Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-14-2014 Board of AdjustmentIOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING Wednesday, May 14, 2014 — 5:15 PM City Hall — Emma J. Harvat Hall AGENDA A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Consider the April 9, 2014 Minutes D. Special Exception Items 1. EXC14-00006: Discussion of an application submitted by Faith Academy, to allow the expansion of an existing school of general instruction in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 1030 Cross Park Avenue, E. Board of Adjustment Information F. Adjourn NEXT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING: June 11, 2014 STAFF REPORT To: Board of Adjustment Item: EXC14-00006 GENERAL INFORMATION: Prepared by: Sarah Walz Date: May 14, 2014 Applicant: Faith Academy 1030 Crosspark Avenue Iowa City, IA Contact: Wisdom Nwafor 1030 Crosspark Avenue 773-746-3426 Property Owner: Kobrin Development Company, Inc. 755 Mormon Trek Blvd. 319-337-4195 Requested Action: Special exception to allow the expansion of an existing General Education use in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone. Purpose: Add 5,000 square feet of additional space to Faith Academy. Location: 1030 Crosspark Avenue Existing Land Use and Zoning: Vacant, Community Commercial (CC-2) Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Pepperwood Plaza, commercial (CC-2) South: residential and public (RM-12, P-1, RS-5) East: residential (RM-12, RM-44) West: commercial (CC-2, CO-1) Applicable code sections: 14-413-3A (General Criteria); 14-413-41D-8 (Specific Criteria) File Date: March 14, 2014 BACKGROUND: In June, 2013, the Board of Adjustment granted a special exception to Faith Academy to establish a General Educational Facility in a Community Commercial (CC-2) zone located at 1030 Cross Park Avenue. The school facility is now established on the south side of a large commercial building that is part of Pepperwood Plaza. The north side of the building contains commercial storefronts with large retail uses (including Slumberland Furniture, Tuesday Morning, and Stuff Etc.) as well as a large parking lot that serves all of Pepperwood Plaza. The south side of the building contains mostly small commercial, warehouse, or office space and faces onto a residential neighborhood. The school has operated a kindergarten through 1st grade at this location for the past year. The building provides a gymnasium, kitchen, restrooms, three classrooms, and common areas in addition to an outdoor play area. Currently, there are 3 classrooms: two are 582 square feet each and the other is 256 square feet. The Zoning Code requires a new special exception for expansions of more than 500 square feet. The Board imposed an additional condition requiring a new special exception if school enrollment would exceed 50 students. The applicant would now like to expand into an additional 5,000 square feet of adjacent building space that was formerly occupied by the Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program office. The new space will allow for the addition of 4 classrooms as well as additional boy's and girl's bathrooms, office space, and a reception/waiting area. The main entrance for students will be relocated so that it directly overlooks the playground on the south side of the building. A sidewalk is proposed on the site plan to connect the drop-off area to the new entrance. Other building entrance points will be for staff and emergencies only. With the additional space, the school will expand its programming to include grades K-6. Plans are to add 1 grade per year for the next 5 years, so that by 2018 they have all 6 elementary grades plus kindergarten. The applicant believes that in five years the total enrollment may reach 105 students, assuming steady growth of one class per year. The main vehicular access to the subject property is via a 2-way drive from Cross Park Avenue. The main parking area for the school is connected by a driveway to a series of parking and loading areas that serve other portions of the larger commercial development, including a loading dock for Slumberland. Traffic flow is shown on the attached aerial photo. With the addition, the school will have 35 or 36 parking spaces: 22 parking spaces in the area west of the play area, 7 on the east side of the building, and another 7 directly east of the play area. Children will be dropped off in the main parking area west of the playground; staff will use parking to the east of the playground. The current 3,500 square foot outdoor play area supports 35 students per recess session. The applicant proposed staggered recess sessions such that no more than 35 students will be on the playground any time. Faith Academy's long-term plan is to create a K-12 program to serve children in the surrounding neighborhood. After the proposed K-6 goals are realized, additional or new facilities will be required. 