HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-12-2013 Board of AdjustmentIOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
Wednesday, June 12, 2013 — 5:15 PM
City Hall — Emma J. Harvat Hall
AGENDA
A. Call to Order
B. Roll Call
C. Consider the May 8, 2013 Minutes
D. Special Exception Items:
1. EXC13-00008 Discussion of an application submitted by Prime Ventures Construction,
Inc., for a special exception to reduce the rear setback requirement for property located in
the OPD-5 zone at 826 Sugar Loaf Circle.
2. EXC13-00009: Discussion of an application submitted by the University of Iowa
Community Credit Union for a special exception to allow a drive -through use for property
located in the CO-1 zone at the southwest corner of N. Dodge St. and Scott Blvd.
E. Other
F. Board of Adjustment Information
G. Adjourn
NEXT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING: July 10, 2013
STAFF REPORT
To: Board of Adjustment
Item: EXC13-00008
826 Sugar Loaf Circle
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Prepared by: Andrew Bassman, Planning Intern
Date: June 12, 2013
Applicant: Prime Ventures Construction, Inc.
580 Madison Avenue, Unit 3
North Liberty, Iowa 52317
319-665-9200
Contact: Michael Pugh
Bradley & Riley, PC
One South Gilbert Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
319-358-5562
Requested Action:
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
Existing Land Use and Zoning
Special exception
Reduction in rear setback from 20 feet to 14 feet
826 Sugar Loaf Circle
.19 acres (8,191 square feet)
Residential (OPD-5)
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: residential (OPD-5)
South: residential (OPD-5, ID-RS)
East: residential (OPD-5, RM-12)
West: residential and Iowa River (OPD-5)
Applicable code sections:
File Date:
BACKGROUND:
14-2A-5b, Specific Criteria for adjustment to
principal setback; 14-415-3A, General Criteria for all
special exceptions
May 14, 2013
The applicant, Prime Ventures Construction, has requested a reduction in the rear setback
requirement, from 20 feet to 14 feet, for a single-family residence located at 826 Sugar Loaf
Circle. The reduced rear setback would allow for construction of a 12-foot by 12-foot screened -in
porch extending from the rear of the second story of the house as well as a covered deck
extending below the porch at the first floor level (see photos). Uncovered decks are allowed to
extend into the rear setback, however a covered deck is considered a porch and is not allowed to
extend into the rear setback (Section 14-2A-413-4).
At the time the building permit for the house was issued, the applicant had planned to build an
uncovered deck. The applicant changed plans and constructed the screened -in porch and
covered deck without a building permit.
The subject lot is 110 feet deep. The rear setback requirement is 20 feet; the front setback
required for the attached garage is 25 feet. The property backs up to Outlot B of Mackinaw Village
Part Four subdivision, which contains a wooded area that is set aside as permanent open space.
Outlot B also covers land adjacent to the west of the subject property, which is also a sanitary
sewer easement for the subdivision. Lots to the south and west of the subject property have not
yet been developed.
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 14-2A-5b
pertaining to reduction of principal building setback requirements in addition to the general approval
criteria for special exceptions as set forth in Section 14-413-3A.
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 (14-2A-5b)
1. The situation is peculiar to the property in question.
Staff believes the situation is peculiar due to the combination of the following factors:
• The house is constructed on a relatively small lot (8,196 square feet).The minimum lot size
in the RS-5 zone is 8,000 square feet.
• The subject lot is relatively shallow: side lot lines measure 110 and 110.5 feet.
• The slope of the property makes the private yard space practically unusable.
2. There is practical difficulty in complying with the setback requirements.
Staff believes that there is practical difficulty based on the following findings:
• Due to the topography of the property the rear yard is practically unusable. The
construction of the screened porch and covered deck allows the occupants more
opportunity to enjoy the backyard private space.
The lot is relatively shallow (110 feet), allowing limited space to create a porch. In order to
comply with the rear setback requirement the applicant may have a screened porch only 6
feet in depth.
3. Granting the exception will not be contrary to the purpose of the setback regulations.
The minimum principal building setback requirement is intended to:
1) Maintain light, air, separation for fire protection, and access for fire fighting
2) Provide opportunities for privacy between dwellings.
3) Reflect the general building scale and placement of structures in neighborhoods.
4) Promote a reasonable physical relationship between residences.
5) Provide flexibility to site a building so it is compatible with nearby buildings.
Staff believes the application satisfies this criterion based on the following findings:
• While consistent placement of homes is one purpose of the setback regulation
that helps to define the character of a neighborhood, allowing a modest setback
reduction of 6 feet along the rear of the property, abutting permanent open
space, would not alter the character of the street or neighborhood.
• Because the setback reduction would be to the rear of the house, the adjacent
land will not be developed in the future, and the porch will remain unenclosed, it
would not restrict access to light and air or separation for fire protection, encroach
on the privacy between dwellings, or promote an unreasonable physical
relationship between residences.
• The houses to the east and southeast of the subject property also have rear
porches (some screened -in and some not). Thus, the proposed porch would not
be out of scale or inconsistent with the rest of the structures in the neighborhood,
as long as the porch remains unenclosed.
4. Any potential negative effects resulting from the setback exception are mitigated to the
extent practical.
Staff believes that the application satisfies this based on the following findings:
• Since adjacent property to the rear will not be developed, there are no negative effects
from the reduced setback.
• Staff recommends that a condition of approval be that the porch and covered deck
beneath are not enclosed to create a three -season porch. This prevents the enclosed
portion of the house (the principal structure) from moving closer to the rear property line
and setting precedent for other houses in the neighborhood to expand.
5. The subject building will be located no closer than 3 feet to a side or rear property line,
unless the side or rear property line abuts a public right-of-way or permanent open space.
• The proposed porch and covered deck maintain the required 5-foot side setback.
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.
Because the setback reduction requested is not contrary to the purpose of the minimum
setback requirements, as explained under specific criterion #3 above, staff believes it
complies with this standard.
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 the application satisfies this based on the findings under specific criterion #3 above
and the following findings:
• Requiring as a condition of approval that the proposed porch and covered deck remain
unenclosed will ensure that the principal structure does not encroach further to the rear
property line, and is consistent with porches on other homes in the neighborhood.
• The porch and covered deck do not extend further toward neighboring homes or the
public right-of-way.
• The reduction in the setback requirement affects only the setback from the Outlot,
which is permanent open space and may not be developed.
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 the application satisfies this based on the findings provided above under the
specific criteria. In addition, by placing a condition on the special exception that prohibits the
porch or the deck below from being enclosed with glass windows or solid walls, the property
owner is aware that the principal structure may not be further extended into the rear
setback.
Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or
are being provided.
Staff believes the application satisfies this based on the following finding:
• All necessary utilities and facilities are already in place for this property and the
subdivision in which it is located.
5. Adequate measures have been or will betaken to provide ingress or egress designed
so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets.
Staff believes the application satisfies this based on the following findings:
• The requested rear setback reduction does not interfere with or alter vehicular access
and will not impact ingress or egress from the property.
• The subject property is a single-family house and does not generate significant 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.
Staff believes the application satisfies this based on the following finding.
• The applicant is required to secure a building permit for the existing porch and covered
deck. All other aspects of the house and property have been reviewed for compliance.
7. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended.
Staff believes the application satisfies this based on the following finding:
While the Comprehensive Plan does not address this issue precisely, it does encourage
policies that preserve and enhance the character of neighborhoods. The plan also
encourages small lot development for the efficient use of land. Staff believes that the
setback reduction is a reasonable accommodation to make a small lot with limited private
open space more enjoyable for its occupants and in a manner that is consistent with other
development in the neighborhood.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of EXC13-00008, a special exception to reduce the rear principal
building setback from 20 feet to 14 feet in order to allow a 12-foot by 12-foot screened -in porch for
property located at 825 Sugar Loaf Circle, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant must secure a building permit for the 12 x 12-foot porch and covered deck.
2. Both the first floor deck and the second floor screened porch must be un-enclosed. The
installation of windows or solid walls on either level would constitute an extension of the
principal structure, which would not be permitted.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location map.
2. Aerial view,
3. Photos,
4. Plat of the subdivision.
5. Site plan.
6. Application materials.
Approved by: _/ 4U A_
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner,
Department of Planning and Community Development
View from Sugar Loaf Circle looking east.
Rear view of houses south of 826 Sugar Loaf. Rear view of properties adjacent to the east.
