
associated with a permitted use, provisional use, or special exception are permitted,
provided they are operated and maintained according to the following standards:
A. The accessory use is subordinate to the principal use of the property and
contributes to the comfort, convenience or necessity of occupants, customers, or
employees of the principal use;
B. The accessory use, building, or structure is under the same ownership as the
principal use or uses on the property;
C. The accessory use, building or structure does not include structures,
structural features, or activities inconsistent with the uses to which they are
accessory;
D. Except for off-street parking located on a separate lot as approved according
to the provisions set forth in section 14-5A-4F, Alternatives to Minimum Parking
Requirements, the accessory use, building, or structure is located on the same
lot as the principal use or uses to which it is accessory; and
E. The accessory use, building, or structure conforms to the applicable base
zone regulations and to the specific approval criteria and development
standards contained in this Article.
The appeal relies on an abbreviated definition of "accessory use" from Chapter 9 of the
code: "Definitions." That definition does not stand in place of or apart from the regulations for
accessory uses. It is staff's contention that to ignore the complete definition, which includes
"customarily incidental and commonly associated with," would allow nearly any use to be
claimed as an accessory use.
The Supreme Court of Iowa discussed language similar to that above in the case of City of
Emmetsbnurq v. Mullen, 129 N.W.2d 677, 678-79 (Iowa 1964), and adopted the following
rationale from 101 C.J.S. Zoning, section 176:
"A use is 'accessory' when it is customarily incident to the main use, or when it is so
necessary or so commonly to be expected in connection with the main use that it cannot be
supposed that the ordinance was intended to prevent it".
In the Emmetsburg case, the issue was whether a three stall garage constructed in a
residential zone and housing two pickup trucks for the owner's business as well as a private
automobile violated the zoning ordinance by not being an accessory use. There was
testimony that many occupants of single-family residences, scattered throughout the City,
used garages for the parking of vehicles and equipment, including heavy equipment, used in
the occupant's business. In upholding the use, the court found that this common practice
was relevant to what construction or interpretation city officials and city residents placed
upon the ordinance with respect to accessory uses.
See also, Grandview Baptist Church v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Davenport.
Iowa, 301 N.W.2d 704, 708-709 (Iowa 1981)(citing the above and finding no error in Board
determination that 32' x 45' steel storage building constructed by church was not an
accessory use incidental to the church).
June 8, 2012
Page 3
The Accessory Use Regulations in the code provide a list of uses and structures considered
accessory and the specific criteria for allowing them. These criteria include measures such
as setbacks, screening, or size limitations intended to limit the scale or intensity of the use
and to minimize any negative impacts associated with the use or structure. The list of
accessory uses includes a wide range of uses, from decks and patios to pet shelters and
cages to drive -through facilities. Several accessory uses have entire code chapters devoted
to their regulation—i.e. outdoor lighting, off-street parking, and signs. [The Use Category
section of the code provides a list of anticipated accessory uses for each principal use
listed.]
The permitted accessory uses most similar to the proposed wind turbine in height or function
are communication towers and mechanical structures. Communication towers (14-4C-2H)
are allowed by special exception only and are subject to setbacks and other regulations
intended to ensure public safety and to reduce the visual impact of the tall tower structure.
Another accessory use that has some similar features is mechanical structures (14-4C-2N).
The regulations for mechanical structures contemplate only ground level and rooftop
structures and limit the size of the structure and require screening the use from public view.
In staff's view, the wind turbine cannot be classified under either of these permitted uses.
At this time, stand-alone wind turbines of the size proposed by Pearson are relatively new in
their application to non -utility uses. The use has not been contemplated by the City's zoning
code. Therefore, in accord with 14-4A-2A-4 of the code (cited above) "a specific use that
cannot be classified into an existing use category shall not be permitted ... without first
establishing a new use category within the Article by Zoning Code Text Amendment." As
noted in both the e-mail and letter denying the permit, City staff is in the process of drafting
an amendment to the zoning code to allow these sorts of wind turbines in appropriate zones
with appropriate conditions to ensure their safety and to control potential impacts on
adjacent properties.
