Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-08-11 BOA Agenda PacketIOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Wednesday, August 11, 2021 – 5:15 PM City Hall, 410 East Washington Street Emma Harvat Hall Agenda: 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Special Exception Item a. EXC21-0012: An application submitted by Elizabeth Homan requesting a special exception to allow an eating establishment use for a Peninsula live-work unit in a Low Density Single-Family Residential Zone with a Planned Development Overlay (RS-5/OPD) at 1040 Martin Street. b. EXC21-0009: An application submitted by Axiom Consultants requesting a special exception to allow a 50 percent parking reduction for other unique circumstances to construct a new mixed-use building at 21 S. Linn Street. 4. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: July 14, 2021 5. Board of Adjustment Announcements 6. Adjournment If you need disability-related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contact Kirk Lehmann, Urban Planning at 319-356-5230 or at kirk-lehmann@iowa-city.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. Upcoming Board of Adjustment Meetings Formal: September 8 / October 13 / November 10 Informal: Scheduled as needed. August 11, 2021 Board of Adjustment Meeting EXC21-0012 ITEM 3A ON THE AGENDA Staff Report Prepared by Staff 1 STAFF REPORT To: Board of Adjustment Item: EXC21-0012 Parcel Number: 1004327059 Prepared by: Joshua Engelbrecht, Planning Intern Date: August 11, 2021 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Elizabeth Homan 1040 Martin Street Iowa City, IA 52245 Contact Person: Elizabeth Homan 1040 Martin Street Iowa City, IA 52245 ehoman4@gmail.com Property Owner(s): MJJM Ventures LLC 1006 Walker Circle Iowa City, IA 52245 Requested Action: Approval of a special exception to allow an eating establishment in a Peninsula Live-Work unit in a Low Density, Single-Family Residential zone with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) Location: 1040 Martin Street Location Map: Size: 0.26 acres Existing Land Use and Zoning: Mixed Use; Low Density Single Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) 2 Surrounding Land Use and Zoning North: Residential; Low Density Single-Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) East: Residential; Low Density Single-Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) South: Mixed-Use; Low Density Single-Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) West: Residential, Open Space: Low Density Single- Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) Applicable Code Sections: 14-4B-3A: General Approval Criteria File Date: July 9, 2021 BACKGROUND: The subject property is adjacent to Emma J. Harvat Square Park in the Peninsula Neighborhood and is zoned Low Density Single-Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5). In 2016, the Board of Adjustment approved an eating establishment for the subject property (EXC16-00006). However, the use has been discontinued for at least one year. As a result, a new special exception is required for another eating establishment use to be allowed. From its initial planning phase, the Peninsula Neighborhood identified specific locations for potential inclusion of non-residential uses, including commercial uses at the ground floor with residential units above. Plans identified an area near the central square for commercial uses such as daycare, small grocery, general retail, and offices. The goal of allowing such uses was to reduce car trips by providing goods and services that would benefit residents of the neighborhood. The Peninsula Neighborhood has its own unique set of development regulations that were adopted by the City as part of its Planned Unit Development. The Regulating Plan is the part of those regulations and guides what kinds of buildings can be constructed where, along with allowable uses. The subject property is classified as a Live-Work site on the Regulating Plan. This allows for some neighborhood commercial uses on the ground floor, in addition to residential uses above, within what is otherwise a residential zone. On parcels identified for mixed uses, the regulations allow several commercial uses by right. However, eating establishments (a category which includes coffee shops, restaurants, and cafes) are allowed only by special exception. The regulations do not include specific approval criteria, so only the general approval criteria are used to evaluate approval of an eating establishment use. 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 general approval criteria in Section 14-4B-3A. For the Board of Adjustment to grant this special exception, each of the following criterion below must be met. The burden of proof is on the applicant, and their comments regarding each criterion may be found on the attached application. Staff comments regarding each criterion are set below. 3 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. FINDINGS: • The subject unit is small at approximately 766 square feet, the intensity of the property will not change substantially from previous occupants, and access to the property and surrounding properties will not be affected. To enlarge the use in the future, such as into the rear space, a new special exception would be required. • Given the remote location of the neighborhood, limited size, and seating constraints, it is likely that the use will rely primarily on customers that are already within the neighborhood, either residents or people traveling to the dog park or along bike trails. 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. FINDINGS: • Before this special exception application, the property was utilized as an eating establishment with minimal effects on neighboring residential uses. Staff does not expect any major impacts to neighboring properties. • The Board has approved special exceptions for other nearby commercial uses with conditions limiting hours of operation, size, and exterior sound. These conditions help ensure that the Peninsula commercial area retains a mix of uses that serve the neighborhood and does not detract from other nearby uses. Staff recommends adopting similar conditions for this use, though limitations on size are not necessary because any subsequent enlargement will require a new exception. Proposed conditions limiting hours of hours of operation and prohibiting exterior amplified sound help to ensure that Peninsula residents can benefit from a restaurant within walking distance without the negative externalities of noise from late night hours and amplified sounds. • Signs and lighting must comply with the regulations for the Neighborhood Commercial and Mixed Use zones, which are designed to be compatible with neighboring residential uses and must be approved by the Peninsula Neighborhood Architectural Review Board. 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. FINDINGS: • The neighborhood is fully developed with a mix of residential and commercial uses. • The Peninsula Regulating Plan includes opportunities for commercial uses in particular locations around the park. • The building was designed and built for commercial use on the ground level. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. 4 FINDINGS: • All access roads are in place for the development, on-site drainage is provided, and the area directly behind the property is reserved for stormwater detention. No additional facilities are required. 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. FINDINGS: • Off-street parking is not required for commercial uses under 1,500 square feet. As such, no parking has been provided for the commercial use. • The use will be limited in the customers it likely will draw due to its small size and remote location in Iowa City. As such, adequate ingress and egress are provided. 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. FINDINGS: • All other aspects of the proposed use have been reviewed for compliance with the specific standards in the Peninsula’s Planned Unit Development regulations. • Any changes to previously approved uses, such as to lighting or signage, will require appropriate permits, and will be reviewed upon application. 7. The proposed exception will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as amended. FINDINGS: • The Peninsula Neighborhood was developed utilizing conservation and traditional neighborhood design principles that include a variety of housing types, neighborhood commercial, and live-work buildings (North District Plan pg. 29). • The Peninsula Regulating Plan includes opportunity for limited commercial uses in locations adjacent to the park. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of EXC21-0012, to allow an eating establishment in a Peninsula Live- Work unit for the property located at 1040 Martin Street, subject to the following conditions: 1. Business hours of operation must close by 10 PM Sunday through Thursday and 11 PM Friday through Saturday. 2. Amplified sound on the exterior of the building is prohibited. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Application Materials 5 Approved by: _________________________________________________ Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services August 11, 2021 Board of Adjustment Meeting EXC21-0012 ATTACHMENT 1 Location Map Prepared by Staff A L L E Y MOSES BLOOM LNF O S T E R R D WALKER CIRMARTIN STSWISHERSTM C C L E A R Y LN ALLEY WILLENBROCKCIR ALLEYCANTON STEXC21-00121040 Martin St.µ 0 0.02 0.040.01 Miles Prepared By: Joshua EngelbrechtDate Prepared: July 2021 An application submitted by Elizabeth Homan requestinga special exception allowing an eating/drinking establishmentin a live-work building for 0.26 acres of property located at 1040 Martin Street. August 11, 2021 Board of Adjustment Meeting EXC21-0012 ATTACHMENT 2 Zoning Map Prepared by Staff A L L E Y MOSES BLOOM LNF O S T E R R D WALKER CIRMARTIN STSWISHERSTM C C L E A R Y LN ALLEY WILLENBROCKCIR ALLEYCANTON STP1 RS5 EXC21-00121040 Martin St.µ 0 0.02 0.040.01 Miles Prepared By: Joshua EngelbrechtDate Prepared: July 2021 An application submitted by Elizabeth Homan requestinga special exception allowing an eating/drinking establishmentin a live-work building for 0.26 acres of property located at 1040 Martin Street. Overlay Zones Overlay Description Planned Development (OPD) August 11, 2021 Board of Adjustment Meeting EXC21-0012 ATTACHMENT 3 Correspondence Submitted by the Identified Party July 20, 2021 RE: Special Exception for 1040 Martin Street Dear Property Owner: The Iowa City Board of Adjustment has received an application submitted by Elizabeth Homan requesting a special exception to allow an Eating/Drinking Establishment in a live- work building for the property located at 1040 Martin Street (see attached map). As a neighboring property owner, you are being notified of this ap plication. If you know of any interested party who has not received a copy of this letter, we would appreciate it if you would inform them of the pending application. The Board of Adjustment will review this application at a public meeting tentatively scheduled for August 11, 2021 at 5:15 pm in Emma Harvat Hall, City Hall, 410 East Washington Street, Iowa City. Because the meeting is subject to change, you may wish to call 319-356-5230 or check the City of Iowa City’s website, www.icgov.org/BOA, the week of the meeting to confirm the meeting agenda. You are welcome to attend this public meeting to present your views concerning this application. You may also submit written information to me for consideration in advance of the meeting, and I will include your comments in the information to be considered by the Board. Please do not hesitate to contact me at kirk-lehmann@iowa-city.org or 319-356-5230 if you have any questions or comments about this application or if you would like more information on the Board of Adjustment review process. Sincerely, Kirk Lehmann Associate Planner City of Iowa City Department of Neighborhood and Development Services What is the Board of Adjustment? The Board of Adjustment is panel made up of Iowa City citizens appointed by the City Council. The board reviews and grants special exceptions and variances and also considers appeals when there is a disagreement about an administrative zoning decision made by the City. Members of the board act like judges, making decisions about individual properties and uses that may have difficulty meeting a specific zoning regulation or to resolve disputes about administrative zoning decisions. The actions and decisions of the Board of Adjustment are binding upon all parties unless overturned upon appeal to District Court. What is a special exception? There are two types of special exceptions. 1. Within the zoning code a number of land uses are set apart as special exceptions that may be permitted in certain zones. Rather than permitting these uses outright, each is reviewed on a case-by-case basis to ensure that they do not negatively affect surrounding properties. For example, daycare centers are permitted in residential zones by special exception. The same is true of churches and private schools. All may be appropriate uses in residential zones, if certain criteria such as parking, screening, and other requirements are met. 2. Adjustments to specific zoning requirements in cases where there are unique circumstances. Again, the opportunity to adjust these requirements and the criteria for allowing such adjustments are described in the Zoning Code. For example, a homeowner may apply for a reduction in a building setback in order to accommodate an addition or other improvement to their property. The Zoning Code lists explicitly each use and standard for which a special exception may be considered. In other words, you can’t request a special exception for everything—only those things called out as special exceptions in the Code. The Code also provides criteria specific to each request. Applicants must provide evidence that they satisfy each of these criteria, and the Board must consider these criteria when making a determination as to whether to grant a special exception. What is a variance? A variance grants a legal right to an owner to develop property in a manner that deviates from a specific provision of the Zoning Code and for which a special exception is not expressly allowed. In seeking relief from the restrictions in the Zoning Code, the property owner applying for the variance must show that the strict application of the Zoning Code would cause and unnecessary hardship such that the property in question is unusable or that a literal interpretation of the ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the zoning district. In addition the circumstances that create this hardship must be unique to the property in question and must not be of the property owner’s own making. What is an appeal? The Board considers and rules on appeals from any citizen who believes there is an error in any decision, determination, or interpretation made by the City or its designee in the administration of the Zoning Code. As with their other decisions, the Board’s ruling is binding on all parties unless overturned on appeal to the District Court. How does the review process work? An application requesting a special exception, variance, or an appeal is a request. The Board makes a decision on whether to grant a specific request only after City staff have provided a review of an application and the public has had an opportunity to make its concerns known. The Board not only has the right to approve or deny requests, but may also choose to approve request subject to certain conditions. In making decisions, the Board may only consider comments and evidence relevant to the specific standards provided in the code. City Development Staff provide reports to the Board for each application on the agenda. The Staff Report provides background information on the application, informs the Board of all the criteria in the Code that a particular application must satisfy, and interprets whether and how an application has satisfied these criteria. How can I participate in the process? Because most applications will be reviewed and decided upon at a single public hearing, it is important for interested parties to respond in a timely and informed manner. Those who wish to speak for or against an application are given an opportunity to be heard by the Board at the hearing, but may also submit written comments prior to the meeting. Written comments must be delivered to the Department of Neighborhood & Development Services at City Hall no later than 5 days before the hearing in order to be included with the Staff Report. All correspondence submitted after that time will be delivered to the Board at the time of the hearing. The Board considers the application, the recommendation of staff (in the staff report) and any additional information, correspondence, or testimony provided at the hearing. Board of Adjustment hearings are usually held on the second Wednesday of each month at 5:15 p.m. in Emma J. Harvat Hall in City Hall. You can find more information at the following website: www.icgov.org/boa. The Staff Report can be very useful to anyone who is unfamiliar with the BOA process or with the Zoning Code and will provide an understanding of the criteria that the Board must consider in rendering its decision. Staff Reports may be obtained from the Department of Neighborhood & Development Services. E-mail kirk-lehmann@iowa- city.org to request a copy of a report. If you have questions about an application or if you simply want more information about issues related to the Board of Adjustment, please feel free to contact Kirk Lehmann at 319-356- 5230 or e-mail kirk-lehmann@iowa- city.org. To submit comments to the Board of Adjustment write to the Board of Adjustment c/o the Department of Neighborhood & Development Services, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City IA 52240 or e-mail kirk-lehmann@iowa- city.org. Board of Adjustment: Frequently Asked Questions A L L E Y MOSES BLOOM LNF O S T E R R D WALKER CIRMARTIN STSWISHERSTM C C L E A R Y LN ALLEY WILLENBROCKCIR ALLEYCANTON STEXC21-00121040 Martin St.