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 14-4B-4D-8 pertaining to General Educational Facilities in CC-2 zones 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 speck and general standards are included on the attached application form. Staff comments related to the speck and general approval criteria are set forth below. Specific Standards (144B-413-8) 1. The use will be functionally compatible with surrounding uses and will not inhibit retail and service uses for which the zone is primarily intended. The Board may consider such factors as site layout, size and scale of the development, and traffic circulation. Staff believes the use will be functionally compatible with surrounding uses due to the combination of the following factors: • The school is located away from the active commercial side of the property, including the customer parking area. The school entrance and playground face toward multi- family buildings located immediately to the east and south of the subject property. • The parking area that would be used by the proposed school for student pick-up and drop-off is adjacent to a loading dock for one of the larger commercial uses in the shopping center. The applicant has provided an illustration showing how traffic circulates through this portion of property. This circulation does not conflict with the loading zone, since the loading dock is recessed into the adjacent building and away from the flow of school traffic. • The school is intended to serve students in the immediate neighborhood most of whom walk to school. V The applicant has stated that the hours of operations would be from 7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Staff believes these hours of operation are compatible with surrounding commercial uses, in that the specified hours, especially pick-up/drop-off time, are not during peak commercial time. 2. The use must provide a drop-off/pick-up area in a location that is convenient to or has good pedestrian access to the entrance of the facility. The drop-off/pick-up area must contain sufficient stacking spaces and/or parking spaces to ensure that traffic does not stack into adjacent streets or other public right-of-way. Staff believes the use will provide a convenient location for a drop-off/pick-up area be functionally compatible with surrounding uses due to the combination of the following factors: • For those students who travel by car, the school will continue to rely on the loading and unloading area to the south of the building and on the circulation pattern shown on the site plan. A sidewalk is proposed on the site plan to connect the drop-off area to the new entrance. • The circulation pattern of the parking lot allows room for approximately 10 cars to stack in front of the pick-up/drop-off location and approximately 10 more cars ahead of the pick-up/drop-off location. In addition, the parking lot includes approximately 29 parking spaces, which, combined with the stacking spaces, should accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed school. The main entrance has been relocated and is now directly adjacent to the playground. The school provides a sidewalk connection between Cross Park Avenue to the entrance along west side of the playground. There is an incomplete sidewalk that runs from the proposed new entrance along the east side of the playground. Staff recommends extending this sidewalk all the way to the Cross Park right-of-way to allow for additional pedestrian access to the school entrance. This sidewalk would provide greater separation between students and the vehicle area that serves the adjacent commercial uses. This sidewalk will be more convenient for students walking to school along Broadway Street. 3. The site must be designed to promote safe and convenient pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular circulation to the school according to the standards set forth in sub- section 14-2C-6F, Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Vehicular Circulation. Pedestrian walkways must be established connecting the main entrance(s) of the school to adjacent public sidewalks and trails. Staff believes that the proposed use will promote safe and convenient pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular circulation based on the findings under criterion #2 above and following factors: • There are sidewalks on both sides of Broadway Street and Cross Park Avenue. As part of the previous special exception the applicant constructed a sidewalk between the entrance and Cross Park Ave. A sidewalk is proposed on the site plan to connect the drop-off area to the new entrance. • The school is intended to serve children who reside in the immediate neighborhood. Low -traffic counts from the residential neighborhoods to the south and provision of sidewalks on both sides of the street in these neighborhoods should ensure safe pedestrian access from the south. Given the expanded population of children who will attend the school and the relocated entrance, staff recommends completing a second sidewalk along the east side of the playground to provide a convenient access located further from the larger parking and drive area that serves adjacent commercial uses. On commercial sites with multiple buildings, sidewalks or other approved pedestrian routes must be provided between the principal buildings on the site. The City may exempt this requirement where pedestrian traffic between buildings is rare or unlikely. Pedestrian traffic between buildings seems unlikely in this case and therefore staff recommends that these routes not be required. General Standards (14-4B-3) 1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Specific criteria 1-3 address the public health, safety, and welfare concerns associated this special exception request. In addition, staff believes that the proposed outdoor play area poses safety concern: • The school provides a 3,500 square foot fenced play area. • The existing sidewalk from Cross Park Avenue provides a direct route to the school entrance that does not conflict with commercial traffic. A sidewalk is proposed on the site plan to connect the drop-off area to the new entrance. An additional sidewalk along the east side of the playground would help to accommodate the additional students who will attend the school and provides greater separation from the vehicle areas associated with adjacent commercial uses. 