CONCLUSION: While the 142.9-foot wind turbine proposed by Pearson would satisfy some
of the standards for an accessory use, the specific use is not "customarily incidental to or
commonly associated with" the office use. The proposed wind turbine does not fit under any
accessory use listed in the zoning code, therefore a code amendment is required in order to
allow the proposed accessory use. For these reasons, staff concurs with the decision of the
building official to deny the building permit.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application requesting appeal
Approved by:
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Department of Planning and Community Development
APL Iz-oaWl
APPLICATION TO THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
APPEAL
DATE: 1 1-May-2012 PROPERTY PARCEL NO.0736326001
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2510 North Dodge Iowa City, IA 52245
PROPERTY ZONE: ORP PROPERTY LOT SIZE: 50.1 AC m/I
APPLICANT:
Name: Robert Wetherell
Address: 2510 North Dodge Iowa City, IA 52245
Phone: 319.339.6552
Michael J. Pugh
CONTACT PERSON:
Name:
(if other than applicant)
Bradley & Riley PC One S Gilbert Iowa City, IA 52240
Address:
Phone: 319.358.5562
PROPERTY OWNER:
Name: National Computer Systems, Inc. dba NCS Pearson, Inc.
(if other than applicant)
5601 Green Valley Drive Bloomington, MN 55437
Address:
Phone: 952.681.3000
1
The Board of Adjustment is empowered to hear and decide appeals where it is alleged there is
error in any order, requirement, decision or determination made by the City Manager or
designee in the enforcement of the Zoning Code or of any ordinance adopted pursuant thereto.
Please see 14-8C-3 in the Zoning Code for detailed information on the appeal procedure.
Planning staff are available to assist applicants with questions about the appeal process or
regulations and standards in the code.
Decision being appealed: The applicant alleges that an error has been made by the following
administrative official (list title) Director, Housing a Inspection Services on (date) 4r1212012
in enforcing the Zoning Ordinance in relation to the property listed above . Please indicate the
section of the Zoning Ordinance cited in the official's decision:
Article C 14-4C-1
Purpose of the Appeal: The applicant wishes to challenge the above decision based on the
interpretation of the following section(s) of the Iowa City Zoning Ordinance. (This section of the
code may or may not be different from the section cited in the decision being challenged.)
14-9A-1
Summary: In the space provided below, or on a separate sheet, summarize the basis for your
appeal referring to the code sections listed above and providing sound reason(s) for overturning
the decision. (Provide evidence demonstrating that the decision was based on an improper or
erroneous interpretation of the Zoning Code).
See attached letter from Michael J. Pugh of Bradley & Riley PC hand delivered to the City of Iowa City Building Division dated April 4, 2012.
See also attached Exhibit "A"
Remedy desired:
Issuance of building permit to construct proposed 95kW wind turbine as described in the
permit application dated April 4, 2012 and provided to the City of Iowa City, IA.
ppdadmiriappeal-boase.doc
2
M: (319) 930-9416
E: kurt.smithftearson.com
From: Loren Brumm [mailto:Loren-Brumm@iowa-city.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2012 9:11 AM
To: Smith, Kurt
Cc: Tim Hennes; Julie Tallman; Jann Ream
Subject: FW: Pearson wind turbine
Hi Kurt,
I received the building permit application for the wind turbine generator at 2510 N. Dodge St here in Iowa City.
Currently I am unable to complete the application since the use is not permitted in the zone, and have denied the permit
application. I have included below e-mail correspondence talking about this matter. Please let us know if you want any
additional information or have questions.
Once(if) the use becomes allowed in the zone we would need additional project information before being able to
continue processing the building permit. This includes, but may not be limited to:
1. A major site plan review would need to be completed. The current site plan is labeled "Preliminary, not for
construction"
2. Plans/information on the tower construction would be needed.
3. Foundation design needs to be signed/sealed by an engineer licensed in the State of Iowa. The e-mailed
foundation calculations are signed by a Minnesota engineer.
4. A special inspection form, provided by the City of Iowa City, would need to be completed. Allowable soil
bearing pressures will need to be confirmed on -site.
Regards, I�
Loren Brumm:: -
Plans Examiner---
319-356-5123 i m'
From: Julie Tallman
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 4:54 PM
To: 'ihodgins@shive-hattery.com'; SLUErH@shive-hattery.com
Cc: Loren Brumm; Tim Hennes; Karen Howard; Bob Miklo
Subject: Pearson wind turbine
Isaac and Shaun, I was wrong in my interpretation that a wind turbine is a permitted accessory use in the ORP Zone.
Accessory uses are, by definition, "customary incidental to and commonly associated with" a permitted use. Wind
turbines are not customary or commonly utilized; therefore, our zoning ordinance does not permit wind turbines.
Planning staff had previously brought the matter before Planning and Zoning, but other priorities prevailed and you now
have the opportunity to request an amendment to the zoning ordinance, in order that language might be developed to
allow wind turbines under specified conditions.
I looked on our website for the appropriate application to request a zoning ordinance amendment and did not find a
link. Please contact the Planning Department at 319/356-5230 to get an application.
