Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-12-2014 Board of AdjustmentCITY OF IOWA CITY IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT November 12, 2014 5: 15 P.M. Helling Conference Room � � r r • r III CITY OF IOWA CITY Department of Neighborhood & Development Services IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING Wednesday, November 12, 2014 — 5:15 PM City Hall — Helling Conference Room AGENDA A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Consid--r the October 8, 2014 Minutes D. Special Exception Item EXC14-000011: Discussion of an application submitted by Dwight Dobberstein to allow off -site parking for property in the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone at 318 N. Linn Street. E. Board of Adjustment Information G. Adjourn NEXT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING: December 10, 2014 STAFF REPORT To: Board of Adjustment Item: EXC14-00011 GENERAL INFORMATION. Prepared by: Sarah Walz Date: November 12, 2014 Applicant: Dwight Dobberstein 311 East Davenport Street Iowa City, IA 52240 319-354-9148 Contact: Jim McCarragher 122 S. Linn Street Iowa City, IA 52240 319-338-9222 Requested Action: Purpose: Location: Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Applicable code sections: File Date: BACKGROUND: Special exception to allow off -site parking. To provide two required parking spaces to allow an occupancy of up to 3 unrelated persons. 318 North Linn Street Approximately 36 x 80 feet Residential, Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone. North: Residential, RNS-12 South: Commercial, CB-2 East: Residential, RNS-12 West: Residential, RNS-12 14-413-3A, General Criteria; 14-5A-4F (1) Specific Criteria for Off -site Parking. October 15, 2014 The subject property is located in the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone at 318 North Linn Street. The purpose of the RNS-12 zone is to stabilize certain existing residential neighborhoods by preserving the predominantly single-family residential character of these neighborhoods. Provisions in the zone prevent the conversion or redevelopment of single-family uses to multi -family uses. The subject property is a single-family use that currently provides no off-street parking. It is therefore considered non -conforming with regard to parking. While the house includes 4 bedrooms, the rental permit allows an occupancy of no more than 2 unrelated persons due to the lack of on -site parking. The maximum number of unrelated persons allowed in the zone is 3. z In order to allow of up to 3 unrelated persons, the property must come into compliance with the required parking-2 spaces. There is sufficient space in the back yard of 318 North Linn Street to provide 2 off-street parking spaces, however this would require paving over most of the yard. In order to preserve the back yard space, the applicant is proposing to provide the required parking on the abutting lot to the east at 311/313 Davenport Street. The property at 311/313 Davenport currently provides 6 parking spaces off the alley (two spaces are provided in the garage and 4 spaces on the parking aisle between the alley and the garage). In addition, at least one parking space is provided on east of the house with access from Davenport Street. The applicant is also the owner -occupant of 311/313 Davenport Street, which has a rental permit allowing a maximum of 3 unrelated persons per unit. For two-family uses (duplexes) the zoning code requires 1 off-street parking space per dwelling unit, unless the unit is occupied by a hcuseho',d with more than two unrelated persons, in which case an additional space is required. [Table 5A2, Off Street Parking Standards.] The maximum total parking that would be required for the duplex property at 3111313 Davenport is 4 spaces-2 for each unit to allow a maximum occupancy of 3 unrelated persons per unit. The applicant is proposing to construct one additional space off the alley, to the east of the garage, which would stack the two spaces to be assigned for 318 North Linn. The Garage, Driveway, and Parking Standards for single-family zones state the following: "For single -and two-family uses in the zone, a required parking space may be located behind another parking space on a regularly constructed aisle, provided the spaces are not stacked more than two spaces deep, counting the space within the garage." [14-2A-6C(1)] ANALYSIS: The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare; to conserve and protect the value of property throughout the city; and to encourage the most appropriate use of land. It is the intent of the Ordinance to permit the full use and enjoyment of property in a manner that does not intrude upon adjacent property. The Board may grant the requested special exception if the requested action is found to be in accordance with the specific criteria included for Section 14-5A-5F(1) pertaining to off -site parking 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 (14-464E-5). 