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 in specific criterion #1 and the following factor.• • Given the limited enrollment, hours of operation, and the location of the school entrance with regard to the other commercial uses in the shopping center, the school is unlikely to have a negative impact on surrounding commercial uses. 3. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located. Staff believes the application satisfies this based on the findings outlined under specific criterion #1 and the following factors: • Hours of operation of the proposed school (7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.) do not conflict with commercial business hours. • The new location for the entrance to the school will better separate children from the vehicle areas that serve the adjacent commercial uses. 4. 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, provided that the required pedestrian route is provided: • All necessary facilities and access for the property are already provided for this commercial area. 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 findings in specific criterion #2 and #3. 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 applicant will need to provide additional bicycle parking. This location for bicycle parking must be approved by the Building Official prior to issuance of a occupancy permit. There is ample space near the entrance for bike parking. 7. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended. The South District Plan depicts the subject property as appropriate for General Commercial uses. The Comprehensive Plan does not explicitly address this property or the proposed use, apart from encouraging the City to consider institutional uses such as schools, daycares, and churches, as important assets for establishing stable and thriving neighborhoods. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends EXC14-00006, a special exception to allow the expansion of a General Educational Facility for up to 105 students in a Community Commercial (CC-2) zone located at 1030 Cross Park Avenue, be approved subject to the following conditions: • Completion of a sidewalk connection along the east side of the playground to the school entrance. An enrollment of more than 105 students or an addition of more 500 square feet of floor area will be considered an expansion of the use that requires a new special exception. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location maps. 2. Views of the proposed school. 3. Site plan. 4. Application materials. Approved by: %t�.L, Robert Miklo, Senior Planner, Department of Neighborhood and Development Services N 113ssnN ------8Cl 113Ssm 80 i-AUdUNYU —7T7 F- Is sAva co - Z-- -7 3AIH0 H011M L 1: w4 --- U (') Z S3�O 10i cu Ln 0 u cm LU ■ • y i . f f .;_ • �afffafffffafrwrra!' a ry �-• A ~ F +-1 ir- M I w V u L x LU 744% LI+ An aerial view of the shopping center. The dotted line shows the area of the building and vehicle/parking areas that will serve the school. Current entrance w l 1 . View from Cross Park Avenue of the area of the building that serves as the school. The arrow shows the location of the current entrance and the proposed new entrance. Note: this image was taken before the school was established. There is now a sidewalk to the entrance and a fenced play area. — — — — — — — The above photos show the sidewalk that runs from parking east of the playground to the entrance. Staff recommends completing the sidewalk so that it connects out to Cross Park Avenue to provide an additional pedestrian route for the growing numbers of children who will attend the school. NV1d 311S ' 21X1w b u sai VM01 'A OOOM8 3d '3AV ABtld SS080 9f09'9L8112W" �"S HOM aioP S S130tl1d uMo AW30VOV H11Vd —3dOH 01 10—VA V 133fOld dSA c=>lNISNFAI 63lj ^ `t zzU Li a } Q {{p yF QFF Jz 3� z D -¢>oz K~O�0 p'ofi Q 3Oewg L5 uor 0z E9F�ig` QO < O w a Q zz 3OOU Omyaa Q 3 Q3Z w Ng O i1Y aW W Q z QOa'MSJ a DQ-D _— U 00� a ow}Qc) ccmrc a a" �jaW>z a0aChH �1W0 Cxc 1 Yb000 to APPLICATION TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SPECIAL EXCEPTION 3-13-2014 DATE: PROPERTY PARCEL NO. PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1030 Crosspark Ave. CC-2 PROPERTY ZONE: APPLICANT: Name: Faith Academy 1023243001 PROPERTY LOT SIZE: +5 Acres Address: 1030 Crosspark Ave. 319-351-4860 Phone: Wisdom Nwafor CONTACT PERSON: Name: - a (if other than applicant) 1030 Crosspark 171 Address: ,, =0 773-746-3426 Phone: PROPERTY OWNER: Name: Kobrin Development Company Inc. (if other than applicant) 755 Mormon Trek BLVD. Address: 319-337-4195 Phone: aI 0 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 366-5239 or e-mail Sarah-walz@iowa-city.org. Purpose for special exception: To allow expansion of previously exempt general education in CC-2 Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any: 6-10-13 Addition size: In incorporating the Mayors Youth center we will add approximately 5000 ft.' in floor area to Faith Academy. Number of classrooms: The addition will add 4 classrooms as well as additional boy's and girl's bathrooms, Office space, reception / waiting area. This addition will also add entrances and fire exits. Number of Students: The long term plan is for K-12. With this proposed addition Faith Academy will educate students K-6. Plans are to add 1 grade per year in ascending order, 2014 add 2nd grade, 2015 add 3rd grade, 2016 add 4th grade, etc. Subsequently, it will be five years before total enrollment is reached at 105 students. This assumes a steady growth of one class per year. After the K-6 goals are