µ 0 0.02 0.040.01 Miles Prepared By: Joshua EngelbrechtDate Prepared: July 2021 An application submitted by Elizabeth Homan requestinga special exception allowing an eating/drinking establishmentin a live-work building for 0.26 acres of property located at 1040 Martin Street. Mailing Name Mailing Address2 Mailing Address3 Mailing Zip Code ADAM M & AMY L PRETORIUS 670 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 ADAM WADE & RACHEL DAWN GARMS 1410 FOSTER RD IOWA CITY, IA 52245 AHMAD SHARIFTABRIZI & HODA SAF 1120 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 ALEAMI MARKETING SERVICES LLC 2209 HARVEST CIR CORALVILLE, IA 52241 ANDREY TATAUROV 1063 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 ANTHONY FINA & HEATHER RICKELS 2251 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 ASHLEY R & SEAN W WANDRO 1237 FOSTER RD IOWA CITY, IA 52245 BADREE JAFAR DAVARYAR M D TRUS 2196 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 BENJAMIN J & LAURA G HARTSON 1211 FOSTER RD IOWA CITY, IA 52245 BILL TINGJUN CHEN 2162 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 BRANDON J STEENLAGE 1260 MOSES BLOOM LN IOWA CITY, IA 52245 BREETHAA JANANI SELVAMANI 1250 MOSES BLOOM LN IOWA CITY, IA 52245 CAITLIN HOGAN 2381 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 CAITLYN R HERNDON 1319 FOSTER RD IOWA CITY, 52245 CARLREN PROPERTIES IOWA LLC 22605 SALEM AVE CUPERTINO, CA 95014 CARMEN S GRIGGS & DIANA K MILL 1138 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 CHANGQING WANG & YANGYANG WANG 908 CANTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 CHARLES H & CLAIRE SELZER WHIT 2188 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 CHARLES R BUCK 1164 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 CHRIS JENSEN 210 EAGLE DR MCGREGOR, IA 52157 CHRISTINE Y MOORE 869 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 CHRISTOPHER L MERRILL 1015 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 COLIN GOLD 967 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 COREY J WILSON 1451 FOSTER RD IOWA CITY, IA 52245 DANIEL FINN 1154 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 DAVID E & DIANE D GROSLAND 1148 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 DAVID J KEHOE 1034 N SHORE DR MOLINE, IL 61265 DEAN E PETERSEN 2176 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 DEBORAH BETSWORTH 1130 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 DENNIS & DEBORAH BEILER 2178 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 DIANA MARRIOTT 893 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 DONALD H HURT 1116 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 DOUGLAS & SARAH SCHOON 2164 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 EDITH C DWARS 1128 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 ELEVATION HOME BUILDER INC 1164 FOSTER RD IOWA CITY, IA 52245 ELLIOTT H SOHN 1035 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 ERIC D & ANN L AXELSON 928 CANTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 FELIPE QUINTERO DUQUE & MARCEL 2357 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 FOSTER ROAD REAL ESTATE LLC 956 SCOTT PARK DR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 GARY A CURTIS 1124 SWISHER STREET IOWA CITY, IA 52245 GRC IOWA CITY LLC 2126 GLENDALE RD IOWA CITY, IA 52245 GREATER IA CTY HOUSING FLLWSHP 322 E 2ND ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240 GRETCHEN G VAN HOUTEN 2184 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 GUSTAVO AVILA ORTIZ 1207 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240 HELENA KENNY & BRIAN O'REILLY 1229 FOSTER RD IOWA CITY, IA 52245 HOUSING FELLOWSHIP (THE)322 E 2ND ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240 HOWARD J KERR 112 WOODBURY LN LAKE BLUFF, IL 60044 I C RENTAL PROPERTIES LLC 765 ARCH ROCK RD IOWA CITY, IA 52245 JACOB KORBAKES & ADRIANNE KORB 2233 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 JAMES BULLARD & TINGTING DUAN 991 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 JAMIE WHITE 2349 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 JASON DEPPE 1443 FOSTER RD IOWA CITY, IA 52245 JASON M WELLS 14455 252ND ST MILTON, IA 52570 JAY CAYNER 2182 WILLENBROCK CIRCLE IOWA CITY, IA 52245 JEANETTE E DENNIS & JOHN D KIN 1144 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 JEFFREY L AIZENBERG 2186 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 JEFFREY P & SALLY J YOUNG 1122 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 JEFFREY S SR & DAVID C ABRAHAM 1132 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 JENNIFER L RUSSELL 885 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 JOY RAYMAN ANDERSON 12126 NEPENTHE WEST BURLINGTON, IA 52655 JUDITH A SCHULTZ 1150 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 JULIE A WITTIG 1142 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 JUSTIN D & STEPHANIE A HIGGINS 1245 FOSTER RD IOWA CITY, IA 52245 KAUSTUBH LIMAYE 2172 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 KEITH M REINS 1471 FOSTER RD IOWA CITY, IA 52245 KELSEY A RASMUSSEN 1126 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 KENNETH J & ALICIA SALVI 2166 WILLENBROCK CIR #103 IOWA CITY, IA 52245 KERRY JESSEN 1160 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 KEVIN C MORROW 1227 F ST NE WASHINGTON, DC 20002 KEVIN T LEICHT 1025 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 LAURA A HILL 2192 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 LAURA GILES 1093 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 LINDA MATERNA 11 LAWRENCIA DR LAWRENCEVILLE, NJ 8648 LUCRETIA WHEELER 1426 FOSTER RD IOWA CITY, IA 52245 MARGARET LU EGINTON 1073 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 MARK R & CAROLE L RAMSEY 1156 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 MARK S & TERESA A BREHENY 1146 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 MARK W MITTAUER 2190 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 MARY M WILSON INTERVIVOS TRUST 2194 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 MATT KNAUSE 2275 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 MATTHEW B ANDERSON & PAULA R A 1227 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 MELISSA E ERTLE 2914 EASTWOOD DR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 MERAJ MOHAMMED & ANEESA AFROZE 9819 HICKORY DR URBANDALE, IA 50322 MICHAEL J DOYLE 2168 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 MJJM VENTURES LLC 1006 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 NANCY JO & STEVEN W ABRAM 903 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 NATHAN R KNAUSE 946 CANTON STREET IOWA CITY, IA 52245 NESTA W DAVIES 1253 FOSTER RD IOWA CITY, IA 52245 NICHOLAS C SUMMY 1083 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 NICHOLAS S BROWN 1114 SWISHER STREET IOWA CITY, IA 52245 NRK ENTERPRISES LLC 946 CANTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 PAIGE A & DAVID G MARTINO 1140 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 PENINSULA DEVELOPMENT CO LLC 44710 MORLEY DR CLINTON TOWNSHIP, MI 48036 PENINSULA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 4470 N GROSEBECK HWY CLINTON TOWNSHIP, MI 48036 PENINSULA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIA 506 E COLLEGE ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240 PETER E BROKAW 947 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 REID A STUBBEE 2309 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 RENATO C FERREIRA DA SILVA 1250 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 RENNING FARMS LLC 2000 JAMES ST STE 109 CORALVILLE, IA 52241-1882 RICHARD L & MARY L TALCOTT 2174 WILLENBROCK CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 RICK A & BRITTAIN A DEERBERG 918 CANTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 ROBERT L & LINDA K GRIMM 1152 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 RONALD WAYNE & KRISTINE SUE FU 6559 EAGLE RIDGE RD BETTENDORF, IA 52722 RUSSELL D CRANE 1230 MOSES BLOOM LN IOWA CITY, IA 52245 RUSSELL J & CINDY BAUSONE 1118 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 SARAH L KRUSE & RICHARD H KRUS 1134 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 SWA INVESTMENTS LLC 115 3RD ST SE SUITE 1200 CEDAR RAPIDS, IA 52401 TANSEY FAMILY TRUST 1136 SWISHER ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 TED LE SCHWARM & JILL MARIE LE 3121 PENDLETON DR CEDAR FALLS, IA 50613 TM COMMERCIAL SERVICES PO BOX 1109 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-1109 VENKEDESH RAJU 249 ARLINGTON DR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 WAYNE W WEBBER AGREEMENT OF TR 44710 MORLEY DR CLINTON TOWNSHIP, MI 48036 WEBBER-IOWA LLC 44710 MORLEY DR CLINTON TOWNSHIP, MI 48036 XI & HONG CHEN 927 WALKER CIR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 1 Kirk Lehmann From:Elizabeth Homan <ehoman4@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, July 20, 2021 12:20 PM To:Kirk Lehmann Cc:Joshua Engelbrecht Subject:Re: EXC21-0012: 1040 Martin Eating Establishment Attachments:image001.png Hello Kirk,    1. No plans on serving alcohol. Plans for hours are within hours of 7am to 9pm, though at first we are mostly looking to  be open in the mornings and lunch.    2. There are city spots right outside the commercial space and there is additional off street parking.    3. Would like to have a sign again similar to how previous restaurant had theirs as it did have a nice asthetic for the  neighborhood on the corner. It is a different name, different business so of course will be a different sign.    4. When you say "back room" I assume you are referring to the the garage, there is now a finished office, the finished  office that is for the owner of the building, ie myself for my use, it is not for storage. The other area of the garage will be  for cafe storage.       Excited to open a Latina women owned small business in Iowa City to celebrate Latino culture and create a nurturing  environment for Latino literature and art to be displayed and exhibited. As a Latinx Hawkeye Alum myself I hope to be  able to give back to the campus and community that gave me so much.      Elizabeth     Elizabeth Homan Sandoval, MD, MPH  Child and Adolescent Psychiatrist   University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics  Ashland Memorial Medical Center  Latino Medical Student Association Faculty Physician Advisory Council   American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry National CICC Committee Member  AMA Women's Wellness through Equity and Leadership Fellow       On Tue, Jul 20, 2021, 11:42 AM Kirk Lehmann <Kirk‐Lehmann@iowa‐city.org> wrote:  Hello Elizabeth:      2 The City recently received your special exception application for the property located at 1040 Martin Street (EXC21‐ 0012). After a preliminary review of the application materials, planning staff has the following comments and  questions:     1. Please describe the following:  a. Characteristics of your eating establishment, including whether you will be serving alcohol and your  anticipated hours of operation;  b. On‐site parking at 1040 Martin Street and the characteristics of nearby on‐street parking; and  c. Proposed signage for the business, including the type of sign and its proposed location.  2. Will you be using the back room as storage for the eating establishment, or did you intend on  using it for another purpose?     Please provide any responses before Monday, August 2 to ensure time for City review prior to the Board of Adjustment  meeting. Note that the City may have additional comments as the review is continued.     If you have any questions, call me at 319‐356‐5247 or email at kirk‐lehmann@iowa‐city.org.        Regards,      Kirk Lehmann, AICP  Associate Planner     The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.     410 E. Washington Street  Iowa City, IA 52240  Main: 319-356-5230  Direct: 319-356-5247  www.icgov.org  August 11, 2021 Board of Adjustment Meeting EXC21-0012 ATTACHMENT 4 Special Exception Application Submitted by the Applicant Project Description: Opening up again an Eating Establishment in the Peninsula Subdivision. There are none for this application. Specific Approval Criteria Exhibit For the Board to approve a special exception, the following general approval criteria must be met: General Criteria (14-4B-3A): 1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. This has previously been a café. There is an open restaurant two doors down. Neighbors have been constantly requesting for this café to be reopened for the last 3 years. 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. This has previously been a café. There is an open restaurant two doors down. Neighbors have been constantly requesting for this café to be reopened for the last 3 years. 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. This has previously been a café. There is an open restaurant two doors down. Neighbors have been constantly requesting for this café to be reopened for the last 3 years. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. This has previously been a café. There is an open restaurant two doors down. Neighbors have been constantly requesting for this café to be reopened for the last 3 years. 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. This has previously been a café. There is an open restaurant two doors down. Neighbors have been constantly requesting for this café to be reopened for the last 3 years. 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. This has previously been a café. There is an open restaurant two doors down. Neighbors have been constantly requesting for this café to be reopened for the last 3 years. 7. The proposed exception will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as amended. Two doors down there is a restaurant with a special exception on the same lot of property as my property. This property has had a special exception for the same exact proposed use in the past, the same set up for customer use, and the same furniture. Parking is now better than it was at the time in the past. As noted in the Application Guide, a description of how this case meets all the criteria should be uploaded as an attachment for consideration by the Board. Typically, specific criteria also need to be addressed, but there are none for this use. Iowa City Assessor Tue, 6/15/2021, 8:28 AM Deed: Contract: MJJM VENTURES LLC Map Area: Route: 20120-Comm-Peninsula 000-000-000 URBAN / MULTI-RES Tax Dist:0050 Plat Page: Lister/Date:MP, 10/14/2016 InspectedEntry Status: CID#: Page 1 Review/Date:BC, 10/26/2016 PENINSULA NEIGHBORHOOD LOT 117 CONDOS UNIT 1Legal: THE DINGO BARDBA: Checks/Tags: MLS:INCOME Subdiv:NONE PDF+PIN:009+1004327059 1040 MARTIN ST, IOWA CITY Land Depth/UnitSide 2Side 1Land Basis Front Rear SF Acres EFF/Type Qual./LandR. Lot SqFt X Rate C-422,848.00 0.065 Subtotal 2,848.00 0.065 Grand Total 0.0652,848.00 Building PermitsSales Values AppraisedReason$ Amount $ AmountRecordingNUTCDateDateNumber B of R St. EqualizedTypeTag 9/15/2016 16-00577 $15,0005812-414 $430,00007/12/2018 Land $30,076 $0 $0D0General Int RemN 3/25/2014 14-00048 $1,000,0005812-412 $010/21/2016 LandC $15,494 $0 $0D22New BldgN 5579-52 $399,00010/21/2016 Dwlg $231,475 $0 $0C25 4929-960 $006/12/2012 Impr $119,245 $0 $0D2 Total $396,290 $0 $0 Plumbing Occ. Code Occ. Descr. Year Built EFF Age/Yr Style Condition Description 302 Restaurant 2014 8/2014 1ST FLOOR COMMERCIAL Brick Veneer - Wood Stories 1 Grade 3+10 Base Basement 0 1st Flr Inset Adj GBA 2319 Ftg & Fdtn Exterior wall Interior wall Pilasters Wall facing Windows Fronts/Doors Reinforced Concrete w/o Bsmt Brick Veneer Drywall or Equiv. Aluminum Good Cost Front 8" 0 0 0 Average Basement Roof Ceiling Struct. Floor Floor Cover Partitions Framing Wood - Average Retail Store(Small) Epoxy Paint (3-coat paint) per SF 4" R'Concrete Drywall Asph. Shingle/ Wood Dk HVAC Electrical Sprinkler Combination FHA - AC Incl. w / Base Exposed Wet 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 766 0 Toilet Room 1 Sprinkler - exposed wet 766 AVG Verticals Horizontals Precomputed Structure B Ext Adjustments © 1995-2015 Vanguard Appraisals, Inc. (rev. 20.0.32.3275) PDF+PIN:009+1004327059 Tue, 6/15/2021, 8:28 AM Page 2 1 of 3 Description 302 Restaurant Units Year Bldg O Bldg / Addn 302 RestaurantPre 766P Ftg & FdtnV Reinforced Concrete w/o Bsmt - 8" Exterior WallV Brick Veneer - 0 Interior WallV Drywall or Equiv. - 0 WindowsV Aluminum - 0 Fronts/DoorsV Good Cost Front - Average H Roof Asph. Shingle/ Wood Dk 766 H Ceiling Drywall - 1 766 H Struct. Floor 4" R'Concrete - 1 766 H Floor Cover Epoxy Paint (3-coat paint) per SF - 1 766 H Partitions Retail Store(Small) - 1 766 H Framing Wood - Average - 1 766 H HVAC Combination FHA - AC - 1 766 H Electrical Incl. w / Base - 1 766 H Sprinkler Exposed Wet - 1 766 Plmb Toilet Room - Base 1 Adj Sprinkler - exposed wet - AVG 766 Ex Kitchen Built-in 1 2016 B.I. Dishwasher PDF+PIN:009+1004327059 Tue, 6/15/2021, 8:28 AM Page 3 Plumbing Occ. Code Occ. Descr. Year Built EFF Age/Yr Style Condition Description 702 Apartment 2014 8/2014 APARTMENT UPPER - 2ND FLOOR Brick Veneer - Wood (Uppers) Stories 1 Grade 3+10 Base Basement 0 1st Flr Plumb 1st Flr Inset Adj 0 GBA 2319 Ftg & Fdtn Exterior wall Interior wall Pilasters Wall facing Windows Fronts/Doors Reinforced Concrete w/o Bsmt Brick Veneer Aluminum Good Cost Front 8" 0 0 Average Basement Roof Ceiling Struct. Floor Floor Cover Partitions Framing Wood - Average Apartment Wd Deck on Wood Joist Asph. Shingle/ Wood Dk HVAC Electrical Sprinkler Combination FHA - AC Exposed Wet 1 1 1 1 1 766 Yes Toilet Room Sink-Kitchen 1 1 Wood Deck 426 High Verticals Horizontals Precomputed Addition B Ext Adjustments © 1995-2015 Vanguard Appraisals, Inc. (rev. 20.0.32.3275) PDF+PIN:009+1004327059 Tue, 6/15/2021, 8:28 AM Page 4 Addtn 1 Description 702 Apartment Units Year Adtn O Bldg / Addn (U) 201 Store - Retail SmallPre 766P Ftg & FdtnV Reinforced Concrete w/o Bsmt - 8" Exterior WallV Brick Veneer - 0 WindowsV Aluminum - 0 Fronts/DoorsV Good Cost Front - Average H Roof Asph. Shingle/ Wood Dk 766 H Struct. Floor Wd Deck on Wood Joist - 1 766 H Partitions Apartment - 1 766 H Framing Wood - Average - 1 766 H HVAC Combination FHA - AC - 1 766 H Sprinkler Exposed Wet - 1 766 Plmb Toilet Room - AVG 1 Plmb Sink-Kitchen - Base 1 Adj Wood Deck - High 426 Ex Garage 1 20141 of 3 426 SF, Brick, Average Pricing Ex Kitchen Built-in 1 20142 of 3 B.I. Dishwasher Ex Kitchen Built-in 1 20143 of 3 B.I. Microwave PDF+PIN:009+1004327059 Tue, 6/15/2021, 8:28 AM Page 5 Plumbing Occ. Code Occ. Descr. Year Built EFF Age/Yr Style Condition Description 702 Apartment 2014 8/2014 APARTMENT UPPER - 3RD FLOOR Brick Veneer - Wood (Uppers) Stories 1 Grade 3+10 Base Basement 0 1st Flr Plumb 1st Flr Inset Adj 0 GBA 2319 Ftg & Fdtn Exterior wall Interior wall Pilasters Wall facing Windows Fronts/Doors Basement Roof Ceiling Struct. Floor Floor Cover Partitions Framing HVAC Electrical Sprinkler 787 Yes 3-Fixture Bathroom Stall Shower or Tub 3-Fixture Bathroom 1 1 1 Verticals Horizontals Precomputed Addition B Ext Adjustments © 1995-2015 Vanguard Appraisals, Inc. (rev. 20.0.32.3275) PDF+PIN:009+1004327059 Tue, 6/15/2021, 8:28 AM Page 6 Addtn 2 Description 702 Apartment Units Year Adtn O Bldg / Addn (U) 201 Store - Retail SmallPre 787P Plmb 3-Fixture Bathroom - Base 1 Plmb Stall Shower or Tub - AVG 1 Plmb 3-Fixture Bathroom - AVG 1 PDF+PIN:009+1004327059 Tue, 6/15/2021, 8:28 AM Page 7 Comment Land Value Dwelling Value Improvement Value M & E Value Total ValueValue TypePrior Year Location Class 2021 $45,570 $231,475 $119,245 $0 $396,290ApprURBAN MULTI-RES 2020 $45,570 $239,382 $123,318 $0 $408,270ApprURBAN MULTI-RES 2019 $45,570 $239,382 $123,318 $0 $408,270ApprURBAN MULTI-RES 2018 $45,570 $228,881 $117,909 $0 $392,360ApprURBAN MULTI-RES 2017 $45,570 $228,881 $117,909 $0 $392,360ApprURBAN MULTI-RES 2016 $45,570 $209,029 $107,681 $0 $362,280ApprURBAN MULTI-RES 2015 DUAL CLASS $45,572 $98,722 $55,531 $0 $199,825ApprURBAN Comm Sketch 1 of 3 PDF+PIN:009+1004327059 Tue, 6/15/2021, 8:28 AM Page 8 Sketch 2 of 3 PDF+PIN:009+1004327059 Tue, 6/15/2021, 8:28 AM Page 9 Sketch 3 of 3 Photo 1 of 3 10/02/2015 Photo 2 of 3 10/02/2015 Photo 3 of 3 10/02/2015 August 11, 2021 Board of Adjustment Meeting EXC21-0009 ITEM 3B ON THE AGENDA Staff Report Prepared by Staff 1 STAFF REPORT To: Board of Adjustment Item: EXC21-0009 Parcel Number: 1010312020 Prepared by: Kirk Lehmann, Associate Planner Date: August 11, 2021 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: CA Ventures 130 E. Randolph Street, STE 2100 Chicago, IL 60601 Contact Person: Mike Welch Axiom Consultants 60 E. Court Street Iowa City, IA 52240 319-519-6220 mwelch@axiom-con.com Property Owner(s): US Bank – Corporate Real Estate PO Box 4601169 Houston TX, 77056 Requested Action: Special exception to 1) reduce the minimum parking requirement by 50% due to unique circumstances and 2) to allow parking on the ground floor Purpose: To allow development of a mixed-use building Location: 21 S. Linn Street Location Map: 2 Size: 15,983 square feet Existing Land Use and Zoning: Commercial; Central Business (CB-10) Surrounding Land Use and Zoning North: Mixed Use; Central Business / Historic Overlay District (CB-10 / OHD) East: Institutional; Neighborhood Public / Historic District Overlay (P-1 / OHD) South: Mixed Use; Central Business (CB-10) West: Mixed Use; Central Business (CB-10) Applicable Code Sections: 14-4B-3A: General Approval Criteria 14-5A-4F-6: Parking Reduction for Other Unique Circumstances File Date: June 11, 2021 BACKGROUND: The applicant, CA Ventures, has requested two special exceptions for the property at 21 S. Linn Street: 1) to reduce the minimum number of required parking spaces for the subject property and 2) to provide a portion of the remaining required parking on the ground floor of its proposed building. A parking reduction of up to 50 percent may be allowed where the applicant demonstrates to the Board that a specific use has unique characteristics such that the number of spaces required is