N 0
r
g
O
M
�� � uj
ALGONQUIN RD ,
o
ELI
ED Y
� U
O
-.. _. Z cy
[�[
O =
Q
DMACKINAW
DR
�
U
_
017�c�ifj
\
7
e�P
v
U
o
:
00
ry:
Z
V
uj
N
.'. ..
- -j
of Al �',villl i1tC FL.+I tliJua• FISM1 nJ IN
X I'sY:h r: A( YhA` YI r Ip &^ubl9
r. _ <r nlr =v41-rr, n.[�errT r
fF
N I",4 f ? Y 'F h E1fL1 =
.� M.IT r nr uc 611 Ik r+nw eH x j j
�tflT� f�.9 I n N'Ci c?�❑ If: I
el fE: of --� Iif lf-oN �=✓.l d�i�f i
T99
^ r
q ��a
l7r
{
m96
94F
h
`
93
8.5
2 z--
Y r E
1 L' u a
C
92
f I ll
•.'y [y,5
fin::
,'F 11
,r�
a z
1
-1 IJ I
y
t
84
85F 1
�aI
1
86
o
J
40
88,
1. TI uNP
)R)kM; Ir rc n>t •-r�r,r rau.
r, v( I ar r,. ne vaF 'roc
L . ,.4! Nl'f 4j II t.T.; rN'i'r]- "rApo,
i 4. 1i TI r I r:v4 Ff-:P.GTY�i3
_fi5 r
IB cI*",b14 .a,nni
The final plat for Mackinaw Village part 4 shows the subject property (Lot 97). Property to the north is part of an outlot that is
permanently preserved as open space. The space between lots 96 and 97 is also part of the outlot and is a sanitary sewer ease
ment.
S c.WsG w¢M � wad � r
�z.-o'�.app,, moo, 3oM /-�J Rio O 4 COs J
CXO6� uj 0 FVI— n LL �i�yU J u Vt
LWL
S2 3 �y3 2M
-
z o Q- � p0
c� o _0
co
i
r
=t xc 13,
DATE: May 14, 2013 PROPERTY PARCEL NO. 1004284003
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 826 Sugar Loaf Circle, Iowa City, Iowa
PROPERTYZONE: SAO/RS-5 PROPERTY LOTSIZE: 8,191
APPLICANT:
Name: Prime Ventures Construction, Inc.
580 Madison Ave Unit 3
Address:
North Liberty IA 52317
Phone:
(319) 665-9200
CONTACT PERSON:
Name: Michael J. Pugh, Bradley & Riley, PC
(if other than applicant)
Address:
One South Gilbert St, Iowa. City,.. , IA
Phone:
(319) 358-5562
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 356-6235 or email sarah-walz@jowa-cify.org.
Purpose for special exception: Reduction in minimum rear set back requirement for
1
principal building in PS-5 zone to accommodate screened in porch.
Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any: N/A v
1
14-2A-4(B)(1)(2)
14-2A-4(B)(5)(b)
14-4B-3(A)
-3-
®. 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.
9. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the
public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare.
Applicant's screened in porch encroaches 5.69 feet into the 20 foot minimum
rear setback requirement for a principal building in a RS-5 zone. Applicant
is seeking a special exception to reduce the required minimum rear setback to
14.31 feet for the screened in porch only. At the time the building permit was
issued, the plans called for an uncovered deck, which met the requirements of
14-4C-2(S). The Plans were later modified to include a screened in porch
without realizing the need to comply with 14-2A-4(S)(4)(b).
3. 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 screened in porch is an attractive amenity and is less intrusive than an
uncovered porch. Outlet "B" of Mackinaw Village - Part Two, which surrounds
the subject property to the north and west, is dedicated open space. Outlot
"B" is also wooded which provides a natural screen and buffer.
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.
The screened in porch will not impede the normal and orderly development of
detached single family homes in the area. The porch is located near the
westerly boundary of the subject property and away from. the home locate on
Lot 98 to the east. Outlot "B" is dedicated open space and buffers the
subject property from Lot 96 to the west. Outlot "B" separates to the
subject property from future development to the north.
4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have
been or are being provided.
Yes, the subject property is located in a City subdivision, which has
been constructed in accordance with City standards. -
-4-
5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress
designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets.
Ingress and egress to and from the subject property is provided by Sugar
Loaf Circle, a public right-of-way.
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 IC).]
The subject property is otherwise compliant with its designated SAO/RS-5
zoning.
7. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the
City.
The property is being used for single family residential purposes consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan. The requested reduction in the minimum rear
set back requirement to accommodate a screened in porch will not be
inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Special Approval Criteria (14-2A-4(B)(5)(h))
(1) The situation is peculiar to the property in question.
The residential home was originally designed to include an uncovered porch attached to
the principal building, which would not have required a special exception. During
construction, the owner decided to modify the building plans to include a screened in
porch without realizing the implication of 14-2A-4(B)(4)(b). The porch encroaches 5.69
feet into the 20 foot minimum required rear setback.
(2) There is practical difficulty in complying with the set back requirements.
The porch measures 12 feet from the rear of the principal building, or 5.69 feet into the
rear setback. A 6.31 foot porch within the setback area is not practical. The subject
property is located at the curve of Sugar Loaf Circle which results in a narrow buildable
lot configuration.
(3) Granting the exception will not be contrary to the purpose of the setback
regulations.
Outlot "B" of Mackinaw Village -- Part Two, is dedicated open space and surrounds the
subject property to the north and west. The area is wooded which provides a natural
buffer between properties. The screened in porch is constructed near the westerly lot line
and away from the residential home constructed on Lot 98.
(4) Any potential negative effects resulting from the setback exception are mitigated to
the extent practical.
Please see response to (3) above. The applicant does not believe 5.69 foot reduction to
the minimum setback requirement will have any negative effect on adjoining properties.
(5) The subject building will be located no closer than three feet (Y) to a side or rear
property line, unless the side or rear property line abuts a public right of way or
permanent open space.
The screened in porch attached to the principal building is 14.31 feet from the rear
property line, and also complies with side yard setback requirements.
(01408721 DOCx)
ml1 � o
0 zo
an
¢p
to ¢
as
o
w
x ax
z
>a 200 g
3
wl
o
Jwi
®
oiO'a
0
L
WLCo
y
_
O
m
Q
~
y 3
'�
oz�om
Vi _
_
z
�� n6
6.
Off_
a x _
�
vUi�umi�i
{1
66
UFO
o��d
U
QO�
wl o
a
UOO
OIL U
U�p
oaW;
Fun
a 2m'o
3w6gvg w �04� av o3 x`,i
W wacgs x„ oa x€.gym'= g
W �Bll6 W
�v3
W
k
a
� e
?p ➢E`o
o.Y
F �
G
II_
I
i I
;9
SR
81 r
X
a5Y
-
g'rq
P
T
�I I
-ICI''
STAFF REPORT
To: Board of Adjustment
Item: EXC13-00009
Scott Boulevard and N. Dodge Street
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Prepared by: Sarah Walz
Date: June 12, 2013
Applicant: University of Iowa Community Credit Union
825 Mormon Trek Blvd
Iowa City, IA
Contact: Dick Noble
P.O. Box 2240
Iowa City, IA 42244
Requested Action: To allow a drive -through facility in the CO-1 zone.
Purpose: To allow for a drive -through banking facility.
Location. Southwest corner of Scott Boulevard
and North Dodge Street
Size: 3.87 acres
Existing Land Use and Zoning: None.
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Residential (OPD-5)
South: Residential (OPD-5)
East: Fire station (P-1) and Residential (RS-5)
West: School District Offices (P-1)
Applicable code sections: 14-4C-2K, Specific criteria for drive -through
facilities; 14-413-3A, General approval criteria
for special exceptions.
File Date: May 14, 2013
BACKGROUND: The applicant, University of Iowa Community Credit Union (UICCU), is
requesting a special exception to allow a drive -through facility for a proposed credit union
branch building to be constructed at the southwest corner of the intersection of Scott Boulevard
and North Dodge Street. The subject property is located in the Commercial Office (CO-1) zone,
in which drive -through uses are allowed by special exception. The proposed drive -through
facility will contain 3 drive -through teller lanes with ATM service.
The subject property was rezoned from Research Development Park (RDP) to Office
Commercial (CO-1) in November, 2008- A special exception was approved for a similar 3-lane
drive through facility at that time, but because the banking facility was not constructed within the 6-
month term of the special exception, the exception is considered expired. The applicant is now
going forward with plans to construct a much smaller facility at the site, a bank branch. (The
proposed building and parking area are significantly smaller than the original proposal.)