realized, additional or new facilities will be required. Traffic flow/Parking/Play area: As per our initial request for special exemption traffic flow is shown on the attached aerial photo showing the traffic pattern. This has worked well for the last school year and we plan to utilize this flow pattern with the new addition. Additionally, there is extra parking spaces that come with the proposed addition. We plan tc use this additional parking for teachers and staff thus freeing additional parking space in the original parking area off the traffic flow pattern. As part of our initial special exemption we provided 3500 ft? of fenced play area. This area is all grass and will support 35 students per recess session. Since recess sessions are staggered by class no more than 35 students will be on the playground any time. Therefore we feel the existing play area is more than adequate. -3- D. General Approval Criteria: In addition to the specific approval criteria addressed In "C", the Board must also find that the requested special exception meets the following general approval criteria or that the following criteria do not apply. In the space provided below, or on an attached sheet, provide specific information, not just opinions, that demonstrate that the specific requested special exception meets the general approval criteria listed below or that the approval criteria are not relevant in your particular case. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare. Previously granted exemption required that playground area be fenced off. This was done and accepted by city prior to 1 st day of school. 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. Faith Academy has been in operation with only positive effects to th&2 neighborhood. CD r .<,y M ® --0 ' cn 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. Since 1st exemption was granted traffic flow has improved as a result of our regulated drop off/parking areas. Hours of school operation have not shown to have any effect on surrounding businesses. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. All neccessary facilities and access have previously been provided. -4- 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. All ingress/egress have been adequately addressed in #2 and #3 above and in original exemption. 6. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the special exception being considered, the specific proposed exception in all other respects conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is to be located. [Depending on the type of special exception requested, certain specific conditions may need to be met. The applicant will demonstrate compliance with the specific conditions required for a particular use as provided in the City Code section 14.413 as well as requirements listed in the base zone or applicable overlay zone and applicable site development standards (14-5A through K)j All standards and codes will have to be met in remodeling this adittional space as we meet all requirements in the original exemption. Cs �- n-: _ m �. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive P(gi of the City. As the initial exemption was found to be consistant with the comprehensive plan we plan to work with the city to further the mission of Human Development. in NOTE: Conditions. In permitting a special exception, the Board may Impose appropriate conditions and safeguards, including but not limited to planting screens, fencing, construction commencement and completion deadlines, lighting, operational controls, improved traffic circulation requirements, highway access restrictions, increased minimum yard requirements, parking requirements, limitations on the duration of a use or ownership or any other requirement which the Board deems appropriate under the circumstances upon a finding that the conditions are necessary to fulfill the purpose and Intent of the Zoning Chapter. (Section 14-8C-2C-4, City Code). Orders. Unless otherwise determined by the Board, all orders of the Board shall expire six (6) months from the date the written decision is filed with the City Clerk, unless the applicant shall have taken action within the six (6) month period to establish the use or construct the building permitted under the terms of the Board's decision, such as by obtaining a building permit and proceeding to completion in accordance with the terms of the permit. Upon written request, and for good cause shown, the Board may extend the expiration date of any order without further public hearing on the merits of the original appeal or application. (Section 14-8G1 E, City Code). Petition for writ of certiorari. Any person or persons, jointly or severally, aggrieved by any decision of the Board under the provisions of the Zoning Chapter, or any taxpayer or any officer, department or board of the City may present to a court of record a petition for writ of certiorari duly verified, setting forth that such decision is illegal, In whole or in part, and specifying the grounds of the Illegality. (Section 14-8C-1 E, 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: Ie2 20� Date: /1 ! 