Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-07-15 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JUNE 11, 1997 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS PRELi !I!IARY Subject to Approval MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Bender, Lowell Brandt, Kate Corcoran, Patricia Eckhardt Bill Haigh MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Scott Kugler, John Yapp, Sarah Holecek, Anne Schulte OTHERS PRESENT: Tim Wolfe, Brad Houser, Ernie Redeker, Tom Mclnerney, Marlene Seydel, Terry Anderson, Vern Robinson, Lorin Dudley, Richard Hermeier, Christopher Drop CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Eckhardt called the meeting to order at 4:32 p.m. ROLL CALL: Bender, Brandt, Corcoran, Eckhardt, and Haigh were present for roll call. CONSIDERATION OF THE MAY 14, 1997, BOARD MINUTES: MOTION: Haigh moved to approve the minutes of the May 14, 1997 meeting of the Board of Adjustment, as printed. Brandt seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND VARIANCE ITEMS: EXC97-0007. Public hearing on an application submitted by T&R Investments, Inc. for a special exception to permit the temporary outdoor storage of tires and appliances as an accessory use to a recycling center for property located in the General Industrial (I-1) zone at 2401 Scott Boulevard. Kugler said the applicant is requesting a special exception to allow discarded tires and appliances to be stored temporarily at property located at 2401 Scott Boulevard. Kugler said the applicant proposes to construct a 60-foot by 25-foot fenced area and to designate this area for the tire and appliance storage. He said the area designated for tire storage is located at the south end of the fenced area to keep it 100 feet from the property line to the north. Kugler said the Board may grant a special exception to permit the outdoor storage of discarded tires or appliances as an accessory use to a recycling facility if certain conditions are met, including: 1) a size limit of 50% of the size of the ground floor area of the principal structure, or 1,500 square feet, whichever is less, 2) maintaining outdoor storage entirely within an enclosed fence, 3) the outdoor storage of tires shall not be closer than 100 feet to any property line, and 4) mosquito abatement measures shall be incorporated into the design of the outdoor storage area. He said the site plan, in combination with the letter from the applicant, indicates that these standards will be met. Kugler said the ordinance amendment to the Zoning Chapter allowing recycling facilities in the' I- 1 zone was designed to limit the types of activities allowed on the site and to require extensive screening of certain aspects of a recycling operation. Kugler said the applicant is required to screen outside storage areas. He said screening is needed for the storage of empty waste containers and collection vehicles and also for the trucking terminal business that is located at Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997 Page 2 the property. Kugler said staff has worked with the applicant to bring his site into compliance with the screening requirements. He said the revised site plan indicates that the screening will be provided. Kugler said staff feels the site should be brought into compliance within 90 days if the request for the special exception is to be considered favorably. 'He said staff feels a performance bond with the City should be entered into to ensure the screening will be provided as required. Kugler said the specific standards for tire and appliance storage are being met on the site plan, but because of past delays by the applicant in complying with the Zoning Chapter requirements for his business, staff recommends that as a condition of approval, the discarded tires and appliances should either be moved indoors or screened by appropriate fencing - solid wood - within 30 days of the Board's decision. Kugler said that with the implementation of the plan and the installation of the required screening, staff feels that the general exception standards will be met for granting a special exception on the property. He said staff therefore recommends that EXC97-0007, a special exception to permit the temporary outdoor storage of tires and appliances as an accessory use of a recycling processing facility, for property located in the I-1 zone at 2401 Scott Boulevard be approved subject to 1) the discarded tires and appliances either being moved indoors or screened by appropriate fencing, being solid wood, within 30 days of the Board's decision, 2) the evergreen screening being provided within 90 days of the Board's decision, and 3) that a performance bond agreement be entered into with the City to assure the evergreen screening will be provided as required. Haigh asked how a performance bond works. Holecek said it is an agreement in which the applicant agrees to pay a certain sum of money, which would cover the costs of finishing the things that need to be done to the site as well as the administrative costs. She said the City could use the money to finish the work on the site. Haigh asked how the amount of money is determined. Holecek said with regard to an eight-foot cedar fence, City staff would calculate the cost of materials and labor to complete the fence. Brandt asked if the 1,500 square foot area runs along the whole length of the back of the building. He asked if the tire area was the only place that tires can be kept and if the larger area was for appliances. Kugler said that was correct, but that other items besides appliances could be stored in the larger area. Brandt asked if the issue of evergreen screening has been a long-standing issue. Kugler said the applicant was first made aware of that requirement about a year ago, and was notified again at the beginning of this year. He said the applicant has started planting some of the required trees. Brandt asked about the letter saying the mosquito abatement issue is being addressed by throwing a tarp over the tires. Brandt asked if this would be adequate. Kugler said during the site plan review, something will be needed to show that the tarp will remain in place and be secured. He said the main thing is to keep rainfall from collecting in the tires and that a tarp should do the job. Bender asked about notification of the public, saying that when she went to the site earlier in the day, there was no sign posted. Kugler said staff gave the applicant a sign about two weeks ago that should have been posted on the property. He suggested asking the applicant. Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997 Page 3 Public hearing: Tim Wolfe, 3610 Taft Avenue, said that as far as the screening, he was not aware that the screening needed to be around the entire building until about a month ago. He said he knew the tire and appliance area needed to be screened. Wolfe said he has no problem taking care of everything. He said it has taken so long because he has submitted six site plans to the City. Wolfe said he had a letter from the fence company indicating they will begin work the first week in July. He said he also had a letter from the landscaping company saying the work will be done in 90 days. Wolfe said he was concerned that people are getting the wrong idea about his business. He said the appliances are placed on a trailer and that when the trailer is full, it is removed. Wolfe said the most tires he has ever had on the lot is 160 tires, and that it is very unusual for him to have that many. Wolfe said the sign he received was placed on the front door of the building and has been there since the day he got it from the City. He said the tires are tarped. Brandt said the concern is not just how the business operates currently, but how it will operate in the future. Wolfe said that it is his building and his investment, and he doesn't want it to look bad. Brandt said he had raised the issue of evergreen screening. He referred to the letter from Julie Tallman from about a year ago and said it was something the applicant should have been aware of for some time. Wolfe said he did not realize the evergreen screening was for the entire property. He said he thought the .performance bond was a bit much and he could resort to storing the materials inside. Kugler said the performance bond is just suggested for the screening along Scott Boulevard and along the north side. Brandt asked the applicant if he would have any problem getting the evergreen screening planted within the 90 days. Wolfe said it would not be a problem and he was not dragging his feet. He said he moved to the building in the middle of winter and had a lot of things to do to the building and he could not do them all at once. Brandt said Wolfe did need to meet the regulations. Brad Houser, 1272 Dolen Place, said he owns the property to the south of Wolfe's and had some questions about the application. He said the BDI covenants state that only 15% of the whole lot can be used for storage. Houser said he is concerned about the amount of tires and appliances that can be stored there. Houser said concerning the screening, the City will be bringing the sewer main down through the property. He said a lot of the plantings and brush on the west side of the property as well as some on the south side will be torn out by the City. Houser said his main concern is how this will affect his property next door. He said issues about the landscaping, i.e., what is going in, how high it will be, and how big the trees are, will make a difference as to how fast it will be sheltered and covered. Houser said the BDI agreement, paragraph 11, specifies a minimum eight-foot high fence or natural evergreen screening and also discusses the 15% rule and/or inside storage. Kugler said the tires and appliances are limited to 1,500 square feet by the ordinance. He said the BDI contains private covenants that the City could not enforce. Houser said the BDI mandates a 15% maximum outdoor storage of any type of materials. Holecek said the 1,500 square feet would not violate the private covenant as far as the 15% requirement is concerned. Kugler said there are other areas of the site being used for outdoor storage. He said he would check into the percentage more closely as part of the administrative site plan review. Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997 Page 4 Houser said his main concern, since he had not yet discussed the issue with Wolfe, is the number of tires and appliances to be stored there and how the numbers will be monitored. Kugler said the storage will be limited to 1,500 square feet and nothing can be stored above the height of the fence. He added that only a small portion of the 1,500 square foot area is eligible for tire storage, because of the requirement for tires to be 100 feet from the property line. Wolfe asked if the City cuts down the trees to put in the sewer line, would the City be required to replace them. Holecek said it was her understanding that Public Works would gerierally reseed and assumed they would generally replant. Wolfe said he understood the general area for the sewer line would be through the gravel on his property. Public hearing closed. MOTION: Haigh moved to approve EXC97-0007, a special exception to permit temporary outdoor storage of tires and appliances as an accessory use to a recycling processing facility for property located in the I-1 zone at 2401 Scoff Boulevard, subject to l) the discarded tires or appliances either being moved indoors or screened by appropriate fencing, i.e. solid wood, within 30 days of the Board's decision, 2) the evergreen screening being provided within 90 days of the Board's decision and 3) that a performance bond agreement be entered into with the City to ensure the evergreen screening will be provided as required. Bender seconded the motion. Brandt asked if the performance bond should only be attached to the evergreen screening. Holecek said that was staff's recommendation. Brandt said he understood that the wood screening has to be at least eight feet in height and the storage cannot extend above the eight- foot mark. Kugler said the regulations specifically state that materials cannot be stored against the fence or above the height of the fence. Haigh asked if he should have addressed mosquito abatement in the motion. Kugler said that issue is a requirement that will be enforced with the site plan. Brandt said he appreciates the fact that some code violations have been addressed with the application. He said this is a relatively new development in terms of the zoning laws. He said some allowances should be made, as there will be complications along the way as people get used to dealing with these issues, Brandt said the property is very exposed along a major thoroughfare that will become an even more major thoroughfare of the City, therefore there must be some attention paid to issues like screening, making sure that unsightly things are not happening to the property. Brandt said that when he first read the staff report, he was somewhat irritated that the screening issue had been on the table for a long time and he wondered what the delay was. He said he appreciated the fact that the City seems to be willing to make some allowance for that in giving a time frame. Brandt said he thinks the performance bond is a reasonable thing to expect to ensure compliance. He said with the conditions attached to the approval, he is inclined to support the application. Bender said looking at the general standards that need to be applied, this exception is reasonable as long as the applicant is mindful of the screening issues. She agreed with Brandt that the Board has to be concerned when discussing development near a major arterial street and a residential area. She said she agrees with the screening requirements. Bender said the recycling aspect of this application is certainly something that is proper and good for the City. Bender said when looking at the size of the building and what is required in the zone, a storage area representing only 16% the size of the existing building seems pretty minimal and is certainly reasonable. She said she would vote in favor of the application. Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997' Page 5 Haigh said he concurred with Bender in that the requirements of the Zoning Chapter are met. He said it is a fact that there must be some place to recycle discarded tires and appliances. Haigh said as long as the use is within the zoning laws, he would have no problem with it and would also vote in favor. Corcoran said she agrees based on previous comments by the other Board members and feels the standards have been met. She said as long as the screening is taken care of and the mosquito abatement is addressed as part of the site plan review, she favors the plan. Eckhardt said she agrees with her colleagues and their comments. She said as she drove out to the site, she saw a beautiful street with lots of grass and big sidewalks. She felt a great deal of effort had been made to make this a beautiful street. Eckhardt said the attention to screening is very important. She said she would also vote in favor. The motion was approved on a vote of 5-0. EXC97-0013. Public hearing on an application submitted by Our Redeemer Lutheran Church for a special exception to permit an expansion of a religious institution for property located in the Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) zone at 2301 East Court Street. Kugler said the applicant is requesting a special exception for the expansion of a church and parking area at 2301 East Court Street. He said two building additions are being proposed and the parking area is to be reconfigured and expanded along the west side of the building and to the south of the property. Kugler said the RS-5 zone permits religious institutions only by special exception, provided that the property has direct access to an arterial or collector street, that the lot contains at least 40,000 square feet, and that the building set back at least two feet from any lot line for each one foot of building height. Kugler said this application appears to meet these specific standards. Kugler said the Zoning Chapter also contains screening requirements for off-street parking lots, which would apply along the east, west, south, and a portion of the north side of the parking area. He said the site plan provided by the applicant indicates that screening will be provided in these areas as required. Kugler said the details of the screening materials must be provided and the tree requirements will have to be met. He said if this application is approved, staff recommends that it be subject to staff approval of the landscaping plan as part of the site plan review process. Kugler said the property contains a stream corridor along the east property line, therefore a Sensitive Areas Site Plan will be required, which should include a requirement for protection of the required buffer during construction activities. Kugler said construction fencing will need to be installed along the stream corridor buffer limits to avoid unnecessary grading within this area by construction crews. He showed the buffer on the map. Kugler said staff has recommended that all drives and aisles within the parking area be installed at the minimum required width as specified within the Zoning Chapter to reduce the amount of paving to the extent possible. He said the narrower drive would require less paving, result in less storm water runoff, help discourage cut-through traffic on the site, and allow it to be located farther from the stream corridor that exists on the site. Kugler said there will likely be a playground for the preschool operated by the church on the east side of the drive on the east side of the building. He said a narrower drive would result in more room for the facility and would result in a shorter crossing for the preschoolers. Kugler said the applicant has submitted a revised site plan, which shows that minimum width drives are being used. Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997 Page 6 With regard to the general exception standards, Kugler said that, provided that the parking area is adequately screened and landscaped, the proposed expansion should not be detrimental to the neighborhood or surrounding properties. He said staff is concerned about the proposed lighting for the area. Kugler said information submitted by the applicant indicates that downcast lights on 30-foot poles will be used. He said other parking lots that have been approved near residential areas in the past have also made use of downcast lighting, but due to the height of the fixtures, spillover of some of the light has caused some complaints from adjacent residences. Kugler said the applicant has been requested to look at the lighting issue more closely and provide possible solutions for this problem. Kugler said the property is located along two arterial streets, which would accommodate the additional traffic that may be generated by the expanded facility. He said one of the drive accesses along First Avenue is being eliminated, thereby improving the situation in this area. Kugler said there is an existing access along Court Street that is fairly close to the Court Street- First Avenue intersection. He said it is anticipated that this intersection will need to be signalized in the near future and the queuing of cars waiting at the light on Court Street is likely to routinely back up beyond the location of this drive. Kugler said staff is therefore recommending that the approval of this application be subject to the drive being converted to a one-way entry only drive and narrowing it down to one lane to discourage people from exiting there. He said the revised site plan indicates that it will be an entry-only drive although it still shows approximately 24 feet in width there. Kugler said staff recommends that EXC97-0013, a request for a special exception to expand a religious institution and its associated parking located at 2301 East Court Street be approved, subject to staff approval of a Sensitive Areas Site Plan and landscaping plan; the western drive onto Court Street being modified to be a one-lane, entry only drive; modification of the lighting plans to reduce the impact on the surrounding neighborhood, and the width of all drives and aisles within the parking lots not exceeding the minimum dimensions required by the Zoning Chapter. Brandt asked Kugler if comments had been received from any of the neighbors or anyone else. Kugler said he had not received any phone calls. He said he attached a copy of the site plan that was in the staff report with the notification letters to neighbors. Public hearing: Ernie Redeker, 777 Keswick Drive, said he is Chairman of the Building Committee for Our Redeemer Lutheran Church. He said they have been working on the project for about three years. Redeker said the church is very sensitive to the needs of the neighborhood and the City. He said he feels the church has been that way in the 40 years it has been there. Redeker said the church was there before there was a residential neighborhood; the neighborhood grew around the church. He said the church has a large lot with almost five acres to work with and he feels they can do a good job. Redeker referred to the parking lot issue and the concern with making the driveway a one-way off Court Street. He said the original request by staff was to close the driveway. Redeker said it would be almost impossible to close the driveway, because it is the main entry to the church's front door. He said the SEATS bus drops people off there and there is also a need for a hearse to be able to get to the front door. Redeker said at the busiest times of the day, the church would not be in business. He said since the main use of the church occurs on Sundays and Wednesday evenings, the church does not feel it will create a traffic problem. Redeker said the church wants to take care of all its needs while meeting the City requirements. Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997 Page 7 He said the church wants to be neighborhood friendly and will do everything it can to make sure the church is a beautiful spot on the east side of the City. Brandt said he drove to the area and was a bit distressed. He said it is a beautiful setting with a lot of trees and the church is nicely nestled in there. Brandt said the church is proposing a pretty substantial parking lot. He said he appreciated what the applicant had said and did not doubt that the applicant would do what he said, but the property would be a lot different after the addition and parking are constructed, even with the screening. Redeker agreed that the property would look different. He said he would have the architect address the lighting issues. Redeker said he wanted the property appropriately lighted without bothering the neighbors. He said the church currently has the problem of people parking on the grass because the parking lot is inadequate. Corcoran asked when the church lights are on. Redeker said the parking lot lights are on in the evening almost daily. He said the parking lot is lighted for safety reasons. Redeker said the current lights are not very attractive, but the new ones will be a big improvement. Tom Mclnerney, 111 East College Street, said he is with Neuman Monson Architects. He distributed a handout with information about the lighting fixtures. Mclnernery said he would propose to provide a fixture that has the ability to provide light and also to have some aesthetic look that would be better than the average light in many parking lots. Mclnerney said there is a screening mechanism on the side of these light fixtures that filters light and prevents unnecessary glow to the sides. He stated that the light fixtures can actually have a light block put on it for any light that might spill to adjacent properties. Mclnerney said one of the issues that has arisen is the height of the light fixtures. He said the engineer also suggested bringing the lights down to 25 feet and he plans to do so. Bender asked what the designations Type R and Type T referred to. Mclnerney said the T stands for two and the R stands for a single fixture type. He added that the current lighting is basically flood lamps. Mclnerney said they had bothered some neighbors in the past and that issue was addressed by simply moving the lights. Mclnerney said he is proposing a new generation of light fixtures. He said they are not choosing the lowest cost fixture, I~ut rather something that will give an added benefit to the community and the parking lot. Mclnerney said they are trying to respect the area with screening and setbacks. He added that the way the parking lot is configured, much of the parking cannot be seen from the street, because it is downhill from the streets. He said the parking is nestled into something of a valley. Mclnerney said the plans would result in the removal of only four or five trees, but they will be adding seven or eight trees, not including the screening. He said they are putting in some willow trees and plantings to help with the erosion that has occurred over time. Brandt asked Mclnerney what the net increase in parking would be. Mclnerney responded that there are currently 115 spots, but the proposal would increase that to 190. Bender asked if the screening is still proposed for a mix of arbor vitae and juniper trees. Mclnerney said they had used a formula for that mix, but after talking with the landscaper, he might put in a wider variety. Brandt asked if the limited size of the drives would be an issue. Mclnerney said there would be a couple of things he could tweak to meet the requirement. He said the church is in favor of narrowing the northeast drive, because a lot of people try to cut through the church parking lot and the narrowing would discourage this. Mclnerney said the width staff has recommended for parking drives would not be an issue. Marlene Seydel, 421 Upland Avenue, said she has lived next to the church for 40 years. She said she does not necessarily oppose the addition, but she and her husband have concerns Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997 Page 8 about the drainage problem with the stream in the back. Seydel said they originally had eight to ten feet behind the shrubs they planted about 25 years ago. She said on the south end of their property, they currently have nothing beyond the shrubs they planted and on the noah end, they have about eight feet of land. Seydel said a few years ago the church brought in a lot of riprap, which has since settled and now diverts water onto her property. Seydel said four or five years ago a storm sewer was buried under Court and Mayfield Streets. She said when there is heavy rainfall a lot of water runs through that huge tube, which has added to the problem. Seydel said she is concerned with what the church will do with the property on the other side of the stream when they start working on the parking lot with all their equipment, because it is directly behind her property. She said her property is open and they can see the entire parking lot from where they are. Brandt said they might want to ask for staff's help on the issue, because the Sensitive Areas Ordinance will come into play. He said there had been mention of putting up construction fencing. Kugler said the construction fencing would be to keep equipment from encroaching into the buffer area. He said as part of the site plan review, staff does look at erosion control measures such as silt fencing, and, depending on how long the soil will be bare, possibly some temporary seeding with some quick growing annual grasses to help hold soil in place. Seydel asked if the riprap that is currently there would be moved further into the creek. Kugler said he did not think they would be encroaching that far. Seydel said she had spoken to one of the City Engineers who came to look at the site and he told her that Something definitely needs to be done about it. She said the problem has gotten worse over the years and that when she moved there it was not a creek, but was a little depression. Seydel said it is now 15 feet deep and 20 to 25 feet wide. Kugler said an earlier plan submitted by the church indicated they were considering installing more riprap there. He said staff suggested something more natural, such as small willow stands to help stabilize the stream banks, but he has not seen anything on the revised site plan about that 'issue. M¢lnerney showed three areas on the map that are subject to the worst erosion. He said the plan would propose that both sides of the bank have plantings. Mclnerney said the main issue is to cut down the velocity of the stream. He said the church would attempt to provide erosion control measures where they would be best suited. Mclnerney said the willow treatment is recommended by a Department of Geology professor who has been working on streambank erosion control. Seydel asked what kind of willows would be planted there. Mclnemey said it would be a type of willow that would have rapid growth and take a lot of moisture from the soil through its root system. He said the trees are the only solution to really consider without providing a concrete throughway. Mclnerney said the area is part of a 100-year flood plain and the erosion issues definitely have to be addressed. Kugler said storm water management is required there and the church will be required to hold a certain amount of water within the parking lot. He said the parking lot will fill up with water, which will then be slowly released into the stream. Mclnerney said the parking lot would contain catch basins collecting water in a throttle that would control the flow. He said there would be a pipe underneath to the bank and the water will be piped in at the same rate it would flow if the area were all grass. Seydel said she had no problem with the lighting and, in fact, liked the lights. She said they are security lights for her. Seydel said, with reference to the willows, she would not necessarily like tall trees across the back of the yard because she already has a lot of shade in her yard. Seydel said she has no problem with the lights or the extra parking, but her primary concern was the erosion control. She said she knows parking has been a problem for the church, because she has seen cars parked on the grass. Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997 Page 9 Terry Anderson, 433 Upland Avenue, said he was not necessarily against the project, but did have concerns. He added that, as Seydel stated, the drainage has been a problem for quite some time, especially after a big rain. Anderson said another concern is the lighting. He said he wanted something more subdued. Anderson said he is concerned about what will be done with the creek. He said he would like to see good aesthetics and added that the concrete riprap does not look very natural. Anderson said the riprap has not been done very well in the past and has actually been a detriment, because it has rolled down into the creek. He said the trees would be a good idea if there were trees that would block the erosion problem. Anderson said it is important not to add to the drainage problem. He said he has lived there 20 years, and the problem has become much bigger since he first lived there. Public hearing closed. MOTION: Corcoran moved to approve EXC97-0013, a request for a special exception for the expansion of a religious institution and its associated parking located at 2301 Court Street, subject to 1) staff approval of a Sensitive Areas Site Plan and a landscaping plan, 2) the western drive onto Court Street being modified to be a one-lane entry-only drive, 3) modification to the lighting plans to reduce the impact of the lights on the surrounding neighborhood, and 4) the width of all drives and aisles within the parking lots not exceeding the minimum dimensions required by the Zoning Chapter. Brandt seconded the motion. Kugler said that if the Board feels the solutions to the lighting plan submitted by the applicant are acceptable, the Board might wish to reference them specifically. MOTION: Corcoran amended the motion for number four to read: 4) that the luminaries that will be installed will be mounted on 25-foot poles and shields will be installed on the fixtures. Brandt seconded the amendment. Corcoran said she lives near the church, with her backyard abutting onto First Avenue. She said she appreciates the input from the two citizens who spoke, because erosion control in the area is an important thing for the church as well as private property owners. Corcoran said it appears the standards needed to approve the exception have been met. She added that the church has been a good neighbor and often serves as a meeting place for non-church related activities such as Hospice. Corcoran said she was appreciative of the need for extra parking, especially considering that there is no on-street parking near the church. She added that she is favorable to the motion, especially with the modifications to the lights. Bender said she concurs with Corcoran. She said when looking at the site and the fact that there is absolutely no on-street parking available, there are really not many other options than to add the parking to accommodate the expansion. Bender said she has a problem with increasing the amount of concrete in residential areas, but likes the fact that as part of the motion, the Sensitive Areas Ordinance will be examined in relation to this plan and there will be appropriate screening involved. She added that she is concerned in neighborhoods, where there are schoolchildren, about large areas that are not well lighted. Bender said she feels the applicant has done a very good job with the lighting issue and she likes the fact that it is downcast, but would not like to see the lighting cut back too far, because it is a safety and security issue. Bender said increased traffic related to the church largely occurs on Sunday, when the schoolchildren will not be in the vicinity. She added that the church's prime hours of operation and any increased traffic that the expansion will bring are not during peak periods of travel in the neighborhood. Bender said the Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11,1997 Page 10 applicant has shown they are concerned and want to be a good neighbor. Bender said she had no problem with the plan and would vote in the affirmative. Brandt said he had lots of problems with the plan, mostly because he does not like the large amount of concrete coming into a residential area. He said he missed the notion of the old neighborhood churches where people mostly walked to church. Brandt said although the application meets the basic standards and regulations, he is concerned about the impact on the general use, enjoyment and value of adjoining properties. Brandt said he had some concerns about the concrete and lighting and appreciated the fact that citizens appeared tonight and caused attention to be paid to some of the drainage