Properties located to the north and south of the bank site are developed with residential uses.
Properties east and west of the credit union property are zoned P-1: Fire Station 4 is located to
the east; to the west is the former Press Citizen building, now home to Iowa City Community
School District administrative offices. East of Scott Boulevard and south of Dubuque Road is a
parcel of land zoned Low -Density Single -Family Residential (IRS-5), which has potential to be
further developed in the future —the Comprehensive Plan has designated this area as
appropriate for future Office Research Park zoning.
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 in section 14-4C-2K pertaining to drive -through facilities in addition
to the general approval criteria for special exceptions as set forth in Section 14-413-3A.
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 approval criteria for drive -through facilities (144C-21K).
a. The number of drive -through lanes, stacking spaces', and paved area necessary for
the drive -through facility will not be detrimental to adjacent residential properties or
detract from or unduly interrupt pedestrian circulation or the commercial character of the
area where it is located. To promote compatibility with surrounding development, safe
pedestrian access, and efficient and safe vehicular circulation on the site, the Board of
Adjustment may require certain conditions, including, but not limited to, restricting the
location of the drive -through to rear or side access, requiring directional signage,
limiting the number of lanes and/or amount of paving, and limiting or prohibiting the use
of loudspeaker systems.
Staff believes the application satisfies this criterion based on the following findings:
• The site plan shows a 3-lane drive -through facility with ATM service. As illustrated on the
site plan, vehicles enter the drive -through by continuing straight (west) from the entrance
on Scott Boulevard and circulating counter clockwise to the covered teller area.
• The curved lane that serves the drive -through provides approximately 15 stacking space
for the service.
• The location of the drive -through is more than 300 feet from the residential zone to the
south and more than 150 feet from the residential zone to the east.
A pedestrian crosswalk connecting the south parking lot to the building entrance crosses in
front vehicles entering and exiting the drive -through facility. While pavement markings in
these areas are required by code in order to show the designated pedestrian route, they are
not shown on the submitted site plan. Staff recommends adding a condition requiring
pavement markings and signage cautioning cars to yield to pedestrians in these areas.
The term stacking spaces refers to the spaces designed to accommodate vehicles that are waiting to access the
service window or ATM.
b. The transportation system is capable of safely supporting the proposed use in
addition to the existing uses in the area. Evaluation factors include street capacity and
level of service, effects on traffic circulation, access requirements, and pedestrian safety.
An adequate number of stacking spaces must be provided to ensure that traffic safety is
not compromised.
Staff believes the application satisfies this criterion based on the findings above in addition to
the following:
• Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard are both arterials streets designed with the capacity
for high traffic volume. A traffic volume count shows that there are on average 14,100
vehicle trips per day near this location on Scott Boulevard. The capacity of a 2-lane arterial
street with a turn lane, like the one on Scott Boulevard, is approximately 20,400 trips per
day.
Traffic entering and exiting the bank is limited to one access point from Scott Boulevard.
Because of the amount of traffic travelling along Dodge Street and Scott Boulevard, the
location of the driveway access to the parking lot was specified as a condition of the
rezoning. The placement of the drive entrance was determined to be an appropriate
distance from the intersection to minimize conflicts between northbound traffic turning
into the bank office development and traffic stacking at the Dodge Street intersection.
A branch bank is not anticipated to generate enough additional traffic to have a significant
impact on traffic safety or circulation on Scott Boulevard. Banks and bank drive -through
lanes generate significantly less traffic than they once did. This is the result of changes
in the industry, including the introduction of on-line banking, debit cards, etc. The
Institute of Traffic Engineers estimates that banks currently attract less than half the
traffic they did before the year 2000. For a bank of this size, we estimate fewer than
1,000 vehicles per day entering and exiting the bank site with more than half of these
vehicles being from pass -by traffic (traffic already using Scott Boulevard) as opposed to
new traffic.
c. The drive -through lanes must be setback at least 10 feet from adjacent lot lines and
public rights -of -way and screened from view to the S2 standard. If the drive -through is
located adjacent to a residential use or property zoned residential, it must be screened
from view of these properties to at least the S3 standard. The Board of Adjustment may
increase or reduce these standards according to the specific circumstances affecting the
site.Z
Staff believes the application satisfies these standards based on the following findings:
The site plan shows that the drive -through facility is setback no less than 50 feet from all
lot lines.
2 14-5F-613: 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. The S2 standard requires enough shrubs to
form a landscape screen ranging between 2 and 4 feet in height. The S3 standard is a buffering treatment that uses
dense landscape screening to provide a visual separation between uses and zones. It is commonly applied between
residential and commercial uses. It requires enough shrubs and small evergreens to form a continuous screen at least 5
feet in height.
• The bank building itself will block views of the drive -through facility from Dodge Street
and other areas to the north.
Y The location of the drive -through is more than 200 feet from the nearest residentially
zoned property to the east (opposite side of Scott Boulevard), and more than 300 feet
from the nearest residential property to the south.
• Because cars using the drive -through lanes are pointed west and north, glare from the
headlights waiting for service will be directed away from the residential property.
• The site plan shows low landscape screening (S2)2 along the north, south, and east
sides of the property in order to screen the parking area from the right-of-way and
nearby residential property. Staff believes distance and the required landscape
screening shown on the proposed site plan will buffer any present or future residential
development from noise or light glare associated with the drive -through operation. Along
the west side of the parking area and drive -through, the applicant is seeking to have
screening waived based on the screening provided by existing vegetation. Staff believes
that distance in combination with the existing and proposed landscape screening shown
on the proposed site plan will buffer any present or future development from noise or
light glare associated with the drive -through operation.
d. Lighting for the drive -through facility must comply with the outdoor lighting
standards set forth in Article 14-5G and must be designed to prevent light trespass and
glare onto neighboring properties.
All outdoor lighting for the commercial development will be reviewed by the Building Official for
compliance with the Code as part of the building permit process.
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 the application satisfies this criterion based on the following findings:
• The site plan illustrates appropriate design and location of the drive -through lanes to
minimize congestion.
• The proposed bank is served by arterial streets that can safely support traffic generated by
the drive -through use.
• The zoning code requires that pedestrian areas near the drive entrance to the bank and
within the bank parking area must have pavement marking or have raised or other
distinctive pavement materials in order mark safe pedestrian routes across the bank lot.
• Stop signs adjacent to the drive entrance will control traffic within the parking area. Stop
signs are located along the north south parking drive to reduce conflicts with cars entering
the drive -through circulation lane.
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 the application satisfies this criterion based on the findings cited above with
regard to the location and circulation for the drive -through lanes, parking area screening, and
distance from adjacent properties.
Landscaping within the island/median around which the drive -through circulates could be added
if the Board believes that additional screening is warranted.
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 application satisfies this criterion based on the following findings:
• The drive -through lane provides adequate stacking space for vehicles waiting to use the
service and circulation is directed away from the adjacent residential zone to the south.
• In addition to distance from adjacent uses, the landscape screening proposed on the site
plan will buffer adjacent uses from the glare of headlights and noise associated with the
drive -through.
• Banks and bank drive-throughs are not significant traffic generators.
4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or
are being provided.
Adequate utilities and access roads are in place. Storm water detention is not required for this
property however, the Developer/Owner must manage the storm water runoff from the site so that
drainage issues will not be created downstream (the Iowa City Community School District
property) from this site.
5. Adequate measures have been or will betaken to provide ingress or egress designed
so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets.
Staff believes that the application satisfies this requirement based on the following findings:
• The location of the drive -way entrance to the property was specified as a condition of the
rezoning of the property in order to ensure safe distance from the Dodge Street and
Scott Boulevard intersection.
• As explained above, the location and design of the drive -through facility allows adequate
stacking space such that it will not create congestion on the 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 site plan shows s2 landscape screening on the north and east sides of the parking area but
not along the south and west sides. The applicant is requesting that the screening in these
areas be waived based upon existing vegetation and distance.
Staff agrees that the existing tree cover along the west side of the parking area is sufficient to
screen views from the adjacent publicly zoned property. Along the south side of the parking
area, staff believes it is appropriate to waive the screening requirement except for the area
around the south end of the north -south drive. Little vegetation is established in this area and
staff believes low screening is appropriate to minimize views of the parking areas and
headlights.