4 rc� ' d, 20 -Y ppdadmhapplication boase.doc Sig ature(s) of Appl' nt s) &(' 4ouk if Different than Appiicant(s) /R y ��rvy 5M/ VP 0 C) = ME rr't M m �j S �^ 98 c.7 W MINUTES PRELIMINARY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APRIL 9, 2014 — 5:15 PM CITY HALL, EMMA HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Gene Chrischilles, Connie Goeb, Brock Grenis, Becky Soglin MEMBERS ABSENT: Baker was in attendance until 6:35 p.m. STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Walz, Sarah Holecek OTHERS PRESENT: Russ Garrett, Kim Glenn, Amy Pretorious, Adam Pretorius, Pete Brokaw, Keith Reiys, Chad Diefenderfur, Corey Wilson, Carolyn Beyer 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 MARCH 12, 2014 MEETING MINUTES Goeb moved to approve the minutes. Soglin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS EXC14-00006: Discussion of an application submitted by Russ Garrett for a special exception to reduce the rear setback requirement to allow a home addition for property in the Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS-8) zone at 632 Brown Street. Walz pointed out on a zoning map that this is the only house on the Brown Street frontage that is in the RS-8 zone, while the two adjacent houses along Brown Street are in the RS-5. She said it's more similar size and configuration -wise with the other houses in the RS-8 zone. She said the other houses adjacent on Brown Street also have much deeper set -backs, and she Board of Adjustment April 9, 2014 Page 2 of 10 showed various photos of the subject house and examples of comer houses in the Northside that are typical in lot size and configuration to the subject house. She said this is a contributing house in the Brown Street Historic District, and an application is going to be put before the Historic Preservation Commission for the proposed addition. Walz said that staff believes the situation is peculiar to the property because due to setback averaging the property is subject to a deeper front setback requirement from Brown Street, the subject property is significantly smaller than the other two lots along the Brown Street frontage, and while a lot of 6,000 square foot is not unusual in this neighborhood, the deep front setback (32 feet) on a lot that is just 100 feet is unusual. Walz said there is practical difficulty complying with the setback requirements because the deeper front setback makes it more difficult in making use of the lot and as a corner lot, the property must provide 2 front setbacks: one along Brown and the other along N. Dodge Street, which reduces the usable portion of the lot. She said the Brown Street neighborhood was established long before current zoning standards and is characterized by small lots with minimal setbacks, especially on the corners; because this is a corner lot, the rear setback functions similar to a side setback, which in the RS-8 zone is a minimum of five feet and in this case is 10 feet, in terms of its relationship to the adjacent property to the north; Walz said that any potential negative effects resulting from the setback exception are mitigated to the extent practical by the fact that it has to go through a Historic Preservation Commission review and that the proposed addition is limited to one story. Walz said the other critical factor is even though this is a rear setback reduction, it does have an impact on the Dodge Street frontage due to the garage entry. Although the applicant can't meet the Zoning Code regulations of twenty-five feet from the garage face to the property line, they can apply for a minor modification. She said they can meet the minor modification requirements of being twenty-five feet from the sidewalk line and the wider curb cut and driveway will actually make a safer situation than now exists. Walz said in response to Goeb's inquiry that there has been no negative response generated by the sign posted or the letters sent to neighbors about this project. Grenis invited the applicant to speak. Russ Garrett, the contractor, and Kim Glenn, one of the property owners, came forward. Garrett said the owners would like to expand the house in order to live there much longer. Chrischilles asked if the privacy fence encompassed the entire rear of the property. Glenn responded that it does. Grenis opened public hearing. Grenis closed public hearing. Baker moved to approve EXC14-00005, a special exception to reduce the rear setback requirement for the principal structure from twenty feet to eleven feet, five inches subject to the following conditions: 1. The setback reduction applies to the proposed onestory addition only; Board of Adjustment April 9, 2014 Page 3 of 10 2. The applicant must secure a Certificate of Appropriateness for the addition from the Historic Preservation Commission. 3. The applicant must secure a minor modification for a reduction in the drive -way length; driveway design should be in substantial compliance with the drawing proposed by staff. Chrischilles seconded. Soglin stated that this is a rear setback that functions like a side setback with the side setback expectation being five feet. Baker said that regarding EXC14-00005 he concurs with the findings set forth in the staff report of April 9, 2014, and concludes that the general and specific criteria are satisfied. Unless amended or opposed by another Board member he recommended that the Board adopt the findings in the staff report as their findings for the acceptance of this proposal. 