Julie
4/8/2012
t
F. Jumes Bradley
Byron G. Riley
Michael K. Denney
Patrick M. Courtney
Donald G. Thompson
Ke5y R. Boier
Gregory J. Seyfor
Dean A Spina
loseah F. schmnN
Bradley G. Hart
William J. Neppl
William T. McCarron
Maureen G. Kenney
Vernon P. Squires
Timothy 1, Hill
Paul D. Bums
Michael J. Pugh
Janice J. Kerkove
Noncy A. `blood
April 4, 2012
VIA HAND DELIVERY
City of Iowa City
Building Division
c/o Doug Boothroy, Director
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
BRADLEY SL RILEY PC
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS
CEDAR RAPIDS - lCWA CITY
TCA'F:)t PucE
OiF. Sat rrti G}LHF.RT S7REcT
10WA CITY, to 52240-3914
TELEPHONE 319-466.1511
TAX: 319-358.5560
Re: Pearson
Wind Turbine — Building Permit Application
Dear Doug:
Kevin C. Popp
Laura C. Mueller
Kimberly H. Blankenship
Joseph W.Younker
Jessica A. Doro
Jeremy B. P. Hagen
Natalie K. Ditmors
Adom S. Tarr
Raymond R. Ri. kol Jr,
Charles W. Showalter
WEBSITE ADDRESS:
�wJ��ttl_Syrilcv. coin
F-MAIL ADDRESS:
mpuL&CF(bradleyriley.com
DIRECT DIAL:
319-358.5562
I represent Pearson in local real estate matters. Please find enclosed the Building Permit
Application submitted by Pearson in connection with the proposed installation of a 115 foot
monopole wind turbine on the southwest comer of its property located at 2510 North Dodge
Street, Iowa City, Iowa. Pearson has already received approval of the wind turbine from the
Federal Aviation Administration. To give you an idea of scale, the proposed Pearson wind
turbine is twenty-six (26) times smaller than the wind turbine located at Kirkwood Community
College in Cedar Rapids.
Previously, Pearson's consultants, Shive-Hattery, Inc., were informed by City Officials in
December of last year that the only municipal approval that was required in connection of the
installation of the wind turbine was the application for a building permit together with a site plan
showing the location of the proposed structure. Pearson relied upon this information to its
detriment, and issued purchase orders with contractors for the installation of the wind turbine in
the aggregate amount of $314,000.00.
(01208553.DOC )
BRADLEY & RILEY PC
April 4, 2012
Page 2
On March 27s', Shive-Hattery officials were informed by Julie Tallman that the City was
previously wrong in its interpretation that a wind turbine was a permitted accessory use in an
Office Research Park Zone. Ms. Tallman indicated that accessory uses are, by definition
"customary incidental to and commonly associated with" a permitted use. She concluded that
Iowa City's Zoning Ordinance does not permit the construction of wind turbines and directed
Shive-Hattery to the City's Planning and Zoning Department to request an amendment to the
zoning ordinance.
The Zoning Code defines an Accessory Building / Use / Structure as follows:
Iowa City Code 14-9A-1:
ACCESSORY BUILDING/USE/STRUCTURE: A building, structure, or use which:
A. Is subordinate to the principal use of the property and contributes to the comfort,
convenience or necessity of occupants, customers, or employees of the principal use; and
B. Is under the same ownership as the principal use or uses on the property; and
C. Does not include structures, structural features, or activities inconsistent with the uses
to which they are accessory; and
D. Except for off street parking located on a separate lot as approved through a special
exception, is located on the same lot as the principal use or uses to which it is accessory.
Please note that the definition does not include "customary incidental to and commonly
associated with" as alluded to by Ms. Tallman. That language is found in 14-4C-1, and is in
reference to a permitted use, provisional use or special exception, not an accessory use. We
believe based on this definition in 14-9A-1, that a wind turbine clearly is a permitted accessory
use to the Pearson building. The wind turbine is designed to generate clean electrical energy that
will contribute greatly to the comfort and convenience of the Pearson campus.
Furthermore, there is established precedent in Iowa City for the installation of wind turbines.
There may be, others, but we do know that the City of Iowa City has installed a wind turbine at
the East Side Recycling Center on Scott Boulevard and there is a wind turbine located at the
University of lowa's Madison Street Services Building, which is a part of the Sustainable Energy
Discovery District. Both of these wind turbines are located in public zones. However, the
Zoning Code does not make a distinction between what is a permitted accessory use in a public
zone and what is a permitted accessory use in an office research park zone. Both zones refer to
Chapter 144C for approval and development criteria for accessory uses.