issues. He said he is inclined to support the plan and has been impressed by things he has heard both from the architect and the church representative in terms of the desire to work with neighbors and also the comments from the neighbors indicating the church has not been a bad neighbor. Brandt said it looked like the Board would be approving the plan, but he would ask that the church and the architects be very sensitive to the comments made at the meeting and work with the adjoining property owners to address what appears to be a serious drainage problem. Haigh said the church has quite easily met the specific standards for a religious institution with the arterial and the collector streets, the lot having at least 40,000 square feet, and setback requirements well in line. He said the screening to be provided for the off-street parking is well within the guidelines. Haigh said the church and the architect gave a good presentation. He hoped there would be some work with the neighbors to take care of the area along the creek. Haigh said someone he heard of who was involved with the willows had done a lot of work over the last 5-10 years, and the willows are the way to take care of some of the problems on banks along creeks. He said the church has shown that in the past, at least most of the time, they have been good neighbors. The motion carried on a vote of 4-0, as amended, with Eckhardt abstaininck Holecek asked Eckhardt to explain for the record why she abstained from the vote. Eckhardt said her husband is a pastor of the same denomination as Our Redeemer Lutheran Church. Eckhardt said that in fairness and justice, she felt she needed to abstain. EXC97-0014. Public hearing on an application submitted by L. Vern and Sally W. Robinson for a special exception to permit a front yard modification along Ridgewood Drive for property located in the Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) zone at 507 Seventh Avenue South. Yapp said the subject property has a triangular shape, with two of the three sides of the property fronting on City streets: Seventh Avenue on the east and Ridgewood Drive to the south. Yapp said Ridgewood Drive has no sidewalk, curb or gutter, is 16 feet wide and functions as an alley, although it is classified as a City street. Yapp said the applicants originally requested a 14-foot by 23-foot porch. He said staff had concerns about the appearance of congestion, so the contractor for the job then proposed a 10-¢oot by 23-¢oot porch. Yapp said the property owners however, were still interested in constructing a 14-foot by 23-foot porch. He said staff further evaluated the impacts of the potential sizes of the prop.osed porch and is now recommending that a 12-foot by 23-foot porch be approved. Yapp said the diagonal'southwest property line is considered to be a front yard lot line, although a rear yard would still have a required 20-foot setback. He said with a 12-foot by 23-foot porch, the encroachment would be 6.7% into the front yard and would come to within 4 ~ feet of the right-of-way line of Ridgewood Drive and within 11 ~ feet of the edge of the pavement of Ridgewood Drive. Yapp said even with a 12-foot wide porch and a 6.7% encroachment, the Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997 Page 11 encroachment is relatively small in relation to the total front yard requirement. Yapp said the proposed screened-in porch should upgrade the use and the value of the property and have a positive effect on neighboring properties. He said even with a 10, 12, or 14-foot porch, light and air for neighboring properties would not be negatively effected. Yapp said the main impact of the proposed structure is a sense of overcrowding and congestion close to Ridgewood Drive. He said the proposed screened-in porch will not pose a public safety hazard and that Fire Code issues or vehicular sight distance problems are unlikely to be created by the porch. Yapp said staff therefore recommends that EXC97-0014, a special exception to reduce the front yard requirement along Ridgewood Drive right-of-way by approximately 192 square feet or 6.7% to allow construction of a 12-foot by 23-foot screened-in porch for property located in the RS-5 zone at 507 Seventh Avenue South be approved. Yapp said he had received no comments from neighboring property owners concerning this application. Brandt asked Yapp why staff decided to split the difference on the size of the porch. Yapp said the 10-foot porch originally recommended in the submitted staff report was the least intrusive. He said even though the 14-foot encroachment did not cause any sight distance concerns, Fire Code concerns, vehicular access concerns, etc., it would cause a sense of overcrowding and congestion in relation to the street. Yapp added that, given the lack of any safety problems and that none of the houses front onto the street, staff felt a 12-foot wide porch was a reasonable size. Eckhardt said Ridgewood does not appear to her to function as an alley, because there are houses back in the triangle. Kugler said it is the rear yards of all those houses that abut the triangle. Yapp added that the street has no sidewalk or gutter systems and is only 16 feet wide. Brandt asked Yapp about the relationship of the building to the street. Yapp responded that the primary buildings are set farther away than the proposed porch. He said some of the garages, however, are closer to the street than the porch would be. Eckhardt asked if the house is owner-occupied. Yapp responded that it is. Public hearing: Vern Robinson, 507 Seventh Avenue South, said he is the owner-occupant and was at the hearing with his wife Sally and contractor Dan Lammers, and the most influential member of the Ridgewood Park Addition, Chris Watt. Robinson said he hoped the project is not controversial and said there are a number of garages that are much closer to Ridgewood than the screened- porch would be. He added that before this application, he never knew the street had a name and thought of it as strictly an alley. Haigh asked Robinson if he had any trouble with the 12-foot width for the porch. Robinson responded that he thought it to be a fair compromise, Eckhardt asked Robinson if the porch would ever turn into a room as opposed to a porch. Robinson said there was a prospect that it could turn into a three-season porch at some time, but it would not be converted into a room. Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997 Page 12 Public hearing closed. MOTION: Haigh moved to approve EXC97-0014, a special exception to reduce a front yard requirement along the Ridgewood Drive right-of-way for approximately 192 square feet or 6.7%, to allow construction of a 12-foot by 23-foot screened-in porch for property located in the RS-5 zone at 507 Seventh Avenue South. Bender seconded the motion. Haigh said he felt the standard is whether or not the situation is peculiar to the property and there is no question that this is a peculiar property. He said he is a porch lover himself and has no trouble with this at all. Haigh said he sees no other way to install a porch there and sees no problem with the Ridgewood Drive issue. He said he thinks it will be a nice addition to the neighborhood and the house and he will vote for it. Bender said she concurred that there is no feasible alternative for the applicants if they want a porch. She said the percentage of encroachment toward a substandard street is very small. Bender said there are no public safety, health, or welfare issues and that the porch will not increase any density. She said the porch would certainly improve the property, surrounding properties, and add to the tax base. Bender said she would vote in favor. Brandt said there is a genuine concern about creating too much of a sense of congestion in the area and that City staff appropriately raised that concern. He said the property is so unique that it makes it more reasonable to consider the porch. Brandt said the compromise was reasonable and he would vote for it as well. Corcoran said she agreed with the other Board members and said the shape of the lot is a very compelling fact. She said the porch will upgrade the neighborhood and will look very nice from Seventh Avenue as well. Eckhardt said she concurred with her colleagues. She said she believed it to be a nice, large lot and that part of the difficulty is the orientation of the residence on the triangular lot. Eckhardt said the porch will not do any harm to the public and meets all the criteria for granting a special exception. She said she would vote in favor. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. EXC97-0015. Public hearing of an application submitted by Dudley Brothers Company on behalf of property owners Randal and Danelie Essing, for a special exception to permit a rear yard modification for a property located in the Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS~5) zone at 816 Rider Street. Yapp said the applicant, Dudley Brothers Company, on behalf of the Essings, is requesting a special exception to reduce the rear yard requirement from 20 feet to 14-feet along the 12-foot length of a proposed three-season porch for property at 816 Rider Street. He said the proposed porch would be located at about the same location as an existing open deck and would be entered from the residence through existing sliding glass doors. Yapp added that the porch would not be connected to the house's heating and cooling system. Yapp said gazebos and closed patios and similar buildings for passive recreational use are a permitted accessory use in the RS-5 zone. He said Section 14-6M-2B of the Iowa City Zoning Code requires that attached buildings shall be located pursuant to the requirements for principal buildings. Yapp said that in this case, the principal building is not allowed to be in the 20-foot rear yard setback. He said this lot is extremely small for the RS-5 zone, adding that it is 4,250 square feet and the minimum lot size in the RS-5 zone today is 8,000 square feet. Yapp said staff feels the requested exception will not be substantial in quantitative terms. He Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997' Page 13 said it would encroach into the required yard about six feet for the 12-foot length involving about a 7.2% reduction of the rear yard. Yapp said the proposed porch would replace a deteriorated open deck and will not affect any trees or landscaping on the property. He added that it should not affect light or air from circulating to neighboring properties. Yapp said one possible alternative would be to construct a detached, enclosed gazebo type of structure, which would be allowed to be within five feet of the rear lot line. He said staff feels the gazebo alternative is less desirable, because it would result in the structure being closer to property lines than the proposed porch and would result in less efficient of the use of the rear yard on this property. Yapp added that staff finds that this encroachment into the rear yard will have minimal, if any, negative impacts on surrounding properties, should improve the sense of privacy for all concerned, and should not contravene the intent of established yard dimensions. He said staff feels that the interests of justice would be served by approving the yard modification. Yapp said one concern of staff was that the porch could become a year-round habitable space, which is why he mentioned that it would not be connected to the home's heating and cooling system. Yapp said staff recommends that EXC97-0015, a request to reduce the rear yard requirement from 20 feet to 14 feet for the 12-foot length of the proposed three-season porch for property located at 816 Rider Street