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. EXC14-00003: Discussion of an application submitted by Peninsula Development Company, LLC, to allow an eating establishment (coffee shop) to be located in the Planned Development Overlay, Low Density Single -Family Residential (OPD-5) zone at 2280 Willenbrock Circle. EXC14-00004: Discussion of an application submitted by Peninsula Development Company, LLC, to allow an eating establishment (restaurant) to be located in the Planned Development Overlay, Low Density Single -Family Residential (OPD-5) zone at 1010 Martin Street. Walz said she would explain both of these special exceptions since they were so closely related, and then the Board could discuss them separately. Walz said showed the Board where the subject properties are located on aerial photos and location maps. She said early in the planning process, areas around the central square were identified as being appropriate and planned to be appropriate for mixed uses and small scale commercial uses to serve the neighborhood. She showed slides of the properties and the surrounding area and plans for the proposed businesses. Walz said the coffee shop is under 500 square feet so it's a low intensity use. She said it's such a small site that not a lot of disturbance could be created, and staff recommends approval of a special exception subject to conditions listed in the report. Chrischilles asked if the Peninsula Code specifies how many mixed use buildings there will be. Walz said some are planned, some are at the discretion of the developer, and all of them will be around the Square. Board of Adjustment April 9, 2014 Page 4 of 10 Grenis asked why in the Peninsula Code these two uses need a special exception and other commercial uses don't. Walz said the other uses are considered lower in intensity and hours of operation and potential for externalities such as noise. She indicated that there was some confusion about the outdoor seating —staff had interpreted the application that all outdoor seating was in the courtyard. Staff had some concern about outdoor seating along the sidewalk. Baker asked if each of these two applications is contingent on the other being approved. Walz said it doesn't affect it from a zoning aspect. Grenis invited the applicant to speak. Amy Pretorious of the Peninsula Development Company said someone will own and maintain the courtyard space, and it would be unfair to the two other unsold units or the coffee shop entrepreneur if the restaurant person were to utilize that space. She said she thinks that when they eventually create the condo documents for this, it will be the larger unit, the restaurant, that will actually be furnishing that space and have priority use for that space. She said right now that the restaurant is not using it, the coffee shop will have access to it but in the event that it becomes full, it would be nice to allow the coffee shop to at least have three bistro tables outside its unit. Chrischilles asked what the distance is from the building to the street in front of the coffee shop. Pretorious said it's about 10 feet back from the sidewalk, the sidewalk is about 6 feet, and there's an 8 foot setback to the curb, so approximately 24 feet. Goeb queried if the applicant is asking to have tables in the front. Pretorious said she was. Soglin asked what the hours will be. Pretorious said they would like to open at 6:00 a.m. to serve the bus traffic. Walz explained that the coffee shop owner will probably not stay open until 10:00 p.m. as recommended, but over time the intended use could change. Chrischilles asked if the zoning is locked in or if there is the possibility of making a so-called commercial area. Pretorious said there are already two mixed use buildings that are live/work and all the mixed use buildings yet to come can have certain types of commercial uses. She said all the properties along the square have the opportunity to be live/work, but the commercial uses that are allowed are fairly limited. Baker asked what the population was and was told that it could get as high as 1,000 occupants. Chrischilles said he thinks it's a good idea to have businesses around the square, but if there are too many commercial properties out there, massive traffic problems will be created. He said on a Sunday when he drove out there, there were already many cars on the street. He said even if it's intended to be a pedestrian area, people would drive to a commercial site if they had a lot of things to buy. He wondered if the development company had thought about a parking lot. Pretorious said she had been told by staff that they couldn't have one. Walz said that they did talk about putting a parking lot behind a future daycare. Parking is not allowed as a principal use in the residential zone. She pointed out where the applicant is trying to get two additional parallel spaces in front of the restaurant and four diagonal parking spaces near the park. Baker asked if comparable commercial activities have to go through the same process. Holecek said under Peninsula rezoning an eating establishment needs a special exception but there are Board of Adjustment April 9, 2014 Page 5 of 10 four commercial uses that are allowed by right. Baker said Chrischilles makes a good point about the long-term future when it changes the whole nature of the development and how much control the City has over that. Baker asked if the other establishment is approved what is to prevent someone coming over and using the outdoor facilities of the coffee shop. Walz reminded the board that alcohol outside is not allowed in a residential zone, but if it happened frequently that people were eating at those facilities and that bothered someone, the City would probably receive a complaint and act on it. Grenis opened public hearing Adam Pretorious of the Peninsula Development Company said this lot is the only lot in the Peninsula zoned for this type of commercial use. He added that the Book of Principles that was put in place by the City, which is one of the three covenants that governs the Peninsula, also gives the Master Association, which every homeowner belongs to, power and authority to add restrictions to hours, noise, or pollution. Walz reminded the Board that the entire neighborhood is zoned Residential and it is just