A final site plan will be reviewed by the building official to ensure compliance with all other
standards in the Zoning Code,
7. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended.
Staff believes the application satisfies this criterion based on the following finding:
• The North District Plan identifies Dodge Street as a main entranceway corridor into Iowa
City. Maintaining and enhancing the appearance of the entranceway is recommended
Street entrance into Iowa City. Locating the drive -through facility away from Dodge Street
and providing adequate screening of drive through and parking areas will help enhance
the appearance of the main entranceway corridor.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of EXC13-00009, a special exception to allow a 3-lane drive -
through banking facility in the CO-1 zone, located south of Dodge Street and west of Scott
Boulevard subject to the following condition:
• Substantial compliance with the submitted site plan, with the addition of traffic signage
and required pavement markings for the pedestrian crossings in the area of the drive -
through and bank entrance and additional S2 landscape screening to be added to the
south end of the north -south driveway.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location map
2,Aerial view of the proposed location,
3 Proposed site plan
4. Application materials
Approved by:
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner,
Department of Planning and Community Development
�n
cc
r /
c
a
T
a
B
2
0
m
t
U
of
Z
O
�14
ION
U
nrow
O
I��
N
4
If
s
- Ol
iW.
-V
Z h
O o U
g
ow
wry:
��I
ery
Q:
La
N
0
I
e
m
Q
...
V
O
�o
O
'S N
IZ
/
Fir-
L
I
/ /
L17y.
�� l✓/ /' �� i� f.np �..�
if
yY /
K,
d f w RKc
®._
6
z
<
�
y
3
AlUiS 20000 N
# s
¢
z
e
dj
Q
Q
(D
(D Q
Q
Q^
.rt
c�
0
0
��
U =
U �
O
L§
�:i
N
��
o0
-
rc
� W
J
�
W W
}'
�G
9ry
°8
III
II
1
I
4
��
�'
I�
L.
L i..
�
My
I
i
i
t
�
r
O
N
i
Q
I
c__ f3 - aa®o']
LAIQE �11_Rr fa N-A ONLy
APPLICATION TO THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SPECIAL EXCEPTION
DATE: PROPERTY PARCEL NO.
PROPERTY ADDRESS: /V Sco?T /,?ayD
PROPERTY ZONE: CO /
PROPERTY LOT SIZE: 3. S%
APPLICANT: Name: _G_ �NIvE�sJ�yy o _Owrt C�e'y.
CFF.a4r- cr-�
Address: 82S Ail„wd'y-
Phone: 7;39-1000
CONTACT PERSON: Name: Z a4C
(if other than applicant)
Address: JW /lo
TDW-4 czry SA .S2zY5�
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-wafz@jowa-city.org.
Purpose for special exception: /DRztaC - 64�
Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any;
C. Specific Annr®VaI Criteria
14-4C-2 Special Exception Approval Criteria for Drive -Through facilities
a. The proposed drive -through lanes are not adjacent to residential property. The
drive -through lanes and stacking spaces do not prevent traffic circulation or block
pedestrian paths within the site or the vicinity. The location of the drive -through
is at the side of the building. The number of lanes has been reduced from the
previously approved drive -through.
The Iowa City Streets and Traffic Engineering Department reviewed the previous
design that included three drive -through lanes in lieu of the two lanes currently
proposed and determined that the streets as designed can handle the additional
traffic generated by the proposed drive -through facility. One single ingress and
egress from North Scott Boulevard will keep Dodge Street free of slowed or
turning traffic.
c. The drive -through will be set hack 10 feet from the lot line as well as be screened
with S2 buffering and screening standards. The proper usage of plantings will
achieve these standards, as well as maintain or improve the site's quality and
value. The drive -through lanes are more than 200 feet from residential areas.
d. Lighting for the drive -through facility will comply with the outdoor lighting
standards in the Iowa City Zoning Code and will shine down to prevent light
trespass and glare onto neighboring properties.
D. General Approval Criteria
1. The drive -up teller is provided as a convenience to nearby residents and commuters in
northeast Iowa City to lessen the need to travel to other UICCU locations in other areas
of Iowa City. The drive -up teller proposed will improve the public health, safety,
comfort, and general welfare by reducing traffic to other branch locations.
2. The University of Iowa Community Credit Union has several other drive -up facilities
within Iowa City. There is no evidence that any of the drive -up facilities has been
injurious to the use and enjoyment of other nearby properties. Also property values
have not diminished near other drive -up tellers. This proposed drive -up facility will be
farther from other property than any of the UICCU's other drive -up facilities and will be
screened with S2 and S3 landscaping.
3. All of the surrounding property. The drive -up teller will not impede either
development. The Iowa City Council has already approved the zoning.
4. As part of the rezoning process, the City of Iowa City Streets and Traffic Engineering
Department reviewed the design capacity of the adjacent streets and determined that
the streets as designed can handle the additional traffic generated by the proposed
facility with a drive -up teller. The Iowa City Engineering Department reviewed site
utilities and drainage and did not have any concerns.
5. The Streets and Traffic Engineering Department has approved the location and design of
the single site access from Scott Boulevard .
6. There are no special requirements in Section 14-4B that apply. Applicable site
development standards are as follows:
® 14-5A:
Minimum parking requirements are listed on the site plan.
® 14-513:
Sign standards will be met with monument signs and building signs.
® 14-5C:
Access to the site has been approved by the City of Iowa City Engineering
Department.
® 14-51):
Refer to the site plan for the intersection visibility standard.
® 14-SE:
Refer to the site plan for landscaping and tree locations.
® 14-5F:
Refer to the site plan for screening and buffering.
® 14-5G:
The site design will meet the illumination standard required for CO-1
zone, Medium Illumination District E2.
® 14-5H:
With regard to the performance standards, the building and drive -up
teller will be similar to the other three facilities in Iowa City located.
0 14-51: Sensitive land features are shown on the site plan.
® 14-5J: The site is not in the flood plain.
® 14-5K: This standard does not apply.
7. Refer to the Applicants Statement attached.
14-4C-2.K.2 Specific Approval Criteria
a. There will be three drive -up lanes. Two will be used for drive -up and one will be used
for an ATM machine and bypass lane. There will be 19 stacking spaces.
The drive -up lanes and stacking space are 325 feet from the nearest residential
property line to the north and screened by the building. They are 220' from the nearest
residential property line to the east and screened with S3 screening. They are 360' from
the nearest residential property line to the south and screened with S3 screening.
There is only one vehicular access point to the property. It will have a stop sign to
protect pedestrians.
A pedestrian cross walk from the parking lot to the south to the building entrance
crosses the drive -up lanes in two places. Pavement markings and signs will be used to
warn motorist.
b. The City of Iowa City Streets and Traffic Engineering Department has reviewed the
design capacity of the adjacent streets and has determined that the streets as designed
can handle the additional traffic generated by the proposed facility with a drive -up
teller. The drive -up teller and stacking spaces are 120 feet from the street assuring
traffic safety is not compromised.
C. The drive -up stacking lanes are 80 feet from the nearest property line and screened with
S2 screening.
d. The lighting will be recessed can lights in the soffits of the overhead canopy and will
comply with the requirements of Section 14-5G. The lighting has not yet been design
but will be submitted with the site plan for building permit approval.
Neighboring Properties within 300ft of the Proposed
University of Iowa Community Credit Union Office
® Mary Lou Gatens
o 2041 Dubuque Rd, Iowa City, IA 52245
• Kevin Crawley
o 2040 N Dubuque Rd, Iowa City, IA 52245
® Marie Paulina
o 2030 N Dubuque Rd, Iowa City, IA 52245
a City of Iowa City
o 410 E Washington St, Iowa City, IA 52240
® Joann Moss
o 1837 N Dubuque Rd, Iowa City, IA 52245
® Michael T Gatens
o 2045 N Dubuque Rd, Iowa City, IA 52245
® Helen LAdams
o 1888 N Dubuque Rd, Iowa City, IA 52245
® George E Hora
o 1890 N Dubuque Rd, Iowa City, IA 52245
® Douglas Patrick
o 1804 N Dodge St, Iowa City, IA 52245
® Press Citizen Co. Inc
o 1725 N. Dodge Street, Iowa City, IA 52245
® Hickory Properties LLC
o 5 Hickory Heights Lane, Iowa City, IA 52245
® Harry Brooks
o 25 Hickory Heights Lane, Iowa City, IA 52245
® Swen T Larson
o 33 Hickory Heights Lane, Iowa City, IA 52245
® Daniel Teduitus
o 10 Hickory Heights. Iowa City, IA 52245
® Coco's Custom Homes Inc.
o 56 Hickory Heights Lane, Iowa City , IA 52245
® Nathan G. Van Der Weide
o 15 Hickory Heights Lane, Iowa City, IA, 52245
® Henry Rosevear
o 1892 Dubuque Rd, Iowa City, Iowa 52245
® Roy B Triplett
o 1896 Dubuque Rd, Iowa City, Iowa 52245
® Felisha A Warner
o 1890 Dubuque Rd, Iowa City, Iowa 52245
Applicant's Statement
The University of Iowa Community Credit Union (UICCU) intends to build a branch office
building with a drive -up teller at the corner of Scott Boulevard and Dodge St. The lot has been
rezoned to CO-1 and requires a special exception for the drive — up facility.