1. Off-street Parking may be located on a separate lot from the use served according to the following rules. When the proposed off -site parking is located in a Residential Zone, the Board of Adjustment may grant a special exception for the proposed parking, provided the conditions in contained in subparagraphs a. through g. are met. a. Special Location Plan A special location plan must be submitted with the application for off -site parking. The location plan must include a map indicating the proposed location of the off -site parking, the location of the use or uses served by the parking, and the distance and proposed walking route between the parking and the use(s) served. The map must be drawn to scale and include property boundaries, including boundaries of any intervening properties. In addition, documentation must be submitted providing evidence deemed necessary to comply with the requirements herein. • Staff finds that the applicant has submitted the required location plan, drawn to scale, showing distance, parking location, walking route, property lines, etc. b. Location of Off -site Parking (1) in Residential and Commercial Zones, no off -site parking may be located more than 300 feet from an entrance of the use served, except as allowed in subparagraph e, below, for parking in a municipally -owned parking facility. The location plan shows two stacked parking spaces intended to serve 318 North Linn located approximately 93 feet from the back door of the house. c. Zoning Off -site parking spaces must be located in the same zone as the principal use(s) served. • The proposed off -site location is in the same RNS-12 zone as the property for which parking will be provided. d. Share use of Off -site Parking —not applicable e. Off -Site Parking in a Municipally -Owned Parking Facility —not applicable. f. Approval Criteria In assessing a special location plan for off -site parking, the Board of Adjustment will consider the desirability of the location of off-street parking and stacking spaces on a lot separate from the use served in terms of pedestrian and vehicular traffic safety; and any detrimental effects on adjacent property; the appearance of the streetscape as a consequence of the off-street parking; and, in the case of non -required parking, the need for additional off-street parking. Staff believes the off -site parking locations are sufficiently convenient and accessible because the two properties are abutting, and parking is located along the rear alley that serves the both properties. Providing the parking for 318 Linn off site will allow the applicant to preserve the minimal amount of rear yard space that is available for the enjoyment of the residents and will reduce the additional amount of paving necessary to meet the parking requirement. g. Covenant for Off -site Parking A written agreement between the owners of the parking and the owners of the property for which the parking will serve must be submitted with the application for off -site parking. The agreement must assure the retention of the parking and stacking spaces, aisles and drives, and be properly executed, binding upon their successors and assigns, and must be recorded as a covenant running with the land. The agreement must provide that it cannot be released, and its terms and conditions may not be modified in any manner whatsoever, with prior written consent and approval from the City. The written agreement must be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. Staff has recommended, and the applicant has indicated, that the covenant be submitted as a condition of approval of the special exception. The covenant must be approved by the City Attorney. 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. Staff believes the application satisfies this criterion because the parking spaces are provided on the abutting property along the alley that serves both properties. Residents will access parking from the alley, which is considered safe for pedestrians and vehicles, and similar to how other residents in the neighborhood access their parking. The proposed arrangement provides assigned parking for the residents and will address this property's demand for on -street parking. 2. The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. Staff believes the application meets this criterion based on the findings listed above with regard to the adjacency of tho properticc a!ong the alley and their location within the same RNS-12 zone. Moreover, parking is already established along the alley, and the property at 311/313 has more than the parking than is required to serve the duplex located on the site. Staff believes that the off -site parking arrangement preserves the limited private open space on the subject property, which is a benefit to the residents of the single-family use and the neighborhood in general as it has the potential to minimize paving in a very densely built neighborhood. 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 meets this criterion based on the findings listed above under general criteria 1 and 2. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. • The proposed parking is located immediately along the alley. All roads and other facilities for this neighborhood are already being provided. 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. The zoning code allows required parking spaces for single- and two-family uses to be stacked. Staff does not believe that the number of cars parking along the alley presents any concern with regard to congestion on public streets and, in fact, will help reduce some demand for on -street parking. 