particular sites that are designated as allowable for live/work. Grenis closed public hearing. Soglin moved to approve EXC14-00003, a special exception to allow an eating establishment at 2280 Willenbrock Circle ( unit 4) subject to the following conditions: 1. Substantial compliance with the site plan submitted; and 2. The establishment shall not exceed 500 sq. feet of gross floor area; 3. Hours of operation are limited to 10 PM weeknights and 11 PM on Friday and Saturday; 4. Amplified sound on the exterior of the building is prohibited. Chrischilles seconded. Baker said he finds this a perfectly reasonable application and feels better knowing that the homeowners association and the property owners association also have additional oversight control, if necessary. Soglin said she agreed the homeowners association having some oversight was comforting but she still had some reservations about the hours of operation at certain times in the morning. She said a slamming car door can be loud but that will be up to the residents to know when and if that becomes an issue for them. She said it's a good use for this neighborhood that has a strong sense of community, and she would hope that the Association encourages people who live in the neighborhood to actually walk there to get their coffee and not drive three blocks. Chrischilles said that regarding EXC14-00003 he concurs with the findings set forth in the staff report of April 9, 2014, and concludes that the general and specific criteria are satisfied. Unless amended or opposed by another Board member he recommended that the Board adopt the findings in the staff report as their findings for the acceptance of this proposal. Board of Adjustment April 9, 2014 Page 6 of 10 Grenis said he concurs with Chrischilles, and based on the responses the Board received regarding this application it's supported by the community. 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. Walz said that EXC14-00004 is for the larger unit, a proposed restaurant and wine bar. She clarified that the term "bar" is misleading in that the proposal is not for a drinking establishment but rather an eating establishment that serves alcohol. She said it has the opportunity to seat more people and so there may be more potential for issues with parking and noise and activity, and then there is the concern about alcohol. She said the maximum occupancy load, which applies to both indoor and outdoor, would be capped at sixty, and that's a Building Code regulation that has to do with provision of bathrooms and the fact that alcohol is being served. Walz said the City did hear from some of the neighbors that there was concern that with the alcohol use things can get a bit more carefree at late hours. She said the fact that the applicant alcohol cannot be in the outdoor areas and is confined to the interior of the building, alleviates much of that concern. She said that staff feels it's best to keep the outdoor seating in the courtyard. She said the conditions staff is recommending are the same as those for EXC14- 00003 with the addition of a new pending ordinance governing the placement of oven vents. Baker said he's know the prohibition of alcohol outside is because of the residential zone, and he wants to know if that alcohol ordinance can ever be changed or is it ironclad. Walz said it would take an amendment of the Outdoor Service Area ordinance to change it. Baker asked if the Council would change that. Walz said that currently there is no support for changing it. Baker said his concern about lighting for the signs is that they will be lit even when not in operation and may cause a disturbance for the residential. Walz said the City has sign regulations designed specifically with neighborhood residential uses in mind and that the Peninsula Code has additional restrictions beyond those of the City. She said if people were unhappy with the lighting they could certainly complain to the Homeowners Association. Goeb asked if it was true that people wouldn't be able to drink outside on the sidewalk but that they could drink on the patio. Walz said there alcohol cannot be anywhere outdoors --on either the patio or near the sidewalk. Grenis invited the applicant to speak. Amy Pretorious showed that the design of the restaurant and coffee shop was intentionally recessed to allow outdoor bistro tables. She said a tiny business like this is fragile and the business plan is encompassing, including what they want to do with a couple bistro tables in addition to the courtyard space. She said they feel that restricting too many things does create a potential for failure, so they would like to see as much help as possible with this business. Board of Adjustment April 9, 2014 Page 7 of 10 Baker asked Pretorious how she would base her decision on responding to nuisance complaints. She explained the chain of action and said the ultimate decision by the Board of the Homeowners Association is based on the principle of being neighborly. Chrischilles asked how large the courtyard is and Walz said it was less than 300 sq. feet. Soglin said the applicant's numbers for occupancy don't add up. Pretorius said during the warmer times of the year they will move seating outside and decrease the indoor seating. Soglin said she could see times when the restaurant will be over capacity. Pretorious said that the occupancy cap of 60 is relatively new and she hasn't had time to adjust the floor plan accordingly, but she would like the ability to allow seating where the owner wants it, whether in the front or in the courtyard. Soglin said she appreciates that restaurants have huge challenges, but