excessive. Parking on the ground floor may be allowed if certain criteria are met, including, but not limited to maintaining an active storefront and providing vehicular access from the rear of the building. The requested special exceptions would facilitate redevelopment of the site into a 13-story, mixed use building with commercial and amenity space on the first floor and approximately 229 residential units above (188 studios/one-bedroom and 41 two-bedroom apartments). The property is in the Central Business (CB-10) zone, which is intended to be the high density, compact, pedestrian oriented shopping, office, service and entertainment area in Iowa City. The current use of the site is a non-conforming parking lot and drive-through banking facility. In the CB- 10 zone, auto oriented uses are generally not permitted, but the existing use has been around since 1962. Development and redevelopment in the CB-10 zone is intended to be in compact groupings to intensify the density of usable commercial spaces, while increasing the availability of open spaces, plazas or pedestrian-ways. To support a healthy and vibrant commercial core, development of mixed use buildings with residential uses located above storefront commercial uses is encouraged. The subject property has some unique challenges. For one, the abutting building to the west includes windows on the second floor that could provide egress. Blocking these windows would prohibit rental permits for those units. Furthermore, the existing First National Bank Drive-In building on the property is a contributing resource to the Downtown National Historic District. However, the subject property is not a local historic landmark and is not located in a Historic District Overlay zone. Despite these challenges, the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan shows this site as one of a few remaining sites for strategic infill, including the demolition of the First National Bank Drive-In building. The Plan identifies factors that should be considered to ensure new development 3 is consistent with the existing fabric of Downtown, which are discussed in more detail in the approval criteria related to consistency with the Comprehensive Plan below. Minimum parking standards are intended to provide off-street parking to accommodate most demand for parking generated by the use, particularly where sufficient on-street parking is not available, and to prevent nonresidential parking from encroaching into adjacent residential neighborhoods. In the CB-10 zone, private, off-street parking is strictly regulated to preserve valuable land for active building uses and to maintain a pedestrian oriented streetscape. As such, consolidated off-street facilities should be provided wherever practical with access provided from public service alleys or courts. As such, plans for downtown envision the Downtown District providing parking at a district-wide level to achieve the desired level of development. As such, parking demand should be accommodated by parking structures, on-street parking, and demand pricing rather than addressing parking on a project-by-project or site-by-site basis. Residential uses are the only land use category in the CB-10 zone that requires a minimum amount of parking (other uses have parking maximums). The proposed project requires 135 parking spaces, as shown in the provided application materials (Attachment 4). However, a parking reduction of up to 50 percent may be requested by special exception where it can be demonstrated that a specific use has unique characteristics such that the number of spaces required is excessive. The requested 50 percent parking reduction would result in 67 parking spaces provided onsite. The building footprint is proposed to contain a few parking spaces on the ground floor and two levels of parking below grade with a total of approximately 67 parking stalls. In CB-10 zones, parking spaces on the ground floor also requires a special exception. The concept (included in Attachment 4) shows access to below-grade parking from the alley to the north of the proposed building. Vehicles and bicyclists would take this alley and either exit onto S. Dubuque Street or S. Linn Street. Pedestrians would exit directly from the building onto the corner of E. Washington Street and S. Linn Street. ANALYSIS: The purpose of the Zoning Code 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 Zoning Code 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 two special exceptions if the requests found to be in accordance with the specific criteria included in Section 14-5A-4F-6, pertaining to parking reductions for unique circumstances requiring a special exception; Section 14-5A-3D-5e, pertaining to parking in a CB-10 zone within the exterior walls of a building requiring a special exception; as well as the general approval criteria in Section 14-4B-3A. For the Board of Adjustment to grant these two special exception requests, each of the following criterion below must be met. The burden of proof is on the applicant, and their comments regarding each criterion may be found on the attached application materials. Staff comments regarding each criterion are set below. 4 Specific Standards: 14-5A-4-F: Parking Reductions for Other Unique Circumstances: 6. Where it can be demonstrated that a specific use has unique characteristics such that the number of parking or stacking spaces required is excessive or will reduce the ability to use or occupy a historic property in a manner that will preserve or protect its historic, aesthetic, or cultural attributes, the Board of Adjustment may grant a special exception to reduce the number of required parking or stacking spaces by up to fifty percent (50%) (up to 100 percent for properties designated as a local historic landmark, listed on the National Register of Historic Places, or listed as key or contributing structures in a Historic District or Conservation District Overlay Zone). FINDINGS: • The proposed building has been designed to serve University of Iowa students for whom on-site storage of a vehicle is less of a priority than living in a walkable urban setting. It includes features specific to that use, such as furnished units and on-site amenities such as study lounges. Students exhibit lower demand for on-site parking and are more likely to utilize modes of transportation such as walking, biking, and transit. While the building is designed and marketed for students, non-students may also reside there as well. • 2019 5-Year American Community Survey data (table B08301) suggests residents in downtown Iowa City use cars less due to proximity to the University, employment, and other services. For typical commutes in downtown Census Tracts (specifically 11, 16, and 21 as shown in Attachment 4), around 45% drive alone to work, 6% carpool, 39% walk or bike, 6% use public transportation, and the remainder use other modes of transportation or work from home. The subject property is located in Tract 21, which has the lowest levels of car usage with only 27% driving alone to work and 87% of residents are enrolled in undergraduate or graduate programs (Table B14002). • The applicant proposes 67 on-site parking spaces, which is approximately 0.29 spaces per dwelling unit and 0.25 per bedroom. • The RISE at Riverfront Crossings, a student housing project on E. Court Street, provides parking at a rate of 0.60 spaces per unit or 0.34 per bed. Staff is not aware of any complaints regarding spillover parking from the RISE. • Gilbane Iowa City, a student housing project on 700 S. Dubuque Street, has been approved for parking at a rate of 0.81 spaces per unit or 0.41 per bed, but it is still going through the permitting process. It required a special exception to have this ratio and used similar rationale regarding unique circumstances as student housing. However, special exceptions do not set precedent. • While the proposed project includes lower levels of parking than other projects, Census data supports that student housing has unique characteristics such that the required number of parking spaces is excessive. Specific Standards: 14-5A-3D-5e: Where parking [in a CB-10 zone] is located within the exterior walls of a building, the following standards apply: (1) The proposed structured parking will not detract from or prevent ground floor storefront uses. Structured parking may be permitted on the ground level floor of a building, provided that a substantial portion of the ground level floor of the building is reserved for and built to accommodate storefront uses. On the ground level floor of the building, parking is not allowed within the first fifty feet (50') of building depth 5 as measured from the front building line. The board of adjustment may reduce this storefront depth requirement if the applicant demonstrates that conditions on the subject property create a practical difficulty in achieving full compliance. In such a case, the applicant must demonstrate that the resulting alternative storefront space, both the interior and exterior, will be of a quality in both design and materials that will enhance the commercial character of the central business district. To mitigate for loss of ground floor commercial space, the board may also require additional quality commercial space be included on an upper floor or mezzanine level and said space be reserved for nonresidential uses. FINDINGS: • The concept indicates that parking is not provided within the first 50' of building depth as measured from the front building line. This will be confirmed during site plan review. • Approximately 72% of the street-facing façade is intended for active nonresidential uses, including retail storefront, office, lobby, and amenity space. The remainder is built for building support areas, including stairwells, elevators, trash facilities, and other similar uses. • The concept indicates that a wall for art will be provided along some of the window- less façade which accommodates building support services. (2) Vehicular access to parking within buildings must be from a rear alley or private rear lane, whenever feasible. Garage openings along the primary street frontage are not permitted if access is feasible from another street or from a rear alley, private street or private rear lane. If there is no other feasible alternative, a garage opening may be allowed along the primary street frontage, if the board determines that the opening(s) will not detract from or unduly interrupt pedestrian flow along the street and traffic and pedestrian safety will not be compromised. Garage openings shall be built to the minimum width necessary for access. FINDINGS: • Vehicular access to the on-site parking is from a rear alley. (3) Any exterior walls of a parking facility that are visible from a public or private street must appear to be a component of the facade of the building through the use of building materials, window openings and facade detailing that is similar or complementary to the design of the building. FINDINGS: • The concept shows that exterior walls to the east and south will not be visible because they are behind the building facades that meet Central Business site development standards and exterior walls to the west will not be visible because they will abut the existing building. • Exterior walls to the south are visible in the alley, but that is not considered a public street. In addition, the wall of the parking facility is set back 50’ from the S. Linn Street right of way. (4) Each entrance and exit to the parking area must be constructed so that vehicles entering or leaving the parking area are clearly visible to a pedestrian on any abutting sidewalk at a distance of not less than ten feet (10'). Stop signs and appropriate pedestrian warning signs may be required. 6 FINDINGS: • The concept shows the entrance and exit to the parking area is more than 50 feet from the nearest sidewalk to the east. • Staff recommends a condition that the applicant provide a convex traffic safety mirror or similar method of providing visibility or awareness of potential conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles using the alley. General Standards: 14-4B-3A: Review Requirements for Both Special Exceptions: 1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. FINDINGS: • The applicant proposes 67 on-site parking spaces, which is approximately 0.29 spaces per dwelling unit and 0.25 per bedroom. • The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) suggest an average parking demand rate of 0.55 vehicles per unit or 0.3 per bedroom for a Multifamily (High-Rise) Dense Multi-Use Urban. • Other more recent high-rise residential projects in the CB-10 zone vary in their approach to addressing parking: o The Tailwind project (109-127 E. College Street) currently underway will include an 11-story multi-family building with 102 dwelling units (186 bedrooms). They will provide 50 on-site spaces after receiving a parking reduction for preserving historic properties (EXC20-0007), with parking ratios of 0.49 spaces per unit and 0.27 spaces per bed. o The Chauncey (404 E. College Street), built in 2017, is a 15-story mixed-use building with commercial and hotel space on floors 1-7, and 60 dwelling units above (76 bedrooms). They provided 45 on-site parking spaces with parking ratios of 0.75 spaces per unit and 0.59 spaces per bedroom. o Park @ 201 (201 E. Washington Street), built in 2012, is a 15-story mixed-use building with commercial space on floors 1-4 and 24 dwelling units above (28 bedrooms). No parking is provided on-site, but it satisfies its 14-space parking requirement through a parking covenant with the Dubuque Street Parking Facility, approved by BOA on July 11, 2012 (EXC12-00003). • The proposed project has per-unit parking ratios that are well below other student housing projects, high-rise projects in the CB-10 zone, and ITE recommendations, but its per bedroom ratios are more similar due to its high percentage of 1-bedroom units. With regards to parking ratios recommended by the ITE, the targeted market of students is more likely to use alternative modes of transportation than is anticipated by ITE data. • Parking ratios appear to be appropriate based on Census data about means of transportation to work in Tract 21. • The Tower Place & Parking Ramp totaling 510 parking, the Dubuque Street Ramp totaling 625 spaces, and the Chauncey Swan Ramp totaling 475 parking spaces are all within two block faces of the proposed building. Parking permits in public ramps are not typically available to downtown residents but they provide parking for downtown visitors and commuters. • The site is occupied by a parking lot and drive-through bank, but parking is not public. 7 • The concept proposes 6 new on-street parking spaces, which should improve on- street parking in the area. Spillover parking is not anticipated to impact on-street parking in neighboring residential areas because nearby streets are metered. • Tenants must consider reduced on-site parking in their decision-making, so it is likely the proposed project will attract tenants who do not require as much on-site parking. • The existing First National Bank Drive-In building on the subject property would be demolished as part of the proposed project, and it is a contributing resource for the Downtown National Historic District. However, City planning documents indicate that this site, including the existing building, should be redeveloped to further other goals related to redevelopment in those documents. The current surface parking lot and drive- through, a use that is not even allowed downtown, detracts from the vibrancy envisioned in the downtown. The current uses also detract from the pedestrian experience as they promote auto usage. Staff finds redevelopment of the site to be in the City interest and consistent with the policy direction of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, but recommends a condition that the historic nature of the site, including it being the site of the drive-through building and the former City Hall, be acknowledged to the satisfaction of the Director of Neighborhood and Development Services. 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. FINDINGS: • The subject property, and surrounding properties, are in the Iowa City Downtown Historic District, which was listed in the National Register on May 27, 2021. Adjacent buildings at 13 S. Linn Street to the north and 28 S. Linn Street to the east are locally designated as local historic landmarks with a Historic District Zoning Overlay. The abutting building at 220-222 E. Washington Street to the west is a contributing structure in the National Register-listed Downtown Historic District. These properties are occupied by a mix of uses but were largely constructed prior to minimum parking standards. • The proposed building includes a brick façade that matches the height of the parapet for the building to the west and the street-level façade is built to Central Business design standards. • Nearby residential properties vary in their parking supply and scale, but there are no single-family residential uses in the immediate vicinity. Most residential units in the downtown cater either to the same market segment as the proposed project, or to high-income households that prefer urban living. • The concept proposes 6 new on-street parking spaces, while on-site parking will be reserved for occupants of the building. Within 2 block-faces, there are approximately 1,610 public parking spaces at the Tower Place, Dubuque Street, and Chauncey Swan Ramps, which provides off-street parking for customers and visitors • The proposed project will increase nearby pedestrian traffic, which will likely improve the commercial viability of nearby businesses. • 220-222 E. College Street has second-story windows that provide egress directly next to proposed building. If a development on the subject property is less than 5’ from those windows, they may not be used for egress which would prevent it from obtaining a rental permit. The concept indicates that the second story will be more than 5’ from the abutting windows, which retains the possibility of egress. 8 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. FINDINGS: • The Downtown District is already developed, and City plans only identified a few additional sites as appropriate for redevelopment given the area’s historic nature. Their future redevelopment will not be impacted by the proposed project. • The abutting property, 220-222 E. Washington Street (not included in the proposed project), is a historic structure that the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan indicates should be preserved. As such, redevelopment should not occur at this site. • The normal and orderly improvement of nearby uses will not be impacted by either the proposed development or parking reduction, though the proposed development may cause temporary closures of streets as part of construction. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. FINDINGS: • The existing streets provide adequate vehicular and pedestrian access. • The site has good access to public transportation, including several bus lines which run on E. Washington Street abutting the proposed project. • Staff will ensure adequate utilities, drainage, and other necessary facilities are being provided through the site plan review and building permitting processes. 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. FINDINGS: • The parking level entrance is located at grade on the alley north of the property. • From the alley, vehicular access to the public street network is excepted primarily to the east on S. Linn Street, though vehicles may exit to the west onto S. Dubuque Street. • One existing vehicular access point on E. Washington Street and several on S. Linn Street will be eliminated as part of the project. • New public parking will be constructed in the E. Washington Street and S. Linn Street rights-of-way. These spaces will help support short-term on-street parking needs for nearby commercial uses. • Pedestrian access is already provided along all public streets, and street improvements shown on the concept will facilitate continued pedestrian use. • Four different Iowa City Transit routes (1, 2, 4, and 9) run next to the subject property on E. Washington Street. 