be approved. Brandt asked if significance to the porch not being connected to plumbing and heating is so that if there were a plan in the future to ever attach plumbing or heating to the room, a building permit would be required. Yapp confirmed this and said the building permit application would then be the trigger for a staff review. Public hearing: Lorin Dudley, 4764 420 Street SE, said he is with Dudley Brothers Company. He said that with regard to whether the porch could be converted to a habitable room, the floors are uninsulated and the windows are single-pane. Dudley said it would be very difficult to heat the room year round and the room is not designed for that purpose. With regard to the sight lines, Dudley said the two houses nearest the site should not be visible at all. He said there is quite a distance for all back yards before anyone could see the porch. Public hearing closed. MOTION: Brandt moved to approve EXC97-0015, a request to reduce the rear yard requirement from 20 feet to 14 feet for the 12-foot length of the proposed three-season porch for property located at 816 Rider Street. Corcoran seconded the motion. Brandt said the application looks very reasonable to him. He said the size of the property is very small, but even with the size of the property, the structure itself still allows at least some room in the rear yard. Brandt said it does not appear to have any adverse impact on neighboring residences and will definitely be an improvement to the property. Corcoran said she agrees. She said the porch will replace a deck that appears to be worn out and the new porch will be an upgrade to the property. She said she would vote in favor. Haigh said he agrees with the previous comments. He said the project would not be substantial and there would only be a 7.2% reduction in the rear yard. Haigh said this is replacing an open, deteriorating deck and so they are replacing something that is already there. He said the appearance and value of the property, and the orientation of the structure in relation to other properties make it easy for him to vote in favor of this. Bender said she agreed that the interests of justice would be served by approving the requested Iowa City Board of A~ustment June 11,1997 Page 14 yard modification. She said the encroachment is very minimal and she cannot see any detriment to the neighboring properties as character of the neighborhood is in no way being changed. Bender said she would vote in the affirmative. Eckhardt said she agreed with all of her colleagues and said the porch would not be much different from what is there now, other than that it would be better looking and be enclosed. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. EXC97-0016NAR97-0003. Public hearing on applications submitted by Richard Hermeier for a special exception to permit front, side and rear yard modifications and a variance to allow a building to exceed the maximum lot coverage permitted in the Neighborhood Conservation Residential (RNC-12) zone for property located at 606 E. Jefferson Street. Kugler said this building was constructed around 1900 and was originally used as a grocery store until it was converted into apartments. He said the two-story structure contains four apartments. Kugler said the applicant contends there is insufficient storage space in the apartments and that the two apartments on the north side of the building are so small that they are difficult to keep rented. Kugler said the applicant is therefore requesting a special exception and a variance to allow two-story additions on the northeast and southeast corners of the building. Kugler said a special exception is requested to modify the front, side, and rear yard requirements and the variance is being requested because the existing structure already exceeds the maximum building coverage for the lot. Kugler said he would discuss the special exception request first. He said the property is located within the RNC-12 zone, which requires 20-foot front yard and 20-foot rear yard setbacks and a five-foot side yard setback. Kugler said the existing building extends into all of these required setback areas. He said the south and west walls of the structure are set back only one foot from the street right-of-way lines and the building encroaches 16 feet into the required 20-foot rear yard, on the north side of the property and one foot into the required five foot side yard, on the east side of the property. Kugler said the primary peculiarity of the property is the excessive mass of the existing structure in relation to the relatively small lot size. He said this disparity resulted from the structure being built around 1900 when setback requirements were not in effect. Kugler added that it is likely that the lot may have been diminished in size over time by previous owners selling off portions of the property. He said these historical peculiarities of the property may explain why the property is overbuilt, but do not present a compelling case in favor of further increasing the mass of the building within the limited area that still exists on the lot. Kugler said the requested encroachments into the front, rear, and side yards are substantial and they are magnified due to the fact that these are two-story additions. Although the exception would not affect the neighborhood to any great extent, its primary impact would be on the adjacent residential properties to the north and the east, which both have residences that sit very close to the lot lines that the additions would be encroaching toward. Kugler said staff feels there are alternative solutions to the problem in lieu of the exception. He said the owner has the option of converting use of the building into two larger, more usable apartments with the same number of bedrooms. Kugler said there is an opportunity for basement storage of bicycles and other items, and it would be possible to use a fence to screen the garbage cans located at the southeast corner of the property. Kugler said in staff's view, the interests of justice would not be served by granting the requested yard modifications. With regard to the general standards, Kugler said the proposed additions raise Fire Code and Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11,1997 Page15 life safety questions due to the proximity of the residential structures on the adjacent properties. He said the northeast addition would block light, air, and visual relief for the adjacent properties and would essentially place a wall less than three feet from the windows of the residence to the north. Kugler said staff feels that the proposed obstruction of open space is likely to devalue both adjoining properties and cause potential maintenance problems because the buildings would be so close together. He said staff feels that the applicant should not be allowed to increase the size of a non-conforming residential structure on a lot that markedly fails to meet the dimensional requirements for dwelling units in the RNC-12 zone. Kugler said it should also be noted that no parking is provided or can be provided on-site for the apartments. He said staff would urge the applicant to consider downsizing the residential use of the property instead of seeking to increase the viability of a higher level of use on such a constrained property. Kugler said staff therefore recommends that EXC97-0016, a special exception to modify 'the front, rear, and side yard requirements to allow construction of two two- story additions on the northeast and southeast corners of the existing residential structure for a property located in the RNC-12 zone at 606 'East Jefferson Street be denied. With regard to the variance request, Kugler said that in the RNC-12 zone, the maximum building coverage permitted on a lot is 40%. He said the existing building covers 68.5% of the lot and the proposed additions would result in a total 77.8% building coverage. Kugler said staff feels the additions would add mass to a building that very visibly projects into the streetscape and increase its incompatibility with other structures in the neighborhood. Kugler said the intent of the RNC-12 zone is to stabilize certain existing residential neighborhoods by preserving the predominantly single-family residential character of these neighborhoods and preventing existing multi-family uses from becoming nonconforming. He said staff feels that allowing enlargement of the building would not encourage the most appropriate use of the land, particularly for a residential structure for which no off-street parking is provided. Kugler said the property is currently overcrowded and to allow the additions would increase the nonconformity of the building coverage for this property. Kugler said granting a variance to allow further obstructions in the limited setbacks that remain on the subject property would allow a slightly higher density to be maintained on the property, and would do so at the cost of increasing the bulk of a building that is already not in scale or harmony with the surrounding neighborhood. Kugler said in granting a variance, the Board must be assured that the three tests of unnecessary hardship are met. He said the first is the reasonable return test. Kugler said if the variance is not granted, the applicant would be able to continue to use the property as an apartment house or could convert the structure into a duplex, and in either case, reasonable use of the property for a purpose allowed in the zone could continue. With regard to the uniqueness test, Kugler said staff feels there is nothing unique about the property in itself that compels the applicant to enlarge the building. He said that because the building on the site is too large for the property, it currently allows for a higher density and more rental income than would otherwise be possible. Kugler said the property owner and his predecessors in title have been able to take advantage of this nonconforming situation over the years. Kugler said to grant a variance in this case would give a further advantage to the applicant that has not been granted to others who are obliged to meet the dimensional requirements of the Zoning Chapter. With regard to the third test, the landowner's own making, Kugler said the applicant did not create the current situation but the proposal to construct the additions is the owner's own idea. Kugler said granting the variance would increase the level of building coverage non-conformity, a situation that is essentially the landowner's own making. Kugler said staff therefore recommends that VAR97-0003, a variance to permit building coverage of 77.8% in order to allow construction of two two-story additions on the northeast and southeast corners of the existing residential structure for a property located in the RNC-12 Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997 Page 16 zone at 606 East Jefferson Street be denied. Kugler added that the Board had a letter from the owners of property immediately adjacent to the east of this property, Donald and Jean Preston, who state that they do not object to the proposed additions. Public hearing: Richard Hermeier, 606 E. Jefferson Street, said he came before the Board after encouragement from his councilman, who thought this building was an exception to the rule, because it was formerly an old grocery store converted into an apartment building. He added that because of the conversion, it has inherent problems within it. Hermeier said the apartments in the back which were converted were once an old garage - one single-car garage converted into an upper and a lower apartment. He said neither of these apartments has closet space and they each have only about 170 square