Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-08-22 Agenda Packet (Revised 8_16_2024)IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Thursday, August 22, 2024 – 5:15 PM City Hall, 410 East Washington Street Emma Harvat Hall REVISED Agenda: 1.Call to Order 2.Roll Call 3.Special Exception Item a.EXC24-0003: An application submitted by Harvest Preserve Foundation, Inc. requesting a special exception to allow a religious/private group assembly use in an Interim Development Single Family Residential (ID-RS) zone at 1645 N Scott Boulevard. (EXC24-0003) 4.Discussion of Bylaws 5.Consideration of Meeting Minutes: April 10, 2024 6.Board of Adjustment Information 7.Adjournment If you need disability-related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contact Parker Walsh, Urban Planning at 319-356-5238 or at pwalsh@iowa-city.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. Upcoming Board of Adjustment Meetings Formal: September 11 / October 9 / November 13 Informal: Scheduled as needed. August 22, 2024 Board of Adjustment Meeting EXC24-0003 ITEM 3A ON THE AGENDA Staff Report Prepared by Staff 1 STAFF REPORT To: Board of Adjustment Item: EXC24-0003 1645 N Scott. Blvd. Prepared by: Parker Walsh, Associate Planner Date: August 22, 2024 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant/Owner Contact: Julie Decker Harvest Preserve Foundation, Inc julie@harvestpreserve.org Brock Heller MMS Consultants b.heller@mmsconsultants.net Requested Action: Approval of a special exception to allow a Religious/Private Group Assembly use in an Interim Development Single Family Residential Zone Purpose: To construct a building that supports programs and Harvest Preserve Members Location: 1645 N Scott Boulevard Location Map: Size: Approximately 100 acres Existing Land Use and Zoning: Private Open Space; Interim Development Single Family Residential Surrounding Land Use and Zoning North: Interim Development Single Family Residential (ID-RS) 2 East: Interim Development Single Family Residential (ID-RS) South: Residential; Low Density Single Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) West: Residential; Low Density Single Family Residential (RS-5) Applicable Code Sections: 14-4B-3A: General Approval Criteria 14-4B-4D-17 Religious/Private Group Assembly In ID-RS, RS-5, RS-8, RS-12, And RNS-12 Zones: File Date: May 10, 2024 BACKGROUND: The applicant, Harvest Preserve Foundation, Inc., is requesting a Special Exception to allow a Religious/Private Group Assembly use at 1645 N Scott Boulevard in order to construct a building intended to support the outdoor focused programs, provide a comfortable and safe indoor space, provide an indoor location for classes and trainings, and have year round restrooms. The property is zoned Interim Development Single Family Residential and is used primarily as Private Open space for Harvest Preserve members. Attachments 1 and 2 include an aerial image and zoning exhibit of the subject property. Harvest Preserve Foundation, Inc. was established in 2005 as a non-profit corporation. According to the Harvest Preserve Foundation, Inc. website, the organization is “dedicated to restoring and maintaining native Iowa prairie and woodlands, preserving healthy aquaculture and cultivating public awareness, appreciation and participation”. The Preserve maintains approximately 100 acres of land that has been placed within a conservation easement with the Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation (Attachment 3). This easement agreement is not enforced by the City. However, the conservation easement does outline the ability to construct buildings within the designated buildable areas; the proposed building location being within a buildable area. Use of the property by the Harvest Preserve Foundation, Inc. for meeting space for members and facilities for a private nonprofit is categorized in the Zoning Code as a private group assembly use (see 14-4A-6I). Such uses typically restrict access to the general public, and own, lease, or hold property in common for the benefit of its members. Examples include religious institutions; private, nonprofit meeting halls, clubs, associations; or nonresidential fraternal organizations. A private group assembly use requires a special exception to operate in the ID-RS zone. The interim development zone is the default zoning district to which all undeveloped areas should be classified until city services are provided. Upon provision of city services, the city or the property owner may initiate rezoning to zones consistent with the comprehensive plan, as amended. The applicant conducted a Good Neighbor meeting on May 29, 2024. A Summary of the meeting is included in Attachment 3. 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 3 requested special exception if the requested action is found to be in accordance with the specific criteria included in Section 14-4B-4D-17, pertaining to Religious/Private Group Assembly uses in ID-RS zones, as well as the general approval criteria in Section 14-4B-3A. For the Board of Adjustment to grant this special exception request, 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. Specific Standards: 14-4B-4D-17: Religious/Private Group Assembly in ID-RS Zones a.The following setbacks are required in lieu of the setbacks specified in the base zone. However, the board of adjustment may reduce these setbacks, subject to the approval criteria for setback adjustments as specified in subsection 14-2A-4-B5, "Adjustments To Principal Building Setback Requirements", of this title. (1)Front: Twenty feet (20'). (2)Side: Twenty feet (20'). (3)Rear: Fifty feet (50'). FINDINGS: •The proposed building exceeds the front, side, and rear setback requirements. The building is located along the curved property line with the front/side setback proposed being 181.40’ from North Scott Boulevard. The proposed building is approximately 778’ from the western property line. A rear setback is not shown as the building is approximately 2,750’ from the rear property line. b.The proposed use will be designed to be compatible with adjacent uses. The board of adjustment will consider aspects of the proposed use, such as the site size, types of accessory uses, anticipated traffic, building scale, setbacks, landscaping, and location and amount of paved areas. The board of adjustment may deny the use or aspects of the use that are deemed out of scale, incompatible, or out of character with surrounding residential uses, or may require additional measures to mitigate these differences. Additional requirements may include, but are not limited to, additional screening, landscaping, pedestrian facilities, setbacks, location and design of parking facilities, and location and design of buildings. FINDINGS: •The subject property is bordered by RS-5 to the west and OPD/RS-5 to the south. To the west, single family development is ongoing and nearing completion, while to the south development on 65 single family lots is beginning to take place. To the north and east across N Scott Blvd. the properties are zoned ID-RS. •The proposed use is located in a building that can be accessed by members and those attending programs or camps on the property for leisure activities or education. The use will provide shelter to members during extreme weather events, as well as restrooms. •The proposed use is classified as private group assembly, so it is primarily intended for use by its members, it typically restricts access to the general public, and it cannot be rented out for commercial office uses or for events held by the general public. 4 •The proposed structure is one story with a walkout basement. The building footprint is 60’x40’ or 2,400 square feet in size. The closest residential use to the proposed building has a building footprint of 2,242 square feet. The 2nd story of that residential use has a floor area of roughly 1,020 square feet and the basement has a floor area of 1,152 square feet for a total floor area of 4,414 square feet. The proposed structure is comparable in size to surrounding residential uses. •The parking facilities are addressed in the criteria c below. Staff adopts the findings in criterion c as if fully set forth here in criterion b. •Transportation staff determined that the proposed use and associated traffic will not overburden Scott Boulevard stating that the street currently carries approximately 5,100 vehicles per day (Iowa DOT 2018) and the theoretical capacity exceeds 15,000 vehicles per day. •Transportation staff confirms that the existing driveway to remain meets the Code requirement of 150’ spacing on an arterial from an adjacent street. •Transportation staff determined that the use of the existing parking spaces will not generate enough traffic to warrant further improvements to Scott Boulevard such as turn lanes or a traffic study. •The occupant load of the main auditorium in the building, which is used to determine the minimum off-street parking requirement, indicates an occupancy of 126 people. Occupancy loads are used to determine necessary fire protection systems and emergency services such as sprinklers and egresses under the City Building Code and City Fire Code and is not a representation of how many people are expected to use the site at any regular time. c.Given that large parking lots can seriously erode the single- family residential character of these zones, the board of adjustment will carefully review any requests for parking spaces beyond the minimum required. The board may limit the number of parking spaces and the size and location of parking lots, taking into account the availability of on street parking, the estimated parking demand, and opportunities for shared parking with other nonresidential uses in the vicinity of the use. FINDINGS: •Proposed uses include religious/private group assembly with the main floor having an occupancy of 126 people. Based on the maximum occupancy of 126 people, the proposed use requires a minimum of 21 parking spaces. •The site plan shows that 21 parking spaces are provided, which meets the minimum requirement. •The bike parking requirement is 5% of the total spaces provided, but no less than 4 spaces provided when required. The applicant will need to provide a minimum of 4 bike parking spaces to be reviewed at site plan review. •There is no on street parking available along N Scott Blvd. The nearest on street parking would be along Tamarack Trail, which has a 26’ pavement width and supports on street parking along one side of the street. •The existing drive located along the northeast side of the property will be used. No improvements to the drive are proposed as part of this application. d.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. 5 FINDINGS: •The closest residential property line from the proposed use is located 778’ to the west. •To ensure the use does not produce negative impacts relating to noise or late- night operations, staff recommends a condition that the building housing the private group assembly use be closed from 10 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. and that amplified sound not be allowed outside. •The subject property is near residential uses and is in an Interim Development Single Family Residential. Both single family and ID-RS zones are in the Low Illumination District (E1), which is the lowest lighting district within the code. However, ID-RS zoned properties are not subject to the same lighting restrictions as single family uses. Due to the proximity to existing single family uses, and the specific approval criteria that the use be designed to be compatible with adjacent uses, staff recommends the condition that any future lighting be subject to the standards of 14-5G-3: Standards for Single Family and Two Family Uses to ensure compatible lighting designs. e.The building official may grant approval for the following modifications to a religious/private group assembly use, without approval from the board of adjustment, upon written findings that the modification will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be injurious to the other property or improvements in the vicinity and in the zone in which the property is located: (1)An accessory storage building less than five hundred (500) square feet in size. (2)A building addition of less than five hundred (500) square feet, provided the addition does not increase the occupancy load of the building. FINDINGS: •This section is not applicable because the proposed use is new. •A special exception is required. f.If the proposed use is located in a residential zone or in the central planning district, it must comply with the multi-family site development standards as set forth in section 14-2B-6 of this title. FINDINGS: •The proposed use is located within an interim zone outside of the Central Planning District and not subject to the multi-family site development standards. 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 proposed building will generally be of a comparable scale to surrounding residential uses and the applicant proposes an increased setback to maintain separation from existing development. 6 •Transportation staff determined that traffic generated by the proposed use will not overburden existing streets. •The proposed use is classified as private group assembly, so it is primarily intended for use by its members, it typically restricts access to the general public, and it cannot be rented out for commercial uses or for events held by the general public. •Staff will ensure all applicable health, safety, comfort or general welfare standards are met as required through any standard building permit. •The proposed building would provide an amenity to enhance the visiting experience for members, programs, and camps, while also acting as a safety shelter when necessary. •Conditions for noise and lighting have been proposed to ensure the proposed use remains compatible with surrounding development so as to not impede on the health, safety, comfort, or welfare of the public. 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 proposed use will not impact the ability of neighbors to utilize and enjoy their properties. •The proposed building is located approximately 778’ from the nearest residential property line to the west. •Conditions as recommended will help mitigate potential negative effects on noise and hours of operation for surrounding properties. •The proposed development is within the area that allows development activity per the existing conservation easement agreement. The vast majority of the property will remain open space, which serves as an amenity and benefit to neighboring properties, which can have a positive impact on property values. •The proposed development is located in an area on the northeastern portion of the subject property that contains other existing structures for Harvest Preserve member use and that do not have City imposed limitations. 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 residential neighborhood to the west is nearly fully developed with residential uses. •Land to the north and east of the subject property remains undeveloped. The development of this land will occur as utilities are extended and development continues from the west. •The proposed use will be setback over 778’ from the existing residential neighborhood and be compatible in scale. •The conditions as recommended mitigate potential effects for surrounding properties. 7 4.Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. FINDINGS: •The subject property has access to City utilities and will extend utilties to the property to serve the new building. •An 8’ wide sidewalk exists along the properties N Scott Blvd frontage. Pedestrian access for visitors of Harvest Preserve is also available through onsite trails. •A large portion of the subject property is green space, which allows the absorption of any stormwater runoff. 5.Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. FINDINGS: •Direct access to the new development will be off of N Scott Blvd and use the existing curb cut and driveway. The proposed building can also be accessed through onsite trails if entering from the west side of the property. •Transportation staff determined that the existing drive was acceptable and the use, as well as the existing parking, would not overburden existing streets or require improvements. 