9 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. FINDINGS: • The CB-10 zone has no minimum lot or setbacks requirements. However, it does require a maximum setback of 12 feet which is met by the proposed project. • Buildings in the CB-10 zone have no maximum height but are restricted by maximum floor-area ratio (FAR) and heights allowed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The maximum FAR, i.e. the amount of floor area in the building in relation to the amount of lot area, is 10.0 in the CB-10 zone. The lot contains 15,983 square feet, so a proposed building may have up to 159,830 square feet. The maximum height allowed by the FAA is approximately 155 feet. The development as proposed appears to comply with these requirements, but they will also be checked during site plan review, as will evidence of FAA approvals. • Multifamily uses in the CB-10 zone must comply with minimum open space requirements. The project as proposed will require 2,700 square feet of usable open space in one or more defined areas, which may include shared patio space on upper floor terraces and indoor activity space for up to 50% of the required amount. The concept shows approximately 2,041 square feet of outdoor open space in two courtyards and 1,814 square feet of covered and indoor open space. Additionally, 3,931 square feet of amenity space is located on the ground floor. • Buildings in a CB-10 zone must abide by the Central business Site Development standards, which include several detailed requirements. The submitted concept appears to address standards related to commercial space, minimum fenestration, building articulation, building entrances, and other related requirements. • In the CB-10 zone, the first two stories of a building must be built to the side lot line to prevent unsafe, unkempt spaces between buildings. The Building Official may approve minor adjustments to account for irregular lot lines or to accommodate structural requirements, such as installing footings or foundations, or to maintain the structural integrity of an adjacent building, as long as the intent of this standard is achieved. Based on the concept, a minor adjustment would be needed to provide for egress for the second of the property at 220-222 E. Washington Street. Staff recommends a condition that design features be incorporated into the project to prevent unsafe, unkempt spaces between buildings prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. • As the project progresses, staff will ensure that all applicable standards and regulations are met through the site plan review and building permitting processes. 7. The proposed exception will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as amended. FINDINGS: • The Comprehensive Plan designates this area as General Commercial on the Future Land Use map and includes a goal to “[m]aintain a strong and accessible Downtown that is pedestrian-oriented with a strong and distinctive cultural, commercial, and residential character.” One objective from this goal is to “[p]reserve the historic, mainstreet character of the Downtown, while encouraging appropriate infill development to enhance the economic viability and residential diversity of the area. • The Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan indicates the subject property is a “Strategic Infill” site as one of the few remaining surface lots downtown. It suggests 10 that redevelopment of the site may consist of a high-rise building occupying the full parcel, with one floor of commercial space, 8 stories of residential space above, no on-site parking, and stepbacks from adjacent historic buildings. • To ensure new development is consistent with the character of Downtown, the master plan provides several guidelines: o New development should be located on sites that do not contain historic buildings o Active uses, such as ground floor retail (and not blank walls), should front onto the street frontages and the City Plaza. o Upper floors should contain office, commercial, and residential uses. o Buildings should be built to the property line. o Corner locations should be reserved for taller buildings, creating a block structure with taller buildings on the corners and lower scale, historic buildings between them. o The taller buildings on the corners should have a lower base consistent with adjacent historic buildings to make them ‘feel’ contextual with the rest of downtown, while also limiting the perceived height of towers o Parking should be located both on-street and behind storefronts in parking structures. • While the First National Bank Drive-In building is listed as a contributing property in the National Register-listed Downtown Historic District, the intent of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan is to redevelop the site and demolish the building. The site, which contains a surface parking lot and drive-through, is underutilized and promotes auto usage, as opposed to a vibrant pedestrian experience. The concept shows active uses on the ground floor with parking behind and underground and includes residential uses above. The property is also located on a corner and includes a lower architectural base with stepbacks to reduce the perceived size of the building. • The Comprehensive Plan includes goals and objectives supporting public art throughout the City. Redevelopment of the subject property will cover a mural that is currently on the wall of the abutting building to the west. The concept includes a mural wall, which helps mitigate the loss. • The Master Plan notes that the City addresses parking demand through a parking district approach to achieve the desired level of development within Downtown, instead of addressing parking on a project-by-project or site-by-site basis. It also encourages pedestrian friendly development and encourages development to build on existing strengths of downtown, such as proximity to the University of Iowa. • Reducing parking to promote redevelopment of the subject property is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. CORRESPONDENCE: The City has fielded a few inquiries and received three pieces of correspondence to date (Attachment 3). Hockett noted that twelve stories seems tall and that the City asked if the City had considered purchasing the lot as public space. Weitzel noted the proposal would be problematic if it demolished 220-222 E. Washington Street, but though the loss of the recently listed drive-through building is regrettable, it is not a locally designated landmark. Kubby noted that the current parking lot and drive-through are not the highest best use of the property and she appreciates the incorporation of stepbacks and cut-outs into the building design. 11 STAF F RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of EXC21-0009, to reduce the minimum parking requirement by 50% and to allow parking within the exterior walls of a building in a CB-10 zone for the property located at 21 S. Linn Street, subject to the following conditions: 1. Substantial compliance with the concept dated July 30, 2021. 2. The historic nature of the site, including it being the site of the former City Hall among other uses, shall be acknowledged, to be approved by the Director of Neighborhood and Development Services prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 3. Clearance of at least 5’ shall be provided from the face of the existing wall where existing windows are located that may provide egress, to the face of the proposed building. This clearance shall be either at or above ground level such that emergency egress be provided to the satisfaction of the Building Official. A perpetual emergency escape easement shall also be required to provide for future egress, to be recorded prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 4. Incorporation of appropriate design features to prevent unsafe, unkempt spaces in the setback between the subject property and the property to the west must be approved by the Building Official prior to issuance of a building permit and must be constructed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 5. A convex traffic safety mirror or similar method of providing visibility or awareness of potential conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles using the alley shall be provided prior to a certificate of occupancy. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Correspondence 4. Application Materials Approved by: _________________________________________________ Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services August 11, 2021 Board of Adjustment Meeting EXC21-0009 ATTACHMENT 1 Location Map Prepared by Staff E WASHINGTON ST S LINN STS DUBUQUE STEXC21-000921 S. Linn St .µ 0 0.02 0.040.01 Miles Prepared By: Joshua EngelbrechtDate Prepared: June 2021 An application submitted by Axiom Consultants,on behalf of CA Ventures, for a special exception allowing a 50% parking reduction for 0.37 Acresof property located at 21 S. Linn St. August 11, 2021 Board of Adjustment Meeting EXC21-0009 ATTACHMENT 2 Zoning Map Prepared by Staff E WASHINGTON ST S LINN STS DUBUQUE STP1 CB10 EXC21-000921 S. Linn St .µ 0 0.02 0.040.01 Miles Prepared By: Joshua EngelbrechtDate Prepared: June 2021 An application submitted by Axiom Consultants,on behalf of CA Ventures, for a special exception allowing a 50% parking reduction for 0.37 Acresof property located at 21 S. Linn St. Overlay Zones Overlay Description Historic District (OHD) August 11, 2021 Board of Adjustment Meeting EXC21-0009 ATTACHMENT 3 Correspondence Submitted by the Identified Party 220 E. Washington St. Iowa City, IA 52240 319 338 -1566 info@beadologyiowa.com www.beadologyiowa.com August 3, 2021 Board of Adjustment 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Board of Adjustment, This correspondence is regarding the special exception application for a 50% parking reduction request by CA Ventures on the corner of Washington and Linn Streets in downtown Iowa City. On the outset, please note that my business is currently next door to this historic lot. I have a new landlord that has a financial framework that makes it untenable for me to stay in my current location past December 2020. CA Ventures and Beadology Iowa are in discussions on the possibility of our business moving into the commercial space in this development if the special exception is approved and they proceed with this development. I have always been hesitant about buildings over 7 stories downtown because our experience with them not having setbacks on the upper floors denigrates the experience on the street. This experience is what keeps a semblance of a smaller town feel while offering the vibrancy of a larger city. I am happy to see that this proposal has two levels of setbacks plus a “cut out” on the northeast corner. These features help us maintain our historic feel to the downtown. The “cut out” also mitigates the height differences between this new building and the Yacht Club, another historic building. These are the features that help this development meet your criteria for granting a special exception. The façade treatments at the historic level of 220 and 218 E. Washington Street and the Englert Theatre across the street (all contributing properties to the City’s successful Federal downtown historic district application) shows that the developers are working to fit their project into the context of our downtown. I would like to see the addition of acknowledgement of the history of this site as a stagecoach stop and as the former site of our City Hall and fire station. This could take the form of the current plaque on the wall currently on site being imbedded in a corner stone of the new building. Another idea is to have enlarged pictures of this site as City Hall as part of the décor and marketing of the leasing office for the apartments. The other opportunity is to have a replica or some part of the popular CoExist mural to be part of the new structure. It might be windows onto the west side of the building that look 220 E. Washington St. Iowa City, IA 52240 319 338 -1566 info@beadologyiowa.com www.beadologyiowa.com out towards the the mural, it might be a section of it replicated on the “mural wall” shown on the documents provided by CA Ventures. The use of this property as a surface parking lot is not the highest, even a medium use of downtown property. To provide the required parking on site is likely not possible. Early discussions about the redevelopment of this property included the demolition of 220 and 218 E. Washington Street, to provide all required parking on site. In relief, this was quickly rejected by the city and developer as not appropriate for our community. Although the drive through structures are part of the definition of this site as historic, I feel that this lot will never be developed if those structures are required to be maintained. The tradeoff of losing these building to have more appropriate use of this lot in a downtown is a tradeoff that is reasonable. The 229 efficiency, 1 and 2 bedroom furnished units are likely marketed to the student body or those who live, work, and play downtown. I think the argument is valid that this development caters to a resident that is less likely to rely on a personal 4 wheeled motorized vehicle. The 67 parking spaces may need to include moped and bike parking, as well as spaces for cars. As someone who has been vocally against many proposals for increased density downtown because they have not been in context of our current assets, I feel it is my obligation to be show up in favor of those projects that meet some of the goals I have talked about for years, i.e. set backs to maintain the feel of our feet on the street. I encourage you to grant the special exception requested by CA Ventures for the development on the corner of Washington and Linn Streets. Sincerely, Karen Kubby 1 Kirk Lehmann From:Andrew Savoy <ASavoy@ca-ventures.com> Sent:Monday, August 2, 2021 5:23 PM To:Kirk Lehmann; Mike Welch Cc:Anne Russett; TFuerst@nilesbolton.com; Mohamed Mohsen Subject:RE: Follow-Up Questions Kirk,     See responses below in red.  Let me know if you have any other questions.  Cc’ing my architect just in case I am misstating something below.     Andrew Savoy Vice President, Development 130 E. Randolph Street Suite 2100 Chicago, IL 60601 Direct: +1 872 259 1773 Mobile: +1 501 786 1736 Email: ASavoy@ca-ventures.com www.ca-ventures.com From: Kirk Lehmann <Kirk‐Lehmann@iowa‐city.org>   Sent: Monday, August 2, 2021 4:17 PM  To: Mike Welch <mwelch@axiom‐con.com>; Andrew Savoy <ASavoy@ca‐ventures.com>  Cc: Anne Russett <Anne‐Russett@iowa‐city.org>  Subject: Follow‐Up Questions     [ALERT * External Email * ALERT]  Hello Mike and Andy,     I wanted to follow up on a couple of questions I have about the proposed project as I’m reviewing the new concept:     1. To confirm, is the FAA height limit for your site 155’? Confirmed  2. Please let me know the square footage of the following spaces:   a. First floor amenity space 3,931 SF (this is only the red portion of the plan, grey is considered back of  house)  b. Second floor courtyard 1,178 SF  2 c. Fifth floor Terrace 1,272 SF  Below is the open space calc:    3. What are the intended uses of the ground floor and fifth floor amenity spaces? The ground‐floor “amenity”  area will likely be a fitness center. I’ll also be trying to integrate some flexible office space as part of the  leasing area that can double as study rooms for the residents as well. The fifth‐floor amenity space will likely  be a resident lounge with kitchenette and TVs.     4. Would the ground floor amenity space be built to accommodate storefront uses? Is there a reason it is not  reserved for storefront uses?   The Purple area shown on the ground floor will be built specifically for retail – we have moved this to face  Washington since it feels like the more appropriate retail street. The ground floor “amenity” area could  certainly be repurposed as retail down the line – it will have a ceiling height identical to the retail space along  Washington and would just require new metered utility connections which would be relatively easy. We feel  that we need to keep it as a fitness center during our term of ownership in order to adequately compete with  other properties. Residents in these types of buildings expect amenities.      If you could answer these questions as soon as possible, it would be much appreciated. Note that I may have some  additional questions, but wanted to be timely with my feedback as we approach the packet publication date.     Thanks,     Kirk Lehmann, AICP  Associate Planner         410 E. Washington Street  Iowa City, IA 52240  Main: 319-356-5230  Direct: 319-356-5247  www.icgov.org          Disclaimer  The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  1 Kirk Lehmann From:Tim Weitzel <tweitzel.email@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, July 7, 2021 1:37 PM To:Kirk Lehmann Cc:Anne Russett Subject:Re: Special Exception-NW Corner Washington at Linn Sts The only possible problem would be if this project allows a but‐for case that would demolish the IXL Block, marked as a  key structure in the Downtown‐Riverfront Crossing Master Plan, a component of the Comprehensive Plan.  The IXL Block  also has been strongly associated with the Historic Preservation Commission as the letter head image. I think a  demolition there would also go against the spirit and intent of the Certified Local Government agreement.    While it would be regrettable to demolish a recently listed structure, the drive up building itself, I don't recall any  language in the Master Plan or Historic Preservation Plan that calls for preservation of non‐key structures that are not  locally designated as a district or landmark. IXL is listed in the Downtown‐Riverfront Crossings as a Key structure.  Best Regards,     Tim      On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 1:12 PM Kirk Lehmann <Kirk‐Lehmann@iowa‐city.org> wrote:  Tim,     The board will be considering the application for a parking reduction based on the following approval criteria:     Specific Approval Criteria (14‐5A‐4F):  7. Parking Reduction For Other Unique Circumstances: Where it can be demonstrated that a specific use has  unique characteristics such that the number of parking or stacking spaces required is excessive or will reduce  the ability to use or occupy a historic property in a manner that will preserve or protect its historic,  aesthetic, or cultural attributes, the Board of Adjustment may grant a special exception to reduce the  number of required parking or stacking spaces by up to fifty percent (50%) (up to 100 percent for properties  designated as a local historic landmark, listed on the National Register of Historic Places, or listed as key or  contributing structures in a Historic District or Conservation District Overlay Zone).     General Approval Criteria (14‐4B‐3A):  2 1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or  general welfare.  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.  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.  4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided.  5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic  congestion on 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.  7. The proposed exception will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as amended.     If one of the above criteria is not met, the Board cannot approve the application. Please let me know if you have any  additional questions.     Regards,     Kirk Lehmann, AICP  Associate Planner  City of Iowa City  319-356-5247     From: Tim Weitzel <tweitzel.email@gmail.com>   Sent: Wednesday, July 7, 2021 12:13 PM  To: Kirk Lehmann <Kirk‐Lehmann@iowa‐city.org>  Cc: Anne Russett <Anne‐Russett@iowa‐city.org>  Subject: Re: Special Exception‐NW Corner Washington at Linn Sts     Thanks, Kirk. I had heard the project might also involve the IXL Block building? Is that an issue for the BOA to consider  with this application?     