Pearson is hopeful that the City will look favorably on Pearson's Building Permit Application_
We are confident installation will meet site development standards under the City Code. If the
City wishes to establish further ordinances regarding the installation of wind turbines, we suggest
(01208553.00C )
BRADLEY & RILEY PC
April 4, 2012
Page 3
that those be developed through the Planning and Community Development Department together
with input from the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Thank you in advance for your attention and consideration of this matter.
Sincerely.,
B EY & RIRY
WP/dab 4ii J. put,
Enclosures
cc: Pearson
Tom Markus, City Manager (via e-mail only)
Eleanor Dilkes, City Attorney (via e-mail only)
(01208531DOC I
E-1
1
CITY 0 IOWA CITY
• Site Address: _
OR
• Lot & Subdivision:
BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION
2510 North Dodge Street
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319)356-5120
fax (319) 341-4020
Date: 4/3/2012
• Owner/Tenant: Pearson (NCS)
Address: 2510 N. Dodge St. City: Iowa City State IA Zip 52245
Phone: 319-358-4351 Email: kurt.smith@pearson.com
• General Contractor: Talk, Inc. (Adam Suetflow)
Address: 312 East River Circle City, Sauk Centre state MN Zip 56378
Daytime Phone: 320-351-8255 Other Phone: 320-491-8356
Subcontractors:
• Plumber: n/a Electrician: TBD
• Mechanical: n/a Sewer/Water: n/a
• Fire Sprinkler Installer. n/a Fire Alarm Installer: n/a
• Project Description: Installation of a 95kw Wind Turbine on SW corner of property.
• Total Value of Project: $ 314,000
(Exclude cost of land)
r
289,620 c='
• Permit Value of Project: $
(Exclude cast of plumb.. mech., elec., fire alarm, fire sprinkler & land)
Contact Person Name: Kurt Smith Phone: 31 "- 301-9416-
Is project subject to:
Iowa Architectural law?
Yes No
lmmmz■*;
Formal site plan review? ...................... ❑
Plot plan review? ................................. ❑
TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF:'
Site Zone:
Lot Area:
❑ f Fees/Escrows Required:
❑ [ Other.
Energy Code review? ........................... ❑ ❑
Historic preservation review? ..........
Flood
Staff initials:
H(sW0Wdgpmwpp.doc &1307
A'�L!jzk-
1 ;J
z
fro_
M
M
LL
0 0 IF A 0 a 0 v & a
OR
El
April 12, 2012
Michael J. Pugh
Bradley and Riley, PC
Attorneys and Counselors
Tower Place
One S. Gilbert Street
Iowa City, IA 52240-3914
Dear Mike:
l t t
6`
CITY OF IOWA CITY
410 East Washington Strcet
Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826
(319) 356-5000
(319) 356-5009 FAX
www.icgov.org
This is in response to your letter of April 4, 2012, concerning Pearson's wind turbine building permit
application.
As I mentioned in our phone conversation of April 11, 20121, Loren Brumm, Building Inspector emailed
Kurt Smith, Data Center Facilities Supervisor, on April 5, 2012 advising him that Pearson's building permit
for construction of a wind turbine was denied. The building permit was denied because the wind turbine is
not considered an allowed accessory use under the Iowa City Zoning Code.
I reviewed the decision to deny the building permit with Legal and Planning staff and conclude that the
wind turbine is not a permitted accessory use because the wind turbine is not "...customarily incidental to
and commonly associated with the permitted use..." in this case office use. The Zoning Code language
quoted is from Article C Accessory Use and Buildings, 14-4C1, General Approval Criteria and is attached
to this letter.
Karen Howard, Associate Planner, has been communicating with Kate Minett from Pearson's and Karen
indicates that Shive-Hattery on behalf of Pearson's is going to be submitting an application to amend the
Zoning Code to allow small wind energy systems with appropriate standards.
However, Pearson also has the right to appeal the decision to deny the building permit to the Board of
Adjustment. If you wish to appeal the decision to deny the building permit you must make application to
the Board of Adjustment and that appeal could be heard as early as May, 2012. Please contact Sarah
Walz, Associate Planner, abput scheduling an appeal with the Board.
inc e ,
vV
ouglas . Boothroy
Director Housing and Inspection
cc: m Markus
ren Howard
hisadmAtrs/db-mpugh.doc
r_�
C-
�� t..-�
•
_ li
PAGE 4C-1 144C
Accessory Uses and Buildings
Article C. Accessory Uses and Buildings
,14-4C-1 General Approval Criteria
Accessory uses, buildings or other structures customarily incidental to and commonly associated
with a permitted use, provisional use or special exception are permitted, provided they are
operated and maintained according to the following standards:
A. The accessory use is subordinate to the principal use of the property and contributes to
the comfort, convenience or necessity of occupants, customers, or employees of the
principal use;
B. The accessory use, building or structure is under the same ownership as the principal use
or uses on the property;
C. The accessory use, building or structure does not include structures, structural features, or
activities inconsistent with the uses to which they are accessory;
D. Except for off-street parking located on a separate lot as approved through a special
exception, the accessory use, building, or structure is located on the same lot as the
principal use or uses to which it is accessory; and
E. The accessory use, building, or structure conforms to the applicable base zone regulations
and to the specific approval criteria and development standards contained in this Article.