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. • There special exception will bring the property into compliance with current off-street parking requirements, which is currently not available on the site. • The Director of Neighborhood and Development Services has indicated that the parking area conforms to all other applicable regulations and standards. 7. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive plan, as amended. The Comprehensive Plan (Central District) calls attention to the demand for rental properties in this neighborhood and encourages a healthier balance of owner -occupied and rental housing. It is noted in the plan that renters are able to pool funds such that they can outbid single-family homebuyers. Though much of the Plan's focus is on homes that are reconfigured into apartments, one may question allowing the increase in occupancy made possible by the provision of parking. However, the subject property has adequate space in the rear yard to provide two parking spaces on site. Staff believes it is therefore preferable to preserve the back yard of 318 Linn, which would likely be paved if the special exception is denied. Another goal of the Comprehensive Plan is to bring over occupied and non -conforming properties into compliance. Because the home has four bedrooms, there may be a temptation to over -occupy the rental. Providing off-street parking to allow 3 unrelated roomers will help ensure that adequate parking is provided for residents of the property. Staff believes that posting a sign indicating the off -site parking will help ensure that residents and owners of both properties are aware of the off -site parking agreement, and the will allow Rental Inspectors to readily verify that required parking is in place. This will help to ensure compliance over time as owners and residents of the two properties change. STAFF RECOMMENDATION : Staff recommends approval of EXC14-00011, an application submitted by Dwight Dobberstein to allow off -site parking for property in the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone at 318 N. Linn Street subject to: • City Attorney approval and filing of the covenant for off -site parking; and The subject off -site parking spaces should be posted with a sign indicating the spaces assigned to residents of 318 North Linn Street. The sign to be approved by the Senior Housing Inspector. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Aerial views of the properties. 2. Location map 3. Location plan 4. Application materials Approved by: John Yapp, Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services 77* I i All A A qm - . . -NdL]UIRJMk" -AW 4 L.7 CITY OF ION CITY � Wi -DA11 g\ Z ---- __ -- CB2 BLOOMINGTON ST C01 _ - Mercy j ICn-,P1 - Hospital N z -- , _z Historic District W3 SITE LOCATION: 318 N. Linn Street \` Conservation District * landmark EXC14-00011 '�■� M1 �rJ�"• " �� ��a„� ..:�_����� oil y ` a�.� I ` � 4 �/ ya �� �n\. I�� 1 I'► r A • .•.. � .. �i.- 'it ''�.` �� �' I r--- i � � - .`yam �i. ' �I -2fh . ■ ... � ... ... — '. -- _� s w� fi � _ �: �: _- � � ` - � � .��� �.- • _ • • • � �: � Fxc.le)- �'()())I !�"� • ,�iL DATE: October 15 , 2014 PROPERTY PARCEL NO. 1010284005 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 318 North Linn Street, lovia City, laza 52240 PROPER 11 ZONE:RNS-i2 PROPERTY LOT SIZE:Sep attached special —iocaiion plan APPLICANT: Name: Dwight A. Dobberstein Address:311 East Davenport Street, loflra City, IA 52240 Phone: (319) 541-9148 CONTACTPERSON: Name: James D. McCarragher (if other than applicant) Address: 122 South Linn Street, Iowa City, IA 52240 Phone: (319) 338-9222 PROPERTY OWNER: Name: _ (if other than applicant) Address: Phone: Specific Requested Special Exception; please list the description and section number III 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 355-5239 or e-mail sarah-walz@fowa-cityorg. ri Off -site parking, loe)a City Ordinance Title 14, Chapter 5A-4(F) Purpose for special exception: To provide off -site parking to meet parkin space ) requirements for occupancy of property requesting special exception. -¢r. C,I <-... : Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any: None fln r Dated this %JtM day of October, 2014 Dwight A obberstein, cr of 311 E. Davenport 318 N. Linn Nancy L. of 311 E, Davenport 318 N. Liini t Parker Dobberstein, Owner of 318 N. Linn a tTJ ' n> ro 7 Dated this 11th day of October, 2014 Charles C. Bob orstein, Outlier 318 N. Limi r^y • ��'I ''� i � i fJ 91 ADDENDUM "A" TO APPLICATION TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS A. Legal Description and Owners of Property seeking exception 1.. 318 North Linn Street, Iowa City, Iowa (a) Legal Description: Commencing at the southwest comer of Lot 4 in Block 57 in Iowa City, Iowa, according to the recorded plat thereof; running thence East 80 feet to the southeast corner of said Lot 4; thence north 36 feet; thence West 80 feet to the West line of said Lot 4; thence South 36 feet to the point of beginning, all located in Johnson County, Iowa. (b) Owners: Dwight A. Dobberstein and Nancy L. Parker, husband and wife Address: 311 East Davenport Street, Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Telephone Number: (319) 541-9148 Charles C. Dobberstein Address: 1611 Center Street, Des Moines, IA 50314 Telephone Number (319) 325-3311 Parker J. Dobberstein Address: 820 Fairchild Street, Iowa City, IA 52245 Telephone Number: (319) 541-9148 B. Plot Plan/Site