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 proposed use and development meet all applicable code standards of the ID-RS zone. 7.The proposed exception will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as amended. FINDINGS: •The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map shows this area as Conservation Design. The Northeast District Plan identified this property as the Bluffwood neighborhood. •The Comprehensive Plan notes that “conservation design is appropriate in areas containing… sensitive features and is meant to balance the protection of sensitive natural features with the development rights of property owners. By clustering development on more buildable portions of the property, natural areas can be preserved” (pg. 27). The proposed use and building would be located in the northeast corner of the property, away from sensitive areas and in a designated buildable area per the conservation easement. •The Northeast District Plan has the goal to, “Use conservation design principals to locate streets, utilities and structures in a way that minimizes disturbance of natural features” (pg. 8). Although the street network is currently built out, in recent years City utilties have been extended to a location that is more suitable to limit disturbance to natural features while providing the property with proper utilties. 8 •The Northeast District Plan also has the goal to “Treat environmentally sensitive areas as amenities” (pg. 8). The Harvest Preserve Foundation has placed over 100 acres into a private conservation easement for the long term protection of natural features with the intent of raising public awareness, appreciation, and participation. The proposed use and structure would provide an indoor space intended to further support and enhance the nature amenities and those who visit. CORRESPONDENCE: Staff has received 23 pieces of correspondence in opposition of the proposed development as presented at the Good Neighbor Meeting on May 29, 2024. Since the Good Neighbor Meeting the applicant revised the site plan in response to neighbor concerns. (Attachment 4). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of EXC24-0003, to allow a Religious/Private Group Assembly use in an Interim Development Single Family Residential Zone for the property located at 1645 N. Scott Blvd, subject to the following conditions: 1.General compliance with the site plan dated 8/15/2024 in terms of the location of the building, parking, and the size and scale of the proposed building. 2.The building must be closed between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. 3.No amplified sound shall be allowed outdoors. 4.Future lighting be subject to the standards of 14-5G-3: Standards for Single Family and Two Family Uses to ensure compatible lighting designs. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Location Map 2.Zoning Map 3.Application Materials 4. Correspondence Approved by: _________________________________________________ Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Department of Neighborhood and Development Services August 22, 2024 Board of Adjustment Meeting EXC24-0003 ATTACHMENT 1 Location Map Prepared by Staff August 22, 2024 Board of Adjustment Meeting EXC24-0003 ATTACHMENT 2 Zoning Map Prepared by Staff August 22, 2024 Board of Adjustment Meeting EXC24-0003 ATTACHMENT 3 Application Material Submitted by the Applicant MA R K DA T E D E S C R I P T I O N PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY: COPYRIGHT DATE: SHEET TITLE C-101 COVER SHEET G24-025 MSN 8/12/2024 16 4 5 NO R T H S C O T T B O U L E V A R D IO W A C I T Y , IA 52 2 4 5 C:\ Us e r s \Le n a M i c h a l e k \Ho r i z o n A r c h i t e c t u r e \Ho r i z o n A r c h i t e c t u r e - Do c u m e n t s \Pr o j e c t s \Ge n e r a l P r o j e c t s \G24 -02 5 Ha r v e s t P r e s e r v e N e w B u i l d \1 - Mo d e l a n d D e s i g n \HA R V E S T P R E S E R V E .pl n HA R V E S T P R E S E R V E N E W ME E T I N G B U I L D I N G SC H E M A T I C D E S I G N - NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N COPYRIGHT © 2015 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED NEITHER ALL NOR ANY PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE AMENDED, REPRODUCED, COPIED OR USED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER EXCEPT PURSUANT TO CONTRACT OR WITH THE SPECIFIC WRITTEN PERMISSION OF OAK TREE HOMES, INC. THESE PLANS, DESIGNS AND SUBJECT MATTER ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF OAK TREE HOMES, INC. THIS DOCUMENT IS AN ARTICLE OF SERVICE AND THE COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE EXPRESSLY RESERVED BY OAK TREE HOMES, INC. MI C H A E L @HO R I Z O N -AR C H I T E C T U R E .CO M PH | ( 56 3 ) 50 6 -49 6 5 WW W .HO R I Z O N -AR C H I T E C T U R E .CO M COPYRIGHT © 2018 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED NEITHER ALL NOR ANY PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE AMENDED, REPRODUCED, COPIED OR USED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER EXCEPT PURSUANT TO CONTRACT OR WITH THE SPECIFIC WRITTEN PERMISSION OF Horizon Architecture. THESE PLANS, DESIGNS AND SUBJECT MATTER ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF Horizon Architecture. THIS DOCUMENT IS AN ARTICLE OF SERVICE AND THE COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE EXPRESSLY RESERVED BY Horizon Architecture. SHEET INDEX ID C-101 A-101 A-102 A-103 A-201 A-202 Name COVER SHEET BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN ROOF PLAN ELEVATION ELEVATIONS 6" TYPICAL, UNLESSOTHERWISE NOTED OFFICE 003 1/A-201 D01 .1 B2 C3 D4 A1 1.01.01 D01.1 S01 W01 GRAPHICSYMBOLS INDICATES SECTION LOCATION ON SHEET INDICATES SHEET ON WHICH DRAWING IS SHOWN SECTION / DETAIL MARKER DETAIL / ENLARGED PLAN MARKER INTERIOR ELEVATION MARKER INDICATES ELEVATION LOCATION ON SHEET INDICATES SHEET ON WHICH DRAWING IS SHOWN ELEVATION / SECTION MARKER INDICATES ELEVATION LOCATION ON SHEET INDICATES SHEET ON WHICH ELEVATION IS SHOWN XX YY XX XX YY DETAIL / ENLARGED PLAN MARKER INDICATES DETAIL LOCATION ON SHEET INDICATES SHEET ON WHICH DETAIL IS SHOWN SPACE DESIGNATION WINDOW MARKER DOOR IDENTIFIERS SPACE NAME SPACE NUMBER WALL TYPE MARKER 4C SKYLIGHT MARKER DOOR IDENTIFIER (ELEVATIONS/SECTIONS) ENLARGED PLAN REFERENCE KEYNOTE IDENTIFIER XX YY DOOR IDENTIFIER (PLANS) KEYNOTE; SEE KEYNOTE LEGEND ON DRAWING'S LAYOUT ALTERNATE KEYNOTE; SEE KEYNOTE LEGEND ON DRAWING'S LAYOUT (SEE PARTITION LEGEND) 1.01.01 VERIFY SCALE BAR IS ONE (1) INCH LONG ON ORIGINAL DRAWING IF BAR IS NOT ONE (1) INCH LONG, ADJUST SCALE ACCORDINGLY 10 ABBREVIATIONS A.D. AREA DRAIN ABV. ABOVE ADA ACCESSIBLE / AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT ADJ. ADJUSTABLE A.o.R. AREA OF REFUGE ALUM. ALUMINUM ALT. ALTERNATE A.F.F. ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR AC. ACOUSTIC / ACOUSTICAL A.F. ALUMINUM FACE APPX. APPROXIMATE / APPROXIMATELY BD. BOARD BLK. BLOCK / BLOCKING BLDG. BUILDING B.O. BOTTOM OF B.O.S. BOTTOM OF STEEL CAB. CABINET C.C. CENTER-TO-CENTER CLG. CEILING CLOS. CLOSET C.M. CONSTRUCTION MANAGER CMU CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT C.J. CONTROL JOINT CONC. CONCRETE CORR. CORRIDOR COL. COLUMN CONT. CONTINUE / CONTINUOUS CONTR. CONTRACTOR DIA. DIAMETER DTL. DETAIL DN DOWN DWG. DRAWING DEPT. DEPARTMENT DBL. DOUBLE DIM. DIMENSION DR. DOOR EXIST. EXISTING EQ. EQUAL E.C. ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR EL. ELEVATION ELEV. ELEVATOR ELEC. ELECTRIC / ELECTRICAL EXP. EXPANSION EXT. EXTERIOR EA. EACH F.D. FLOOR DRAIN F.E. FIRE EXTINGUISHER F.E.C. FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINET FIN. FINISH / FINISHED FLR. FLOOR F.O. FACE OF FT. FEET / FOOT FLUOR. FLUORESCENT GYP. GYPSUM GALV. GALVANIZED GA. GAUGE G.C. GENERAL CONTRACTOR HR. HOUR H.P. HIGH POINT HVAC HEAT, VENTILATION, AIR- CONDITIONING HORIZ. HORIZONTAL HT. HEIGHT INSUL. INSULATION / INSULATING I.D. INSIDE DIAMETER INCAND. INCANDESCENT JAN. JANITOR JT. JOINT LBS. POUNDS LAV. LAVATORY LAM. LAMINATE L.P. LOW POINT MAX. MAXIMUM MFR. MANUFACTURER / MANUFACTURED MTL. METAL MIN. MINIMUM MIRR. MIRRORED MTD. MOUNTED M.O. MASONRY OPENING MISC. MISCELLANEOUS MECH. MECHANICAL N.I.C. NOT IN CONTRACT NO. NUMBER N.T.S. NOT TO SCALE O.C. ON CENTER O.D. OUTSIDE DIAMETER OPP. OPPOSITE OPG. OPENING P.C. PLUMBING CONTRACTOR P.F. PANEL FACE PR. PAIR P.T. PRESSURE TREATED PL. LAM PLASTIC LAMINATE QTY. QUANTITY R RISER R.W.C. RAIN WATER CONDUCTOR REINF. REINFORCING / REINFORCED REQ. REQUIRED R.O. ROUGH OPENING REV. REVISED / REVISION REFL. REFLECTED REC. RECESSED RAD. RADIUS S.S. STAINLESS STEEL ST. STREET SIM. SIMILAR STL. STEEL SQ. SQUARE SAN. SANITARY SUSP. SUSPENDED STD. STANDARD SPEC. SPECIFICATION TEL. TELEPHONE T.O. TOP OF T.O.S. TOP OF STEEL T.O.W. TOP OF WALL TOIL. TOILET TYP. TYPICAL THK. THICK TMP. TEMPERED T.S.G. TEMPERED SAFETY GLASS U.O.N. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED U.L. UNDERWRITERS LABORATORIES VEST. VESTIBULE V.C.T. VINYL COMPOSITION TILE W/ WITH W.C. WATER CLOSET WD WOOD & AND @ AT ± PLUS OR MINUS ° DEGREE ANGLE [ CHANNEL # NUMBER □SQUARE Ø ROUND / DIAMETER / C.L. CENTER LINE / PL. PLATE ∏ U-BAR ∟ LEG-BAR BUILDING CODE SUMMARY IBC 2021 CONSTRUCTION TYPE AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM SECTION 602 AND TABLE 601 SECTION 903 VB (NON-SPRINKLERED) MEANS OF EGRESS IBC 2021 REQUIRED PROVIDED MAXIMUM PATH OF COMMON EGRESS TRAVEL MAXIMUM EXIT ACCESS TRAVEL DISTANCE MINIMUM CORRIDOR WIDTH MAXIMUM DEAD END MINIMUM NUMBER OF EXITS TABLE 1006.2.1 SECTION 1017 & TABLE 1017.2 SECTION 1020 SECTION 1020 SECTION 1006 & TABLE 1006.3.2 75' (100' FOR STORAGE) 200' 44" 20' 2 100' MAX FROM BASEMENT STORAGE 60" N/A 2 USE AND OCCUPANCY CHAPTER 3 BUILDING AND PROJECT DATA A-3 TABLE 601, 602 & SECTION 705 TABLE 601 TABLE 705.8.3 TABLE 705.8.2 PRIMARY STRUCTURAL FRAME TABLE 601 AND SECTION 704 BEARING WALLS EXTERIOR INTERIOR EXTERIOR WALL OPENINGS NOT REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE RATINGS IBC 2021 REQUIRED PROVIDED NONBEARING WALLS AND PARTITIONS EXTERIOR INTERIOR FLOOR CONSTRUCTION ROOF CONSTRUCTION UNPROTECTED PROTECTED TABLE 601, 602 & SECTION 705 TABLE 601 TABLE 601 TABLE 601 0 HOURS 0 HOURS 0 HOURS 0 HOURS 0 HOURS 0 HOURS 0 HOURS 0 HOURS 0 HOURS 0 HOURS 0 HOURS 0 HOURS 0 HOURS 0 HOURS NOT REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED BUILDING DESCRIPTION AND USE 1 STORY BLDG.CAMP AND ACTIVITY BUILDING BUILDING HEIGHT REQUIRED/ALLOWED PROVIDED NOT REQUIRED BUILDING STORIES GROSS BUILDING AREA TABLE 504.3 40' MAX. TABLE 504.4 11 2,400 SQ. FT. 6,000 SQ. FT. (A-3 OCCUPANCY)LARGEST FLOOR AREA / STORY 2,400 SQ. FT. 1ST FLOOR AREA 2,400 SQ. FT. TABLE 506.2 OCCUPANCY CALCS OCCUPANT LOAD APPX. 20'-0" NO STORAGE AREA REQUIRED 2,200 SQ. FT. (GROSS)8300 SQ. FT. / PERSON (GROSS) ALL OCCUPANCIES 4,219 SQ. FT.134 APPLICABLE CODES AND ORDINANCES 2021 IBC: ALL APPLICABLE CHAPTERS ANSI 117.1, 2009 EDITION: ALL APPLICABLE CHAPTERS ASSEMBLY 1,870 SQ. FT. (NET)12515 SQ. FT. / PERSON (NET) PROJECT SCOPE: NEW FACILITY SERVICE BUILDING (ASSEMBLY) 90' FROM STORAGE, N/A FOR ASSEMBLY MINIMUM NUMBER OF EXITS FROM BASEMENT TABLE 1006.2.1, OCC<29 1 1 BASEMENT FLOOR AREA 2,200 SQ. FT. KITCHEN 149 SQ. FT. (GROSS)1200 SQ. FT. / PERSON (GROSS) UP 5 1 / 2 " 5' - 1 1 / 4 " 3 1 / 2 " 11 ' - 8 " 3 1 / 2 " 5' - 1 1 / 4 " 3 1 / 2 " 16 ' - 4 1 / 4 " 5 1 / 2 " 3 1/2"4'-8 1/2"3 1/2"4'-1 1/4"5 1/2" 5 1/2"49'-8 1/2"3 1/2"9'-1 1/4"5 1/2" 5 1 / 2 " 39 ' - 1 " 5 1 / 2 " 3' - 8 " 3'-8" 3' - 8 " 3'-8" ASSEMBLY 15 S.F./OCCUPANT 1870 S.F. (NET) PER IBC TABLE 1004.5 (44" CIRCULATION RESERVED AT PERIMETER PER TABLE 1020.3) TOTAL OCCUPANTS - 125 T O T A L D I S T A N C E T R A V E L E D - 35' FE C TOTAL DISTANCE TRAVELED - 60' KITCHEN 200 S.F./OCCUPANT TOTAL OCCUPANTS - 1 70" DOOR EGRESS CAPACITY - 350 OCCUPANT LOAD - 46 34" DOOR EGRESS CAPACITY - 170 OCCUPANT LOAD - 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18UP DOWN Cu s t o m T e x t 60' 40 ' 39 ' - 4 " 4'-3/4"3 1/2" STORAGE 300 S.F./OCCUPANT TOTAL OCCUPANTS - 8 TOTAL DISTANCE T R A V E L E D - 9 0 ' FE C 40" STAIR EGRESS CAPACITY - 133 OCCUPANT LOAD - 4 TOTAL DISTANCE TRAVELED - XXX'EXIT TRAVEL PATH AND DISTANCE (200' MAX) EGRESS COMPONENT CAPACITY FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINET LIFE SAFETY LEGEND EXIT SIGN FEC XX" STAIR EGRESS CAPACITY - XX OCCUPANT LOAD - X SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 1st FLOOR LIFE SAFETY PLAN 0 4'8'16' SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 BASEMENT LIFE SAFETY PLAN 0 4'8'16' HARVEST PRESERVE NEW MEETING BUILDING GENERAL NOTE PLEASE REFER TO IBC TABLE 1004.5 FOR OCCUPANCY DENSITY MA R K DA T E DE S C R I P T I O N PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY: COPYRIGHT DATE: SHEET TITLE A-101 BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN G24-025 MSN 8/12/2024 16 4 5 NO R T H SC O T T BO U L E V A R D IO W A CI T Y , IA 52 2 4 5 C:\Us e r s \Le n a M i c h a l e k \Ho r i z o n Ar c h i t e c t u r e \Ho r i z o n Ar c h i t e c t u r e - Do c u m e n t s \Pr o j e c t s \Ge n e r a l Pr o j e c t s \G24 -02 5 Ha r v e s t Pr e s e r v e Ne w Bu i l d \1 - Mo d e l an d De s i g n \HA R V E S T PR E S E R V E .pl n HA R V E S T PR E S E R V E NE W ME E T I N G BU I L D I N G SC H E M A T I C DE S I G N - NO T FO R CO N S T R U C T I O N COPYRIGHT © 2015 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED NEITHER ALL NOR ANY PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE AMENDED, REPRODUCED, COPIED OR USED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER EXCEPT PURSUANT TO CONTRACT OR WITH THE SPECIFIC WRITTEN PERMISSION OF OAK TREE HOMES, INC. THESE PLANS, DESIGNS AND SUBJECT MATTER ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF OAK TREE HOMES, INC. THIS DOCUMENT IS AN ARTICLE OF SERVICE AND THE COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE EXPRESSLY RESERVED BY OAK TREE HOMES, INC. MI C H A E L @HO R I Z O N -AR C H I T E C T U R E .CO M PH | (56 3 ) 50 6 -49 6 5 WW W .HO R I Z O N -AR C H I T E C T U R E .CO M COPYRIGHT © 2018 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED NEITHER ALL NOR ANY PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE AMENDED, REPRODUCED, COPIED OR USED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER EXCEPT PURSUANT TO CONTRACT OR WITH THE SPECIFIC WRITTEN PERMISSION OF Horizon Architecture. THESE PLANS, DESIGNS AND SUBJECT MATTER ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF Horizon Architecture. THIS DOCUMENT IS AN ARTICLE OF SERVICE AND THE COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE EXPRESSLY RESERVED BY Horizon Architecture. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18UP DOWN Cu s t o m Te x t W01W01W01 D01 D02 D02 D02 D02 D01 60' 40 ' 39 ' - 4 " 4'-3/4"3 1/2" STORAGE 019 A: 626 sq ft MECHANICAL 019 A: 155 sq ft STORAGE 020 A: 1,314 sq ft AIRLOCK 021 A: 69 sq ft 1 A-201 2 A-20 1 1 A-20 2 2 A-202 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 BASEMENT PLAN 0 2'4'8' MA R K DA T E DE S C R I P T I O N PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY: COPYRIGHT DATE: SHEET TITLE A-102 FIRST FLOOR PLAN G24-025 MSN 8/12/2024 16 4 5 NO R T H SC O T T BO U L E V A R D IO W A CI T Y , IA 52 2 4 5 C:\Us e r s \Le n a M i c h a l e k \Ho r i z o n Ar c h i t e c t u r e \Ho r i z o n Ar c h i t e c t u r e - Do c u m e n t s \Pr o j e c t s \Ge n e r a l Pr o j e c t s \G24 -02 5 Ha r v e s t Pr e s e r v e Ne w Bu i l d \1 - Mo d e l an d De s i g n \HA R V E S T PR E S E R V E .pl n HA R V E S T PR E S E R V E NE W ME E T I N G BU I L D I N G SC H E M A T I C DE S I G N - NO T FO R CO N S T R U C T I O N COPYRIGHT © 2015 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED NEITHER ALL NOR ANY PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE AMENDED, REPRODUCED, COPIED OR USED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER EXCEPT PURSUANT TO CONTRACT OR WITH THE SPECIFIC WRITTEN PERMISSION OF OAK TREE HOMES, INC. THESE PLANS, DESIGNS AND SUBJECT MATTER ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF OAK TREE HOMES, INC. THIS DOCUMENT IS AN ARTICLE OF SERVICE AND THE COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE EXPRESSLY RESERVED BY OAK TREE HOMES, INC. MI C H A E L @HO R I Z O N -AR C H I T E C T U R E .CO M PH | (56 3 ) 50 6 -49 6 5 WW W .HO R I Z O N -AR C H I T E C T U R E .CO M COPYRIGHT © 2018 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED NEITHER ALL NOR ANY PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE AMENDED, REPRODUCED, COPIED OR USED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER EXCEPT PURSUANT TO CONTRACT OR WITH THE SPECIFIC WRITTEN PERMISSION OF Horizon Architecture. THESE PLANS, DESIGNS AND SUBJECT MATTER ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF Horizon Architecture. THIS DOCUMENT IS AN ARTICLE OF SERVICE AND THE COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE EXPRESSLY RESERVED BY Horizon Architecture. DOOR SCHEDULE ID D01 D02 D03 D04 D05 Quantity 4 4 2 2 2 DOOR W 6' 3' 3' 3' 3' HT 7' 7' 7' 7' 7' THK 1 3/4" 1 3/4" 1 3/4" 1 3/4" 1 3/4" GLZ HALF HW SET SECURITY STOREROOM PRIVACY STOREROOM CLASSROOM NOTES MAIN ENTRY DOOR - DOUBLE DOOR WITH PANIC HARDWARE SECURE STORAGE DOOR BATHROOM DOOR - PRIVACY LOCK SECURE STORAGE DOOR KITCHEN DOOR WINDOW SCHEDULE (SIZES NOMINAL) ID W01 W02 W03 W04 Quantity 10 2 1 2 Width (Nominal) 8' 4' 4'-6" 2'-6" Height (Nominal) 5' 5' 3'-6" 3'-6" NOTES CSMT - FIXED - CSMT DOUBLE CASEMENT DOUBLE CASEMENT CASEMENT UP W01W01 W01 W04 W04 W03 W01W01 W01 D01 W02 W02 W01 D05 D03 D03 D04 D04 D05 5 1/ 2 " 5' - 1 1/ 4 " 3 1/ 2 " 11 ' - 8 " 3 1/ 2 " 5' - 1 1/ 4 " 3 1/ 2 " 16 ' - 4 1/ 4 " 5 1/ 2 " 3 1/2"4'-8 1/2"3 1/2"4'-1 1/4"5 1/2" 5 1/2"49'-8 1/2"3 1/2"9'-1 1/4"5 1/2" 5 1/ 2 " 39 ' - 1 " 5 1/ 2 " 3' - 8 " 3'-8" 3' - 8 " 3'-8" 1 A-201 2 A-20 1 1 A-20 2 2 A-202 JANITOR CLOSET 013 A: 20 sq ft CLOSET 014 A: 20 sq ft KITCHENETTE 015 A: 146 sq ft BATHROOM 016 A: 50 sq ft BATHROOM 017 A: 50 sq ft MEETING ROOM 018 A: 1,207 sq ft CIRCULATION 020 A: 778 sq ft SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 1st FLOOR PLAN 0 2'4'8' MA R K DA T E DE S C R I P T I O N PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY: COPYRIGHT DATE: SHEET TITLE A-103 ROOF PLAN G24-025 MSN 8/12/2024 16 4 5 NO R T H SC O T T BO U L E V A R D IO W A CI T Y , IA 52 2 4 5 C:\Us e r s \Le n a M i c h a l e k \Ho r i z o n Ar c h i t e c t u r e \Ho r i z o n Ar c h i t e c t u r e - Do c u m e n t s \Pr o j e c t s \Ge n e r a l Pr o j e c t s \G24 -02 5 Ha r v e s t Pr e s e r v e Ne w Bu i l d \1 - Mo d e l an d De s i g n \HA R V E S T PR E S E R V E .pl n HA R V E S T PR E S E R V E NE W ME E T I N G BU I L D I N G SC H E M A T I C DE S I G N - NO T FO R CO N S T R U C T I O N COPYRIGHT © 2015 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED NEITHER ALL NOR ANY PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE AMENDED, REPRODUCED, COPIED OR USED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER EXCEPT PURSUANT TO CONTRACT OR WITH THE SPECIFIC WRITTEN PERMISSION OF OAK TREE HOMES, INC. THESE PLANS, DESIGNS AND SUBJECT MATTER ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF OAK TREE HOMES, INC. THIS DOCUMENT IS AN ARTICLE OF SERVICE AND THE COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE EXPRESSLY RESERVED BY OAK TREE HOMES, INC. MI C H A E L @HO R I Z O N -AR C H I T E C T U R E .CO M PH | (56 3 ) 50 6 -49 6 5 WW W .HO R I Z O N -AR C H I T E C T U R E .CO M COPYRIGHT © 2018 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED NEITHER ALL NOR ANY PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE AMENDED, REPRODUCED, COPIED OR USED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER EXCEPT PURSUANT TO CONTRACT OR WITH THE SPECIFIC WRITTEN PERMISSION OF Horizon Architecture. THESE PLANS, DESIGNS AND SUBJECT MATTER ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF Horizon Architecture. THIS DOCUMENT IS AN ARTICLE OF SERVICE AND THE COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE EXPRESSLY RESERVED BY Horizon Architecture. Slope 4:12 Sl o p e 4:12 Slope 4:12 Sl o p e 4:12 1 A-201 2 A-20 1 1 A-20 2 2 A-202 2' 40 ' 2' 2'60'2' 64' 11 1/2"15'48'-1/2" 5 1/2"12' 40 ' 7' SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 ROOF PLAN 0 2'4'8' MA R K DA T E DE S C R I P T I O N PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY: COPYRIGHT DATE: SHEET TITLE A-201 ELEVATION G24-025 MSN 8/12/2024 16 4 5 NO R T H SC O T T BO U L E V A R D IO W A CI T Y , IA 52 2 4 5 C:\Us e r s \Le n a M i c h a l e k \Ho r i z o n Ar c h i t e c t u r e \Ho r i z o n Ar c h i t e c t u r e - Do c u m e n t s \Pr o j e c t s \Ge n e r a l Pr o j e c t s \G24 -02 5 Ha r v e s t Pr e s e r v e Ne w Bu i l d \1 - Mo d e l an d De s i g n \HA R V E S T PR E S E R V E .pl n HA R V E S T PR E S E R V E NE W ME E T I N G BU I L D I N G SC H E M A T I C DE S I G N - NO T FO R CO N S T R U C T I O N COPYRIGHT © 2015 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED NEITHER ALL NOR ANY PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE AMENDED, REPRODUCED, COPIED OR USED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER EXCEPT PURSUANT TO CONTRACT OR WITH THE SPECIFIC WRITTEN PERMISSION OF OAK TREE HOMES, INC. THESE PLANS, DESIGNS AND SUBJECT MATTER ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF OAK TREE HOMES, INC. THIS DOCUMENT IS AN ARTICLE OF SERVICE AND THE COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE EXPRESSLY RESERVED BY OAK TREE HOMES, INC. MI C H A E L @HO R I Z O N -AR C H I T E C T U R E .CO M PH | (56 3 ) 50 6 -49 6 5 WW W .HO R I Z O N -AR C H I T E C T U R E .CO M COPYRIGHT © 2018 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED NEITHER ALL NOR ANY PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE AMENDED, REPRODUCED, COPIED OR USED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER EXCEPT PURSUANT TO CONTRACT OR WITH THE SPECIFIC WRITTEN PERMISSION OF Horizon Architecture. THESE PLANS, DESIGNS AND SUBJECT MATTER ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF Horizon Architecture. THIS DOCUMENT IS AN ARTICLE OF SERVICE AND THE COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE EXPRESSLY RESERVED BY Horizon Architecture. SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 NORTH ELEVATION 0 2'4'8' SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 WEST ELEVATION 0 2'4'8' MA R K DA T E DE S C R I P T I O N PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY: COPYRIGHT DATE: SHEET TITLE A-202 ELEVATIONS G24-025 MSN 8/12/2024 16 4 5 NO R T H SC O T T BO U L E V A R D IO W A CI T Y , IA 52 2 4 5 C:\Us e r s \Le n a M i c h a l e k \Ho r i z o n Ar c h i t e c t u r e \Ho r i z o n Ar c h i t e c t u r e - Do c u m e n t s \Pr o j e c t s \Ge n e r a l Pr o j e c t s \G24 -02 5 Ha r v e s t Pr e s e r v e Ne w Bu i l d \1 - Mo d e l an d De s i g n \HA R V E S T PR E S E R V E .pl n HA R V E S T PR E S E R V E NE W ME E T I N G BU I L D I N G SC H E M A T I C DE S I G N - NO T FO R CO N S T R U C T I O N COPYRIGHT © 2015 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED NEITHER ALL NOR ANY PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE AMENDED, REPRODUCED, COPIED OR USED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER EXCEPT PURSUANT TO CONTRACT OR WITH THE SPECIFIC WRITTEN PERMISSION OF OAK TREE HOMES, INC. THESE PLANS, DESIGNS AND SUBJECT MATTER ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF OAK TREE HOMES, INC. THIS DOCUMENT IS AN ARTICLE OF SERVICE AND THE COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE EXPRESSLY RESERVED BY OAK TREE HOMES, INC. MI C H A E L @HO R I Z O N -AR C H I T E C T U R E .CO M PH | (56 3 ) 50 6 -49 6 5 WW W .HO R I Z O N -AR C H I T E C T U R E .CO M COPYRIGHT © 2018 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED NEITHER ALL NOR ANY PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE AMENDED, REPRODUCED, COPIED OR USED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER EXCEPT PURSUANT TO CONTRACT OR WITH THE SPECIFIC WRITTEN PERMISSION OF Horizon Architecture. THESE PLANS, DESIGNS AND SUBJECT MATTER ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF Horizon Architecture. THIS DOCUMENT IS AN ARTICLE OF SERVICE AND THE COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE EXPRESSLY RESERVED BY Horizon Architecture. SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EAST ELEVATION 0 2'4'8' SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 SOUTH ELEVATION 0 2'4'8' 10304-032m-general criteria_v1-Response.docx August 9, 2024 City of Iowa City Neighborhood & Development Services 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, IA 52240 RE: General Approval Criteria for a Special Exception Application at 1645 N. Scott Blvd. (Harvest Preserve) Code Section 14-4B-3: Special Exceptions: A. Approval Criteria: In order to grant a special exception, the Board must find that the applicant meets the specific approval criteria set forth in this title with respect to the specific proposed exception. The Board must also find that the applicant meets the following general approval criteria or that the following criteria do not apply: 1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. This exception would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare in any way. It would allow for an indoor gathering space, out of the elements with restroom facilities. 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 proposed exception does not fundamentally change the existing use of the property which is for the preservation and enjoyment of the natural environment. 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 district is Interim Development Residential, and the use is private open space. The neighboring residential districts are built out and the development of the interim residential districts on the opposite side of N. Scott Blvd. would not be impeded. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Public water main and sanitary sewer will be extended within the N. Scott Blvd. Right-Of-Way in order to provide new private water and sanitary sewer services with the future site plan for construction approval. Gas and electric services will be provided from existing utilities along N. Scott Blvd. The existing access drive and parking lot pavement 10304-032m-general criteria_v1-Response.docx area will be utilized and no changes to the drainage pathway are being proposed. 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. The existing drive will be utilized to access the site. 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. All applicable zoning regulations and standards of the ID-RS zone are being met. 7. The proposed exception will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as amended. The future land use as depicted in the Comprehensive Plan is Conservation Design. This special exception allows for the continued use of the Harvest Preserve Foundation as private open space. Respectfully submitted, Brock Heller, Project Manager 10304-032m-specific criteria_v1-Response.docx August 9, 2024 City of Iowa City Neighborhood & Development Services 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, IA 52240 RE: Specific Approval Criteria for a Special Exception Application at 1645 N. Scott Blvd. (Harvest Preserve) Code Section 14-4B-4: Specific Approval Criteria for Provisional Uses and Special Exceptions: D. Institutional and Civic Uses: 17. Private Group Assembly In ID-RS Zone: a. The following setbacks are required in lieu of the setbacks specified in the base zone. However, the board of adjustment may reduce these setbacks, subject to the approval criteria for setback adjustments as specified in subsection 14-2A-4B5, "Adjustments To Principal Building Setback Requirements", of this title. (1) Front: Twenty feet (20'). Provided. (2) Side: Twenty feet (20'). Provided. (3) Rear: Fifty feet (50'). Provided. b. The proposed use will be designed to be compatible with adjacent uses. The board of adjustment will consider aspects of the proposed use, such as the site size, types of accessory uses, anticipated traffic, building scale, setbacks, landscaping, and location and amount of paved areas. The board of adjustment may deny the use or aspects of the use that are deemed out of scale, incompatible, or out of character with surrounding residential uses, or may require additional measures to mitigate these differences. Additional requirements may include, but are not limited to, additional screening, landscaping, pedestrian facilities, setbacks, location and design of parking facilities, and location and design of buildings. The proposed private group assembly use would provide an indoor meeting space and restroom facilities for members of Harvest Preserve. This use would be in support of the outdoor recreational space that is already provided at the Harvest Preserve Foundation. Existing wooded areas and topography will buffer views from the Tamarack Ridge Subdivision on the West side and the N. Scott Blvd. Right-Of-Way on the North and East sides. 10304-032m-specific criteria_v1-Response.docx c. Given that large parking lots can seriously erode the single- family residential character of these zones, the board of adjustment will carefully review any requests for parking spaces beyond the minimum required. The board may limit the number of parking spaces and the size and location of parking lots, taking into account the availability of on street parking, the estimated parking demand, and opportunities for shared parking with other nonresidential uses in the vicinity of the use. The amount of required parking for the Special Exception Use is able to be achieved with the existing on site parking lot. d. 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. A large setback beyond the minimum and existing screening will mitigate any adverse effects of nearby residents, as noted on the site plan. e. The building official may grant approval for the following modifications to a religious/private group assembly use, without approval from the board of adjustment, upon written findings that the modification will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be injurious to the other property or improvements in the vicinity and in the zone in which the property is located: (1)An accessory storage building less than five hundred (500) square feet in size. Does not apply. (2)A building addition of less than five hundred (500) square feet, provided the addition does not increase the occupancy load of the building. Does not apply. f. If the proposed use is located in a residential zone or in the central planning district, it must comply with the multi-family site development standards as set forth in section 14-2B-6 of this title. Does not apply. Respectfully submitted, Brock Heller, Project Manager Summary Report for Good Neighbor Meeting Project Name: ___________________________Project Location: _________________________ Meeting Date and Time: ________________________________________________________ Meeting Location: _____________________________________________________________ Names of Applicant Representatives attending: ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Names of City Staff Representatives attending: _______________________________________ Number of Neighbors Attending: ________ Sign-In Attached? Yes ______ No ______ General Comments received regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary)- _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ Concerns expressed regarding project (attach additional sheets if necessary) - _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ Will there be any changes made to the proposal based on this input? If so, describe: ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Staff Representative Comments ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Harvest Preserve Special Exception 1645 N Scott Blvd. 5/29/2024 at 6:00 PM Harvest Preserve Pond House Brock Heller - MMS Consultants Alex Carrillo - Bedrock Builders Parker Walsh ~ 30 X Didn't think anything was allowed to be built within the conservation easement. Don't like the location, want to see the building moved to the other side of the trees. Not happy with the fence that is already along the property line. Don't feel that indoor restroom facilities are necessary for the property. Views from residential properties will be ruined. Don't believe the project aligns with the "mission" of Harvest Preserve. Amount of cars/traffic in and out of the site and possible noise associated with the project. Size and location of building being too close to houses. Event policy. Who has access and what are the hours of operation? Where will overflow parking be? Don't want cars parked on Tamarack Trl. Possible future expansion within the building envelope. Site lighting being visible from homes. The building location has been moved to the other side of the wooded ravine so that it won't be visible from the neighboring residential lots. To build in this location, the owner will be extending the public utilities within the Scott Blvd. R/O/W in order to install new utility service lines in lieu of connecting to the existing well and septic system. 