Any accessory uses listed in the following subsections must comply with the conditions listed.
As noted, some require special exception approval from the Board of Adjustment. If a
regulation in the Base Zone Chapter conflicts with a regulation contained in this Article, the
regulation that is more specific to the situation applies. When regulations are equally specific or
when it is unclear which regulation to apply, the more restrictive regulation will govern.'
A. Accessory Apartments
Accessory Apartments are permitted in the RS-5, RS-8, RS-12, RM-12, RM-20, and RNS-20
zones in owner -occupied Detached Single Family Dwellings and Detached Zero Lot Line
Dwellings and in buildings accessory to these same dwelling types, provided the following
conditions are met:
1. Permit Required
Prior to the establishment of any accessory apartment, the owner of the principal'
dwelling unit must obtain a rental permit from the Department of Housing and
Inspection Services according to the applicable procedures set forth in Chapter 8 of
this Title, Review and Approval Procedures.
2. Ownership and Occupancy
a. The owner of the property on which an accessory apartment is_located,'Must
occupy at least one of the dwelling units on the premises as the _ _i rmanent
legal resident.
b. The accessory apartment and the principal dwelling must be +the -same__
ownership. '� w L
Title 14: Iowa City Zoning Code Revised 07-0609
Exhibit "A"
The Director of Housing and Inspection Services opined on April 12, 2012 that the wind
turbine at issue is not a permitted accessory use because the wind turbine is not, ".. .
customarily incidental to an commonly associated with the permitted use." This
conclusion cites to Section 14-4-C1 of the Zoning Code.
As stated in Michael Pugh's prior April 4, 2012 correspondence, the language cited by
the City refers to a permitted use, provisional use or special exception but not an
accessory use. We continue to believe that the City's citation to Section 14-4-CI is
misplaced. Nevertheless, even if the City's position is to be addressed on its own terms,
jurisprudence in other jurisdictions explicitly rejects the City's conclusion.
In Hamby, et. al. v. Board of Zoning Appeals, 932 N.E.2d 1251 (Indiana, 2011),
neighboring homeowners brought an action for declaratory relief reversing the local
Board of Zoning's decision to permit a wind turbine tower as an accessory use.' Under
the applicable zoning ordinance an "accessory use or structure" was defined as a building
or use that was "incidental or subordinate to and customary in connection with the
principal building or use and which is located on the same lot with such principal
building or use." Id. at 1254.
The neighboring homeowners argued that "customary" means "usual or habitual" and
that even if a free standing wind turbine were "incidental or subordinate" that it could not
under any reasonable interpretation be construed as "customary." Id at 1254. The
county countered that the word "customary" is to be considered in the context of the
particular building or structure and not as a general standard. In addition, the county
argued that it is circular to argue that a wind turbine must be customary before it may be
a permitted accessory use because if it is not permitted to be constructed it would never
become customary.
The Indiana Court of Appeals noted that the phrase "customarily in connection with" was
not defined in the applicable ordinance and therefore decided to apply the plain, ordinary
and usual meaning. Id. at 1255. The court further framed its analysis by noting that
ordinances inhibiting the use of real property are strictly construed in favor of the free use
of land.2 Id. The court then concluded, "We do not believe that the `customary 1ri.
connection with' requirement for an accessory use structure should be con%rued`so as to
prevent the implementation of new technologies ..." Id. The court added:tat to
See also Tink- Wig Mountain Lake Forest Property Owners Association v. Laxkawaxen Township Zoning_
Hearing Board, 986 A.2d 935 (Penn. 2009) (Affirming that a wind turbine tower is an accessoryatse under__,.
the applicable ordinance which defined an accessory use or structure as "A use of land or of a building or
portion thereof customarily incidental and subordinate to the principal use of the land or building�nd
located on the same lot with such principal use." (emphasis added). -
Z In Iowa, zoning restrictions must also be strictly construed in favor of the free use of property. See
Greenawalt v. Zoning Bd ofAdjustment of City of Davenport, 345 N.W.2d 537 (Iowa 1984); Linn County
v. City of Hiawatha, 311 N.W.2d 95, 100 (Iowa 1981); Business Ventures, Inc. v. Iowa City, 234 N.W.2d
376, 381 (Iowa 1975); Jersild v. Sarcone, 260 Iowa 288, 296, 149 N.W.2d 179,185 (1967).