Plan See Special Location Plan attached as Addendum "B" to Application C. Specific Approval Criteria - Required by Title 14, Chanter 5A-4(F) 1, Special Location Plan. See Special Location Plan attached as Addendum 'B" to Application 2. Location of off -site parldng. The proposed off -site parking spaces are located within 300 feet from the entrance of the residential building requesting this exception. See Special Location Plan attached Addendum "B" to Application 3. Zoning. The off -site parking spaces and the residential property requce ting this exception are both located within the same zone: RNS-12. ,.3 4. Shared use of off -site parking. As shown on Addendum "B", the number of parking spaces being made available for the requested off-street parking of 318 North Linn equals the sum total of off-street parking spaces required for this properties. 5. Approval criteria. The use of the off-street parking requested for property seeking the special exception would: (a) Preserve green space which would otherwise have to be used to meet the parking spaces required. (b) Provide safer parking for residents of the property seeking this special exception by providing a stacked parking spaces on the easterly side of the garage where it would not otherwise interfere with pedestrian traffic or vehicular traffic. (c) Provide a safer alternative for parking for the residents of the property seeking this special exception by providing not only a safer area to enter their vehicles but to also providing access onto city streets through an established alleyway with entrances at both Gilbert Street and Linn Street. (d) Preserve the appearance of the streetscape by permitting this offsite parking in an area already used for the parking of motor vehicles. 6. Covenant for off -site parking - will be prepared to reflect decision of the Board and then submitted for review and approval to the Iowa City Attorneys office, D. General Approval Criteria - (Required by Application) 1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare: The requested special exception will actually promote and provide for public health, safety, comfort and welfare by providing off- street parking and reducing congested parking on city streets. It will also provide assigned parking for tenants who can access their vehicles without worrying of opening doors on streets with moving traffic or obstruct traffic while backing their vehicles into parking spaces. In addition, the requested parking spaces are already located in an area being used for parking motor vehicles and adjacent to an alleyway which provides access to both Gilbert Street and Linn Street. 2. The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the .!1gsc and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substjtttially�diminish and impair property values in the neighborhood: The proposed parking spacers v iT proviol parking on land already owned by the applicant and will therefore not injure or!nterfeiv with -the enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity. The parking spa's'd?wi$lalsarnot substantially diminish or injure the property value since it provides parkingli�kn Ega al4emy being used for parking, will preserve green space in the neighborhood and is(46catc� An al-ama where similar property use and similar off-street parking currently exists. �� 3. Establishment of specific proposed exception will not interfere with normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in a district in which the property is located: The requested exception will not interfere with or impede normal or orderly development of the surrounding property since it is proposed in area already being used for parking, which is owned by the applicant and is able to access city streets by an existing alleyway adjacent to the proposed parking spaces. 4. Adequate Utilities, Access Roads, Drainage and/or Necessary Facilities have been or are being provided: The offsite parking proposed for the property seeking exemption is in all area off an existing alleyway which accesses both Linn and Gilbert Street and needs no further utilities, access roads, drainage or necessary facilities. 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken, provide ingress o- egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets: Ingress and egress access already exist fer the parking spaces sought by the property seeking special exception through an established alleyway which enters both Linn and Gilbert Street. Traffic congestion is minimized by utilizing tine existing alleyway rather than requesting an additional curb cut entrance to the city streets. 6. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the special exception being considered, the special proposed exception in all other respects conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is located. [Depending on the type or special exception requested, certain specific conditions may need to be met. The applicant will demonstrate compliance with these specific conditions required for tine particular use as provided for in City Code Section 14-413 as well as requirements from tine City and the base zone or applicable overlay zone and applicable site development standards (14-5 A through KI. See Paragraph C in this addendmrn. 