The property is on the Dodge Street entranceway to Iowa City. The City's Comprehensive Plan
has been to preserve the natural beauty of the Dodge St. entranceway. This is one of the
UICCU goals as well. All of UICCU facilities are professionally landscaped and beautifully
maintained.
The building will respond architecturally to its surroundings and the vision of Dodge Street as a
green entranceway to the city. The pitched roof will reflect the hills of the topography. Natural
materials of brick and stone will anchor the building to the site. The building's orientation will
face Scott Boulevard to screen the drive -up teller from view from Dodge St. Monument signs,
rather than a large over -head freestanding sign, will quietly and unobtrusively mark the
commercial aspect of the property. The landscape will contribute to the screening of the
building and parking lot while also improving the beauty of the existing site. The Credit Union
landscaping will include trees and bushes along both streets and enhance the gateway to the
city.
-6-
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 requlrements, 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-BC-2C-4, City Code).
rd r . 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-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.
Date: sa sy iy 20 1-3 41X L�w���ie> c/rfDxT dHaoy
Signature(s) Applicant(s)
Date:
Signature(s) of Property Owner(s)
if Different than Applicant(s)
ppdadmi nopplication-boase.doc
APPLICATION TO THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
-----SPECIAL EXCEPTION -----
DATE: PROPERTY PARCEL NO, 1010454010
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 113 South Johnson Street, Iowa City, Iowa
PROPERTY ZONE: RM 12 PROPERTY LOT SIZE: 75X80= 6,000 SQ. FT.
APPLICANT/ NAME: Mark McCallum
CONTACT PERSON ADDRESS: 1610 Crescent Street, Iowa City, Iowa
PHONE: 1-319-430-1461
PROPERTY OWNER: NAME: Byron Burford Estate (Kevin Burford)
ADDRESS: 528 College Street, Iowa City, Iowa
PHONE: 1-319-594-6083
Specific Requested Special Exception: Applicable sections of the zoning chapter:
Chapter 4. Use Regulations. Article C. Accessory Uses and Buildings. Section E.
Bed and Breakfast Inn allowing for five guest rooms.
Purpose for special exception: As allowed in Section E. Applicant is requesting
to operate as a five room Inn.
Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any: None filed- Not applicable,
A. Legal description: Parcel Number 1010454010. Map Area: 20400-RES, Sec-
Twp-Rng: 10-79-6. IOWA CITY (ORIGINAL TOWN) N 75' LOT 8 BLK 41
B. Plot Plan/Site Plan:
C, Specific Approval Criteria: As provided for in Article C. Accessory Uses
and Buildings. Section E. Bed and Breakfast Inns. Applicant proposes to
develop an Inn Operation (Burfords on the Park) according to the
following conditions of section E.
D. The principal use of the property will be an owner -occupied Detached
Single Family Dwelling,
E_ No more than 5 bedrooms (or guest suites) will be provided to guests
who stay for periods not to exceed 14 consecutive days.
F. A minimum of three off-street parking spaces will be provided in addition
to the sparking spaces required for the dwelling. Parking may be located
one behind the other.
G. Nonresident employees are prohibited, except as approved by the Building
Official as a Minor Modification, according to the procedures and
approval criteriw for ""in r ^"odifca ion as set forth in Article 14-413. No
non-resident employees are anticipated at this time.
H. If dwelling contain rooming units for permanent roomers, the number of
bedrooms for a Bed and Breakfast Inn is reduced by the number of
rooming units.
I. Applicant agrees to install Fire protection equipment according to the
currently adopted International Residential Code. ( Hard wire smokes in
each guest room, exit signage, Fire extinguisher on each floor)
J. Applicant agrees to comply with signage rules -limiting sign to one non -
illuminated sign not to exceed two square feet in area.
K. Applicant agrees to: Every two years, the operator must obtain a rental
permit authorizing this use from the City after establishing compliance
with City ordinances.
GENERAL APPROVAL CRITERIA: (D.):
1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger
the public health safety, comfort, or general welfare: Applicant proposes
to develop 113 South Johnson Street into an owner occupied Bed and
Breakfast Inn featuring guest rooms and suite with private bathrooms. To
the degree it is physically possible- one guest room on the main floor
will be designed according to the City's voluntary universal design
program.
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 -
Applicant proposes to replace Bed and Breakfast Guest Rooms lost to the
recent redevelopment of properties in the 500 block of Washington
Street. Applicant proposes to add value to a potential landmark property
in a neighborhood that has recently suffered from a lot of redevelopment
pressures.
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: With the recent redevelopment projects in the 500 and 600
blacks of Washington Street., applicant would suggest that most if not
surrounding properties are already developed at their maximum use per
the current zoning code guidelines.
4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/ or necessary facilities
have been or are being provided: Property has access to paved service
alley on north side of property. With in the past 6 years has had a new
sewer line upgrade and water line replacement.
5. Adequate ^ easurec h,, n tioon c :aL' b to en to provide ingress or
egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets: Property
is on west side of College Green Park and shares the street with only
two other properties. Paved alley on north side of property provides
additional access to surrounding properties. Property has driveway on left
side of house that currently has two parking spaces. There are also two
parking spaces off the alley on the north side of the house. Applicant
proposes to redo /extend driveway to west end of lot line to get the
required 3 parking spaces. Special note: 113 South Johnson Street is
located one block from a 24 hour parking ramp.
6. Except for the specific regulations' and standards applicable to the
special exception being considered, the specific proposed exceptions in all
other respects conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the
zone in which it is to be located: Applicant proposed to comply with all
the items outlined in Article C. Accessory Uses and Buildings. Section E.
Bed and Breakfast Inns. Applicant agrees to comply with any other
reasonable request the city may make.
7. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the
City: The property is located in the College Green Historic District on the
western edge of the Central Planning District. The property abuts the
Downtown Planning District. Property is former home of local artist Byron
Burford. Burfords work is displayed in art galleries regionally and
nationally. Much if not most of Burford's work was created at 113 South
Johnson Street. Bur -fords association with renowned artist Grant Wood is
of special note. Applicant believes that property could qualify to be an
the National Register of Historic Places. Applicant believes any uses that
would preserve the association of Mr. Burford's association with the
property and maintain the property as a key structure in the College Hill
Historic District would be consistent with the comprehensive plan.
June 2, 2012
Board of Adjustments
Attn: Sarah Walz
410 E Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
To Dear Honorable Members of the Board of Adjustments:
Please accept this letter in support of the Mark McCall um's request to utilize 113 South Johnson
Street in Iowa City as a five room inn. As the Executive Director of Friends of Historic
Preservation (FHP) I believe that Mr. McCallum's request helps to fulfill the mission of FHP by
preserving the historic buildings and neighborhoods of Iowa City.
FHP has a deep interest in Iowa City's future and we recognize Iowa City's need for investment
both in older neighborhoods and homes and investment in business, like the proposed inn, which
would to support the economy of Iowa City. Mr. McCullain proposal would indeed allow us to
retain one of the older homes in Iowa City in its current form, keeping intact the College Green
Neighborhood, and repurpose the structure into a revenue generating property appropriate for the
neighborhood. Further, the closure of the inns formally located at 511, 517, and the second floor
of 521 East Washington Street have left a need for an inn in the neighborhood.
It should be noted that Mr. McCullam has significant experience and success in the preservation
of historic structures and their utilization as income generating properties. Other properties Mr.
McCullam has successfully restored and include The Brown Street Inn located at 430 Brown
Street, Rohrbacher's Sanatorium located at 811 East College Street, and College Hill Studios
located at 932 East College Street, formally a fraternity house.