feet of living space. Hermeier said it is hard to keep the two apartments rented, and they cannot be rented to a couple, because they are so small. Hermeier said he has tried to add amenities to the apartments to keep tenants. He said he decided to try to get any kind of modification to add space, especially closets. Hermeier said he has had to use mobile units in the apartments for hanging clothes. He said it has been problematic in the sense that he has tried to upgrade the building each year, but still the southeast corner has garbage cans exposed to the public. Hermeier said bicycles have also been a huge problem. He said they cannot be easily stored in the basement, because of the narrow steps. Hermeier said the tenants do not want to store their bicycles outside. He said he thought a better way would be to create a storage area in the southeast corner of the building for bicycles and garbage cans. Hermeier said this would also be a good area for recycling and the storage area would improve the building as well as the neighborhood. Hermeier said he could understand some of the concerns regarding the proposed rear addition. He said he went to his neighbors before submitting an application and asked if they had any objections and if so, they should put them in writing. He said if they approved of the project he also asked them to put it in writing. Hermeier said he only received one response, which was from the Prestons, who approve of the project. He said the Prestons have been happy with the way the building has progressed in terms of the renovations. Hermeier said he had asked the neighbors if there would be any difficulty with going with the zero variance. He said he had noticed that the Preston building was developed to the line of zero variance at the northeast corner of the building. Hermeier said he decided to ask for the zero variance, but would certainly be amenable to cutting back, possibly even to the existence of the north wall of the building. He said even that would add a little life space to the apartments and hopefully make them more rentable. Hermeier said he has added amenities to the apartments to cater to the tenants and said he has tried to be a good neighbor. He said the 1983 ordinance is punitive to someone with a 1900 building, because it doesn't allow him to make any changes. Hermeier said he felt the building should be grandfathered in, as has been the case in other cities where he has lived, such as Chicago. He said he would appreciate any assistance. Regarding the conversion to a duplex, Hermeier said he did extensive remodeling last summer that included all new bathrooms on the first floor, which are adjacent to the other apartments. He said converting to a duplex would require tearing out the bathrooms that have just been newly renovated. Eckhardt asked Hermeier how long he has owned the building. Hermeier said he has owned the building for four years, but that it was run by a management agency for the first two years he owned it. He said he had always felt the management agency was not trying hard enough to rent the smaller apartments. Hermeier said he then took over management of the building and has found that it is difficult to keep the smaller apartments rented. Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997 Page 17 Brandt said Hermeier had raised the issue of grandlathering in the property. Brandt said that in actuality, when the current zoning went into place, the property was immediately out of conformity, but was allowed to continue its rental of four apartments. He said the property actually was grandfathered in at that time. Brandt said Hermeier is asking to go beyond what was grandfathered in to allow additional changes, even though the building is already nonconforming. Hermeier said his experience with a similar situation in Chicago allowed him to make changes to a building that was in existence before an ordinance was passed. Brandt said the Neighborhood Conservation Zoning was put in very specifically as an effort to stabilize some of the older neighborhoods in town and to ensure that changes and alterations within those neighborhoods occurred within reasonable guidelines. Brandt said the property is already pretty massive in terms of the lot size. Hermeier said he had made the application at the suggestion of Mr. Thornberry, who had been very helpful to him. Hermeier said any assistance or modification would be beneficial. Public hearing closed. MOTION: Bender moved to approve EXC97.0016, a special exception to modify the front, rear, and side yard requirements to allow construction of two two-story additions on the northeast and southeast corners of the existing residential structure for a property located in the RNC-12 zone at 606 East Jefferson Street. Haigh seconded the motion. Haigh said the application did not meet any of the standards for allowing exceptions to setback requirements. He added that there .would be an impact on the residential properties to the north and the east. Haigh said the requested yard modifications would add substantially to the problem. Haigh said one of the main problems he had would be the problem with the Fire Code and safety conditions as well as the maintenance of the building and adjacent buildings. He said he would have trouble supporting this particular exception, because of the problem of it being too close to other residential structures as well as the massiveness of the building as is. Brandt said he also had real problems with the application, because of the overall mass of the property to begin with and the fact that so much space on the lot is already taken up. He said he would have a hard time considering approval of any expansion whatsoever, partly because of the mass of the building and also because it is in the conservation zone. He said he had concerns about precedent-setting, because there are a lot of properties that are already nonconforming with the current zoning. Brandt said the property was the way it was at the time it was purchased and that these conditions were already known. He said the Board would just be aggravating the situation and causing difficulties for people who reside in adjacent properties. Eckhardt said she thought this is much more than an old store building. She said the second story has been added and that making an apartment out of an existing garage and building above the garage has already added a great deal more in rentable space than there would have been originally in what was just a store building. Eckhardt said grandfathering in means the owner gets to keep that, but it does not mean he can do anything he wants with his property. She said it would be a bad precedent to set to allow the requested yard modifications, because there are plenty of people who would like to take advantage of it, if it were the rule. Eckhardt said the owner has a small lot and a large building on it, and there is no way to make the building bigger and be fair. She said she would vote against the application. Bender said the thing that is most troubling to her is that it is already a nonconforming use. She said to expand a nonconforming use would be a huge mistake. She said she empathized with the applicant in terms of the difficulty with renting the smaller apartments. Bender said she would Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997' Page 18 concur with the staff recommendation that the feasible alternative given the mass of the structure and the amount of the rear, front and side yard encroachments, which she feels are beyond reasonable, would be to assimilate the smaller apartments into the larger apartments. She said she realized this would cause the applicant some expense, but it was an alternative that could result in essentially the same number of bedroom units. Bender said it should not decrease substantially the amount of rent derived from the property. She said she was also concerned about the safety and maintenance issues as well as the public welfare and fire issues of the proposed additions. She said the people who live there now may be sympathetic to the concerns, but they will not always live there. Bender said she could not in good conscience think that this follows the spirit of the Zoning Code and she could not support it. Corcoran said she agreed for all the reasons previously stated. She said she realized the applicant has made a number of improvements to the property and it looks very nice, but she thought the Board could not approve the application to enlarge this nonconforming use. The affirmative motion was denied on a vote of 0-5. MOTION: Brandt moved to approve VAR97-0003, a variance to permit building coverage of 77.8% in order to allow construction of two two-story additions on the northeast and southeast corners of the existing residential structure located in the RNC-12 zone at 606 East Jefferson Street. Haigh seconded the motion. Brandt said he would have the same comments as were made with the special exception and in fact, the standards for approving a variance are much more stringent than those for a special exception. He said a variance should only be granted in the most significant of cases that meet all of the applicable standards. He said this case has difficulty in meeting most of the standards. Brandt said the situation existed at the time the property was purchased and he felt the Board should not aggravate the situation. Haigh said he agrees with Brandt's comments. He said the application has to meet the three hardship tests of a variance, one of them being the uniqueness test. Haigh said the property really has no unique environmental features. He said because the building is too large for the property, it allows for a greater density and more rental income than would otherwise be possible. Haigh said the applicant is correct in that he did not create the situation as is, but the proposal to expand it is his own idea. Regarding the mass of the building, Haigh said increasing from 68.5% to 77.8% would create a precedent that he did not think the Board was willing to make. He said he would have a real problem supporting this variance. Bender skid she agrees the application does not meet the unnecessary hardship tests. She said she does not see any way to reasonably expand this building, particularly in the RNC-12 zone, and does not think it would be appropriate. She said it does not follow the spirit of the law and the zoning to expand this kind of a nonconforming use. Bender said there are such limited setbacks already and she could not approve this in good conscience. She said it will be more expensive to implement turning it back into two larger apartments initially, but because the number of bedrooms would be the same, in her estimation the applicant would still get reasonable use and return from the property. Bender said she could not support the variance. Corcoran said she is not in favor of the variance. She said the applicant had not demonstrated to the Board that the three tests of unnecessary hardship had been met. Corcoran said she finds that the property can yield a reasonable return if it is used only for the purposes allowed currently. She added that this owner's situation is not unique or peculiar and there are other non- conforming properties within this zone. She said the hardship is of this landowner's own making in that he is seeking this modification. Corcoran said she did not believe that any of the tests Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997' Page 19 have been met and she could not vote in favor of the variance. Eckhardt said she would like to thank the owner for making his apartment building the best that he can and for putting all the effort