7. Proposed use will be consistent with the comprehensive plan of the City. The Comprehensive Plan, does not directly address the issue of shared parking. The Plan does however acknowledge that that there is high demand for on -street parking in the older neighborhoods close to campus and downtown where the property requesting the exception is located. The applicant is willing to use an existing paved area on his owner -occupied lot that with the addition of one space would provide stacked parking for the requesting propert. The requested exception will benefit a part or town that is lacking in public open parking space and will preserve private green space. The requested exception will also provide offsite parking in an area which is already being used for parking, is owned by the applicant and provides existing safe access to city streets by an existing alleyway adjacent to the proposed parking spaces. MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 8, 2014 — 5:15 PM EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: CALL TO ORDER: Larry Baker, Connie Goeb, Becky Soglin Gene Chrischilles, Brock Grenis Sarah Walz, John Yapp, Susan Dulek Erica Damman; Pam Earhart; Casey Boyd The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM. ROLLCALL: PRELIMINARY A brief opening statement was read by Baker outlining the role and purpose of the Board and the procedures that would be followed the meeting. CONSIDERATION OF THE SEPTEMBER 10, 2014 MINUTES: Soglin moved to approve the minutes. Goeb seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 3-0. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC14-000010: Discussion of an application submitted Erica Damman for a special exception to reduce the front principal building setback requirement from 15 feet to 7 feet for property located in the Low Density Single-family (RS-5) zone at 427 Clark Street. Walz showed the location map of the property indicating the zone in which the property is located. The applicant has also submitted an application to the Historic Preservation Commission for approval of the porch design because the house is located in the Clark Street Conservation District. Walz showed an aerial view of the property. She stated that in older neighborhoods homes are sometimes built with a variation such as being set back much further to the street than would be required now or, in other cases, the homes are set much closer to the front property line than is required now. In this case, the frontage along Clark Street shows the homes on the north end of the block are set much closer to the street than the homes on the southern Board of Adjustment October 8, 2014 Page 2 of 6 end of the block, which are set further back. When setbacks are consistently different from the current requirement, the code allows setback averaging, which bases the setback on the placement of existing buildings abutting the subject property, In this case, that would be 7 feet at 425 Clark to the north and 6 feet at 431 Clark to the south for an average setback of 6.5 feet. However, because homes on the south end of the block have deeper setbacks. setback averaging is not an option for reducing the current setback requirements. In 2008, the abutting property at 425 Clark Street was granted a special exception to reduce the required front setback to 7 feet to allow for the construction of a historically appropriate porch, similar to what is proposed by the applicant. Historical documents show that the subject structure included a front porch at one time, though was later removed. Walz stated porches are common in this neighborhood; the house currently has an unsheltered entrance and a front facade that is out of character with its historic architecture and out of character with the surrounding neighborhood Most other houses along the street either have full front porches or covered entries. Wals said that Staff believes that the reduction in the front setback requirement would not be counter to the purpose of the regulations as the home will still be set back 7 feet from the front property line. The reduction will not diminish the opportunity for privacy between buildings as it does not encroach on properties to either side and is separated from neighboring properties across the street by more than 60 feet. Walz explained that it is important that the structure be an open air front porch, rather than an enclosed addition, the structure has a lesser effect on the sense of separation for light and air. Staff recommends that EXC14-00010, an application for a reduction in the front principal building setback from 15 feet to 7 feet to allow construction of an open-air front porch, subject to the following conditions: • The applicant will secure a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Commission. • The constructed porch will remain open and may not be enclosed with solid walls or windows. Goeb asked for clarification on whether the Historical Preservation Commission must approve the application first, or if the Board needs to give approval for the setback exception firs. Walz replied that either can happen first because each is conditioned on the other. Goeb questioned how the setback will be changed, specifically haw far will the front of the porch be from the sidewalk. Walz confirmed the new setback will be 7 feet from the sidewalk to the front of the new porch. Erica Damman (427 Clark Street) stated that the house originally had a