(01219320.DOC )
conclude otherwise would be contrary to public policy, especially in light of state and
federal incentives to renewable energy systems. Id.
The City erroneously cites to Section 14-4C-1 to arrive at the conclusion that a wind
turbine tower is not an accessory use under the zoning code. Courts that have examined
language almost identical to Section 14-4C-1 have reached the opposite conclusion. The
correct definition of an accessory use is found at Section 14-9A-1.
The City has already allowed the installation of wind turbines in publicly zoned property
which is contrary to the reasoning found in Mr. Boothroy's April 12, 2012 letter.
(01219320.DOC )
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MAY 9, 2012 — 5:45 PM
CITY HALL, EMMA HARVAT HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, T. Gene Crischilles, Brock Grenis, Will
Jennings, Caroline Sheerin
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Walz, Karen Howard, Sarah Holecek
OTHERS PRESENT: David Kieft, Kevin Monson, Dan Black, Tom Gelman
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
None.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM.
ROLL CALL: All were present.
A brief opening statement was read by the Chair outlining the role and purpose of the Board and
the procedures that would be followed in the meeting.
CONSIDERATION OF THE MARCH 28 AND APRIL 11 MEETING MINUTES:
Jennings moved to approve the minutes for March 28th, 2012.
Baker seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0.
Baker moved to approve the minutes for April 11th, 2012.
Grenis seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0.
SPECIAL EXCEPTION
EXC12-00007: Discussion of an application submitted by MidwestOne Bank for a special
exception for a temporary drive -through banking facility on property located in the Community
Business Service (CB-2) zone at 509 S Dubuque Street.
Board of Adjustment
May 9, 2012
Page 2 of 7
Walz reminded the board that at this meeting they are looking at two related special exceptions.
She said the first application deals with the property to the east of the alley on the location map,
which is the old Sabin School that was formerly owned by the Iowa City School District. She
said that property was purchased by the University of Iowa with the hope of trading or working
with MidWestOne Bank to relocate their property that is a block north on Clinton Street for the
reconstruction of the music school. She noted that this juggling of properties started shortly
after the flood of 2008 to relocate University properties out of the flood plain. She explained that
MidWestOne Bank would like to temporarily relocate their facility from Clinton Street to the
Sabin School Building and use the back area for the drive -through while they plan their new
bank that would be located on the corner of Harrison and Clinton Streets.
Walz said that cars would most likely come into the drive -through by accessing the alley from
Harrison, which is a low -volume street. She said there are two lanes in the drive -through and
each lane has two stacking spaces so there would be space for a total of three cars in each
lane.
Walz said that the area is part of the Riverfront Crossings Downtown Plan. She stated that the
property is currently undergoing a rezoning to move from public ownership to private use and
will be rezoned to Community Business Service (CB-2). She said drive-throughs are allowed in
the CB-2 zones by special exception. She said in the next year or so the area will be rezoned
yet again to an overlay that is specific to Riverfront Crossings and will allow mixed uses, that is,
both residential and commercial uses. She said the bank's plan is to be at this location for up to
five years and then relocate to the corner of Harrison and Clinton Streets. Walz said that one
thing that was missing on the layout that staff would like to see is some sort of separation
between the drive -through and the alley. She said staff would like to keep the specific method
for separation unspecified so the bank could propose a method and staff would have final
approval. She said they would also be required to make pavement markings to show how the
circulation flows.
Walz said the reasons staff thinks this is appropriate are that it's located off a low -volume street
and the alleyway is paved and given that the surrounding uses currently are mainly parking,
staff doesn't think it will disturb the environment in this area.
Grenis asked about the location of the drive -through.
Walz replied that the drive -through will be in an area on the plan where there are hedges and
trees denoted.
Sheerin said there's not much room in the alley.
Walz remarked that it's a twenty foot wide alley that's sufficient for two-way traffic.
Grenis asked if the staff -requested pavement markings would mark the alley as well as the
drive -through.
Walz explained that there would be signs to mark the entrance, and the pavement arrows in the
drive would mark the direction to pull through the drive -through.
Sheerin asked if the building would remain and the drive -through would be added.
Board of Adjustment
May 9, 2012
Page 3 of 7
Walz affirmed this and said that some landscaping marked on the site plan would be removed to
make room for the drive -through.