It is my sincere belief that Mr. McCullam has Iowa City's best interests at heart. 113 North
Johnson House is a loving restored home currently in the care of an ardent preservationist.
However, it proximity to campus, lack o C yard, and the fact that it now backs up to a multistory
apartment building have limited its chances of being purchased as a single family home. Mr.
MCCUllam'S proposal may be the only way to ensure that the home, a contributing home in the
College Green Historic Neighborhood, is maintained.
1 strongly encourage your support of their program.
Alicia Trimble
Executive Director
Friends of Historic Preservation
0
r--
N
O
m
Who were the Burfords?
As a child growing up in Greenville, Mississippi, Byron Burford had limited
exposure to art, such as circus posters and magazine illustrations but it was not
until his father took him to the Art Institute of Chicago in 1933 that he experienced
the works of the great masters. From that moment on, Burford decided to become
an artist. Reflecting on this moment, Burford commented, "I don't know when these
(paintings) were made, and I don't know how they were made, but this is what I
want to do in life."
As a wide-eyed young boy in Greenville, Mississippi Burford became fascinated with
the circus. His father, associated with the YMCA, sponsored and booked the
traveling circuses, sideshows and bands to appear in the community. Byron often
recounted how his father knew these people on a first name basis and that he was
attracted to all the excitement surrounding the shows. Much to his surprise, one
summer his father, thinking that a short stint with a circus would satisfy his
fascination, arranged for him to join the Tom Mix Circus. His fascination developed
into a passion, and for the rest of his life Burford was involved with the circus.
When it came to going to college, Burford had a choice of scholarships to either Yale
or Iowa. Because he recalled seeing American Gothic at the Chicago Art Institute, he
chose Iowa where he studied under Grant Wood and Philip Guston. Having received
his B.F.A. in 1943, he began his M.F.A. studies when war broke out. Burford
volunteered for the Army Air Corps and in 1944 while still in the service, he
returned to Iowa where he married fellow student, Kathleen "Kay" Kane from
Dubuque where the Kanes were prominent leaders of the community. (Kay's father,
Mark R. Kane was mayor of Dubuque and vice-president and business manager of
the Dubuque Telegraph -Herald)
"Kay" Burford was an artist in her own right. During her tenure at the University of
Iowa School of Art, "Kay"taught drawing to undergraduate students. In 1947, she
was one of the first three women to be accepted into the Writers Workshop, along
with classmate, Flannery O'Conner. Her work. "Bedtime Story', completed in Paul
Engle's class, was later published in the September 1947 edition of Junior Bazaar
Magazine.
The Burfords made Iowa City their permanent home when in 1947 Byron completed
his M.F.A. and at the urging of Grant Wood, he accepted a job as a faculty member at
the University of Iowa. During the 50's while Byron taught at the University, he
moonlighted both as a jazz musician and a magician touring Midwestern movie
theatres with his spook show, Dr. Caligari's Cabinet of Horrors. Often Kay would
team with Byron to perform mindreading. These pursuits for Byron were the
fulfillment of boyhood dreams and experiences having been exposed to black jazz
musicians and itinerant magicians at a young age.
In the early 60's Burford was the recipient of two J.S, Guggenheim Fellowships and
four Ford Foundation Grants. During his sabbatical in England, he met fellow artists
Keith Vaughan and David Hockney who he befriended to come to Iowa as visiting
faculty. In 1968, Byron was invited to represent the United States in the prestigious
Venice Biennale.
That same year, Byron and Kay Burford became the third owners of 113 S. Johnson.
It was their decision to leave the house largely intact for living areas and to utilize
the attic and basement as painting and printmaking studios for Byron. Paneling
from the maid's room in the attic was brought down to the kitchen and used as
wainscoating. The library became Kay's writing and drawing studio and each of the
three bedrooms were set aside for the family children.
The large dining room and kitchen were perfect for the many dinner parties they
held. As a faculty wife, Kay was famous for her dinner parties entertaining faculty
members, friends as well as many visiting writers and artists . Evenings at 113 S
Johnson were lively and many notables were entertained and remained close
friends of the Burfords. Well known writers and poets include: Hortense Calisher,
Curtis Harnack, Bill Fox, Frank Conroy, Anthony Burgess, Alan Gurganus, Kurt
Vonnegut, Jane Cooper, Mark Strand, Marvin Bell, and Vance Bourjaily. Visiting
Artists such as David Ilockney, Robert Wilson and Ray Parker complimented
members from the Art faculty such as James Lechay, Ulfert Wilke, John Dilg, Howard
and Gretchen Rogavin. Joseph and Genie Patrick, Hans Breder,Virginia Meyers and
Jim Snitzer. And friends from the University Community included Susan & Willard
"Sandy" Boyd. Abby & Jim Van Allen, Jim & Sally Lindberg, Nancy & Frank Sieberling,
and Dee & Carrie Norton.
Even with this magnificent house, in the 1970s Burford considered purchasing a
small circus. A bit apprehensive, his wife, Kay, suggested, "Why don't you create
your own circus?" The result was the Great Byron Burford Circus, a travelling art
exhibit in a circus tent that featured life-sized painted circus figures, many of which
were motorized to move in synchronization with programmed lights, evocative
music and sound effects. The exhibit, an early example of performance art, traveled
through the Midwest and South and was wildly successful in attracting over a
quarter of a million visitors, many of whom had never been to an art exhibit before.
Funded by the National Endowment for the Arts, the exhibit generated community
interest, involvement, and participation at every location it visited.
In 1985, in preparation for retirement from the University, a studio was added to
the house. Here Byron continued to produce numerous works of art as a Professor
Emeritus.
Burford's works are to be found in the permanent collections of numerous
important musuems, including the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis, the San
Francisco Museum of Art, the Nelson -Atkins Museumm in Kansas City, Kansas, the
High Museum in Atlanta, the Sheldon Memorial Art Gallery, Lincoln, the National
Museum of Art in Washington, D.C., and the Central Museum of Art, Tokyo, Japan. In
Iowa, Burford's work can be found in the collections of the University of Iowa Art
Musuem, the Cedar Rapids Art Museum, the Figge, Davenport, the Des Moines Art
Center, and the University of Iowa Hospitals.
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MAY 8, 2013 — 5:15 PM
CITY HALL, EMMA HARVAT HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Brock Grenis, Gene Chrischilles, Will
Jennings, Becky Soglin
MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Walz, Sarah Holecek
OTHERS PRESENT: David Bentz, Mike Pugh, Jay Nelson
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
None.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM.
ROLL CALL:
A brief opening statement was read by Grenis outlining the role and purpose of the Board and
the procedures that would be followed in the meeting.
CONSIDERATION OF APRIL 10, 2013 MEETING MINUTES
Jennings moved to approve the minutes with one correction.
Bakerseconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0.
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM
EXC13-00006: Discussion of an application submitted by McDonald's USA, LLC for a
special exception to expand the existing drive -through facility on property located in the
Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 2440 Mormon Trek Boulevard.
Walz said exact application was approved almost one year ago. She said at that time the
property was zoned Intensive Commercial (CI-1) and was going through a rezoning and a
request for a special exception. She said the property was subsequently rezoned to CC-2. She
said the applicant wants to add a second drive -through in order to move customers through the
drive -through line more quickly. She said there is plenty of stacking space, but staff's main
concern last time was getting some of required screening and providing clear pedestrian access
Board of Adjustment
May 8, 2013
Page 2 of 10
to link from the sidewalk. She said the applicant's proposed site plan showed everything the
staff requested with the special exception.
Grenis asked if there were any changes since last time.
Grenis invited the applicant to speak.
David Bentz of Bentz Engineering in Urbandale, Iowa, said he had nothing to add.
Grenis opened public hearing.
Grenis closed public hearing.
Baker moved to approve EXC13-00006, a special exception to allow an expansion of the
existing drive through facility at 2440 Mormon Trek Boulevard subject to the following
conditions:
• Substantial compliance with the site plan submitted, including signage and
pavement markings indicating the one-way circulation of the drive and marking of
the pedestrian areas at the front of the store;
• Approval by the Building Official of the final site plan, lighting plan, and any new
signage for the site.
Chrischilles seconded
Baker said that regarding item EXC13-00006 he concurs with the findings set forth in the staff
report of May 8`", 2013, and concludes that the general and specific criteria are satisfied. Unless
amended or opposed by another Board member he recommends that the Board adopt the
findings in the staff report for the approval of this proposal.
Grenis concurred with Baker's findings.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0.