this is a very residential area and the success of the restaurant could produce problems. She said one-third to of the letters of support did express concern about the hours of operation, but there is a process in place to deal with that through the Homeowners Association. Grenis opened public hearing. Pete Brokaw of 947 Walker Circle said because of the size of it, he doesn't think this business will draw many people from outside the neighborhood. He said it will be a neighborhood establishment, and he supports it. He thinks there is a good homeowners association in place to deal with any unforeseen problems or issues. Keith Reiys of 1471 Foster Road asked about the hours of operation for the restaurant. Goeb asked what the use of the building could be if the restaurant failed. Holecek it could be a daycare, office, small retail, eating establishment or a living unit. Chad Diefenderfur of 991 Walker Circle said he supports the business but he does have a concern about the hours of operation and would encourage the Board to limit them. He said that according to the Peninsula Code, he doesn't believe that the Homeowners Association has the power to self -regulate the hours of operation. Corey Wilson of 1451 Foster Road said some people have had concerns about alcohol in the neighborhood, but this is not a college bar, or a roadhouse and restaurants of similar size in Iowa City do not have a raucous environment. Carolyn Beyer of 1227 Swisher Street said having an establishment that sells alcoholic beverages is a mistake for the neighborhood and poses a safety concern, particularly to children, who are often in the park. She said her perception is that the primary focus of the proposed establishment is to serve wine and beer and have snack food available, which could attract a college crowd. She said large, multifamily units are being developed right down the street from the subject site, and it will be convenient for college students to frequent the bar. She said she thinks the bar will bring an undesirable element into the neighborhood, while discouraging the establishment of businesses more suited to the area. Pretorious said she and the majority of the residents feel that this type of business is the best fit for the neighborhood. Board of Adjustment April 9, 2014 Page 8 of 10 Soglin asked if mixed drinks can be served. Pretorious said definitely beer and wine and sake, but the owner hasn't said anything about applying for a liquor license. Grenis closed public hearing. There was discussion amongst the Board members about defining the hours of operation. Grenis moved to approve EXC14-00004 to allow an eating establishment at 1010 Martin Street subject to the following conditions: 1. Substantial compliance with the site plan submitted; 2. The establishment shall not exceed a combined indoor -outdoor occupancy load of 60; 3. Hours of operation are limited to 10 PM weeknights and 11 PM on Friday and Saturday; 4. Amplified sound on the exterior of the building is prohibited; 5. The commercial kitchen hood vent shall conform with a proposed ordinance now under consideration by the City Council. Chrischilles seconded. Grenis said he thinks this is a good application. He said he appreciates the concerns with alcohol sales especially the unknown characteristics of what that could be. He said it's a use that's been shown to be desirable by the neighborhood as a whole, and he understands the appeal. Grenis said he likes the conditions the Board has on the application. Goeb said she understands clearly what the concerns are about alcohol but it seems that the way it's configured, this will be a more sedate setting and won't expand into a raucous bar. She said practically speaking, you can't separate a restaurant from a bar and if you eliminate the bar, the restaurant won't happen. She said it seems to be something desired by the neighborhood for some time. Chrischilles said he thinks most of the clientele will be from the neighborhood. He said there could be problems from the sale of alcohol but one of the tempering factors is that it is going to be indoors. He said he can see why most of the neighborhood supports it and thinks it can be a positive addition. Soglin said she agrees with what other members have been saying. She said she hopes that families with children would also patronize this restaurant at earlier hours. Chrischilles said that regarding EXC14-00004 he concurs with the findings set forth in the staff report of April 9, 2014, and concludes that the general and specific criteria are satisfied. Unless amended or opposed by another Board member he recommended that the Board adopt the findings in the staff report as their findings for the acceptance of this proposal. A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-0. (Baker left at 6:36 p.m.) Board of Adjustment April 9, 2014 Page 9 of 10 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. OTHER: Holecek said that the City received the decision on the 101 d walnut Street case today and the Board did prevail. She said the court noted that the Board had done their job well. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION: ADJOURNMENT: Goeb moved to adjourn. Soglin seconded. The meeting was adjourned on a 4-0 vote. W OC 0 f0� I u Lu N ci LL Q O p N LU a O I x x x x ! x N S x x x x j x M x x x x x N x x x x x x x x x j x co x x x x ! x m N x ! x x x m 0 S x j x x x CM x ! x x x 10 h x x x x x 0 x ! x x x x a W x x x x n O a n to ro IT uO m W o 0 o 0 0 0 N N N N N N W r H W Z W U H J U C Y l= m a 0 m m Z aJ Vl U Z W W m Z y Z J O a ¢ O a 2 Z Z m c7 C7 U � t0 d �E E d daaz a¢¢ n n u n X: a w Y