5/29/2024 6:00 PM T:\10304\10304-032\10304-032-GNM Attendance List.docx Harvest Preserve - Good Neighbor Meeting Attendance List Vicki and Mike Ryan (1196 Tamarack Trl) Don and Christine Backens (1308 Tamarack Trl) Nate Knause (1355 Tamarack Trl) Tom Edwards (1356 Tamarack Trl) Doug Boothroy (2817 Buckle Down Cir) David McCauley (thinking of buying) Mike and Gail O’Donnell (1320 Tamarack Trl) Jan Miller (2857 Hickory Trl) Kaila Boothroy and Reggie Schirm (1236 Tamarack Trl) Toni Van Voorhis (1263 Tamarack Trl) James McCoy (1022 Tamarack Trl)) Anith Mathai (1369 Tamarack Trl) Miho and Kevin Cromwell (1183 Tamarack Trl) Myrrl and Linda McBride (1176 Tamarack Trl) Joy Kelly (1479 Tamarack Trl) Carlos and Laurie Pacheco (1274 Tamarack Trl) August 22, 2024 Board of Adjustment Meeting EXC24-0003 ATTACHMENT 4 Correspondence Submitted by the Identified Party From:thomas edwards To:Parker Walsh; mdeperro09@yahoo.com; reggieschirm@gmail.com; vicki ryan; sean-fain@uiowa.edu; mitchelljbarnett@gmail.com; jthomasmobile@gmail.com; nate@elevationhomebuilders.com Subject:Preserve Building/Parking Lot Feedback Date:Friday, May 17, 2024 12:19:45 PM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Hi Parker, My name is Tom Edwards and I live at 1356 Tamarack Trail Iowa City, IA. Per our discussion, I have serious concern about anything being built in the preserve. When we purchased this property in early 2021 we were told explicitly that nothing would ever be built in that preserve. Now my understanding is that there is a proposal to build some type of housing building for entertainment along with 29 parking spots that will be located in the NW corner, 106 feet from the Tamarack Trail property lines. To say this is unacceptable is a HUGE understatement. This goes against everything we were told when we purchased these lots just a few years ago. To ruin a scenic view for the residents of Tamarack with a construction project that is unnecessary and quite frankly sounds stupid is ridiculous. I am asking every resident of Tamarack Trail to attend the in person meeting on June 12th at 5 pm to voice their concerns and have this ridiculous proposal shut down. Who is the person that proposed this? I would like their contact information to voice my concerns and even bring legal action if necessary. I have copied a few other residents of Tamarack Trail in this email. Expect to receive quite a few more complaints. This will not be taken lightly. Sincerely, Tom Edwards From:reggieschirm@gmail.com To:Parker Walsh Subject:My official email regarding the proposal to build on the Harvest Preserve Date:Sunday, May 19, 2024 8:45:09 PM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Parker, A proposal to build anything 106 feet from Tamarack property lines is absolutely preposterous. There are so many more favorable locations to build on that vast area of land that would make more sense for the Harvest Preserve, and the residents of Tamarack Trail. We pay very high property taxes on this street, and gladly do so, because of the beauty of Tamarack Trail. With this proposal, our street will not have the same feel as when we all moved here. Not to mention how it will negatively effect our property values. Have you, or anyone, thought of noise pollution and headlights from vehicles in residents back yards due to this facility? Residents of Tamarack and the HOA are joining together and will fight this proposal until it gets shut down. Appreciatively, Reggie Schirm 1236 Tamarack Trail Iowa City, Iowa 52245 319-530-4469 Sent from my iPhone From:Toni Van Voorhis To:Parker Walsh Subject:Special Exception 24-003 Harvest Preserve Date:Monday, May 20, 2024 9:01:22 AM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Dear Parker, We are writing to express our opposition to the proposed special exception request at Harvest Preserve. We are members of the preserve and also reside within the Tamarack Ridge subdivision. (We will be out of town at the time of the public hearing on Jun 12, 2024.) Although our home does not abut the area of the proposed "private group use building" and adjacent parking, we have our own concerns of reduced property values and noise. We are also extremely sympathetic to the added concerns of our neighbors who have homes adjacent to the proposed area of development. We do understand that one only has control over one's own property. However, we draw our expectations of what will occur on this land from the Harvest Preserve Mission Statement: "It is the mission of Harvest Preserve foundation, Inc. to restore, protect, and preserve its land holdings as a spiritual sanctuary. Harvest Preserve is holy ground where invited guests many quietly commune with whatever aspect of manifestation of the Divine they find personally appealing. The Preserve is a place to feel welcome, embraced and open-hearted and to indulge in the awe and wonder of nature." In addition, the following announcement was published in the Preserve's December 2022 Newsletter: "It's been a wonderful year at Harvest Preserve! Notably, we were able to put a conservation easement on all 100.64 acres, protecting it from development FOREVER!" (emphasis theirs) We understand that a conservation easement can take many forms and, if specified within legal documents, the owner can retain the right to build on their property. However, this proposed project is certainly neither in keeping with the communications above, nor was possible development of this land conveyed to the owners of the lots abutting the preserve at the time of purchase. These folks have now built expensive homes on their land. This is quite something to spring on them, and will surely reduce property values. They have already been surprised by the erection of an unsightly 10' tall chain link fence along their rear lot lines. Now, they are faced with the possibility of a structure with accompanying parking just over the fence. Imagine transitioning from a rear view of a quiet meadow to a gathering structure and 25+ vehicles. We are also concerned and unhappy with the lack of interface between HP and the Tamarack Ridge neighborhood. We note that a building permit request for this structure was filed by Bedrock Builders on 1/31/2024. In the time period between then and now, there has been no outreach to our neighborhood whatsoever. Harvest Preserve has 100 acres of land and buildable property in close proximity to its existing main entrance, parking lot, and outbuildings. The proposed project has been designed for the one portion of the Preserve that would very negatively impact neighbors. We write to request that you soundly reject this proposal. From:John Labrie To:Parker Walsh Cc:Kelly Labrie Subject:Special Exception 24-0003 - Harvest Preserve group assembly use building Date:Tuesday, May 21, 2024 5:22:20 PM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Dear Mr. Walsh, I am writing to express my dissatisfaction with the parking lot and group assembly building construction that is being proposed on the corner of the Harvest Preserve near Tamarack Trail. I own the property at 1380 Tamarack Trail and purchased the property with the belief that the owners of the Harvest Preserve would be protecting the wildlife and natural beauty of the area. This construction project and resulting structure if approved will be a tremendous eye sore to this beautiful portion of Iowa City, and will negatively impact the value of homes in the entire Tamarack Trail neighborhood. I encourage you and the rest of the Board of Adjustment to decline this request so that the beauty of this portion of Iowa City can be preserved. I will not be able to attend the public hearing on 6/12 so I am sending this note in hopes that you will share my displeasure with the rest of the board. I’d like to urge all of you to decline the proposed construction and I appreciate your collective consideration in this matter. Sincerely, John Labrie 1380 Tamarack Trail Iowa City, IA jglabrie@outlook.com 734.276.0708 From:Gail O’Donnell To:Parker Walsh Subject:Harvest Preserve Special Exception Date:Thursday, May 23, 2024 11:18:00 AM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Good Morning, As a resident in Tamarack Ridge, I am opposed to the Special Exception application by Harvest Preserve Foundation. 1. How do we know this isn’t a test case? If the proposal passes, will the Preserve use this for future expansion? 2. Placement of the facility is so close to backyards of residences on Tamarack Trail. ( these owners were promised NO development for 100 years.) Residential privacy? 3. There is available alternate real estate for building at the main entrance of Harvest Preserve. 4. Development not in keeping with nonprofit status. 5. What hours of operation? Noise? Light pollution? Frequency of use? 6. Development in conflict as a Nature Preserve. Thank you for reading my concerns in this matter. Sincerely, Mike O’Donnell From:Donald Backens To:Parker Walsh Subject:Harvest Preserve Special Exemption Request Date:Friday, May 24, 2024 7:54:28 PM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Dear Mr. Walsh, as a homeowner who owns a house on Tamarack Trail whose backyard ends at the existing fence along the proposed requested exemption area, I have several concerns. Most of these, I’m sure, are similar to my neighbor’s concerns. They include: Possible noise problems, dust from the 28 car parking lot and probable reduction in property values. My wife and I moved here from Rapid City, SD where we owned a beautiful acreage in the BlackHills. We moved here because our daughter and son-in-law told us about these wonderful lots for sale that butted up to a nature preserve. In fact, they are currently building a home next door to us. Before buying, we were assured that the Preserve would remain as is for the next 99 years with no new buildings or expansions. Our decision to move here was largely due to this promise. I guess I only have one question - is there any benefit to the homeowners affected by this Special Exemption Request that could possibly outweigh our concerns? We’ve lived here less than two years and had planned to have this be our last home. Thank you for listening Mr Walsh and we plan on being at all ofthe associated meetings. Sincerely, Don Backens.  Sent from my iPhone From:Gail O’Donnell To:Parker Walsh Subject:Special Exemption Date:Tuesday, May 28, 2024 7:25:19 AM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** To Parker Walsh, the City of Iowa City, Harvest Preserve, As a member of Harvest Preserve and a resident in Tamarack Ridge, I do not support this Special Exception for Private Group Assembly for development. 1. The proposed development of land has been dedicated as a nature preserve and recognized by Iowa’s DNR for protecting the land from development. 2. The Harvest Preserve’s Mission statement is to restore, protect and preserve the land. 3.Building a 40’x60’ building with 29 parking spaces in a current residential neighborhood, is not being a good neighbor, not in keeping with preserving the land and will have adverse effects on the Tamarack Ridge neighborhood. 4. This proposal will decrease the current homeowners, and open lot owners property values. 5. The proposed entrance for use is so close to Tamarack Trail, public safety for turning cars and bicyclists should be considered, as I feel it will create a potential hazard. 6. The main entrance already has 20 parking spaces that could be utilized for parking and space to build another “ private group” meeting space. In keeping the area in harmonious nature, without affecting the residential neighborhood. 7.Transparency- as a member of HP, we were not involved in this decision making, but we were involved with the chip seal road that was installed behind lots 35-48. This is along the 8 foot stainless steel eyesore fence installed. I suspect in anticipation of this project. As a result, we deal with cars racing down the chip seal road intermittently for various reasons, and this will only get worse. 8. We were told no development for 100 years, the land is in 100 year perpetuity, if this special exception is approved, when does the “ building stop?! Please say No to this proposal and reconsider the placement of the Private Group Assembly. Thank you, Gail O’Donnell 1320 Tamarack Trail From:Vicki Ryan To:Parker Walsh Cc:Anne Russett; Vicki Ryan Subject:RE: [External] RE: Tamarack Ridge Date:Tuesday, May 28, 2024 1:54:59 PM Attachments:image009.png image010.png image011.png image012.png image013.png image014.png image015.png image016.png image017.png image018.png image027.png image028.png image029.png image030.png image031.png image032.png image034.png image035.png image036.png image037.png image038.png image039.png image040.png ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Hi Parke and Anne, Hope you enjoyed the long weekend- always goes to fast. First and foremost, thank you for meeting with us last week to help us understand next steps. Some comments and concerns I see now, prior to attending the good neighbor meeting. I went out yesterday and walked where they want the building and parking spots. Below is a list of some major concerns: -Traffic: People already use a cut through from First Ave to Scott by taking Hickory to Tamarack. All the navigation apps will take you this way- we already have issues with speeding down our road as we have a lot of little kids and NO sidewalks to walk on. This will become very dangerous once this event center is built. -Traffic on Scott- speed limit is 35- average speed is probably 50. Adding an entertainment venue on this road means more traffic, speeding. -Size of building: for that area, seems building is going to be extremely large -there is already some existing parking spots on that piece of property- what happens to them- can they be removed or counted towards the amount they need per code? It just seems like they are asking for a lot of additional spots that will definitely make the area an eye sore. With no parking on Scott, what happens if they do have over flow parking. Only place they could then park would be Tamarack.. -the need for large trees to block building and parking: the houses on the east side of Tamarack will back right up to this-we needs something to block this not just for the sound but also for privacy and security. People visiting this new establishment will be able to see directly into our neighbors windows and also be able to easily jump fence and enter properties that are along the east side of the building -Lighting: wether it be security lights and/or entertainment lights it will be shining exactly in the windows of those homes. Not to mention glare of cars pulling in and out of the area -Noise: this travels the way it is due to the open area and trees-I cant imagine the noise when this establishment is built. Again, young neighborhood, young kids. Concerns are music and loud speakers of course -Property values: the first 4 lots in the neighborhood are for sale and already having a tough time selling due to Scott being so busy. There is no doubt to even try to sell those lots will require a lower list price which in fact lowers all of our properties values. That is if they sell- we also cant finish sidewalks in the area which is a safety issue for us all, until these sell. The entire project will devalue Tamarack Ridge subdivision and impair our property values. I am sure some of these items may be addressed tomorrow but I wanted to get it out there to you as my concerns right now. Thanks again for meeting last week. Have a great day. Parker, ill see yah tomorrow ! Vicki Ryan-President Tamarack Ridge VICKI RYAN Regional Sales Manager 630.881.4982 vryan@myndm.com 2475 Village View Drive, suite 100 Henderson, NV 89074 www.myndm.com From: Parker Walsh <PWalsh@iowa-city.org> Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 4:35 PM To: Vicki Ryan <vryan@myndm.com> Cc: Anne Russett <ARussett@iowa-city.org> Subject: RE: [External] RE: Tamarack Ridge Vicki, From:Anith Mathai To:Parker Walsh Subject:Special Exception 24-0003 1645 N Scott Blvd Date:Tuesday, May 28, 2024 5:31:18 PM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Dear Mr. Walsh, As I will not be able to attend the public meeting, I wish to provide my written comments. As a resident of Tamarack trail (1369), I wish to convey my opposition to the special exception 24-0003. Specifically for reasons stated below (as referred to in the 14-4B-3A general criteria in the Iowa City code) see text in italics 1.The specific proposed exception will 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.