front porch, similar to the one being proposed and similar to the one on the neighboring house. Baker opened public hearing. Pam Earhart a resident of Clark Street for 42 years confirmed that the home in question once had a front porch, and is in favor of the exception to the setback to allow this home to have a front porch again. Board of Adjustment October 8, 2014 Page 3 of 6 Baker closed public hearing. Soglin moved to approve item EXC14-00010 an application submitted Erica Damman for a special exception to reduce the front principal building setback requirement from 15 feet to 7 feet for property located in the Low Density Single-family (RS-5) zone at 427 Clark Street subject to the following conditions: • The applicant will secure a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Commission. • The constructed porch will remain open and may not be enclosed with solid walls orwindows. Goeb seconded the motion. Baker stated he felt this would be an improvement on the property and is in favor. Soglin said that regarding EXC14-00010 she concurs with the findings set forth in the staff report dated October 8, 2014, and conclude that the general and specific criteria are satisfied. Unless amended or opposed by another Board member she recommends that the Board adopt the findings in the staff report as their findings for the acceptance of this proposal. Baker noted that this was supported by letters to the board as well as public approval so support from the neighborhood. A vote was taken and the motion carried 3-0. Baker 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 VAR14-00001: Discussion of an application submitted by Greg Sirowyfor a variance from the vehicular access requirements for a two-family use for properties located in the High -Density Single -Family (RS- 12) zone at 1243 and 1253 Dodge Street Court. Yapp presented the staff report and showed slides of the property. The property was subdivided in 1996 for duplex construction and duplexes were constructed on four of the lots and the other two lots have remained undeveloped. A building permit was issued for duplex construction on the properties at 1243-1253 North Dodge Court, and foundations have been constructed. After construction started, staff discovered the properties could not meet the specific standard in City Code Section 14-413 4A (5f(2)): If the lot width is less than 80 feet, vehicular access is restricted to an alley or private rear lane. These two lots are 70 feet wide. In reviewing the history of these lots, staff discovered that the initial subdivision in 1996 and a subsequent rezoning in 2005 were approved with the expressed intent of allowing duplex construction. The other lots which were a part of the 1996 subdivision (Jacob Ricord's Board of Adjustment October 6, 2014 Page 4 of 6 Subdivision) on North Dodge Court have had duplexes constructed on them. A rear lane or alley, which was made a requirement for duplex lots narrower than 70 feet in 2005, was not a part of the 1996 subdivision. Previously to 2005, the lots on the south side of North Dodge Court were zoned RS-8, Medium Density Single Famiiy, and duplex construction was permitted on the lots. In 2005, as a part of an update to the Zoning Code, duplexes were made to be only permitted on corner lots in the RS-8 Zone. Therefore, the lots on North Dodge Court were rezoned {as a part of a City -initiated rezoning) to RS-12 with the expressed intent of allowing duplex construction on the lots. A 2005 staff report to the Planning and Zoning Commission from the 2005 rezoning states: Because some recent subdivisions were designed for zero -lot line or duplex dwellings and there are still vacant lots within these subdivisions, staff is proposing to rezone these areas from RS-8 to High Density Single Family (RS-121 The RS-12 Zone will allow duplexes and zero -lot dwellings on the interior Jots as well as corner Jots. The intent of the rezoning was to continue to allow for duplex construction on lots subdivided prior to the 2005 Zoning Code amendment. What was not considered however was the requirement for alley or rear lane access for lots narrower than 80 feet in width. In this case no alley or rear lane was required as a part of the original subdivision in 1996, and the applicant cannot meet the requirement for rear access for these lots. Yapp gave the analysis that The proposed variance will not threaten neighborhood integrity, nor have a substantially adverse effect on the use or value of other properties in the area adjacent to the property included in the variance. These lots were intended for duplex construction when platted in 1996, and duplexes have been constructed on the other lots in the subdivision. Duplexes are not out of character for the south side of North Dodge Court. The proposed variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Chapter and will not contravene the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, as amended. Staff finds the Comprehensive Plan s u p p o r t s a diversity of housing t y p e s within neighborhoods — this neighborhood contains single famiy structures, duplexes, and a multi-- family project was recently approved on the north side of North Dodge Court. The Comprehensive Plan also supports compatible infill development- as noted above, the other lots on the south side of North Dodge Court (as part