1 Kirk Lehmann From:Jackie B. <jackiehockett@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, June 25, 2021 9:11 AM To:Kirk Lehmann Subject:Re: Notice of rezoning? Thank you for the information, did the city consider purchasing this land at all to use it as public space? It is such a lovely corner of downtown with that exceptionally joyful mural and view of the Englert- it would be a great spot to continue the ped mall experience. Twelve seems so high for this part of our historical downtown area. Can I direct concerns to the Board you mention in the email, or do I address some other board? Thank you On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 8:25 AM Kirk Lehmann <Kirk-Lehmann@iowa-city.org> wrote: Hello Jackie, Axiom Consultants has submitted a special exception application to the City requesting a 50% parking reduction to construct a new 12-story building at 21 S. Linn Street (Case Number EXC21-0009). The Board of Adjustment will review this application at either an in-person meeting in Emma Harvat Hall (City Hall, 410 East Washington Street, Iowa City) or an electronic public meeting via Zoom. Regardless of its location, the meeting is tentatively scheduled for July 14, 2021 at 5:15 p.m. However, staff is still waiting on additional information to assist in evaluating the application, which may delay the public meeting to August 11. Because the meeting is subject to change, check the City of Iowa City’s website, www.icgov.org/BOA, the week of the meeting to confirm the meeting agenda and location. You are welcome to attend and present your views concerning this application, or you may submit written information for consideration to me in advance of the meeting, and I will include your comments in the information to be considered by the Board. If you have any questions or comments about this application or if you would like more information on the review process, please feel free to contact me at kirk-lehmann@iowa-city.org or 319-356-5247. Sincerely, Kirk Lehmann, AICP Associate Planner 2 City of Iowa City 319-356-5247 From: Jackie B. <jackiehockett@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2021 1:54 PM To: Anne Russett <Anne-Russett@iowa-city.org> Subject: Notice of rezoning? Can you tell me what the application is for the notification at 72 S. LINN street please? That lot with that amazing mural? Thank you Disclaimer The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. June 29, 2021 RE: Special Exception for 21 S. Linn Street Dear Property Owner: The Iowa City Board of Adjustment has received an application submitted by Axiom Consultants requesting a special exception to allow a 50% parking reduction for other unique circumstances to construct a new mixed-use building at 21 S. Linn Street (see attached map). As a neighboring property owner, you are being notified of this application. If you know of any interested party who has not received a copy of this letter, we would appreciate it if you would inform them of the pending application. The Board of Adjustment will review this application at either in-person meeting in Emma Harvat Hall, City Hall, 410 East Washington Street, Iowa City or an electronic public meeting via Zoom. Regardless of its location, the meeting time is tentatively scheduled for July 14, 2021 at 5:15 p.m. Because the meeting is subject to change, check the City of Iowa City’s website, www.icgov.org/BOA, the week of the meeting to confirm the meeting agenda and location. You are welcome to attend this public meeting to present your views concerning this application. You may also submit written information for consideration to me in advance of the meeting, and I will include your comments in the information to be considered by the Board. Please do not hesitate to contact me at kirk-lehmann@iowa-city.org or 319-356-5230 if you have any questions or comments about this application or if you would like more information on the Board of Adjustment review process. Sincerely, Kirk Lehmann, AICP Associate Planner City of Iowa City Department of Neighborhood and Development Services An electronic meeting, pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8, may be held because a meeting in person is impossible or impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of Board members, staff and the public presented by COVID-19. Details on how to participate if it is an electronic meeting will be included in the agenda packet, which will be available at www.icgov.org/BOA the Monday before the meeting. Providing comment in person is not an option. What is the Board of Adjustment? The Board of Adjustment is panel made up of Iowa City citizens appointed by the City Council. The board reviews and grants special exceptions and variances and also considers appeals when there is a disagreement about an administrative zoning decision made by the City. Members of the board act like judges, making decisions about individual properties and uses that may have difficulty meeting a specific zoning regulation or to resolve disputes about administrative zoning decisions. The actions and decisions of the Board of Adjustment are binding upon all parties unless overturned upon appeal to District Court. What is a special exception? There are two types of special exceptions. 1. Within the zoning code a number of land uses are set apart as special exceptions that may be permitted in certain zones. Rather than permitting these uses outright, each is reviewed on a case-by-case basis to ensure that they do not negatively affect surrounding properties. For example, daycare centers are permitted in residential zones by special exception. The same is true of churches and private schools. All may be appropriate uses in residential zones, if certain criteria such as parking, screening, and other requirements are met. 2. Adjustments to specific zoning requirements in cases where there are unique circumstances. Again, the opportunity to adjust these requirements and the criteria for allowing such adjustments are described in the Zoning Code. For example, a homeowner may apply for a reduction in a building setback in order to accommodate an addition or other improvement to their property. The Zoning Code lists explicitly each use and standard for which a special exception may be considered. In other words, you can’t request a special exception for everything—only those things called out as special exceptions in the Code. The Code also provides criteria specific to each request. Applicants must provide evidence that they satisfy each of these criteria, and the Board must consider these criteria when making a determination as to whether to grant a special exception. What is a variance? A variance grants a legal right to an owner to develop property in a manner that deviates from a specific provision of the Zoning Code and for which a special exception is not expressly allowed. In seeking relief from the restrictions in the Zoning Code, the property owner applying for the variance must show that the strict application of the Zoning Code would cause and unnecessary hardship such that the property in question is unusable or that a literal interpretation of the ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the zoning district. In addition the circumstances that create this hardship must be unique to the property in question and must not be of the property owner’s own making. What is an appeal? The Board considers and rules on appeals from any citizen who believes there is an error in any decision, determination, or interpretation made by the City or its designee in the administration of the Zoning Code. As with their other decisions, the Board’s ruling is binding on all parties unless overturned on appeal to the District Court. How does the review process work? An application requesting a special exception, variance, or an appeal is a request. The Board makes a decision on whether to grant a specific request only after City staff have provided a review of an application and the public has had an opportunity to make its concerns known. The Board not only has the right to approve or deny requests, but may also choose to approve request subject to certain conditions. In making decisions, the Board may only consider comments and evidence relevant to the specific standards provided in the code. City Development Staff provide reports to the Board for each application on the agenda. The Staff Report provides background information on the application, informs the Board of all the criteria in the Code that a particular application must satisfy, and interprets whether and how an application has satisfied these criteria. How can I participate in the process? Because most applications will be reviewed and decided upon at a single public hearing, it is important for interested parties to respond in a timely and informed manner. Those who wish to speak for or against an application are given an opportunity to be heard by the Board at the hearing, but may also submit written comments prior to the meeting. Written comments must be delivered to the Department of Neighborhood & Development Services at City Hall no later than 5 days before the hearing in order to be included with the Staff Report. All correspondence submitted after that time will be delivered to the Board at the time of the hearing. The Board considers the application, the recommendation of staff (in the staff report) and any additional information, correspondence, or testimony provided at the hearing. Board of Adjustment hearings are usually held on the second Wednesday of each month at 5:15 p.m. in Emma J. Harvat Hall in City Hall. You can find more information at the following website: www.icgov.org/boa. The Staff Report can be very useful to anyone who is unfamiliar with the BOA process or with the Zoning Code and will provide an understanding of the criteria that the Board must consider in rendering its decision. Staff Reports may be obtained from the Department of Neighborhood & Development Services. E-mail kirk-lehmann@iowa- city.org to request a copy of a report. If you have questions about an application or if you simply want more information about issues related to the Board of Adjustment, please feel free to contact Kirk Lehmann at 319-356- 5230 or e-mail kirk-lehmann@iowa- city.org. To submit comments to the Board of Adjustment write to the Board of Adjustment c/o the Department of Neighborhood & Development Services, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City IA 52240 or e-mail kirk-lehmann@iowa- city.org. Board of Adjustment: Frequently Asked Questions E WASHINGTON ST S LINN STS DUBUQUE STEXC21-000921 S. Linn St .µ 0 0.02 0.040.01 Miles Prepared By: Joshua EngelbrechtDate Prepared: June 2021 An application submitted by Axiom Consultants,on behalf of CA Ventures, for a special exception allowing a 50% parking reduction for 0.37 Acresof property located at 21 S. Linn St. Parcel Number Mailing Name Mailing Address1Mailing Address2 Mailing Address3 Mailing Zip Code 1010377005 MOKA JAVA LLC 3046 FOREST RIDGE DR NE IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010311038 MIDWESTONE BANK; TRUSTEE PO BOX 1700 IOWA CITY, IA 52244 1010376003 M S D H ASSOCIATES 122 S LINN ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010377008 BLACKSTONE BUILDING LLC 4703 LEPERCHAUN LN CEDAR RAPIDS, IA 52411 1010377009 TSB HOLDINGS LLC PO BOX 1490 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-1490 1010376002 IA LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010377001 LOUISE L DOBRIAN TESTAMENTARY PO BOX 64142 SAINT PAUL, MN 55164-9366 1010377002 PARM & HARRY LLC 227 E WASHINGTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010377003 223-5 EAST WASHINGTON ST LLC 414 E MARKET ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 1010377004 ENGLERT CIVIC THEATRE INC 221 E WASHINGTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397001 JODI CONNOLLY SALON INC 201 E WASHINGTON ST #101 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010312006 QQ LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010312007 IOWA CITY DOWNTOWN PROPERTIES PO BOX 1490 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-1490 1010311001 VASILI LLC 1105 W BENTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52246 1010311002 DOUGLAS A & CAROL C DUSS 604 ELBA DR NOKOMIS, FL 34275 1010311003 RINELLA FAMILY LLC 7 1/2 S DUBUQUE ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010311004 JEET SAINI 2581 HWY 1 NE SOLON, IA 52333 1010311005 JAMES A MONDANARO 225 S LINN ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010312013 FFF 1 LLC 2626 NEWPORT RD NE IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010312004 JTK HOLDINGS LLC 730 N LINN ST IOWA CITY, IA 52245 1010311006 ALICE PARRY LLC 19 1/2 S DUBUQUE ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240-3902 1010311037 MACHT INC 19 1/2 S DUBUQUE ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240-3902 1010311036 MACHT INC 19 1/2 S DUBUQUE ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240-3902 1010311035 HAZEL J MILLER PO BOX 1700 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-1700 1010309001 U OF I 4 JESSUP HALL IOWA CITY, IA 52242-1316 1010312016 US BANK- CORPORATE REAL ESTATE PO BOX 460169 HOUSTON, TX 77056 1010312017 LASANSKY CORP 216 WASHINGTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010312018 218 WASHINGTON LLC PO BOX 1490 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-1490 1010436004 ROBERT J WILLERT 4161 DANE RD SE IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010311032 BREMER TRUST PO BOX 1700 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-1700 1010311033 BREMER TRUST PO BOX 1700 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-1700 1010311034 BREMER TRUST PO BOX 1700 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-1700 1010312015 US BANK- CORPORATE REAL ESTATE PO BOX 460169 HOUSTON, TX 77056 1010312020 US BANK- CORPORATE REAL ESTATE PO BOX 460169 HOUSTON, TX 77056 1010312019 220 E WASHINGTON ST RES COOP 2010 KEOKUK ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010377006 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 E WASHINGTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240-1826 1010440001 NATIONAL COOP GROCERS ASSOC 14 S LINN ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010440002 LIBERTY PROPERTY INVESTMENTS L 125 PHEASANT RUN LN WEST BRANCH, IA 52358 1010440003 UNITED ACTION FOR YOUTH 355 IOWA AVE IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010440004 BRADLEY & RILEY 2007 1ST AVE CEDAR RAPIDS, IA 52401 1010440005 HOMEBUILDERS ASSOC OF IA CITY PO BOX 3396 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3396 1010440006 ECUMENICAL HOUSING CORP 320 E WASHINGTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010440007 LIBERTY PROPERTY INVESTMENTS L 125 PHEASANT RUN LN WEST BRANCH, IA 52358 1010440008 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 E WASHINGTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240-1826 1010440009 NEW PIONEER'S COOP SOCIETY 22 S LINN ST #2A IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010440010 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 E WASHINGTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240-1826 1010440011 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 E WASHINGTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240-1826 1010378001 U OF IOWA FACILITIES CORP PO BOX 4550 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-4550 1010376004 IOWA CITY MASONIC TEMPLE ASSOC 312 COLLEGE ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010313004 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 E WASHINGTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240-1826 1010313005 ECUMENICAL HOUSING CORP 320 E WASHINGTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010312008 CLIFFORD BUILDING PARTNERSHIP 3771 COTTAGE RESERVE RD NE SOLON, IA 52333 1010312009 CLIFFORD BUILDING PARTNERSHIP 3771 COTTAGE RESERVE RD NE SOLON, IA 52333 1010312010 KINGMUMMEY LLC 57 CHARLES DR IOWA CITY, 52245 1010312011 FFF 1 LLC 2626 NEWPORT RD NE IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010312012 FFF 1 LLC 2626 NEWPORT RD NE IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010312014 FFF 1 LLC 2626 NEWPORT RD NE IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010377012 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 E WASHINGTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240-1826 1010441001 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441002 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441003 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441004 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441005 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441006 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441008 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441009 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441010 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441011 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441012 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441013 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441014 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441015 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441016 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441017 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441018 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010441007 2900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010452001 CC-1 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010376001 CITIZEN BLDG LTD PRTNRSHP PO BOX 1226 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-1226 1010397002 JODI CONNOLLY SALON INC 201 E WASHINGTON ST #101 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397003 BE2 TECHNOLOGIES LLC 308 E BURLINGTON ST #422 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397004 BE2 TECHNOLOGIES LLC 308 E BURLINGTON ST #422 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397005 BE2 TECHNOLOGIES LLC 308 E BURLINGTON ST #422 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397006 CENTRAL PARK LLC 221 E COLLEGE ST #1301 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397007 CENTRAL PARK LLC 221 E COLLEGE ST #1301 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397008 RYAN T BUI 34 SAMUEL DR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 1010397009 CENTRAL PARK LLC 221 E COLLEGE ST #1301 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397010 AARON A MARDIS 201 E WASHINGTON ST #602 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397011 ARTHUR & CAROL L MARDIS 201 E WASHINGTON ST #602 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397012 CENTRAL PARK LLC 221 E COLLEGE ST #1301 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397013 REBECCA EITING 201 E WASHINGTON ST #702 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397014 LANCE & KAREN DUNN 237 ROSEDALE RD CEDAR RAPIDS, IA 52403 1010397015 DAVID A & KATHRYN A GIMER 1603 HIDDEN VALLEY DR IOWA FALLS, IA 50126 1010397016 THOMAS J TESAR & JESSICA S TES 201 E WASHINGTON ST #802 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397017 DAVIS, MAGDA MONTIEL 201 E WASHINGTON ST UNIT 803 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397018 SOPHIA K CHIU APT 1108 716 SYCAMORE ST CINCINNATI, OH 45202 1010397019 JOHN DAVID SHALLMAN & LANI M B 201 E WASHINGTON ST #902 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397020 BE2 TECHNOLOGIES LLC 308 E BURLINGTON ST #422 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397021 KUNATUM PRASIDTHRATHSINT 201 E WASHINGTON ST #1001 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397022 RAD PROPERTIES LLC SUITE 217-31024165 IH10 SAN ANTONIO, TX 78257 1010397023 RAD PROPERTIES LLC SUITE 217-31024165 IH10 SAN ANTONIO, TX 78257 1010397024 ETRE FAMILY PROPERTIES LLC 711 18TH AVE CORALVILLE, IA 52241 1010397025 ETRE FAMILY PROPERTIES LLC 711 18TH AVE CORALVILLE, IA 52241 1010397026 MCELREE