and work into it. She said she felt there would be a major impact on adjacent property if the variance were granted, and there is a concern about Fire Code and safety issues. Eckhardt said having seen a fire in the neighborhood in the past shows how dangerous it could be. She said she feels the owner is getting the most out of the land that he can possibly get, partly due to the fact that the property is nonconforming. She said she did not believe any of the unnecessary hardship tests have been met and she could not, in good conscience, vote in favor of this. The affirmative motion was denied on a vote of 0-5. EXC97-0017. Public hearing on an application submitted by Christopher Drop, on behalf of property owner Elizabeth Beltz, for a special exception to permit a rear yard modification for property located in the Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) zone at 1929 Friendship Street. Yapp said the applicant is proposing the construction of a 17-foot by 5-foot, ten-inch wide hallway and a 12-foot by 11-foot screened-in porch to be constructed in the rear yard of the residence at 1929 Friendship Street. He said the hallway would encroach three feet into the required 20-foot setback area, while the porch would encroach eight feet into the 20-foot setback area. He added that the applicant is planning to remove an existing 11-foot by 8-foot detached screened-in room which abuts the west property line. Yapp said the existing residence is nonconforming in that it is 17 feet from the rear lot line. He said the lot itself is nonconforming, because it is a 6,000 square foot lot in the RS-5 zone where the minimum lot size today is 8,000 square feet. Yapp said the proposed addition would encroach approximately 6.6% into the required rear yard, which staff feels is a modest encroachment. He added that at its closest point, the addition would be 12 feet from the rear lot line and seven feet from the side lot line. Yapp said the residence is currently seven feet from the side lot line. Yapp said the porch should not negatively impact adjacent properties; it should not inhibit any sunlight or air from reaching the residences to the south or to the west, or give adjacent properties a sense of overcrowding or congestion, especially since the detached screened-in room will be removed. Yapp said staff recommends that EXC97-0017, a request to reduce the rear yard requirement from 20 feet to 12 feet for the 11-foot length of the screened-in porch and from 20 feet to 17 feet for the 5 foot, 10-inch length of the proposed hallway be approved, subject to the removal of the existing detached screened-in room which lies on the west property line. Eckhardt asked if the hallway would be a completely enclosed part of the house. Yapp responded that it would and would have a door from the hallway out into the screened-in porch. Haigh asked if staff had received any comments from neighbors and Yapp responded that staff had received no comments. Public hearing: Christopher Drop, 511 3rd Avenue, said he made this application on behalf of the homeowner. He said the hallway would have an exit to the rear yard and also an entrance onto the screened porch. Drop said the existing detached screened-in porch was built by a previous property owner. He said the whole idea was to build something that would be usable, without having to go Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11,1997 Pag~ 20 outside. Drop said the screened porch was not intended, nor does the owner ever intend to use it for living space. Drop said the property is already nonconforming as far as the 17 feet. He said the houses to each side are far enough away and there are no trees to remove in the construction of the porch. Public hearing closed. MOTION: Haigh moved to approve EXC97-0017, a special exception to reduce a rear yard requirement from 20 feet to 12 feet for the 11-foot length of the screened porch and from 20 feet to 17 feet for the 5 foot, 10-inch length of the proposed hallway, subject to the removal of the existing detached screened-in room that lies on the west property line. Corcoran seconded the motion. Haigh said the porch will definitely improve the property and will be a much better approach than having the detached screened-in structure. He said there would be no impact on the immediate neighborhood as it is pretty secluded back there. Haigh said he saw no reason not to approve this exception. Brandt said he agrees and said this seems to be a relatively minor encroachment. He added that there were no safety or character problems with the neighborhood and the porch would be relatively non-intrusive. Brandt slid in terms of following the stgnd~rds, he would have no problem with it. Bender said she agrees. She said that yard setbacks are in place to minimize the sense of overcrowding, which is not applicable in this case. She said the encroachment is very small in quantitative terms. Bender said it would be more suitable for the property and also look better to have the porch attached. She said she did not see any problems with it and that it certainly does not change the character of the neighborhood. Bender said it would improve the property and, not hearing any objections from any of the several neighbors who were notified, she saw no reason not to approve. Corcoran said she agrees with Bender for the reasons she stated. Eckhardt said her colleagues have given all the reasons for voting in favor. She commented that the configuration of the plan is quite compact and that the addition of the hall is quite clever and makes good use of the land. Eckhardt said it is a good project. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997 Page 21 OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1. Discussion of Setting Reasonable Time Limits on Public Discussion Haigh said he brought up the issue after the last meeting, but said it may have been an overreaction on his part. He said one item took an extremely long period of time - about three hours. Haigh said one person spoke over an hour. Eckhardt said she thought an hour was excessive, but did not know what could be done once the person gets started. Yapp commented that the Planning and Zoning Commission has a five-minute time limit per person on public discussion. He said they are more lenient with that limit for the applicant, but do stick to it for other people. Holecek said the rationale behind allowing the applicant more time is to facilitate communication between the applicant and the Commission as the applicant is providing information that may not have been in the staff report. She asked if it was the applicant who spoke for an hour and Haigh responded that it was. Haigh said the applicant was reciting a whole case. Haigh added that it may have been a one-time thing and might not ever happen again. Eckhardt and Bender said the potential is there for it to happen again. Bender said that with the Schabilion case, a dozen people said virtually the same thing. Bender said she would have no problem with setting a time limit. She said it would be appropriate and that many boards do it. Bender said the Chair sets the tone and then can educate, giving specific instructions for speaking and a time limit. Holecek said that the Board of Adjustment is a quasi-judicial body and is therefore different from other boards. Bender said an exception could then be made in the case of the applicant. She said it is difficult, because there is a fine line between wanting people to feel they have been heard, but on the other hand, an hour is totally unreasonable. Holecek said since the appeal from the Board of Adjustment goes directly to the District Court level, there is an obligation to take and weigh the evidence. She said at some point it would not be obtrusive for the Chair to step in and tell the applicant there is some repetition to the case. Eckhardt said the Board could at least have a statement that goes to the applicant asking them to be brief and not to repeat information that is already in the report, because Board members will have already read the report. Bender suggested the Chair reiterate at the beginning of the meeting that they like to hear from the public and they have already read the staff report. Brandt said it is good to monitor the situation, but he would rather err on the side of giving speakers plenty of time. He said the Board meets once a month and this is the applicant's one shot at speaking about something that is very important to him or her. Eckhardt said there is no way to interrupt someone without being really rude. Corcoran said she felt that if someone would appeal to the District Court, one of the things the applicant would cite as grounds for the illegality of the Board's decision would be that he or she was cut off and not allowed to present all the evidence. She agreed that it was something to watch on a case-by-case basis. Eckhardt said she could at least give a statement at the beginning of the meeting asking speakers to be brief. Holecek said she liked the idea of saying that Board members have read the staff report and are familiar with the material contained in it. Brandt said the Board does not get this kind of situation very often, and the notion of jumping in when things are going that way and making the reminder would be good, too. Holecek said that especially with repetition, it should not be a problem to jump in and ask if there is new material. Eckhardt said the Board is quite lengthy itself in its deliberations and wants to be careful with its decisions. Holecek said it is critically important for the Board to take care to delineate the basis for its opinions. Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11,1997 Page 22 Bender asked if the Board would want to limit support people or informally make that part of the introduction of the forum. Brandt said he did not think the support people have been a huge problem and he would rather not say anything that even comes across as discouraging. He said the Board should monitor the situation, but he would be reluctant to do anything that sounds that discouraging. Corcoran said the public hearing is to allow the applicant to provide the Board with any new information and to respond to questions or concerns of the Board and those in the staff report. She added that the hearing is also for any other interested citizens to give their input. Haigh said the thing to do might be not to do anything unless it becomes a problem. Holecek said having the discussion and being sensitive to it, while monitoring the situation and having discussed potential responses, has probably served the purpose. 2. Iowa Avenue Item: Haigh referred to the Iowa Avenue item discussed at the previous meeting. Corcoran asked how long the applicant had to comply. Kugler said if the application was approved, the applicant has six months to get the work done. In the case of a denial, the building is in violation and enforcement should proceed right away. Holecek said she had planned to follow up with enforcement and had not yet had a chance to do so. Eckhardt asked if the applicant would have to take a story off the building. Holecek said she did not know how they would do it. Eckhardt said it tells every other developer and builder in town that they can get away with this. Brandt said that when talking with the inspectors, he questioned how they were interpreting the rule about establishing the grade by artificial means. He said he questioned whether or not the rule allowed that means of establishing grade. Haigh said he questioned that as well. 3. Garbage Cans Eckhardt wanted City staff to note that Mr. Hermeier's garbage cans were out in plain sight near the sidewalk, which is not allowed. Kugler said he would check into the matter. 