Grenis asked how often at the bank's current location they have more than three cars stacking
in the drive -through.
Walz said that is a question for the applicant. She said staff thinks drive-throughs are low -
intensity enough already and are starting to diminish in use with the increase of on-line banking.
She said there is more use of drive-throughs at outlying areas where there's a dependency on
cars and less use at those near downtown.
Dan Black of MidWestOne Bank said he would refer the Board's questions to Monson and Kieft.
He said the bank intends to lease this property. He said at this time the design for the
permanent move is under very preliminary design, so a temporary solution is very important to
them. He said the University has indicated that they would like the bank by August or
September of 2012. He explained that the bank will function out of the old Sabin School
property much like they do out of the bank itself, with drive -up, parking and mortgage loan
offices as the main function, with no teller -line banking per se.
Grenis asked how often they currently get more than three cars in a drive through line.
Black said there has never been a formal study done on back-up, but from personal experience
he knows that there is very seldom more than three cars backed up. He clarified that there will
be a window in the building, and in the second lane there will be a small tube system. He said
that people like to use the window, so he has witnessed two or three cars backed up in that
lane.
Jennings said he's concerned about an ATM that close to an alley where there might be foot
traffic using the ATM.
Grenis asked if there were ATMs in the lobby inside.
Black said there were not.
Tom Gelman, legal counsel for MidWestOne Bank emphasized that this is a request for a
temporary solution to an impending issue. He said key to the bank's concern is replacing its
facilities with very comparable facilities. He explained that the use of the drive -through facility
over the years has been a diminishing use. Gelman said this is a temporary arrangement for
probably a period of two or three and at maximum five years. He said that the special exception
could be limited so it would only be applicable to this property for so long as it's used for this
interim purpose, with the special exception then being terminated when the permanent special
exception comes into effect. He asked the Board to let the applicant know about their specific
concerns so they can adapt and address them with signage or other measures. He said it's
critical at this stage that the bank have a clear understanding of the availability of this sort of use
for this application as well as for the next application regarding permanent use, otherwise it
effects their decision about their current property.
Baker asked what the nighttime lighting set-up is for the drive -through.
Kevin Monson of Neumann Monson Architects stated that he is also the Chairman of the Board
Board of Adjustment
May 9, 2012
Page 4 of 7
of MidWestONe Bank. He said there will be lighting for the drive -up and there will be a canopy
to protect it and provide an access point for the pneumatic tube in the west lane. He added that
this special exception is important not only to the bank, but also to the School of Music and its
opportunity to move downtown. He said without the ability to use this lot, the proposed sale of
the bank's property to the School of Music would likely not happen. He said bringing that school
into the heart of downtown will bring a renaissance and provide 400 or more events per year
needing audiences. He said he thinks that's a dream for any city of this size and it's critically
important to the future of the city. He added that the bank has been in discussion with the City
about this issue for over a year. He said it had been their hope that the rezoning of the
Riverfront Crossings and the change of zoning that is anticipated would allow them to not come
before the Board with this issue. He said they had decided that they could not wait and needed
to bring the issue before the Board. Monson said they have reviewed with the City the proposed
language for the future requirements and have been working closely with the Planning
Department and are meeting all the requirements that are being proposed for Riverfront
Crossings as well.
Walz said that if safety of people accessing the ATM is a concern and the drive -through seems
otherwise appropriate, the Board might think about ways to make it more difficult for a
pedestrian to cut into the line, like using a decorative fence as opposed to bollards. She
explained that a bollard is a concrete pier.
Jennings said he's not that concerned about droves of foot traffic. He said his main concern is
that it's a multi -use alley, and the bank is not the only use. He said there are people living there
as well as cutting through on the alley, and he's trying to mindful of things moving at different
speeds.
David Kieft on behalf of the University of Iowa and the Board of Regents said they have been
working with the bank for two years, ever since they decided to relocate the School of Music to
this location. He said they acquired this property from the school district last December when
the school district relocated to the old Press -Citizen building on North Dodge. He said they are
very much in favor of this proceeding, and they will be entering into a lease shortly with
MidWestOne Bank that will allow them to occupy this space.
Sheerin opened public hearing.
Sheerin closed public hearing.
Sheerin invited discussion.
Grenis moved to approve EXC12-00007, a special exception to allow a temporary drive -
through banking facility at 509 S Dubuque Street subject to the following conditions:
1. The installation of bollards, pavement markers or other means of separating the
outside drive -through lane from the alley be approved by staff.
2. The drive -through area will have pavement markings and signage to direct
vehicles.
3. There will be general compliance with the site plan for the drive -through as
submitted with the final site plan and lighting to be approved by the Building
official.