REVOCABLE TRUST 201 E WASHINGTON ST #1103 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397027 JOHN J O'CONNOR 16 AUBURN EAST LN CORALVILLE, IA 52241 1010397028 ALLEN A SEITZ 201 E WASHINGTON ST #1202 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397029 ALLEN A SEITZ 201 E WASHINGTON ST #1202 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397030 EMAD M HASAN 201 E WASHINGTON ST #1301 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010397031 CENTRAL PARK LLC 221 E COLLEGE ST #1301 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010314008 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314015 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314025 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314001 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314002 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314003 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314004 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314005 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314006 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314007 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314009 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314010 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314012 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314013 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314014 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314016 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314017 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314018 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314019 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314020 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314021 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314022 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314023 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314024 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010314011 1900 LLC PO BOX 3049 IOWA CITY, IA 52244-3049 1010315001 SANJAY & JIGNA JANI 208 ROCKY SHORE DR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 1010315002 SANJAY & JIGNA JANI 208 ROCKY SHORE DR IOWA CITY, IA 52245 1010315003 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315004 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315005 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315006 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315007 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315008 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315009 MOEN GROUP 221 E COLLEGE ST #1301 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315010 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315011 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315012 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315013 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315014 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315015 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315016 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315017 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315018 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315019 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315020 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315021 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315022 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315023 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315024 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315025 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010315026 MARC B MOEN 221 E COLLEGE ST #300 IOWA CITY, IA 52240 1010312021 NET LEASE FUNDING 2005 LLP FLOOR 9 2325 E CAMELBACK RD PHOENIX, AZ 85016 1010312023 MONARK LLC 221 E BURLINGTON ST IOWA CITY, IA 52240 August 11, 2021 Board of Adjustment Meeting EXC21-0009 ATTACHMENT 4 Special Exception Application Submitted by the Applicant Project Description: Special Exception to seek a parking reduction for other unique circumstances per code 14-5A- 4F-6. CIVIL  STRUCTURAL  MECHANICAL  ELECTRICAL  SURVEY  SPECIALTY 60 East Court Street #3, Iowa City, IA 52240 | 319.519.6220 www.axiom-con.com 21 S. LINN STREET Special Exception – Parking Reduction GENERAL CRITERIA (14-4B-3A): 1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. The request for a reduction of the amount of on-site parking provided will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare of community. The reduced parking on-site will reduce the amount of vehicular traffic that would otherwise be present around the site. The reduction will also encourage alternate forms of mobility including walking, biking, and use of existing public transportation services. 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. The request for reduced parking will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not diminish or impair property values. The surrounding properties are commercial buildings or mixed-use buildings. There are no single-family properties in the vicinity of the project. 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 request for a parking reduction will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement on the surrounding properties. The project is redeveloping an existing parking lot into a quality housing in the urban core of Iowa City. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. The infrastructure for this project already exists. The existing street and sidewalk network can support this proposed development. The city-owned utilities are adequately sized to service this building. The public transit system will potentially benefit from increases in ridership and demand from the residents of this building. 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. The proposed project will eliminate multiple driveways along the west side of S. Linn Street and a driveway on the north side of Washington Street. This will provide for a safer and more enjoyable pedestrian experience in this area. The access to the underground parking for the project will be from the existing public alley on the north side of the property. P a g e | 2 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. Other than the request for the parking reduction, the project conforms with all other regulations and standards of the CB-10 zone. 7. The proposed exception will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as amended. Yes, the proposed exception for parking reduction is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the city, as amended. 21 S Linn Street, Iowa City Legal Description Parcel 1 Lot 1, in Block 66, Iowa City, Johnson, Iowa Parcel 2 The East 26 feet and eight and one-half inches of Lot 2, in Block 66, Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa except the South 30.42 feet of the West 2.87 thereof. Parcel 3 The East 0.67 feet of the North 25.92 feet of the South 30.42 feet of the West 2.87 feet of the East 26 feet and eight and one-half inches of Lot 2, in Block 66, Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa August 11, 2021 Board of Adjustment Meeting PRELIMINARY MEETING MINUTES ITEM 4 ON THE AGENDA July 14, 2021 Prepared by Staff MINUTES PRELIMINARY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAL MEETING JULY 14, 2021 – 5:15 PM MEMBERS PRESENT: Nancy Carlson, Bryce Parker, Amy Pretorius, Mark Russo MEMBERS ABSENT: Gene Chrischilles STAFF PRESENT: Sue Dulek, Kirk Lehmann OTHERS PRESENT: Matt Knepper, Parker Dobberstein, Tracy Barkalow, Natalie Oppedal, Eric Hendrickson, David Gimer, Connie Smith CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM. ROLL CALL: A brief opening statement was read by Pretorius outlining the role and purpose of the Board and the procedures that would be followed in the meeting. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC21-0006: An application submitted by Iowa City Ready Mix, Inc. requesting a special exception to enlarge an existing heavy manufacturing use in a General Industrial (I-1) zone to construct an addition at 1854 S. Riverside Drive. Pretorius opened the public hearing. Lehmann began the staff report showing the site plan for the concrete plant, it is on the west side of the river, south of the highway along old 218, it's on South Riverside Drive which acts as the frontage road to the west. The area is currently zoned General Industrial (I-1) and for surrounding zones, to the west it’s P-1 public zone, to the south it's other I-1 zones, and then to the northeast, it is CI-1 which is intensive commercial which does have a mix of intensive commercial uses and some public uses. Regarding background, Lehmann noted the applicant is the owner of the concrete Electronic Meeting (Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8) An electronic meeting is being held because a meeting in person is impossible or impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission members, staff and the public presented by COVID-19. Board of Adjustment July 14, 2021 Page 2 of 17 manufacturing business at 1854 South Riverside Drive, which is considered a heavy manufacturing use and is only allowed by special exception in the I-1 zone. Lehmann stated this use has been here since 1963 and it became a conforming use in 2005 when it got a special exception to build additional buildings. The site currently contains three buildings, the primary building, which is where the addition is proposed but it also has offices, and then there are two other frame buildings. The proposed addition is primarily on the north side of the primary building and there's also a two-foot expansion on the east wall as well. The addition will be a little taller than what's there currently as it will enclose some equipment on the site. Lehmann showed some pictures of the current site and then the site plan The role of the Board tonight is to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application based on the facts presented. To approve the special exception the Board must find that it meets all applicable approval criteria, which includes both general and specific criteria. Lehmann stated the specific standards for this special exception is at 14-4B-4C-4 which pertains to heavy manufacturing uses in CI-1 and I-1 zones. The first criterion is that it has to be located at least 500 feet from any residential zoned property. Lehmann confirmed there are no residential zones within 500 feet, the nearest one is probably around 1000 feet away from the subject property, so it means that standard. The second criterion is that all proposed outdoor storage and work areas must be located and screened to adequately reduce noise, dust and visual impact on surrounding properties. Lehmann explained in this case the proposed edition will reduce noise and dust because manufacturing equipment which is not currently enclosed will be replaced and enclosed in the building envelope. Additionally, other buildings on property won't be impacted and with the addition comes some updates to the facade which will have a positive visual impact. The third criterion is that traffic circulation and access points must be designed to prevent hazards to adjacent streets or property. Lehmann stated the property is primarily accessed from three curb cuts on South Riverside Drive which, as previously mentioned, is a frontage road for Old Highway 218, and most of the site around the primary building is paved and that's where there is access and circulation through and around the site and it's where they provide some parking for their equipment as well. This addition is relatively small and will retain adequate space for circulation to the north and east. Additionally, the equipment replacement is not expected to significantly increase the daily truck traffic, so staff finds that this criterion is met. Lehmann next moved onto the general standards for all special exception at 14-4B-3. The first is that the specific proposal exceptional will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Staff finds that the addition will enclose new manufacturing equipment within the building and the equipment is expected to decrease load times into mixers and increase on-site storage capacity, which should decrease reliance on other shipping tankers or dump trucks and so as a result it's not anticipated that daily truck traffic will increase as a result of the addition. Also, surrounding roads don't have sidewalks or bike trails so pedestrian interaction is minimal and not as much of a concern. Lehmann did note however the property is in the hundred-year flood plain and a floodplain permit will be required to document that the addition will not be in the floodplain. Lehmann showed that hundred-year floodplain is mostly along the north and east property line, and the primary building in the center of the site and the addition doesn’t appear to expand into the hundred-year floodplain. Board of Adjustment July 14, 2021 Page 3 of 17 The second criterion is that specific proposal 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. Lehmann reiterated the property to the west in the public zone is the Iowa City Airport and the addition is in the transitional zone of the airport which restricts maximum building height to 75 feet. The addition is significantly below that so it won't impair the use of the airport and the FAA has already accepted the proposed addition. As for other nearby properties, they are zoned I-1 and contain industrial or light industrial uses and none of the owners have raised concerns over the proposed addition, although some may be here for the public meeting tonight to speak. To the north and east are trees to screen the use from public trails which are across the river. Again, this project will improve the building’s appearance, so staff finds that it won't negatively impact surrounding properties or their values. The third criterion is that the establishment of proposed exception will not impede the normal and ordinary development and improvement of the surrounding property for use as permitted in the district. Staff finds that the addition is relatively small, and the building will be more than 100 feet from adjacent properties to the west and south and more than 50 feet from public property to the north. Also, the surrounding neighborhood is already developed with industrial and public uses so staff doesn't believe the addition will affect their future development or improvement. Fourth is that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Lehmann explained the site currently has adequate access to utilities. If improvements to utilities are required, they must be approved by the appropriate entity prior to construction and the applicant noted that they've been in communication with those entities. As far as other facilities such as roads, drives and stormwater management, staff is not expecting it to be significantly impacted by the proposed addition. Compliance with the City's building code and other requirements will be reviewed during site plan and building permit review. The fifth criterion is that adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. Lehmann noted the property is accessed from South Riverside Drive and that road dead ends north of the property, so traffic is primarily limited to vehicles accessing the property. As far as circulation around the building, adequate space is retained with the addition, and the addition not expected to significantly increase traffic. The sixth criterion is that except for the specific regulations and standards of applicable being considered, this specific proposed exception will conform with all other regulations. Staff looked at a couple different things here that Lehmann wanted to point out to the Board. First is the addition will be about 50 feet tall, which is slightly higher than the maximum base building height allowed in I-1 zones, however, for every additional two feet of setback the building may have an additional foot of height. The current building setback provides approximately eight additional feet of height, so the addition complies with the maximum building height with that taken into consideration. With regards to parking, the onsite buildings total about 20,800 square feet and heavy manufacturing uses require one parking space per 750 square feet of floor area and two loading spaces for uses that have between 20,000 and 40,000 square feet, so the two loading spaces are already triggered by the existing buildings, but the additional 600 square feet of the proposed addition will require additional parking space. Another issue that comes into play is the sensitive areas ordinance which requires a 50 foot buffer between the river and development activity. Based on staff’s evaluation, the addition is outside of that area and staff will ensure that the site design conforms with all applicable zoning standards and regulations, Board of Adjustment July 14, 2021 Page 4 of 17 including those related to the parking and the sensitive areas, during site plan review. Lehmann noted again the property is in the 100-year floodplain, but the proposed addition appears to be outside of the floodplain but that will need to be confirmed with the floodplain permits and that will be another review process. The final criterion is that the proposed exception will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Lehmann noted as far as future land use designations on the Comprehensive Plan, it shows this area as general industrial and the South Central District Plan shows it as industrial manufacturing uses. Lehmann added the Comprehensive Plan includes a goal to increase the property tax base by encouraging the retention and expansion of existing businesses. Based on this review staff recommends approval EXC21-0006 to allow an enlargement to an existing heavy manufacturing use in a General Industrial (I-1) zone to construct an addition at 1854 S. Riverside Drive. Lehmann also noted staff has not received any written public comments to date. Matt Knepper (Iowa City Ready Mix) stated they basically need to replace equipment inside their plant and that is the purpose of this. He noted they would rather spend the money to get exactly what they want, they have the room to make something that's going to load their mixers a bit faster. Having more length on the side of the building will allow a bigger piece of equipment to replace the one that's in here. Additionally, they also want to make it so it's similar to other plants and actually enclose the entire plant and the silos and right now they've got silos that are sticking up through the roof which makes it not look as nice. With this addition, the tower that's going to be right in the center of the building will cut into the east side of the building area by probably two feet and where they will do the work they will tie in to make it look good on the backside of the building. He also noted they have equipment that's been around since 1963 and it's getting difficult find parts to replace things so they need to replace what they have in there and to increase capacity so they don't have to rely on tankers and trucks on a daily basis. Therefore, it'll actually cut back on the amount of tankers that come in throughout the day because they'll be able to hold more. Knepper confirmed they’ve already got the approval from the airport and have the floodplain permits approved. Pretorius noted no questions for the applicant, nor have any other members of the public chosen to speak so unless the Board needs more clarity on anything she will go ahead and close the public hearing. Pretorius closed the public hearing. Pretorius asked for a motion so the Board could open discussion. Carlson moved for approval EXC21-0006, an application to allow an enlargement to an existing heavy manufacturing use in a General Industrial (I-1) zone to construct an addition at 1854 S. Riverside Drive. Parker seconded the motion. Carlson stated regarding agenda item EXC21-0006 she concurs with the findings set forth in the Board of Adjustment July 14, 2021 Page 5 of 17 staff report of this meeting date, July 14, 2021 and concludes that the general and specific criteria are satisfied, so unless amended or opposed by another board member she recommends the Board adopt the findings in the staff report for the approval of this proposal. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-0. Pretorius stated the motion is declared approved, any person who wishes to appeal this decision to a court of record may do so within 30 days after this decision is filed with the City Clerk’s Office. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC21-0007: An application submitted by Shive-Hattery on behalf of Regina Catholic Education Center requesting a special exception to enlarge an existing general education facility use in a Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) zone to construct an addition at 2150 Rochester Avenue. Pretorius opened the public hearing. Lehmann stated this special exception is similar to the last one in that it is enlarging an existing use but in this case it's a general educational facility in a low density residential single-family zone at 2150 Rochester Avenue. Lehmann noted the location map was included in the agenda packet and shows the entire site. He noted showed the map, the school building is in the center of the site which is located north of Rochester Avenue and west of North First Avenue. The area is zoned RS-5, to the north it is zoned PI-1, public, to the east is RM-12, low density multifamily and then to the west and south is some additional RS-5 and then also to the south is some CN- 1 which is neighborhood commercial. The applicant is designing an addition for Regina Catholic Education Center and the property is pretty large, and the addition is relatively small. Lehmann noted a general educational facility in an RS-5 zone is only allowed by special exception and in this case, Regina has expanded many times and received several special exceptions in the past. The current application would allow an addition that is approximately 1850 square feet, it's actually two editions, one is in the south center part of the building and one is on an interior courtyard. Again, these are relatively small compared to that the building. Lehmann showed how they compare with the existing area noting the entrance that is in the south central part of the site, and this exception would expand that into a courtyard to the northwest and it would expand it in into open area to the southeast and then again to the north there's that that small expansion in the interior courtyard as well. The addition would cover up some of the green space in the interior courtyard and in front of the building itself. He showed pictures of the site and noted the existing part that would be replaced, and the green space in front of that, and the tree behind is in one of the interior courtyards. He showed a close up of that part that's going to be replaced and noted the site plan also show some reconfiguration of the sidewalks, including an ADA ramp. The role of the Board of Adjustment tonight is to approve, approve with conditions or deny the application based on the facts presented. To approve the Board will need to find that it meets all applicable criteria, which includes specific standards for the waiver requested and general Board of Adjustment July 14, 2021 Page 6 of 17 standards for all special exceptions. In this case the special standards are for general educational facilities in RS-5 zones and at 14- 4B-4D-11. The first standard is that the following setbacks are required in lieu of setbacks specified in the base zone, which are 20 feet for the front and side and 50 feet for the rear. In this case, the proposed additions are in the central, south side building and will comply with all enhanced setback requirements. The second specific criterion is that it must be designed to be compatible with adjacent uses. Lehmann stated Regina has been here since 1958 and multiple additions have been approved over the years. For this exception they are looking at the additions which are small compared to the scale of the total buildings on site, which are approximately 165,000 square feet, and the proposed addition is 1850 square feet. Also, the additions are not expected to increase occupancy due to the uses of both the proposed and the existing uses in that space. The site plan shows that the existing area has an occupancy of 303 and that after reconfiguration it will decrease to 277. Occupancy will be calculated during the building permit review, but staff is not expecting occupancy to increase as a result of this so based on those findings staff finds the proposed use will retain compatibility with adjacent uses. Third, any requests for parking beyond the minimum are carefully scrutinized by the Board. In this case Regina has two parking lots, one along Rochester Avenue that has about 103 spaces and one to the north which has about 170 spaces, so it's about 300 spaces total. The proposed additions do not affect parking or increase it in any way and the required minimum parking for the use is currently about 226 spaces. With the proposed addition being small, Regina will be able to maintain adequate parking on the site to accommodate any new added space. Fourth is the proposed use will not have significant adverse effects on the livability of nearby residential uses due to noise, glare from lights, late night operations, odors, and litter. Staff finds the proposed additions are small compared to the overall scale of the building and are not expected to increase occupancy. Also, the proposed additions are about 450 feet from any neighboring residential uses and will not have significant adverse effects on livability. The fifth criterion is that the building official can approve it without a special exception if it is less than 500 square feet, otherwise, it must be approved by the Board. In this case the proposed addition is 1850 square feet which is why the application is before the Board tonight. The final specific criterion is that if it is in a residential zone or central planning district, which it is, it must comply with the multifamily site developed standards which are at 14-2B-6 of this title. Lehmann explained many of the multifamily site development standards don't apply to an institutional use in a RS zone, things like parking design, building entrances, balconies, and exterior stairs. In this case, the addition does have to comply with some standards related to aisles and drives, building scale, building materials, mechanical equipment and some other standards that staff reviews during the site plan review. When looking at this application staff noticed that there might need to be some minor site plan changes to address the minimum required setbacks between the internal drive aisle and the proposed addition. Lehmann explained this could be addressed through minor modification and those issues can be worked out at site plan review so staff doesn't believe that is a concern and that this criteria is met. Board of Adjustment July 14, 2021 Page 7 of 17 The general standards are at 14-4B-3 and relate to all special exception applications. The first is that it can't be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Staff finds that the additions are specifically designed to improve the safety and general welfare of the pre-kindergarten program by providing a more secure entrance, that's one of the purposes of the addition, and staff will ensure that other applicable life and safety standards are met through the building permit process. Lehmann noted there's also a part of the project that will create a new ADA accessible ramp where there is currently not one so that will also improve accessibility of the site and based on these findings, staff believes that this criteria is met. The second is that the exception will not injure the use or enjoyment of property in the immediate vicinity or impair property values negatively. As Lehmann previously noted the proposed addition is small and not expected to increase occupancy. Additionally it's about 450 feet away from the closest property and it's also pretty far back on the site itself, so it won't negatively impact of the public view. Staff believes it won't have any negative impact. The third criterion is that it won't affect normal and ordinary development and improvement of surrounding property for uses in the district. Lehmann noted generally the surrounding neighborhood is fully developed with mixed residential, commercial and open space uses. The open spaces are expected to remain open space. Also, the additions are set back far enough from the property line and will not affect development or improvement of surrounding properties. Fourth is regarding adequate access to utilities, access roads, drainage and/or other facilities. As previously noted, the property is already developed and includes utilities, access roads, drainage and other facilities and it's also developed for the surrounding neighborhood. The project includes the replacement of some existing sanitary sewer line and improvements to the stormwater management systems. All other standards and regulations will be met through the site plan review and building permit processes. The fifth criterion is that adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. Lehmann stated access to the site is provided from a one-way inbound and outbound drive on Rochester and then there's a two-way drive on North First Avenue. Internal circulation is along internal drives which provides access to the buildings and the parking. Pedestrian access to the building is slightly modified as a result as they are going to install an ADA accessible ramp which will improve overall accessibility, but otherwise changes aren't going to be made to the parking or to the existing driveways. Sixth, the special exception must conform with all other regulations or standards of the zone in which it is located. Lehmann noted looking at the site standards, the additions will not cause the property to exceed the maximum lot coverage or the maximum height, the additions are only one story. Again, setback requirements are met by the proposed additions and the multifamily site development standards can be too. Staff will ensure that applicable standards and regulations are met through the site plan review and building permit processes. Finally, the proposed exception must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Lehmann noted the Future Land Use map of the Comprehensive Plan shows this site for public or semi-public use and the Central District Plan shows it as private institutional. There is also a vision for the Comprehensive Plan which states that neighborhood schools, particularly elementary schools, are an integral part of a healthy sustainable neighborhood, schools serve Board of Adjustment July 14, 2021 Page 8 of 17 not only a center of education, but as a focal point for community gathering and neighborhood identity. The addition also won't change the land use of the property and otherwise it is consistent with the Plans so staff believes this criterion is met. Based on these findings staff recommends approval of EXC21-0007, to allow an 1,850 square foot addition to a General Educational Facility use within a Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) zone for the property located at 2150 Rochester Avenue. Lehmann noted staff received a public comment, but it wasn't so much regarding this special exception, it was more concerning the public notice that they received, but it did not include any concerns about the special exception. Natalie Oppeda (Shive Hattery) is representing Regina and wanted to say that this addition allows Regina to bring all of their pre-K classrooms into a localized area of the building. Right now, they're spread out and having them together increases the security for that pre-K program, especially as people are visiting halfway through the day and things like that. Pretorius noted no questions for the applicant and no other members of the public chose to speak so unless the Board needs more clarity on anything she will go ahead and close the public hearing. Pretorius closed the public hearing. Pretorius asked for a motion so the Board could open discussion. Russo moved for approval EXC21-0007, an application to allow an 1,850 square foot addition to a General Educational Facility use within a Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) zone for the property located at 2150 Rochester Avenue. Carlson seconded the motion. Parker stated regarding agenda item EXC21-0007 he concurs with the findings set forth in the staff report of this meeting date, July 14, 2021 and concludes that the general and specific criteria are satisfied, so 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. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-0. Pretorius stated the motion declared approved, any person who wishes to appeal this decision to a court of record may do so within 30 days after this decision is filed with the City Clerk’s Office. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC21-0008: An application submitted by Neumann Monson Architects requesting a special exception to allow a Rooftop Service Area for a nonconforming drinking establishment in a Central Business (CB-10) zone at 111 E. College Street. Board of Adjustment July 14, 2021 Page 9 of 17 Pretorius opened the public hearing. Lehmann noted the applicant is requesting a special exception for rooftop service area (RSA) which will be for non-conforming drinking establishment in the CB-10 zone. The subject property is on the Ped Mall with an alley to the south, it’s east of South Clinton Street. It is currently zone CB-10 with a historic district overlay and is part of the Tailwinds project. It is surrounded on the east and west by other buildings that are also the Central Business District, with the historic district overlay and then to the north is additional CB-10 zoning and the same to the south and it's surrounded by a mix of different uses. As Lehmann noted it is part of the Tailwinds project which includes both the renovation of existing historic structures along the south side of ped mall, including the rehabilitation of this commercial space. It also includes an 11-story multifamily building to the south of the existing structures, and that was a special exception that this Board had approved a parking reduction for. The proposed drinking establishment that would be here, the proposed Reunion Brewery, is a non-conforming drinking establishment use which meets special criteria that Council had adopted on May 27 with the goal to promote historic preservation and maintain the economic vitality of downtown. The staff report goes in more detail but Lehmann noted basically it explains how the use is allowed here, and what the applicant is proposing is to construct a terrace on the rooftop on the south side of 111 College Street which would provide approximately 1430 square feet of open air seating. Lehmann showed images of the area and where the RSA would be which what they're doing is lifting off the top of the roof for part of the area to create open air seating but will retain the walls around it. He added this was a part of the project that was reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission. The role of the Board tonight is to review and approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application based on the facts presented. To approve it has to meet both specific standards that pertain to the waiver requested and the general standards for all special exceptions. In this case the specific standards can be found at 14-4C-2AA-1 which are the approval criteria for rooftop service areas. The first criterion is related to accessibility and it has to meet building and fire codes and be ADA compliant with elevator service and accessible restrooms. Lehmann stated the proposed RSA will be fully accessible with an elevator at the north end of the building providing access and there will be accessible restrooms on the same floor. As far as other building and fire codes, that will be reviewed during the building permit review. The second set of criteria contains a couple subcriteria related to design and it is trying to ensure that it's designed in an attractive manner that will not detract from adjacent uses and will prevent nuisance and safety issues. Lehmann wanted to remind the Board they can require more restrictions than staff recommends by the virtue of the special exception itself. The first design criteria is that it must be directly adjacent to or above the use to which it is accessory and there cannot be other uses on the floor in between the RSA and the use to which is accessory. The site plan illustrates the proposed dimensions, setbacks, occupancy, landscaping, accessibility and other required. Staff does recommend that compliance with the submitted site plan be a condition of approval. Otherwise, the proposed RSA is directly adjacent to and above the drinking establishment to which it is accessory and the only use in the building is the proposed Reunion Brewery so staff believes it meets this standard. Board of Adjustment July 14, 2021 Page 10 of 17 Second, it has to be set back from adjacent upper floor uses and the edge of the roof be screened and completely enclosed in a decorated fence or wall built with high quality durable materials. Lehmann stated the RSA will be screened by the existing exterior walls of the historic building which are 16 feet tall. For other screening and setbacks, to the north there is an interior dining area that will separate the RSA from the ped mall, to the west there's interior space that will separate it from uses, and to the east it will be separated by that existing wall and then to the south there will be that exterior wall which will retain its windows. Additionally, the RSA will be set back six feet from that south facade and the site plan indicates it will include vegetative roof components within that setback area which will provide some additional buffering. The screening will not negatively impact light, air outdoor views from abutting buildings. Third, it has to be set back 10 feet from the street facing edge of the roof. The design proposes a buffering screen that was submitted with the application and it was included in the agenda packets. As far as the street facing façade, in this case that is the ped mall which is technically East College Street, and the RSA is set back 24 feet from the street. Again, the exterior walls have a six-foot setback and will help prevent noise nuisance issues. Another way to prevent nuisance issues is that there will be a minimum of five staff persons at this level, who will ensure safety, address nuisances, and prevent underage drinking. Based on these things and a staff recommendation that compliance with the submitted management plan be a condition of approval, staff believes that the standard is met. The fourth design criteria is that lighting must comply with the outdoor lighting standards and that a lighting plan be submitted that illustrates compliance. The applicant submitted a lighting plan which indicates that canopy lights will be the primary exterior light source, it's expected to have a total outdoor light output of 6500 lumens which is well below the maximum allowed by Code. The management plan also notes that those lights will be turned off when the RSA is not in use, and there are some time limits associated with the RSA just by the virtue of the RSA and the use that is there. In addition, to fully ensure compliance staff recommends approval of a lighting site plan be required prior to issuance of a building permit. The final design criteria is that no signs will be allowed in or on the exterior wall or fence of the RSA within public view. Lehmann stated for the proposed use, there is a logo-based mural planned for the interior portion of the east wall within the RSA but it won't be visible from any public street, sidewalk, access easement, park or other open space, so this criterion is met. Lehmann stated the next set of criteria are related to