- I expect this exception will reduce property values in the area. 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. - Future exceptions may be allowed that do not match the orderly development for which this area was zoned. 5.Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets.- I expect the traffic to increase substantially, resulting in overflow onto Tamarack Trl. Thank you for your consideration. Anith Mathai From:Nathan Knause To:Julie Decker; sean-fain@uiowa.edu; MITCHELLJBARNETT@gmail.com; vickiryan75@yahoo.com; jthomasmobile@gmail.com; Parker Walsh Subject:Re: Proposed building at Harvest Preserve Date:Thursday, May 30, 2024 9:20:12 AM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Julie thank you for hosting the meeting yesterday. I want to give my two cents and let everyone know I don’t really have a dog in this fight since my company doesn’t own any lots in the Tamarack and just finishing our last per custom home in the neighborhood. I am looking at this from both sides and just giving my option. I agree with all the homeowners about the concerns and think they valid. I do understand and agree we never reached out or had our agent reach out to make sure no buildings could be built back there. I think a good compromise could be reached that owners would be more acceptable to. There will be a few and I think you know who that are from the meeting they will never be happy. 1. Make changes that Doug Boothroy suggested with orientation of the building 2. Provide 3D views of what the building will look like 3. Add screening trees and plants, provide landscaping plan and timeline 4. Give insurance or rules or agreement on how the space will be used and times used will not be used after dark. 5. Update to buildable area behind those homes to limit to just this building will go long way I think this is the big takeaway that people will like 6. Change the 8’ galvanized 12ga fence to a 5’ black fence, I think that would be go so very far with the neighborhood. When the permit was issued allowing that 8’ fence Terry G at the city did not know that Tamarack was being developed into sub and when he looked it up the area was still under zoning that allowed 8’ fence, when its residential max allowed is 6’. So its just buy dumb luck that the 8’ fence slipped past the approval. From:Seth Tomchik To:Parker Walsh Subject:Harvest Preserve Special Exception 24-003 Date:Thursday, May 30, 2024 12:50:36 PM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Dear Parker Walsh and the Board of Adjustment, I am writing to provide feedback on Special Exception (24-003) for the proposed new Harvest Preserve building. I am a resident of the Tamarack Ridge neighborhood (with a home bordering Harvest Preserve) and also a Harvest Preserve member. I understand, respect, and share neighborhood concerns about any potential major development at the site in the future. We have a window of opportunity to support the protection of natural areas/green space, which enhance the quality of life for all, as Iowa City grows. In my view, the best way to achieve this is to work collaboratively with stakeholders to maximize preservation over time. This includes facilitating land uses (hiking, outdoor educational activities, summer camps, etc.) that support preservation of natural areas/green space. My understanding is that Harvest Preserve shares this objective, and believe that their programming reflects respect for the land & wildlife. Providing a more functional support building for ongoing daytime activities (summer camps, etc.) is logical. Therefore, I support the current proposal to build the outbuilding (the proposed footprint and square footage is similar to one single-family home). To address concerns from the residents of adjacent communities (i.e., Tamarack Ridge), it will be important to assess and mitigate any concerns about building visibility, lighting, noise, rental hours, rental group size, and potential impact on the sale of the remaining lots in the neighborhood. I think that focusing effort on these aspects of the proposal can produce a mutually beneficial outcome. Sincerely, Seth Tomchik From:Gail O’Donnell To:Parker Walsh Subject:Harvest Preserve Special Exception Date:Thursday, May 30, 2024 4:18:32 PM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Mr. Parker Walsh/City of Iowa City, This project needs to slow down! The Preserve has taken ample time to prepare for this development. It is extremely unfair for our HOA to respond on such short notice.It feels like the Preserve is trying to rush this process, hoping residents of Tamarack Ridge HOA will just roll over and allow the project to move forward with little or no resistance. I don’t know when this idea was actually hatched, but I know the permit was issued January ‘24. I have a sick feeling that this proposal goes back multiple years. And it feels underhanded, and very unethical. I feel that Tamarack HOA residents were flat out lied to about “ NO Development for 100 years,” I personally don’t think the ides of a building is bad, I just vehemently abhor the site of the current plan! Allow us the time to defend our properties, and property values! Please postpone the June 12 meeting, Sincerely, Mike O’Donnell 1320 Tamarack Trail From:Christine Backens To:Parker Walsh Subject:Follow up from the Good Neighbor Meeting held on 5/29 at Harvest Preserve Date:Thursday, May 30, 2024 8:27:34 PM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** After the meeting, I am even more concerned about this proposed project. The key reasons are: 1. The parking lot light & car lights ~ this will be very intrusive to the tranquility we have come to enjoy. 2.The potential parking overflow and traffic on Tamarack Trail Because of unsold lots, we already have to walk in the street @ times. 3.The noise ~ voices carry, which we already experience to a small degree with hikers in that area. If this project is approved, it will be VERY disrupting to the peace & quiet we have gotten accustomed to. 4.If this proposal is passed, I fear it'll lead the way to more outbuildings being built. 5.Decreased property values ~ if this is passed, I firmly believe it'll impact the resale value of our home. Look @ the unsold lots on Tamarack Trail. I've had people tell me it's because nobody wants an ugly prison fence to look @ in their backyard. It's a major eyesore!!! If this proposal is passed, it'll only make it worse. 6.When purchasing these lots, many of us were told nothing would be built behind us. This is the ONLY reason we purchased our lot and have gone through the expense of planting many many trees as we do care about the environment. I went to the meeting last night thinking it would be a 'good neighbor' meeting & came away with feeling it was anything BUT that! There were some very legitimate concerns brought up by several homeowners and it was disturbing to hear (more than once) 'oh, we didn't think about that'. Seriously??? They are actually proposing something when they don't understand the full impact it'll have to their neighboring million dollar homes???? I feel they are being shady & disingenuous. There were so many contradictory statements made during the meeting. This didn't build trust. How is the 'mission' of Harvest Preserve to restore and maintain the native Iowa prairie and woodlands achieved by constructing a new building and parking lot? And is having a current septic system which has never been inspected or cleaned out also part of that 'mission'? Is putting up a prison high, galvanized chain link fence also part of that 'mission'? They already have a building they can remodel to make it suitable for the purpose they are trying to obtain as well as a parking lot. They can add a port-a-potty & call it good. I have spent a good amount of time writing this & would hope everyone on the board will have the courtesy to read it. Respectfully, Christine Backens From:Gail O’Donnell To:Parker Walsh Subject:Harvest Preserve Special Exception Date:Thursday, May 30, 2024 8:57:11 PM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Mr. Parker Walsh/City of Iowa City, The “Good Neighbor” meeting held last night with Harvest Preserve, MMS, Bedrock Builders, and the Tamarack Ridge residents was so disappointing and it was apparent that this project has not been well thought out. There was some good discussion and several possible solutions to this proposal. But I’m having a hard time swallowing its” for the kids” and that new bathrooms are a primary concern! The pond house is lovely overlooking the pond especially at sunset! Its rustic appearance is fitting for a nature preserve. Kids and adults alike appreciate simplicity in the nature setting. We can go to cookie cutter building any day with AC, flushing toilets, carpet etc! Please slow this decision making process down and find out some of the facts and information that the residents wanted to know. Would this Exemption just open the door to more expansion when we were told 100 years of NO development? What is the purpose of a nature preserve if the land isn’t protected? In fact, the DNR just recognized the HP for just that! The parking and increased traffic is a major concern to our neighborhood. And decreasing property values is another consideration. But won’t this building have to meet city codes?( the current pond house apparently doesn’t!)The occupancy of 160 is an outrageous number, and 4800 square feet totally unnecessary UNLESS it’s going to turn into a wedding venue for receptions and large gatherings! I would like to add as a member of HP, I have not read anything in the newsletters about the possible construction of a new meeting/reception building, which would appear underhanded. We actually haven’t used our membership once this year and only a handful last year, but we do enjoy looking out and seeing the wildlife and the open space in our backyard. It’s a shame the 8ft galvanized steel fence is also in the picture, when our HOA guidelines ( per Joe Clark) specifically states it has to be vinyl coated green or black. Thanks you for your consideration in delaying this process and hopefully rejecting the current proposal. Sincerely, Gail ODonnell 1320 Tamarack Trail From:John Labrie To:Parker Walsh Cc:Kelly Labrie; drseda@outlook.com Subject:Special Exception 24-0003 - Request for special assembly building at 1645 N Scott Blvd Date:Friday, May 31, 2024 9:26:52 AM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Parker, I’m following up on email correspondence that you and I had regarding the above topic earlier in the month. I was advised by my realtor (copied on this email) this morning that because of the proposed construction and potential future work at the Preserve, the buyers of my home at 1380 Tamarack Trail who were under contract to purchase the property and close on June 14th have backed out of the agreement. I now plan to invest thousands of dollars in backyard landscaping as an attempt to obstruct the view of the preserve property and areas of potential future construction as best I can so that I can try to sell my property. I am very disappointed about the feedback that I received regarding the interaction between the owners / operators of the preserve and members of the Tamarack Trail community during the meeting that occurred earlier this week. I wish that preserve leadership was being more understanding of the concerns expressed by the Tamarack Trail community and think that they should be willing to invest in ways that would help solve the concerns expressed by the neighborhood. Options for doing so would include ideas like replacing the current chain link fence with plantings or other barriers that would be more aesthetically appealing and would both better restrict view of the intended changes to their property while enhancing the beauty of both their property and the neighborhood. I would appreciate it if you could express my views to the entire board during your upcoming meeting on the topic. Thank you for your consideration and any support you can provide to the consequences this issue is having on my ability to sell my property. Sincerely, John Labrie jglabrie@outlook.com 734.276.0708 From:IowaCity@enotify.visioninternet.com To:Parker Walsh Subject:Special Exception-Harvest Preserve Date:Friday, May 31, 2024 4:56:23 PM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Message submitted from the <Iowa City, IA> website. Site Visitor Name: Carlos and Laurie Pacheco Site Visitor Email: Pachfam44@gmail.com May 31, 2024 Mr. Parker Walsh Neighborhood and Development Services City of Iowa Re: Special Exception-Harvest Preserve Mr. Walsh, After attending the good neighbor meeting hosted by Harvest Preserve, we were informed that the current build site was not their first choice. They indicated that the first site choice was not acceptable to Iowa City because it involved septic installation. Wouldn’t it make sense to grant an exception for installation of septic at the original site instead of upsetting 40 some residents that are being affected by the special exception application at the proposed second choice site? Our concerns are as follows: -Building occupancy is for 160. Where will everyone park? Vehicle overflow will force individuals to park on Tamarack Trail. This will be a big safety concern for parents and their small children. -Noise, car lights, parking lot lighting next to a residential community is also of great concern. -Unsold Tamarack Trail residential lots, will remain unsold due to the proposed new building structure. This may result in a depreciation of home values. Please recognize our concerns, re-evaluate the “Special Exception“ and proposed location. Please enable Harvest Preserve to move forward at another location, away from Tamarack Trail residents. Sincerely, Carlos and Laurie Pacheco 1274 Tamarack Trail Iowa City, IA 52245 Pachfam44@gmail.com From:rob phipps To:julie@harvestpreserve.org; Parker Walsh Subject:Harvest Preserve Pond House Date:Sunday, June 2, 2024 2:41:25 PM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Julie and Parker, We own several lots that directly back up to this project. I understand the desire for such a facility although on such a large piece of land it seems it could be located in a different area not impacting homes. If it has to be in this location I would propose maybe a nicer fence and some more trees as a concession. Thanks Rob Phipps Sent from Mail for Windows Department of Otolaryngology – Head & Neck Surgery 200 Hawkins Dr. 21200 PFP Iowa City, IA 52242 319-356-2201 Tel 319-356-4547 Fax uihc.org June 26, 2024 Mr. Parker Walsh Iowa City Board of Adjustments Iowa City Iowa Dear Mr. Walsh I am writing this email in strong opposition to the proposed expansion at the Harvest Preserve located on Scott Blvd in Iowa City. I am a homeowner in the Tamarack neighborhood. I am concerned that this expansion will drastically impact our property values, most significantly those whose property backs up to the Preserve. This should concern the Iowa City Council as it will certainly impact tax assessments. Our currently yearly tax payment is $14,000 and our neighbors are likely similar which means our neighborhood contributes several hundred thousand dollars each year to the city budget. There are no positives that can be gained from this proposed expansion and construction. Thank you for your consideration, Sincerely, Brian