Grenis declared the motion for the special exception 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.
VARIANCE ITEM
VAR13-00001: Discussion of an application submitted by Jay Nelson for a variance to
waive the off-street parking requirements to allow redevelopment of property located in
the Central Business Service (CB-2) zone at 211 N. Linn Street.
Walz reminded the Board how a variance differed from a special exception. She showed the
Board pictures of the subject property and how the entrance is above grade, which makes
access difficult and is not ideal for commercial uses and that it has no storefront windows. She
said the issue for the variance itself is not the building, but that the property can't provide
parking on site. She said the subject property was grandfathered in with six parking spaces
Board of Adjustment
May 8, 2013
Page 3 of 10
based on the existing commercial floor area. She said all the properties on both side of this
block of Linn Street were platted before the current requirements for parking were enacted.
Walz said the subject property is only twenty-four feet wide, and there is no way to bring parking
onto the property from Linn Street or from the back of the building. She said the properties at
209, 211, and 215 North Linn all have access to the rear of their buildings via a 10-foot
easement that runs north -south along the rear property line. She reported that the subject
property currently has two parking spaces that tuck under the second floor of the building, but
these spaces are considered non -compliant because the easement by which the spaces are
accessed does not meet the code requirement for width —a 22-foot wide drive is required in
order to allow perpendicular parking.
Walz referred the Board to the staff report that documents discussions that have transpired
between the applicant and several City departments. The applicant has included pro formas that
indicate it will take three apartments in order for the property to have a reasonable rate of return.
She said the applicant is seeking a variance to have the requirement for 8 parking spaces to be
waived. She said when they take down the building the applicant will lose the right to the six
ghost spaces. She said the applicant is asking to develop first floor commercial space that
would serve commercial uses requiring up to 5 spaces, which would allow them any of the uses
that are allowed in the zone. The variance would also waive three spaces to for the three
proposed apartments on the two floors above.
Walz read from the staff report and summarized the criteria and backup material. She said that
the applicant has to meet each one of the criteria in order for the variance to be granted. Walz
said that staff is recommending that the Board waive the requested eight parking spaces and tie
to that the conditions contained in the staff report.
Walz said that she had provided the Board with two letters that she received after the packet
was mailed to them. She said one is from the owners of Oasis and other from Mike Wright,
representing the Northside Neighborhood Association. She said that the applicant had a good
neighbor meeting last week and met with business owners and residents of the area.
Jennings asked what, if any, restrictions are there on the types of first floor commercial use that
could be put into the proposed building. Walz replied that it would be whatever that is allowed in
the zone. She said the highest and most intense use would probably be a small restaurant,
limited by the five parking spaces it has. Jennings asked if it could be a bar. Holecek indicated
that it could be an eating and drinking establishment with a liquor license, which would allow it to
stay open until midnight. She said there is a limit on the placement of bars and this property is
too close to other bars to be allowed that use.
Chrischilles asked about the length of the waiver. Holecek said unless the building went away,
the right to the parking spaces for the proposed uses would remain. Chrischilles said he thought
the number of spaces was irrelevant since they do not exist anyway. Walz explained that the
number of spaces waived places a restriction on how the building can be used.
Jennings said parking is an issue in this area and one way to control it is with occupancy rates.
Baker asked for the dimensions of the proposed building. Walz replied that the building is
twenty-three feet, four inches in width and depth of the property is seventy feet, with about four
feet being used for garbage dumpsters. Baker asked if you could somehow provide parking on
Board of Adjustment
May 8, 2013
Page 4 of 10
the back would you still not have access to the parking. Holecek said the access easement is
only ten feet and under the Zoning Code you need twenty-two for an aisle.
Walz said the property to the west may redevelop someday and may be built to the property
line. The Board cannot encumber the subject property with something it doesn't have rights to
in perpetuity —it only has rights to a 10-foot easement.
Jennings said he wants to make sure there is adequate space for the dumpsters. He said the
problem is that when dumpsters have to be physically wheeled out, they don't always get put
back and if the alley isn't sufficiently plowed in winter the garbage still collects. Walz said staff
thought it important that there be access provided and that trash collection only be at the back
of the building. She said the back of the building is the only place the dumpsters can be placed.
She said the Board could attach a condition that calls attention to the situation and asks
Housing and Inspection Services to ensure that there is adequate space for the dumpsters.
Jennings said he doesn't want to create roadblocks for the applicant, but he is concerned about
issues relating to alleys and dumpsters and egress.
Baker said even if they could put on -site parking there now, they have no right to that in the
future. He asked if that wouldn't be the same problem with the trash pickup. Walz said that
someone would probably have to wheel them out by hand. She said the Code would not allow a
parking situation where someone couldn't back up. She said it is adequate easement for
storage of the dumpsters, and the dumpster service may have to do some of the work by hand.
Baker asked if some future owner could redevelop the property and further restrict access. Walz
said no one can interrupt that access because it is an easement that is granted to all of those
properties.
Baker asked about the measurements of the third floor apartment.
Baker referred to a sentence in staff report stating that the quality of the apartments has the
potential to encourage long-term residents to the neighborhood and asked if that is a staff
opinion. Walz said staff encouraged the applicant to put careful thought in designing a floor plan
that would be attractive to long-term residents without inviting over -occupancy. The conditions
of the variance should hold the applicant to the submitted.
Baker talked about the seeming contradiction in the staff report pertaining to the goals of the
Northside Marketplace addressing the parking demands for growth and development of the area
versus a statement that says eight spaces does not seem an onerous request that would have
an adverse effect on neighboring properties and continues on to say that future requests for
reduced parking or waivers of required parking for this neighborhood should be reviewed with
great scrutiny.
Walz said she thinks they have reviewed this application with great scrutiny. She said staff and
the applicant worked on this for a long time to come up with something reasonable. She said
staff feels it is fair because he has some rights with the old building that will go away with the
new one. She said a useful building is desirable. Whether someone uses the existing building
or creates a new one, the property is going to generate a certain amount of parking demand that
cannot be met on site. Staff felt that adding two spaces or the rights to uses that would require
two additional spaces was not so onerous as to tip the scales in the neighborhood. She said,
however, that a tipping point would be reached at some time in the future.
Board of Adjustment
May 8, 2013
Page 5 of 10
Walz told the Board that if they think the idea of increasing metered parking in the area had
merit, they should write a letter to Council and request that the City consider the issue.
Baker said he understood the parking issue better than he did the hardship issue. Walz replied
that they are part of the same piece, because anyone interested in this building would want to
redevelop it, and the only thing that stops redevelopment here is the parking issue. She said
once the building comes down, it has no rights to any parking nor any opportunity to create any
parking. If you have to provide parking and there is no opportunity to do so, that is a hardship.
Baker asked if the owner had tried to sell the property. Walz said he has, and much time has
been consumed in the effort by the Building Department to evaluate appropriate uses. Baker
asked if it is the potential developer who determines the financial feasibility. Walz said it is,
though staff reviewed the pro formas. Baker asked if the ideas a potential developer had are
financial options also available to the current owner. Walz said they are.
Soglin asked if bicycle parking is provided on the subject property, and Walz said bike owners
would have to carry the bikes upstairs or use City provided bicycle racks out front. Soglin asked
if the City periodically reviews the supply based on the increase in residential units in this area.
Walz said she doesn't know if that has been done recently, but the Board can certainly add a
requirement for additional bike parking to the conditions.
Chrischilles asked if the five ghost spaces allocated for the commercial space cover any type of
use that might go in. Walz said it would, based on square footage or seating. She said she
should clarify that the ghost spaces go away, so the variance is a waiver from the requirement.
Grenis invited the applicant to speak.
Mike Pugh of 1 South Gilbert Street, as representative for the applicant, said they would adopt
the information in the staff report as well as the points the City staff makes and the conclusions
and findings that they make and make that a part of applicant's specific application.
Pugh said that under the Code for an eating or drinking establishment you need one parking
space allocated for 150 square feet or one-third of the occupancy load. He said five parking
spaces would support a fifteen person occupancy load. He said the Building Department told
them such a load is basically determined by seating or tables, and they allocate three or four
persons per table.
Pugh said because of the age of this block, the ghost parking spaces that are currently
grandfathered in for each of these buildings were provided to each of the property owners at the
time the Zoning Code was implemented based on the uses at the time. He said, therefore, these
properties were not developed based on an existing Code. He said the applicant's request for
eight ghost parking spaces is below the average of 10.8 allocated for that block based on the
parking study provided by staff. He said in the context of block, the applicant's request should
be considered reasonable.