4. Upon establishment of a proposed new bank facility at the corner of Harrison and
Clinton Streets the subject drive -through will be discontinued.
Baker seconded.
Board of Adjustment
May 9, 2012
Page 5 of 7
Sheerin invited discussion on the motion.
Baker said he finds that the specific and general standards as outlined in the staff report May 9,
2012, have been satisfied and unless otherwise noted by another member of the Board, he
recommends that the Board makes the findings in the staff report the record for the acceptance
of this proposal.
Grenis agreed that since this is a temporary fix and is a part of the puzzle that includes all the
different properties coming together, he supports the special exception and agrees with the
finding facts.
Jennings concurred.
Sheerin concurred because of the temporary nature of the proposal and the fairly low -volume
foot and vehicle traffic.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0.
EXC12-00008: Discussion of an application submitted by MidwestOne Bank for a special
exception for a drive -through banking facility on property located in the Community Business
Service (CB-2) zone at the southeast corner of the intersection of Clinton and Harrison streets.
Walz said as the applicant indicated earlier, the building is in its concept stages. She said what
the Board is to consider is solely the drive -through lay -out. She said there are three stacking
spaces in each lane plus the space for the car at the tube or at the window. She said there is
more than ten feet of separation from the alley so cars would probably most often be entering
the alley from Harrison Street, but they may come from Prentiss Street as well. She said they
will circulate through to the north with a curb cut back onto Harrison Street. She said the exit is
setback from the public sidewalk so people will have a view, but staff does recommend there be
signage there reminding drivers that they are crossing a pedestrian area. Walz said that all the
things that apply to the previous special exception also apply to this one except that in this case
the applicant is asking for an extension from the usual term of six months to up to five years
from the time the decision is filed until construction begins. She said that at such time as this
bank is constructed and ready to open the other drive -through for EXC12-00007 will be
discontinued.
Baker remarked that the special exception adhered to the property rather than to the property
owners, so if this property owner sells the property without doing the project would the special
exception remain in place.
Holecek said the special exception would remain in place if the property changed hands and if a
drive -through was established within five years that adhered to the conditions.
Dan Black said it is critical to the bank that they have the availability of this drive -up.
Baker asked Black what they planned to do with the old Sabin School.
Black said they have no plans. He said it is university -owned and they will just enter into a lease
on it.
Board of Adjustment
May 9, 2012
Page 6 of 7
Sheerin opened public hearing.
Sheerin closed public hearing.
Baker moved to approve EXC12-00008, a special exception to allow a drive -through
banking facility at the southeast corner of Harrison and Clinton Streets subject to the
following conditions:
1. The drive -through area will have pavement markings and signage to direct
vehicles, including pedestrian signage at the exit onto Harrison Street.
2. There will be substantial compliance with the proposed design of the drive -
through as submitted with the final site plan and lighting to be approved by the
Building official and approval of the curb cut onto Harrison Street by the Public
Works Department.
3. This special exception will be extended for five years within which time the
applicant must have taken action to establish the use or construct the new bank
building under the terms outlined above.
Baker seconded.
Sheerin invited discussion.
Baker said he finds that his basis for approving this application is understanding that the
applicant has satisfied both the specific and general standards as outlined in staff report of May
9th, 2012.
Grenis, Jennings and Crischilles agreed with these finding.
Sheerin added that she feels this is good for the community because it will help not only the
bank, but also the School of Music, which is a vital part of the university and the community.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0.
Sheerin declared the motions for both special exceptions approved, noting that anyone wishing
to appeal the decision to a court of record may do so within 30 days after the decision is filed
with the City Clerk's Office.
��7_1.:� �Z�ly_1 �P1���1i�.1_�►` �>ilil��]��iSL' 1rit��F
Walz encouraged board members to attend a board and commission workshop being offered by
the Institute of Public Affairs and provided handouts with a description of the workshop and
information on how to sign up.
ADJOURNMENT:
Jennings moved to adjourn.
Baker seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 5-0 vote.
W
� U
V) W
w
QzN
Op
GZ
IX W
Q ~
OQ
m
o�
XXXXX
XX
i
�X
Go
N
XX
i
XX
M
CDXX
i
XD
XX
i
�X
N
I-
COItLOC)
gw
.....
00000
N
N
N
N
N
�X
w
—
o0000
—
—
��
co
L
�
A
'C
to
(D
le�
U)
c6
m
(�
c
w
Ile—
c
N
•�
_
O
Z
_5
co
U
F=
E
`o
m
m O
0
Z
X
LU
c a)m
Eo
N
m Q z o
d Q II II Z
II II W I�
xOOz i
5-
LU
Y