Andrews Dr. Brian and Sarah Andrews 2870 Buckle Down Cir Iowa City, IA 52245 From:Andrews, Brian T To:Parker Walsh Subject:Harvest Preserve Expansion opposition Date:Wednesday, June 26, 2024 3:31:53 PM Attachments:We sent you safe versions of your files.msg Tamarack Letter 2024.pdf ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Mimecast Attachment Protection has deemed this file to be safe, but always exercise caution when opening files. Mr. Walsh Please accept my letter of strong opposition to the Harvest Preserve Parking lot proposition. The Tamarack neighbor which abuts the Harvest Preserve is unanimously in opposition to this expansion and construction. Thank you, Brian Andrews From:Anith Mathai To:Parker Walsh Subject:Re: Special Exception 24-0003 1645 N Scott Blvd Date:Wednesday, June 26, 2024 3:57:54 PM Attachments:image001.png image002.png image003.png image004.png image005.png image006.png ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Hi Parker, I would like to add to my original list, that I oppose this measure to allow construction. After attending the "Good neighbor meeting" and being informed that the capacity for this building would be 160 people, but with only 39 planned parking spots, it's clear that the overflow parking would spill onto Tamarack Trail. In addition, since the event center is not restricting consumption of alcohol on premises, nor limiting the nature of the events (e.g. a wedding could be hosted or an evening event), this could result in disorderly conduct or impaired driving on Tamarack trail, on which reside a number of younger children. In summary, allowing this construction will 1. Reduce property values on Tamarack trl overall 2. Encourage future exceptions, which will not match the original zoning plan, and discourage organized development 3. Increase traffic and reduce the orderly flow of traffic on Tamarack trl (due to lack of parking spots) 4. Result in potentially disorderly conduct of patrons of the center (loud music etc) 5. Increase chances of impaired operation of motor vehicles on a residential street. Regards, Anith On Wed, 29 May 2024 at 08:19, Parker Walsh <PWalsh@iowa-city.org> wrote: Thank you, Anith. I will pass your comments along to the Board of Adjustment for consideration. Thanks, Parker Parker Walsh WWW.ICGOV.ORG Associate Planner p: 319-356-5238 410 E Washington St Iowa City, IA 52240 Iowa City Transit is now FARE FREE! Learn more at ICGOV.ORG/FAREFREE From: Anith Mathai <anithmathai@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2024 5:31 PM To: Parker Walsh <PWalsh@iowa-city.org> Subject: Special Exception 24-0003 1645 N Scott Blvd ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Dear Mr. Walsh, As I will not be able to attend the public meeting, I wish to provide my written comments. As a resident of Tamarack trail (1369), I wish to convey my opposition to the special exception 24-0003. Specifically for reasons stated below (as referred to in the 14-4B-3A general criteria in the Iowa City code) see text in italics 1. The specific proposed exception will 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.- I expect this exception will reduce property values in the area. 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. - Future exceptions may be allowed that do not match the orderly development for which this area was zoned. 5.Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets.- I expect the traffic to increase substantially, resulting in overflow onto Tamarack Trl. Thank you for your consideration. Anith Mathai 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 July 2, 2024 Dear Parker and Members of the City of Iowa City Board of Adjustment, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Special Exception 24-003 request to build a parking area and a private use assembly building at the Harvest Preserve. The private use assembly building will be used for various purposes including camps, weddings, and receptions. The maximum capacity is 122 occupants with 21 parking spaces. The following issues could negatively impact the residents of the Tamarack Trail neighborhood: •Noise: Car doors, engines, music, voices, and general noise are significant concerns. (General Criteria A.1) •Intoxicated Occupants: Julie at the Harvest Preserve has not addressed this issue. However, if wedding receptions are held there will likely be alcohol present. (General Criteria A.1) •Trash and Garbage: Julie has stated she does not want to work on weekends. Without adequate operational controls in place, there is a concern for increase trash and garbage. (General Criteria A.1) •Lighting: Parking lot lights and headlights from cars will negatively affect many homes and residents on Tamarack Trail. (General Criteria A.1) •Safety: An increase in traffic and parking is likely on Tamarack Trail and Buckle Down Circle. (General Criteria A.1 and A.5) Traffic The Navigation APP, Waze, directs drivers through Tamarack Trail when traveling north on 1st Avenue to the destination of 1645 North Scott Boulevard. This could result in additional vehicles using Tamarack Trail. The Iowa DOT collected traffic volumes during the 2020 season. Even though these numbers may have been impacted by COVID-19, they still provide a useful reference for vehicle volumes and potential traffic patterns at the proposed site. According to the Iowa Traffic Data (arcgis.com) a total of 26,200 vehicles per day converged on the intersection of Scott Boulevard and 1st Avenue. •52% from east of 1st Avenue on Scott Boulevard •19% from west of 1st Avenue on Scott Boulevard •29% from 1st Avenue With the proposed site as the destination, there is a potential for 81 extra vehicles converging at the intersection of Scott Boulevard and 1st Avenue. This could mean 24 vehicles arriving before an event and 24 vehicles leaving after the event would be traveling on 1st Avenue, some of which may have intoxicated drivers. This increase in traffic raises significant concerns for the safety and well- being of Tamarack Trail residents. Parking According to the 2022 National Household Travel Survey, the average number of occupants per trip for all household vehicles was 1.5 persons. Source: FOTW #1333, March 11, 2024: In 2022 the Average Number of Occupants Per Trip for Household Vehicles in the United States Was 1.5 | Department of Energy The Special Exception 24-003, which requests to construct a private assembly use building, has a maximum capacity of 122 persons with 21 parking spots. Based on the average number of occupants per vehicle, the following is an estimate of the number of vehicles that could attempt to park at the proposed site: •120 occupants – 80 vehicles •100 occupants – 67 vehicles •80 occupants – 53 vehicles •75 occupants – 50 vehicles •60 occupants – 40 vehicles 2 When more than 32 people assemble at this gathering center, there is a strong possibility of parking overflow. The overflow vehicles will likely park on the ‘chip seal’ driveway that runs parallel with the fence or on Tamarack Trail. The ‘chip seal’ option would potentially be used first, followed by Tamarack Trail, as it is in clear view of the proposed site. The distance between Tamarack Trail and the proposed site is only a 0.12-mile drive and/or walk. Image #1: Distance from Private Use Assembly Building to Tamarack Trail Image #2: Available Sidewalk from Private Use Assembly Building to Tamarack Trail. Please see red line below. Regarding the potential impact of overflow parking on Tamarack Trail, the standard dimensions for parallel parking spaces typically require a minimum of 22 feet. Source: What Are the Standard Parking Space Dimensions? (asphaltkingdom.com). Example If 122 occupants (max capacity) attend this proposed building site at once, the 21 available parking spots will be filled and the overflow of parked cars could potentially park on the ‘chip seal’ or Tamarack Tamarack and Buckle Down Circle. 22 feet x 60 vehicles = 1320 feet The ‘chip seal’ driveway is approximately 1068 feet long. This is not enough space for occupants to park without overflowing to other areas. 3 Image #3: Length of Chip Seal Driveway If occupants are allowed to park on the ‘chip seal’ driveway, there will still be an excess of approximately 12 vehicles. Most of these vehicles will likely park on Tamarack Trail, further increasing congestion and potential safety hazards for the neighborhood. Image #4: Shows Impact of Overflow Parking on Tamarack Trail 4 If occupants are not allowed to park on the ‘chip seal’ driveway for reasons such as weather and Harvest Preserve policy, there could potenially be an excess of 60 vehicles that park on Tamarack Trail and this may also lead to parking on the adjacent Buckle Down Circle. 81 total vehicles - 21 (parking spots available) = 60 (overflow) Please see below: Google Area & Distance Calculator Map | Measure Distance Area on Google map (maps.ie) Image #4: Shows Impact of Overflow Parking on Tamarack Trail and Buckle Down Circle Furthermore, there are approximately 28 children under the age of ten in the neighborhood. Many of these children ride bikes, scooters, and walk around the area regularly. Approval of Special Exception 24-0003 has the potentially to significantly increase the risk to these children, compromising their safety and well-being. In order to grant a special exception, the Board must find that an applicant meets specific criteria. The examples stated above demonstrate that the Special Exception 24-003 does not meet the general approval criteria A.1, “The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare” and general approval criterial A.5, “Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets.” Appreciatively, Reggie Schirm 1236 Tamarack Trail Iowa City, Iowa 52245 From:Marcia Hammond To:Parker Walsh Subject:Special Exception 24-003 Date:Wednesday, July 3, 2024 7:30:27 AM ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Parker. In good faith… Intentions… Deception… Many thoughts go into this email as I write. I made the decision to move here after years of looking around deciding on where I would spend the last chapter of my life. I was told by my builder the land behind me was in a trust and nothing would be built for 100 years. Is it good faith or deception as I have nothing in writing from said builder nor do the other homeowners on Tamarack Trail. This project to build is not in keeping with the environment of this community. The special exception changes the landscape of the community and raises very serious concerns for: Safety Noise pollution Light pollution The land itself from woodland to surface parking and a building to accommodate around 120-160 people. The value of homes The reason I use the word deception is there are other areas in the preservation the building could reside because you can have a septic system due to the fact there is much acreage to support that type of system We have as home owners in building, met all the conservation standards and paid the high level tax this community requires. There are no special exceptions for homeowners who are your constituents why would you consider this project when it is not inclusive of all. We have long suffered the results of privatization at the expense to the tax payers. Our properties are our biggest investment let us keep the intention of the community. Residential Thank you for your time and consideration. Marcia A Hammond 1344 Tamarack Trail August 22, 2024 Board of Adjustment Meeting DISCUSSION OF BYLAWS ITEM 4 ON THE AGENDA Prepared by Staff CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: August 16, 2024 To: Board of Adjustment From: Susan Dulek, Ass'!. City A ttome� Re: Possible Amendment to the Procedural Rules (aka, the bylaws) The agenda for the August 22 Board of Adjustment meeting contains an item to discuss the question of nominating a member who is not present at the meeting. Currently the Procedural Rules (aka, the bylaws) for the Board of Adjustment do not specific�lly address the nomination of a member for the office of Chair or Vice Chair who is not present. I said specifically as the Procedural Rules do state Robert's Rules apply except as otherwise provided, and Robert's Rules do address this matter. The issue is whether the Board desires to have Robert's Rules govern this situation or wishes to adopt a different procedure. There are three options, which in no particular order are: 1.Under Robert's Rules, a member who is nominated but not present can decline the nomination. In order to facilitate this, the Board Secretary (City staff) should be assigned to notify the person promptly of the nomination, and the person should either accept or decline the nomination. If the person declines, the agenda for the next meeting would include a new election. 2.Another option is to prohibit the nomination of a person who is not present. In this instance, the Board need not defer the election of both offices to the following meeting. For example, Member A is present and is nominated for/elected as Chair. Member B is not present but others would like to nominate Member B for Vice Chair. The Board would just defer the election for Vice Chair to the next agenda. If the situation was reversed, the newly elected Vice Chair would preside over the meeting and the election of the Chair would be on the following agenda. 3.The above two options are known as nominations from the floor. A third option is nomination via a slate of candidates put forth by a Nominating Committee, which the Board then votes to approve the slate. The Committee will have spoken to the candidates who, in turn, will have indicated they will accept the nomination. Given that the Board has only 5 members, this does not appear to me to be a good option, and I am not aware of any City Board or Commission that elects via a slate. Attached to this Memo is a copy of the current Procedural Rules with proposed revisions to adopt either of the first two options described above. It takes three votes to amend the Procedural Rules, which are not effective until approved by the City Council. Copy to: Park Walsh, Planner 1 PROCEDURAL RULES Iowa City Board of Adjustment ARTICLE I. AUTHORITY: The Iowa City Board of Adjustment shall have that authority which is conferred by Chapter 414 of the Code of Iowa; City Code Title 14, Chapter 7, entitled "Administration," Article A, entitled "Board of Adjustment," and through the adoption of these procedural rules stated herein. ARTICLE II. MEMBERSHIP: Section 1: Qualifications. The Board of Adjustment shall consist of five (5) members appointed by the City Council. All members of the Board shall be residents of Iowa City, Iowa. A majority of the members of the Board shall be persons representing the public at large and shall not be involved in the business of purchasing or selling real estate. Section 2: Compensation. Members shall serve without compensation but may be reimbursed for expenses incurred for travel outside the city on designated Board business. Such expenses must be submitted to the City Manager. Section 3: Orientation for New Members. Prior to the first regular meeting following their appointment, each new member shall be given an orientation briefing by City staff and be provided with the Board's procedural rules and other information that may be useful to Board members in carrying out their duties. The City Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan are available online. Section 4: Absences. Three (3) consecutive unexplained absences of a Board member from regular Board meetings may result in a recommendation to the City Council from the Board to discharge said member and appoint a new Board member. Members shall be removable for cause by the City Council upon written charges after a public hearing. Section 5: Vacancies. Any vacancy on the Board because of death, resignation, long­ term illness, disqualification, or removal shall be filled for the unexpired term by the City Council after at least thirty (30) calendar days of public notice of the vacancy. Section 6: Terms. Members shall be appointed for terms of five (5) years. No members shall be appointed to succeed themselves. However, a member appointed to fill an unexpired term with one (1) year or less remaining may also be appointed concurrently for one full five (5) year term. Section 7: Resignations. Resignation should be submitted in writing to the Board Secretary, who will transmit the resignation to the City Council with copies to the City Manager, the Director of Neighborhood and Development Services, and the Board Chairperson, preferably at least sixty (60) days prior to the date of intended departure. 