management. For RSAs there must be a management plan and at least one employee must be designated to monitor safety and compliance on the RSA during hours of operation. He noted the proposed use will serve alcohol so it is considered an Outdoor Service Area (OSA) which brings some additional standards to play that are incorporated into management plan. As far as staff on the roof, the management plan notes that there will be a minimum of five staff persons, and they will ensure compliance during hours of operation if nuisance or safety issues arise. Lehmann stated the management plan may be modified and he will also talk about temporary use permits later related to amplified sound, but those can also be suspended or revoked. So based on these findings and staff’s recommended conditions, which is substantial compliance the management plan, staff believes that this criteria is met. The second management criterion is that in the CB-10 zone where the building containing the Board of Adjustment July 14, 2021 Page 11 of 17 RSA abuts or is directly across a public alley from a property containing upper floor residential uses or hotel rooms that have windows facing the RSA, hours of operation must be limited. In this case the RSA doesn't abut nor is it directly across a public alley from a property containing upper floors residential uses or hotel rooms. Lehmann noted however there will be upper floor residential windows facing the proposed RSA in the new 11-story building, but it is under the same ownership and there is the existing wall that will be maintained which will help mitigate noise and light conflicts for windows facing that RSA. Additionally, the exterior light fixtures will face downwards so staff finds that this standard is met. The next specific criterion is related to food service, so if alcohol is being served food service must be provided, and they must submit evidence of the how this will be met. The management plan includes details of a fully functional kitchen and that substantial food service will be provided during all hours of operation. Lehmann reiterated compliance with that management plan is recommended as a condition of approval. Regarding noise, the design of the RSA must minimize the carry of noise across property boundaries and staff or the Board may require different screening materials. Evidence of a noise mitigation plan must be included and there's an opportunity to provide additional measures if there are issues. The management plan contains some provisions to help manage noise on the RSA and the existing walls will minimize the carry of noise across property lines. With regards to amplified sound, the applicant has said they will provide amplified sound at this time but if they do, they will apply for a separate temporary use permit. It would be a seasonal permit to be reviewed annually. Lehmann noted the amplified sound has its own specific criteria as well, it is only allowed with certain uses, subject to some limitations, which is why this RSA in a CB-10 zone requires a seasonal temporary use permit. It's also limited to background noise at a low volume and it has to be more than 100 feet from other service areas or be inaudible to those other areas, and then there's also a requirement for a sound mitigation plan as part of that temporary use permit process. The permit may be denied or rescinded if noise becomes a nuisance, or if the terms of the temporary use permit or the special exception, are violated. Lehmann reiterated the applicant is not proposing amplified sound at this time but based on these findings staff believes that that this criterion is currently met. Lehmann also noted there are also some subcriteria regarding amplified sound, if it's located within 300 feet of a residential zone is prohibited, but that's not applicable; second the City may restrict the hours when amplified sound may be used, but in no case will it be permitted between the hours of 12 o'clock midnight and 10 o'clock am and the management plan notes that; and third they're not allowed to have live entertainment using amplification which the management plan notes and it may be restricted or prohibited during public events, festivals or concerts which is noted in the management plan as well and that the operator will comply with other requests to restrict or prohibit sound use, which includes requests by the City, and then that the applicant must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that the design of the RSA will minimize noise across property boundaries. Lehmann stated there are also specific standards related to additional criteria for non- conforming drinking establishments, which this is. First, it must be located directly above and contiguous to the licensed drinking establishment. The RSA is directly above and contiguous to the licensed drinking establishment and the Reunion Brewery is the only use in this building. Board of Adjustment July 14, 2021 Page 12 of 17 Second, there can't be a horizontal expansion of that drinking establishment. Because the RSA is completely located above it there is not a horizontal expansion through the RSA. Finally, there cannot be an increase in interior floor area or interior occupant load of the existing drinking establishment, except if necessary for certain specific criteria. Lehmann stated the applicant will not increase interior floor nor will it increase the occupant load but staff does recommend a condition that no solid roof be allowed to be constructed over any portion of the RSA in the future to ensure that there is not a future increase in interior floor area. Lehmann next discussed the seven general criteria at 14-4B-3. The first is that the proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. He noted that access to the property and surrounding properties won't change because of the proposed RSA. Any heat sources must meet all applicable fire and safety regulations in the building permit process and also it must be ADA compliant. To promote safety the management plan notes that customers must present ID before entering the RSA and under age patrons will not be allowed without supervision after 10pm and that matches existing City ordinances and as additional protection, starting at 9pm customers must also present an ID at the first level entrance. To prevent people from accessing other rooftop areas the RSA will be actively managed with at least five staff, based on the management plan, and they'll ensure compliance, so staff believes this criterion is fully met. Second, it cannot injure the use or enjoyment of property in the immediate vicinity or impair property values. Lehmann reiterated the RSA is screened on all sides and there's a stepback to the south, and those will help prevent nuisance and safety issues on surrounding properties. There’s also the interior building space which screens it to the north and west. As far as lighting goes, it will all face downward and comply with outdoor lighting standards and noise will be controlled, as discussed previously. In addition, the renovation will help ensure the continued economic viability of this space where parts of it have been vacant for a while now. Therefore, as a result it is seen as having a positive impact on surrounding properties, so staff believes that this criterion is met. The third criterion is it will not impede normal and orderly developments for surrounding uses. This property is in the Downtown District and zoned CB-10 with the Historic District Overlay which allows quite a few different uses including the RSA to create more diversity in activities. There is already a mix of uses around it and the ones immediately to the east and west are part of this redevelopment project, to the south the RSA will be about 20 feet from that building and it's more than that to buildings to the north so with appropriate controls on amplified sound and other noise issues staff believes the proposed use is compatible surrounding developments and won't affect redevelopment in the future, and it should be an attractive addition to downtown. With regards to access facilities and utilities, the site already has existing services, and the details of those will be reviewed during building permit process. For the RSA it's not expected to impact anything as those are more tied to the broader redevelopment project, but for the existing RSA it's not as applicable. Regarding ingress or egress, access to the building is primarily expected to be through the ped mall, there is a private alley just to the south but otherwise no changes are being proposed that will affect traffic congestion on public streets, so this is also less applicable that other standards. Board of Adjustment July 14, 2021 Page 13 of 17 Criterion six states it must meet other regulations for the zone. As noted, an approved lighting plan for the proposal is recommended as a condition of approval to ensure compliance with the City’s outdoor lighting standards. The RSA will serve alcohol and will have to comply with the outdoor service area standards that has its own process of staff review and it will also have to receive a liquor license through the City, which has its own process. Finally, if there's amplified sound that also has an additional process through the temporary use permit process, so based on all these reviews and staff’s current review they believe this criteria is met. Finally, the special exception must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Lehmann stated the Future Land Use Map shows this area for general commercial and includes a vision for continued investment downtown to ensure it’s a place as the center of arts, culture, entertainment, commercial, and civic activity. The Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plans talk about this as the heart of the region with historic buildings next to new buildings, streets that are active throughout the day and into the night, with some objectives about quality infill and maintaining a balance of uses and activities. One of the reasons the outdoor service area or the RSA standards were created was to help promote different activities that could be available, so based on these findings staff believes this criteria is met. Based on these findings, staff recommends approval of EXC21-0008, to allow a Rooftop Service Area (RSA) as an accessory use to a nonconforming drinking establishment in a CB-10 zone for the property located at 111 E. College Street, subject to the following conditions: 1. Substantial compliance with the submitted site plan, dated March 1, 2020. 2. Compliance with the submitted management plan, dated July 9, 2021. 3. No solid roof shall be constructed over any portion of the Rooftop Service Area. 4. A lighting plan in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance shall be approved by the Building Official prior to issuance of a building permit. Russo asked if there is an estimate how many people or the capacity of the RSA. Lehmann stated the capacity is 97. Carlson asked if that's based on square footage. Lehmann said yes, it's based on square footage but it can't increase the occupancy of the overall building and that's one of the special exception criteria, it just gets basically subtracted out from the rest of the building. Final occupancy would be determined at building permit issuance. Parker asked how many levels of the facade are there, he thought it was three levels. Lehmann noted it is a two-story building. Russo added the second story is occupied partially by an enclosed dining area and the remainder is this open area. Russo asked if there is no back wall on the RSA, it won’t be closed. Lehmann said it will be enclosed in that they are keeping what is essentially the existing historic facade and they will tear the roof off half of it so that historic wall on the back will be between the building and the property line. Russo asked if it is an 8- or 10-foot wall. Lehmann stated it is a 16-foot wall but there will be windows in it as well. Russo noted he is just trying to imagine what will occur up there on a game day. It seems that's sort of what it's set up for and he is wondering how TV’s come into play with amplified sound. Lehmann stated he believes TVs are counted as part of amplified sound so if that’s the case, Board of Adjustment July 14, 2021 Page 14 of 17 they would need a temporary use permit to have TVs on in the space. Russo asked about the five staff members, he assumes at least three of them are wait staff and having 97 plus people there it could get crazy, so is that five staff members all crowd control or are they just staff such as bus people or waiters/waitresses. Lehmann said in the management plan it is detailed as a minimum of one manager, one doorman, one bartender and two servers. He noted that is the minimum but he would assume if they require more they would put more up there and if they do have issues with some of these things they're going to have to deal with those issues or otherwise there can be steps taken against that use. Carlson asked if there are only 10 patrons up there would they still have to have five management people there. Lehmann replied yes because that is what is in the management plan, there has to be a minimum of five. Russo asked if they would be sharing those five with the indoor dining area as well so potentially if 97 people is to capacity for the outdoor area what's the capacity for the indoor area. Lehmann is unsure but assumes the applicant would be able to answer that one. Parker Dobberstein (Neumann Monson Architects) stated the overall occupancy load is about 450 and would include the 97 on the patio. Carlson asked what is the capacity of private dining area that faces above the Ped Mall and Dobberstein replied that capacity is 49. Dobberstein stated this is a pretty exciting project and they've been fortunate to be working with the tenant on it. The tenant is well established and well known in the area, he has relationships with the neighbors and is conscientious of those relationships. With this they basically get a unique feature, a unique establishment that is a viable business for the area. Carlson asked in order to gain access to the enclosed area up on the second-floor people would be carded and whatever to get upstairs and could they move from the from the covered area to the open-air area. Dobberstein believes they would card at the front door and then anyone can move from the indoor to the outdoor areas. Lehmann said the management plans states there will be a doorman at the entrance of the rooftop who will be required to mark underage patrons with an ink stamp, and they won't be allowed after 10pm. They would also card at the door downstairs but that's not specifically addressed in the management plan until 9pm. Carson noted if they basically looked at the capacity of the covered dining area upstairs and the outdoor space upstairs there is a capacity for 142 people and they could move around from the outdoor space to the indoor space or is that indoor dining area sort of screened off most of the time. Dobberstein noted there is a wall and the plan shows an operable nanowall system so panels that fold together to create an open space. Russo noted if it becomes one continuous space he is curious how they can ensure that only 97 people get in there. Dobberstein noted it's up to the building tenant or the business owner to police it. Carlson asked if the covered dining area can have amplified sound. Lehmann replied that Board of Adjustment July 14, 2021 Page 15 of 17 indoor sound would not be considered by the RSA application. Even if it's open to the outside area it'd be similar to having a business allowing its windows to be open with amplified sound. Russo said then they could open potentially the nanowall and have live music inside but hear it on the outside area. Lehmann agreed that could happen. Russo said then someone who is a resident in the neighboring high rise might also hear the sounds. He is concerned of a neighborhood squabble over this that's all. Lehmann stated they did not consider amplified sound in the enclosed area because that's not regulated under the RSA regulation. However if there are noise or nuisance complaints it could be handled through other provisions in the City Code. Lehmann noted the only other special exception approved rooftop service area is Joe's which also came before the Board of Adjustment. Parker asked about the Hilton Garden Inn outdoor area. Lehmann said he believed they are provisionally allowed for if they're affiliated with a hospitality oriented use. Pretorius noted no questions for the applicant nor any other members of the public chose to speak so unless the Board needs more clarity on anything she will go ahead and close the public hearing. Pretorius closed the public hearing. Pretorius asked for a motion so the Board could open discussion. Russo moved for approval EXC21-0008, to allow a Rooftop Service Area (RSA) as an accessory use to a nonconforming drinking establishment in a CB-10 zone for the property located at 111 E. College Street, subject to the following conditions: 1. Substantial compliance with the submitted site plan, dated March 1, 2020. 2. Compliance with the submitted management plan, dated July 9, 2021. 3. No solid roof shall be constructed over any portion of the Rooftop Service Area. 4. A lighting plan in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance shall be approved by the Building Official prior to issuance of a building permit. Carlson seconded the motion. Parker stated regarding agenda item EXC21-0008 he does concur with the findings set forth in the staff report of this meeting date, July 14, 2021 and concludes that the general and specific criteria are satisfied, so 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. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-0. Pretorius stated the motion declared approved, any person who wishes to appeal this decision to a court of record may do so within 30 days after this decision is filed with the City Clerk’s Office. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC21-0009: Board of Adjustment July 14, 2021 Page 16 of 17 An application submitted by Axiom Consultants requesting a special exception to allow a 50 percent parking reduction for other unique circumstances to construct a new mixed-use building at 21 S. Linn Street. Pretorius opened the public hearing. Lehmann stated the applicant has requested this item be deferred until August 11. Carlson moved to leave the public hearing open and defer this item to the August 11, 2021 meeting. Parker seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-0. CONSIDER THE JUNE 30, 2020 MINUTES: Parker moved to approve the minutes of June 30, 2021. Carlson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-0. BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS: Lehmann stated that this will be the last online meeting, they will resume in person meetings starting August 11. The Board will meet in Emma Harvest Hall in the City Hall. He noted they will still be recording meetings and publishing them, as part of the new standard so it will be similar to a Council meeting. He added they are currently not allowing hybrid meetings so everyone will have to attend in person. Lehmann did note since Parker often travels they might be able to occasionally allow him to call in or do a zoom. Lehmann also wanted to mention that the City is requesting public input on how to spend American Recovery Act Funds and were hoping that Boards and Commissions could weigh in on it either as the Board or take the individual survey that's available. The survey information is available on that letter that was in the agenda packet. ADJOURNMENT: Russo moved to adjourn this meeting, Carlson seconded, a vote was taken and all approved. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ATTENDANCE RECORD 2021 NAME TERM EXP. 7/14 CHRISCHILLES, GENE 12/31/2022 O/E PARKER, BRYCE 12/31/2024 X PRETORIUS, AMY 12/31/2023 X CARLSON, NANCY 12/31/2025 X RUSSO, MARK 12/31/2021 X Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused -- -- = Not a Member