Pugh said in the good neighbor meeting, people were very supportive of what the applicant is
proposing to do.
Board of Adjustment
May 8, 2013
Page 6 of 10
Pugh said they don't feel that having the ghost spaces or redeveloping the property as proposed
will have much of an effect on the demand for parking in the area. He said residents in this area
may be inclined not to have a car if parking is so difficult.
Pugh said the redevelopment plan is consistent with the Central District Plan in that it will blend
in with the surrounding area. The plan calls for apartments that will help support business in the
area; the plan calls for one -bedroom apartments that will attract long-term residents. The
building will be close to the street, and redevelopment of the site will better position the owner to
attract a commercial tenant, adding to the mix of other commercial buildings in the Northside
Marketplace.
Pugh explained that they ran one pro forma under its current configuration and another based
on the proposed square footage of the residential units and the commercial space, with the
second pro forma yielding a more attractive rate of return.
Pugh read from a memo by Jann Ream of the City expressing support for the proposed project.
Pugh said the applicant is in agreement with the conditions of the staff report.
Baker asked how much useable commercial space the property currently has.
Jay Nelson, 3237 Jasper Avenue NW and owner of the subject property, replied that it is a bit
less than 1200 square feet on the main floor. Baker asked if the new construction would
increase the commercial space. Nelson said it would not. Baker asked what Nelson would
charge if someone wanted to use that commercial space now. Nelson said he's getting nothing
for it today. Baker asked if he's confident that having new commercial space will get him tenants
that he's not getting now. Nelson said he's heard of interest in the new space. Baker asked if it's
possible with the new plan to have more than one commercial tenant. Walz said that would be
doubtful with such a narrow space. Baker said other than the parking problem, which to him is
the least of the problems with regard to a variance, what are the building impediments to using
the current building to achieve the same purpose of commercial on the ground floor and two to
three apartments. Walz said in order to do that, the owner would have to come into compliance
with some of the parking requirements. She said he doesn't have rights to residential right now
so to do a change of use he would have to provide the parking. She said it's not necessarily the
absence of parking that is the impediment to investors: it's the improvements that need to be
made to the building itself. They would be sinking a lot of money into what is really an obsolete
building. Baker asked if he could still get a variance for the parking using the same property.
Walz said the desire is to have a building that's a real asset to the neighborhood and its
commercial tenant, and the Board would be waiving parking either way. Therefore it seems
better to get a building that is useful and attractive.
Baker asked if the owner anticipated the costs when he bought the building. Nelson said he
bought the building for sentimental reasons and was under the impression that he could have a
renter upstairs. Baker said he would ask how much of the responsibility is on the owner for
creating his own hardship, as in this and other cases he has seen. He said he'd like to talk to
the Board at some time about if there should be some process in the buying and selling of
property where the new owner is aware of what can be done with the property.
Walz said what renders the building obsolete is lack of maintenance and updating over many
years and changes in the Building Code and the Zoning Code. She reiterated all the reasons
Board of Adjustment
May 8, 2013
Page 7 of 10
that no one is able to make use of this building in its current state. Baker said he was agreeing
that the proposed building will be a substantial improvement to the neighborhood but was
questioning the legal justifications here and what they are using as the criteria for hardship.
Walz said that hardship is the highest bar to meet because so often the case is that a person
bought something they thought they could use in a way that is not allowed. Baker said he thinks
the point is that as much work that would have to be done on the building, it's not financially
viable to do so.
Grenis opened public hearing.
Grenis closed public hearing.
Soglin said that there are new techniques being developed for waste management, and in the
future there may be a different method used, like composting. She said there was a hope that
people without cars would live in this building, yet there is no secure bicycle parking. Walz said
that efficiencies and one -bedroom units are required to have .5 bicycle spaces. Holecek said
that typically bicycle parking is addressed by the installation of a bike rack, but she can't confirm
that.
Jennings said because this a variance, the Board should be forward -thinking and say that the
variance should also address the larger goals of this asset to the community, that it includes not
just the reduction of the number of cars but that it also address things like solid waste
management, recycling, and the larger picture that is also beneficial to the community. He said
this is an issue that he would like City staff to address by being forward -looking as they look at
incentives and not limit themselves to just parking spaces.
Walz said there is currently a pilot program under way for recycling in multi -family housing.
Jennings said he would add a condition that the City of Iowa City Housing and Inspection
Services verify that dumpster storage and access removal and proper replacement to storage
locations is feasible in practice and application for compliance with the storage ordinance and
general public health and safety standards.
Baker said he would like it to spell out that it's restricted to three one -bedroom or studio
apartments.
Chrischilles asked if that isn't already inferred by the three parking spaces that are allotted.
Walz said it is.
Baker moved to approve VAR13-00001, a request to waive the Zoning Code requirements
for eight off street parking spaces to allow redevelopment of a property located in the
Central Business Service (CB-2) zone at 211 N, Linn Street subject to the conditions:
1. Substantial compliance with the floor plans submitted and elevations submitted
on May 2 restricting the residential use to three one -bedroom or studio
apartments. Any changes to the floor plans or elevations to be approved by the
Director of Planning
2. The applicant must secure a building permit and final approval for exterior design
and materials from the City in order to construct the proposed building
3. That the City of Iowa City Housing and Inspection Services verify that dumpster
storage and access removal and a proper replacement to storage location is
Board of Adjustment
May 8, 2013
Page 8 of 10
feasible in practice and application for compliance with the storage ordinance and
public health and safety standards
Jennings said the third condition mandates that the dumpsters are properly stored and returned
to their proper storage and not just on a drawing.
Jennings seconded the motion.
Baker said regarding VAR13-00001 he concurs with the findings set forth in the staff report of
May 8, 2013, and concludes that the specific criteria are satisfied. Unless amended or opposed
by another Board member, he recommends that the Board adopt the findings and staff report for
the approval of this proposal.
Grenis added that in addition to the staff findings, he finds that it's not contrary to the public
interest based on correspondence the Board received supporting the decision and that this is
completely in line with the Comprehensive Plan, in particular the Northside Marketplace section
of the Central District Plan.
Soglin added that the applicant is facing hardship due to a unique combination of issues that no
other properties face in terms of having no storefront windows and having a raised first floor.
Jennings said that this is not a case of hardship by neglect, that the property owner has not
deliberately allowed this property to fall into a state of neglect such that he is claiming hardship.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0.
Grenis declared the motion for the variance 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.
OTHER
Consider a request to extend the term of a special exception for New Cingular Wireless
PCS LLC (AT&T) to locate a communication transmission facility in the Neighborhood
Public (P-1) zone at 2901 Melrose Avenue (West High School).
Walz said it is not definite that the applicant will need the extension. She said they have been
making progress with the Building Department within their six month term but various delays
from the school district for some soil studies among other things have delayed the process, and
now the school district is asking the applicant to wait until the school year ends to install the
tower and antenna. She told new Board members that it was the choice of the school to have
the tower located on its property and showed them what the applicant intends to do. She said
the Board can either grant the extension to September 1, or the applicant will have to reapply.
Baker moved to approve a request to extend until September 1, 2013, the term of EXC13-
00003, which was approved in February of 2012.
Jennings seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0.
Board of Adjustment
May 8, 2013
Page 9 of 10
OTHER:
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION:
Walz thanked Jennings for his service to the Board. Jennings said it has been a special
pleasure to work with a City staff that is as meticulous and thorough and well-intentioned in their
work.
ADJOURNMENT:
Jennings moved to adjourn.
Bakerseconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 5-0 vote.
F 0
W
O
(n W m
� � o
W N
U
a Z N
LL Q
0 0 0
0 z N
W
a �
o
In a
X
X
X
X
X
N
O
X
X
X
X
X
M
LU
X
X
X
X
M
O
W
w
X
X
X
X
N
X
X
X
X
a
X
X
X
X
X
I
X
X
X
c
O
o
N
W
X
X
X
X
O
LU
X
X
X
X
O
n
X
X
X
0
X
�
N
W
o
0
0
0
0
0
N
N
N
N
N
N
LU
LU
F-
H
W
Z
W
O
LU
z
~
Y
U
W
K
Y
O
LLI
Q
U
LLI
J
m
=
m
2
N
U
Z
w
Z
W
W
Z
N
Z
W
J
Y
W
Q'
W
U
Z
m
Z
N
O
U
(=
W
Y