2 Section 8: Temporary Alternate. An alternate member, if available, shall be appointed as provided herein, to replace a member who is unable to participate in an appeal of an administrative decision due to a conflict of interest. Any person who has served as a member of the Board within the five (5) years preceding the filing of the appeal, and who represents the public at large and is not involved in the business of purchasing or selling real estate, shall be qualified to serve as an alternate. When a member has recused himself/herself due to a conflict and the date of hearing before the Board has been set, the Secretary of the Board shall notify all such persons and the first to agree to serve as the alternate is hereby appointed to do so. ARTICLE Ill. OFFICERS: Section 1: Number. The officers of the Board shall be a Chairperson and a Vice­ Chairperson, each of whom shall be elected by a majority vote of the members of the Board. The Board Secretary shall be a staff person, who is appointed by the Director of Neighborhood and Development Services. Section 2: Nomination, Election and Term of Office. The Chairperson and Vice­ Chairperson shall be elected annually at the first regular meeting of the Board each year, except as provided herein. A member who is not present at the meeting may not be nominated for an office, and members may defer election for that office until the next meeting. OR The Secretary must promptly notify a member elected to an office if the member was not present at the meeting. The member must notify the Secretary whether the nomination is accepted or declined, and if declined, election for that office will be placed on the agenda for the next meeting. Section 3: Vacancies. A vacancy in the office of Chairperson or Vice­Chairperson because of death, resignation, removal, disqualification, or other cause shall be filled by election from the members of the Board for the unexpired portion of the term. Section 4: Chairperson. The Chairperson shall, when present, preside at all meetings, call special meetings, and in general perform all duties incident to the office of a Chairperson, and such other duties as may be prescribed by the members from time to time. Such Chairperson may administer oaths and compel the attendance of witnesses. Section 5: Vice-Chairperson. When the Chairperson is absent, abstaining, or recusing, the Vice­ Chairperson shall perform the duties of the Chairperson and shall have all the powers of and be subject to all the restrictions upon the Chairperson. Section 6: Acting Chairperson. In the absence and/or due to the abstention or recusal of both the Chairperson and Vice­Chairperson, the remaining three (3) Board members may elect a member to serve as Acting Chairperson. The Acting Chairperson shall perform the duties of the Chairperson and when so acting shall have all the powers of and be subject to all the restrictions upon the Chairperson. 3 Section 7: Secretary. The appointed staff person, who serves as the Board's Secretary, shall be responsible for maintaining the office of the Board, receiving and filing Board decisions and orders, posting and publishing notices as required by law, and for maintaining minutes and other records of the Board's proceedings. ARTICLE IV. APPLICATIONS: Section 1: Application Forms. Any application for a request or appeal to the Board of Adjustment shall be filed with the City Clerk on forms provided by the Secretary of the Board. The Secretary's office is located in the Department of Neighborhood and Development Services. Forms are available in the Office of the City Clerk and on the City's website. In the appropriate cases, the Building Official shall transmit to the Secretary all documents constituting a record, upon which the Board shall act. Section 2: Application Submittal. Appeals to the Board shall be filed with the City Clerk within a reasonable time period, not to exceed thirty (30) calendar days after the action appealed from, and shall specify the grounds for such appeal. An appeal from a decision by the Building Official to issue a building permit shall not be deemed to have been filed within a reasonable time if such appeal is filed more than fifteen (15) calendar days after construction work pursuant to such permit is observable from adjacent properties or the public right­of­way or fifteen (15) calendar days after an alleged violation of the zoning code is similarly observable. Applicants may appeal an approval or a denial of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Commission within a conservation district by filing a letter with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days after a Resolution of Denial is filed by the Commission. Section 3: Application Filing Fee. The applicant shall complete the required forms, provide all information requested on the form, and provide any additional information as requested by the Secretary of the Board. A filing fee shall be paid upon presentation of the application. Application fees are established by resolution of the City Council. Section 4: Party of Interest. Requests for a variance or special exception must be filed on behalf of the real party in interest, such as the owner or contract purchaser. Section 5: Case Number. An application filed according to the above procedure shall be given a case number within seven (7) calendar days of the filing date. Case numbers will be assigned according to the order in which applications are received. ARTICLE V. NOTICE: Section 1: Notice Letters. No less than ten (10) calendar days prior to the public hearing, the Secretary of the Board shall send notice by mail to all property owners of record and to all non­duplicative individual occupants (when available on the City Assessor's website), within 500 feet of the subject property. Such notice shall include a description of the action requested along with the time and location of the meeting. The applicant shall be formally notified of the time and place of the hearing, in writing, by the Secretary of the Board. 4 Section 2: Newspaper Notice. Notice of the time and place of public hearings shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation not more than twenty (20) calendar day nor less than ten (10) calendar days prior to the hearing. It shall contain the street address or location of the property and a brief description of the nature of the application or appeal. Section 3: Notice Sign. No less than ten (10) calendar days prior to the public hearing, the Applicant shall post a sign on or near the property upon which the application is being made and shall remove the sign immediately following the public hearing on the application. The sign will be provided to the applicant(s) by the Board Secretary. ARTICLE VI. HEARING: Section 1: Regular Hearings. Hearings will be held as needed at a regular time and place to be set by the members of the Board. Section 2: Special Hearings. Special hearings or meetings of the Board may be called by the Chairperson and shall be called by the Chairperson or Vice­Chairperson at the request of three (3) or more members of the Board. Section 3: Place of Hearings. All hearings and meetings of the Board shall be open to the public and shall be in a place accessible to people with disabilities. Section 4: Quorum. Three (3) members of the Board shall constitute a quorum. Section 5: Applicant Representation. The applicant may, at the time of the public hearing, appear on their own behalf and be represented by agent and/or counsel. The applicant or their representative may present oral argument and testimony; witnesses, including experts; and may submit written evidence and exhibits in the form of statements, photos, charts, or other relevant evidence. In the absence of the applicant or their representative(s), the Board may proceed to act on the matter based on the information provided. Section 6: Briefs. The Board may request written briefs for legal argument. Applicants may submit written briefs if they so choose. Section 7: Conduct of Hearing. Order and decorum shall be maintained at the hearing by the Chairperson of the Board of Adjustment, so as to allow an orderly presentation of evidence wherever possible. The Chair may swear witnesses and direct order of testimony. The Chair shall avoid testimony that is overly redundant. The Chair may provide for recesses during the deliberation, as appropriate. Any Board member who has a legal conflict of interest shall recuse him/ herself from the decision­making process. A member who has a legal conflict of interest or otherwise elects to recuse him/herself due to a perceived conflict of interest shall state the reason for recusal prior to discussion of the matter under consideration and may choose to leave the meeting room for the duration of the proceedings for that application. Section 8: Hearing Order for Special Exceptions and Variances. The order of hearing for special exception or variance requests shall be as follows: 5 1.Staff presentation of the facts of the case and recommendation to the board. 2.Statement by proponents of the application. 3.Statement by opponents of the application. 4.Rebuttal by proponents and then by opponents. 5.General discussion by the Board. The Board may request additional comments from the participants. Section 9: Hearing Order for Appeals. The order of hearing for appeals of an administrative decision shall be as follows: 1.Brief introduction by the Secretary of the Board setting forth the administrative decision on appeal and appellant’s grounds for the appeal. 2.Appellant presentation on the rationale for the appeal. 3.Staff presentation on the rationale for the administrative decision being appealed. 4.Statement by proponents of the appeal. 5.Statement by opponents of the appeal. 6.Rebuttal by proponents and then by opponents. 7.General discussion by the Board. The Board may request additional comments from the participants. Section 10: Board Deliberation. After all parties have been heard, the public hearing will be declared closed so that the Board may deliberate the case. The Board must state findings of fact and conclusions of law. These facts and legal conclusions must be set forth in writing as required by Iowa law. An application may be deferred or withdrawn at the request of the applicant at any time before a decision is made by the Board. Section 11: Board Motions. Motions may be made and seconded by any member of the Board. Motions are always made in the affirmative, approving the requested action. Section 12: Board Voting. After a motion and discussion, the Board shall be polled for votes. A board member may abstain from voting, which is a non­vote. The concurring vote of three (3) members of the Board shall be required to uphold an appeal, to decide in favor of a special exception, or to grant a variance. Voting on Board decisions will be by roll call and will be recorded by yeas and nays. Proxy votes are not allowed. Section 13: Legal Advisor. The City Attorney or a designated representative shall act as legal counsel to the Board. Section 14: Conduct of Meetings. Except as otherwise provided herein, Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised shall be used to conduct Board hearings and meetings. ARTICLE VII. RECORDS: Section 1: Record of Hearings. Audio recordings shall be made for all hearings and such recordings shall be kept for a period of no less than six (6) weeks. Minutes shall be produced from such recordings and forwarded to the City Council after approval by the Board or the Secretary of the Board. All minutes shall be maintained by the Secretary of 6 the Board and shall also be on file at the City Clerk's Office. The applicant may request a court reporter at the applicant's own expense. Section 2: Case Files. The Secretary of the Board shall keep a file of all cases, including forms and additional information. Said file shall be a public record and available for public inspection during business hours. Copies may be made available upon request, at cost. Section 3: Transcript. Upon request, a transcript or the audio recording of the Board's deliberation will be made, at cost to the requester. In the case of an appeal to district court there is no charge for the transcript. ARTICLE VIII. DECISIONS: Section 1: Timing. Whenever possible, decisions by the Board shall be made at the same hearing wherein the testimony and presentation of evidence are considered. Section 2: Format. Formal decisions shall be made in writing, setting forth findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by Iowa law. Section 3: Filing. Each decision shall be filed with the City Clerk within a reasonable time after the Board hearing, and shall be stamped by the Clerk to indicate the date and time of filing. The Clerk will forward the decision to the Johnson County Recorder's Office for recording at the City's expense. Section 4: Contact. A copy of said decision shall. be forwarded by the Secretary of the Board to the applicant, the Building Official, the City Attorney's Office, and any Attorney of Record within a reasonable time after filing with the City Clerk. Section 5: Reconsideration. Upon written request, the Board may reconsider a decision on a special exception or variance application. A request for reconsideration must be made within fifteen (15) calendar days of the meeting at which a vote on the application was originally taken and shall articulate and be based on evidence that was not presented or was unavailable at the time of the original hearing. A motion to reconsider must be made at the subsequent meeting by a member of the Board who voted on the prevailing side. If a motion to reconsider is approved, the application will be placed on the agenda of the next meeting in order to satisfy the requirement for public notice and hearing. No decision may be reconsidered more than once. Appeals to the Board may not be reconsidered. ARTICLE IX. AMENDMENTS TO THE PROCECURAL RULES. Section 1: Amendment. A concurring vote of three (3) of the members of the Board shall be necessary to amend these procedural rules. Such proposed amendments shall be presented in writing at any regular meeting or at any special meeting called for that purpose. Amendments shall go into effect upon approval by the City Council. 7 (Adopted Reso. No. 24­_____) August 22, 2024 Board of Adjustment Meeting PRELIMINARY MEETING MINUTES ITEM 5 ON THE AGENDA MINUTES PRELIMINARY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAL MEETING EMMA HARVAT HALL APRIL 10, 2024 – 5:15 PM MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Nancy Carlson, Bryce Parker (via zoom), Mark Russo, Paula Swygard MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Sue Dulek, Parker Walsh OTHERS PRESENT: Casey Kohrt CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM. ROLL CALL: A brief opening statement was read by Baker outlining the role and purpose of the Board and the procedures that would be followed in the meeting. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC24-0002: An application submitted by Casey Kohrt requesting a historic preservation exception to 1) reduce the minimum onsite parking required for a three-bedroom single family home from two to one space and 2) waive the standard that parking spaces within the front setback must be located behind another parking space for the property at 435 Rundell Street. Baker opened the public hearing. Walsh began the staff report showing an aerial of the property and then the zoning map which shows this property as within a historic district overlay, which grants them the ability to have the historic preservation exception tonight. He stated this is a three-bedroom single-family home constructed in 1937, the house is a key contributing structure in the Longfellow Historic District, and the applicant is seeking to convert the garage to habitable living space in order to assist their ability to live in the home long term. On March 21, 2024, the Historic Preservation Commission approved a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow the garage conversion and rear additions subject to the condition that window and door products are approved by staff and that will be approved by the historic preservation planner during the building permit review. The Certificate of Appropriateness also acknowledges that the project can lead to historic preservation exception from the Board of Adjustment to reduce or waive the parking requirements. The exception requests to reduce the onsite minimum parking requirements from two to one and the standard that parking spaces within the front setback must be located behind another parking space. Walsh shared the existing floor plan with noting the covered patio in the rear and the existing garage. He then showed the proposed floor plan with the rear addition in the same location as the previous covered patio but noted that addition is not part of the Board of Adjustment review Board of Adjustment April 10, 2024 Page 2 of 7 tonight, the Historic Preservation Commission already reviewed and approved the addition through the Certificate of Appropriateness, with a building permit being the next step for the addition. The focus tonight is for the garage, the plan is to convert it in order to have a first-floor restroom, which the home does not currently have, as well as some additional habitable space. The plan is to replace the garage door with a wall but still maintain the appearance of a garage from the outside and still appear as a single stall garage after the conversion. Walsh stated since this is a three-bedroom home the Code will require two parking spaces, which they have currently with one within the garage and one within the driveway. The owner is requesting to waive the required two parking spaces and also waive the parking within the front setback standard. Again, the Code currently requires at least one space to not be within the front setback or the driveway and by converting the garage the only other available parking location will be within the driveway which is also within the front setback. Walsh next reviewed the specific approval criteria, starting with the Historic Preservation Exception. Criteria one is the modification or waiver will help preserve the historic aesthetic or cultural attributes of the property. Staff found the existing historic character will be preserved as the remodel will maintain the appearance of a permanent single car garage which was original to the house and important to maintain the character. Criteria two is that the applicant must obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Commission. Walsh confirmed on March 21, 2024, the applicant received an approved Certificate of Appropriateness. Walsh next reviewed the general approval criteria that must be met for approval of all special exceptions. First is the proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, and general welfare. Walsh noted the use of and intensity of the property will not change due to the garage converting to living space nor will it impede the access of any surrounding properties as all changes will happen on the site within the existing footprint of the property. Criteria two is that the specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of the property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The findings for this are the proposed alteration will not impact the ability of neighbors to utilize and enjoy their properties, nor will it negatively impact property values within the neighborhood. Criteria three stated the establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and the improvement of surrounding properties. The surrounding neighborhood is already fully developed with residential uses and the proposed garage alteration will not enlarge the building footprint nor will it substantially impact the development of surrounding properties. Criteria four is that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been provided on the property. Again, the property is currently developed, as well as the neighborhood, so there's no changes to the utilities, access roads, drainage, or any other necessary facilities for the neighborhood. Additionally, the sidewalks along both sides of Rundell will remain unaltered and the green space for the property will remain in place so any stormwater runoff will be absorbed by the existing green space. Board of Adjustment April 10, 2024 Page 3 of 7 Criteria five is that adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on the public streets. Again, there are no changes proposed to the existing driveway, sidewalk, or the street and one parking space would continue to be provided on site within the existing unaltered driveway. Also, traffic on the street is mostly limited to residents and non-street parking will continue to be available along both sides of Rundell. Walsh also explained Rundell Street currently has an 80-foot right-of-way with 40-foot paving which does exceed even arterial streets minimal requirements. For two-way traffic the minimum required is 22 feet and Rundell is 40 feet. Also, in order to park on both sides of the street they need a minimum of a 28-foot-wide street which in this case it is 40 feet. Criteria six is that except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception does the property comply with all of the Code requirements. Walsh stated outside of the specific waivers they're discussing tonight, the property does meet all other applicable Code standards. Seventh is if the special exception is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan designates this area as residential, as does the Central Planning District, and the use is intended to remain the same this is just an alteration to the parking standards. The Comprehensive Plan’s vision also includes a goal to preserve historic resources in established neighborhoods, which is carried out through the strategy and supporting the goals of the Historic Preservation Commission and supporting reinvestment in housing and existing neighborhoods. The Plan also notes that in order to protect the community’s historical assets they should continue to support the Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan. Walsh stated the Central District Plan includes a goal to work to achieve a healthy balance of rental and owner-occupied housing in the District's older neighborhoods to promote long term investment, affordable housing opportunities and the preservation of historic homes in neighborhoods. The goal goes on to list strategies such as examining the zoning rules to ensure that they support housing goals and neighborhood stabilization efforts. This single- family property is located within a historic district and although the Board is not revising the zoning code tonight, the Board does have the opportunity to examine and modify the standards related to the garage conversion in order to support long-term housing investment in the neighborhood. Walsh noted that the the Historic Preservation Commission has reviewed the project and approved it due to the property owner’s ability to maintain the existing historic character. Staff received one piece of correspondence in support of this application. Staff recommends approval of EXC24-0001, to 1) reduce the minimum onsite parking required for a three-bedroom single family home from two to one space and 2) waive the standard that parking spaces within the front setback must be located behind another parking space. Carlson asked about the parking space in the front yard noting she thought that parking spaces in the front yard cannot be within 15 feet of the sidewalk. Walsh stated the specific details of the standard they're looking to waive here tonight is that parking is not permitted in the front principal dwelling setback except in the following situation, for single family uses one of the required parking spaces may be provided in the principal dwelling setback on a regularly constructed aisle that leads directly to a space that is not located in the front principal dwelling setback. He explained the setback for this zone is 15 feet and they currently have one space Board of Adjustment April 10, 2024 Page 4 of 7 that would be located within the garage that is outside of that setback but by converting the garage space to living space the only available spot would be within the driveway, and that would be within that 15-foot front setback. There is not any other specific standard that says the space must be 15 feet away from a property line. Baker noted everything they do is permanently attached to this property, so in the future, however many years, this parking reduction requirement would apply to all future occupants of the property. Walsh confirmed that would be correct. Baker asked what then about rental properties in this zone, if for example 10 years from now the house was sold, rented out, would still only one parking space required for four bedrooms. Walsh confirmed yes, for this site it currently requires only two spaces, regardless of owner-occupied or rental, if they approve this reduction and only require one space on this site that wouldn't change based on if it was no longer owner occupied. This is a permanent reduction, regardless of owner-occupied or rented in that zone. Baker asked if all things being equal, same applicant, same application, same property, same issue, except not in a historic district is it the same decision and recommendation by staff. Walsh stated yes, the historic district itself is not the deciding factor on the recommendation. Baker asked if the applicant were to choose to build an addition on the back, not using the garage, per se, but the porch behind the garage expanding that, parking would not be affected so would that require them to come before this Board at all. Walsh stated they would have to go back to the Historic Preservation Commission for approval on anything that alters the exterior appearance of the home, but the parking would not be an issue in that case. Carlson noted when she drove up and down the street today she noticed most of the houses on that side of the street are very similar, if not exactly the same, and in most cases the garages have been changed into living space and the cars are parked on the driveway in front. Did all of those houses have to apply for exceptions to allow that. Walsh replied that he was aware of at least one other property that did go through the exception process on the street and future properties would have to do the same. Casey Kohrt (435 Rundell Street) has lived in the home with his husband, Christopher Munoz, for 21 years now. They have recently paid off the house and are thinking long term about staying in the house and this is something that will help them stay in the house because the bathroom now is upstairs and the laundry and pantry are down in the basement, which is a lot of very steep stairs. He noted this is a Moffitt house and for 21 years they have not pulled a car into the garage because it’s too small, it was built for model A's and stuff like that. They have always parked in the driveway or on the street. Rundell Street is one of the widest streets in Iowa City because it used to have a trolley that ran down the middle of it so there's ample parking on Rundell for many, many cars. He does not see any public good in not approving this exception. Baker asked for 21 years they’ve had two cars using the property and have parked one on the street. Kohrt confirmed that was correct. Carlson asked how many square feet this adds to their living situation. Kohrt stated it would be probably 160 or 180 additionally square feet and gives them a main floor bathroom and laundry on the first floor and a pantry for the kitchen, which is what they are looking for. Carlson asked Board of Adjustment April 10, 2024 Page 5 of 7 how many square feet they have right now, noting those Moffitt houses are small. Kohrt stated theirs is 1100 square feet not including the basement. Baker closed the public hearing. Swygard moved to approve EXC24-0002, to 1) reduce the minimum onsite parking required for a three-bedroom single family home from two to one space and 2) waive the standard that parking spaces within the front setback must be located behind another parking space. Russo seconded the motion. Swygard stated she appreciates the reinvestment in the existing home and making it more adaptable for their needs and can certainly recognize the need for a restroom being more conveniently located. Carlson noted when she looked at all the houses today and at the garages, she thought there's no way anybody today could get their car into that garage area, they are small, so by converting it into living space seems like the only reasonable thing to be done to use that space. Carlson stated regarding agenda item EXC24-0002 she does concur with the findings set forth in the staff report of meeting date, April 10, 2024, and concludes that the general and specific criteria are satisfied, so unless amended or opposed by another Board member she recommends that the Board adopt the findings in the staff report for the approval of this exception. Swygard seconded the findings. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. Baker 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. CONSIDER MARCH 13, 2024 MINUTES: Carlson moved to approve the minutes of March 13, 2024 with minor corrections. Russo seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION: Swygard noted she was absent for the last meeting and at that meeting she was elected Vice Chair. She wanted to state she wasn't officially notified of the results of the vote and only learned about the election by watching the recording on City Channel 4. It caught her off guard, but she doesn’t know what the options are at this point. She reviewed the Board bylaws, and they don't specifically address the election of a member who's absent, the bylaws refer to the most current edition of Robert's Rules and per Robert's Rules she would have the option to decline the office after she was appropriately notified, as long as she does that within a certain timeframe. Since she hadn't been notified, when she found out by watching the recording of the meeting, she reached out to City planning staff, and Dulek as the attorney present at that meeting. Swygard stated she will not decline the office and will serve as Vice Chair but does think they could do better. Granted, it's a very small Board but as a practical matter she thinks Board of Adjustment April 10, 2024 Page 6 of 7 it's best to elect a member who would agree to serve and avoid the problem of electing someone who's absent without any input from them first. Someone could decline the office which would trigger another election, she almost did that but wanted to avoid putting anyone else in the position of not knowing what their options were. Swygard stated she would like to see this process outlined in more detail in the bylaws and perhaps Dulek could offer some advice and draft something if other Board members support exploring this and possibly amending the bylaws to more clearly define the process of being elected in absentia. Dulek asked if they want this discussion on the agenda for the next meeting. Baker feels it would be appropriate to give the staff and City attorney time to think of possible verbiage. Baker apologized because he was the one that nominated Swygard, they were looking for vice chair and he thought she'd be good. If there's any sort of discomfort at all, that's his fault and he apologizes. Baker agreed put on the agenda for next month. Walsh noted they don't have a meeting lined up for May but this will go on the next meeting agenda. ADJOURNMENT: Russo moved to adjourn this meeting, Swygard seconded, a vote was taken and all approved. Board of Adjustment April 10, 2024 Page 7 of 7 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ATTENDANCE RECORD 2023-2024 NAME TERM EXP. 3/8 4/12 4/19 5/10 6/14 7/12 11/8 12/13 3/13 4/10 BAKER, LARRY 12/31/2027 X X O/E X X X X X X X PARKER, BRYCE 12/31/2024 X X O/E X X X X X X X SWYGARD, PAULA 12/31/2028 X X X X X X X X O/E X CARLSON, NANCY 12/31/2025 X X X X X X O/E X X X RUSSO, MARK 12/31/2026 X X X O/E O/E X O/E X X X Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused -- -- = Not a Member