of the 1995 subdivision) also contain duplexes. When these lots were rezoned to RS-12 in 2005, the intent was to continue to permit duplexes on these lots. Yapp explained that the test for unnecessary hardship consists of three prongs 1. The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if used only for a purpose allowed in the zone where the property is located. The lots were platted and intended for duplex construction, rezoned in 2005 to allow for duplex construction, and purchased as duplex lots. No rear lane or al!ey was required when Board of Adjustment October 8, 2014 ?age 5 of 6 the property was subdivided, and it is prohibitive to require a rear lane or alley at this stage due to lot size, and the ownership and land use of surrounding property. The other duplex lets on North Dodge Court do not have rear access. Foundations have been installed for duplex construction on these lots. 2. The owner's situation is unique or peculiar to the property in question, and the situation is not shared with other landowners in the area nor due to general conditions in the neighborhood. The situation is peculiar in that the property was subdivided in 1996 prior to there being a requirement for alley or rear lane access for duplexes on lots less than 80 feet in width. It is also peculiar in that the Zoning Code was amended in 2005 to no longer allow duplexes on interior lots, which resulted in a City- initiated rezoning of the lots to RS-12 with the intent of allowing duplexes to be constructed. The rezoning in 2005 failed to account for the fact that these lots did not have rear access. Requiring rear lane access for these two lots would be peculiar and unique, and the other duplexes on North Dodge Court do not have rear access. 3. The hardship is not of the landowner's or applicant's own making or that of a predecessor in title. The 2005 Zoning Code amendment to require rear -lane access for lots less than 80 feet in width is not of the landowner's making, and the lots were platted prior to this requirement being enacted. The City -initiated rezoning in 2005 to RS-12 was not of the landowner's making, and was intended to continue to allow duplex structures on these lots. Yapp noted that staff received one email from a neighboring property owner in favor of granting the variance. Staff recommends that VAR14-00001, a variance from City Code 14-413-4A (5f(2)), which requires alley or rear lane access for two-family structures on lots less than 80 feet in width, be approved for Lots 1 and 2 of Jacob Ricord's Subdivision i.e. the properties at 1243 and 1253 North Dodge Court. Soglin questioned if this issue had been noticed in 2005 what would have happened. Yapp stated that the code would have included the exception and written differently. Baker asked if the code needs to be rewritten. Yapp stated that this is an isolated issue and should not require the code to be rewritten, unless they find it is also an issue in other parts of the city. The code is good for future subdivisions, as new subdivision will be designed to meet the code, this was an isolated issue due to the majority of the subdivision being constructed prior to the 2005 code change. Casey Boyd introduced himself as a properly partner for the construction project and appreciates the Board and the city staff's time. Once the problem was identified they all worked together to remedy it. Baker asked Boyd if the construction of the project had been suspended due to this issue. Boyd confirmed that construction has been suspended for one month. Goeb asked how the issue was discovered. Boyd explained that appraiser noticed the zoning requirement and notified the city staff. Baker opened public hearing Board of Adjustment October 8, 2014 Page 6 of 6 No one from the public was in attendance. The public hearing was closed. Soglin moved that VAR14-00001, a variance from City Code 14-4B-4A (5f(2)), which requires alley or rear lane access for two-family structures on lots less than 80 feet in width, be approved for Lots 1 and 2 of Jacob Ricord's Subdivision i.e. the properties at 1243 and 1253 North Dodge Court. Goeb seconded the motion. Baker noted concern about the construction suspension and agreed that is something that needs to be address in a more sensitive manner in the future. Goeb said that regarding VAR14-00001 she concurs with the findings set forth in the staff report dated October 8, 2014, and conclude that the general and specific criteria are satisfied. Unless amended or opposed by another Board member she recommends that the Board adopt the findings in the staff report as their findings for the acceptance of this proposal. Baker agreed and also noted the cooperation of the applicant with appreciation. A vote was taken and the motion carried 3-0. Baker declared the motion 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. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION: None ADJOURNMENT: Goeb moved to adjourn Soglin seconded Meeting was adjourned on a 3-0 vote. 2013 - 2014 NAME TERM E3CP. 1117 12t11 118 3112 419 5114 9110 1018 BAKER, LARRY i1112017 X X X X X X X X GOEB, CONNIE 111/2015 X X X X X X X X GRENIS, BROCK 111/2016 X X X X X X X Ole CHRISCHILLES, T. GENE /1112019 X X X X X X X OlE SOGLIN, BECKY 1/112018 X X X X X X X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O1E = AbsenttExcused -- = Not a Member