4. BDIIssue Brandt asked about the earlier issue with the BDI. Holecek said the issue involves private covenants and whether or not they were going to be violated. Holecek said that at one time the City was a quasi-developer of BDI and was one of the financiers, so the City may have been signatory to those covenants. She said that, as such, the City would be a party that would neither want to facilitate nor allow anyone to be in violation. Holecek said she would look into the matter. OTHER Corcoran and Haigh said they would not be at the July 9 meeting. Eckhardt asked if her reason for not voting on one of the issues was adequate. Holecek said it was fine. Holecek said if a member is going to abstain, the reason needs to be stated for the record. Iowa City Board of Adjustment June 11, 1997 Page 23 ADJOURNMENT: Adjournment was moved by Corcoran and seconded by Haigh. The meeting was adjourned at 7:32 p.m. Patricia Eckhardt, Board Chairperson Melo(:~ ~'?ck~w~l, Board Secretary' Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte ppdadrnin~min\boa6-11 .doc SIGN IN SHEET IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING WEDNESDAY, JUNE 11, 1997- 4:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS Name ' 2. . ..)(~~ [-~'~ .~f~ 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Address ~ ff MINUTES PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION JUNE 18, 1997 MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: GUESTS: STAFF PRESENT: Barbara Endel, Ken Fearing, Bruce Pruess, Kathy Wallace, Ross Wilburn Judith Klink, Matt Pacha, Allen Stroh William Buss, Bob Miklo Terry Trueblood, Mike Moran, Bob Howell, Kriz Maurer, Rex Marilyn FORMAL ACTION TAKEN Moved by Endel, seconded by Wilburn, to approve the May 14, 1997 minutes as written. Unanimous. IOWA CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Bob Miklo, Senior Planner in the City's Planning and Community Development Department, presented a brief overview of the draft Iowa City Comprehensive Plan. A series of public meetings will be held to obtain feedback from community groups and other boards and commissions. The Planning and Zoning Commission plans to hold a public hearing on July 17, with the Comprehensive Plan then being forwarded to the City Council for adoption. Miklo stated an overview of the neighborhood open space plan is part of the plan. He asked the commission to review the plan to see if there are any weaknesses or issues not addressed. He noted the sections most important for the commission's review were pages 1-28. Wilburn asked if it included a plan for how the city intends to promote some of the traditional neighborhood concepts. Miklo stated the plan encourages more compact development, with clear design guidelines. Pruess stated the commission would review the Comprehensive Plan and it would be discussed at the August meeting. FIRST AND ROCHESTER SUBDIVISION (Parts 4-6) Trueblood reviewed the neighborhood open space objectives for the pertinent Upper Ralston Creek District. The amount of open space required for this proposed development is approximately .55 acres. He pointed out an area approximately 660 feet long and 36 feet wide along the south boundary adjacent to Ralston Creek, noting it is just an example of the .55 acres required. Trueblood asked if the commission would like to encourage development of this area for green space/trail or accept fees in lieu thereof. Bob Miklo stated the sensitive areas ordinance would also apply. Pruess asked if there would be a possibility of a establishing a trail extending to the west of this area, toward Hickory Hill Park. Miklo indicated it would not be possible without the purchase of easements, noting people are reluctant to give up a portion of their back yards. Miklo noted the possibility of a greenway along Ralston Creek from this area to the east. Pruess referred to the popularity of the trail established in the Longfellow neighborhood, noting accepting this area would preserve the land with the hope of developing a trail in the future. Wilburn agreed with Pruess, noting the potential for the neighborhood association applying for a P.I.N. grant to develop this area. Endel noted Anchorage, Alaska has 121 miles of paved trails, making it a very user friendly city. She encouraged trying to link places together in the city, making it easier for people to get around. Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Fearinq, to accept the .55 acres to support future potential development of a trail to connect into Hickory Trail (Street), supportinq the objectives of the Neighborhood Open Space Plan. "DOG PARK" Letters and a counter petition in opposition to the proposed "dog park" were distributed to the commission. Trueblood stated the commission needed to determine what its recommendation would be, if any. He indicated if such a facility is established, he would lean away from establishing it in Hickory Hill Park. Based on past history in dealing with Hickory Hill Park, people do not seem to want any development in Hickory Hill Park, other than trails. Wallace asked if any thought had been given to possible other locations. Trueblood noted one possibility was a section in Scott Park south of the creek and east of Scott Boulevard. This area was previously used for soccer fields for the younger children, and is bordered by Scott Boulevard, farmland and Ralston Creek. Endel stated taking into account the city's limited resources, development of a "dog park" would not be a top priority for her. She noted she was a dog owner, but was opposed to such a facility based on the small amount of people it would serve as opposed to how much time and attention it would take and potential problems. Various issues such as cost for fencing, upkeep, noise, and liability were cited by commission members. Pruess noted the opposition, stating he would be more interested if there was a structured group to champion the cause, providing time, energy and financial assistance. Trueblood indicated he would inform the individual who initiated the survey that the commission is opposed to establishing a "dog park" in Hickory Hill Park, and has serious concerns establishing such a facility on city property. Staff will ask for specific ideas, but would inform them that at this time it does not look positive for establishment of a "dog park". PARK AND RECREATION FOUNDATION REPORT Trueblood reported $170,000 in actual pledges has been received to date for the Mercer Park Gymnasium Project, with several other pledges pending. The committee's final report meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, June 24. The goal is to have a minimum of $200,000 in pledges prior to taking the fund raising campaign to the general public. RIVERFRONT AND NATURAL AREAS COM/~ISSION REPORT Fearing reported the commission would be determining tonight how many members would attend the Parks and Recreation annual park tour on July 2; Miller Monument is donating three plaques to be placed in Ryerson's Woods; plans for the 1998 Arbor Day event will begin January 1; and the commission has been working on revising their by-laws. PARK TOUR Trueblood stated some City Council members have expressed interest in going on the annual park tour, but were unable to due to a prior commitment. He asked if the commission would like to change the date (July 2) of the tour. Various members noted the difficulty in finding a time where commission members could attend. The consensus of the commission was not to change the park tour date. Pruess noted it would be possible to drop off park tour attendees earlier if they needed to be. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Trueblood reported on the following: Boys Baseball Parkinq - During times of Iowa City Boys Baseball and Iowa City Girls Softball games, parking has been allowed along the bike path in lower City Park if the parking lots are full. A few complaints have been received from people walking on the path, and staff is keeping a close eye so people do not abuse the privilege. Fearing noted some residents in the area are pleased because parking in front of their houses is reduced. Napoleon Park - The irrigation system is being installed; MidAmerican Energy is requiring only a minor change in relocation of poles for the lighting project; and preliminary work has been completed to bid out the fencing project. Iowa City Kickers Soccer Park - The irrigation system will be up and running this week, and seeding and fertilization has been completed. Ryerson's Woods - Prairie grass and wild flowers have been planted north of the parking lot. 3 Job Openlnqs - Staff is working on hiring for two positions - additional maintenance worker for the Central Business District (new) and senior maintenance worker/turf grass specialist for the Parks Division (replacement). DeDartmental Reorqanization - Staff is working on the departmental reorganization and hopes to have it completed prior to August 1st. Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Fearinq to adjourn. meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m. Unanimous. The 4 MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 19, 1997 - 7:30 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS - CITY CIVIC CENTER PRELIMINARY Subject to Approval MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Bovbjerg, Benjamin Chait, Pam Ehrhardt, Dick Gibson, Phil Shive, George Starr, Lea Supple MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Bob Miklo, Traci Howard OTHERS PRESENT: Harry Wolf RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, of amendments to Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article N, entitled "Off-Street Parking and Loading," to increase the parking requirements for residential uses in the CB~5, Central Business Support Zone as referenced in the memorandum dated May 1, 1997 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Starr called the meeting to order at 7:36 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was no public discussion. ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES ON CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: Starr said that all appointments were made at the Council's June 17, 1997, meeting, so there were no vacancies to announce. CODE AMENDMENT ITEMS: Public discussion of an amendment to Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article B, "Zoning Definitions," to change the definition of GRADE. Miklo distributed a revised definition of GRADE proposed by the Building Official to address the Commission's concerns raised at the informal meeting on June 16, 1997. Miklo said if the revised definition did not address all the concerns, the Commission could defer the item to its next meeting. Starr noted that there was significant discussion about the item at the informal meeting, and he asked Commission members if this definition addresses those concerns. Bovbjerg asked what had changed. Gibson said the reference to determining building height had been added. Chait said the revised definition is much clearer. He said one concern with the previous version was that an individual could not construct retaining walls, and this allows such construction. Planning and Zoning Commission June 19, 1997 Page 2 Gibson asked about the relationship between the first and second sentence. He said the measurement occurs at the lowest point of elevation between the building and the property line or between the building and five feet away from it when the property line is more than five feet away from the building. He asked where the measurement would be made when the second sentence is taken into account. Bovbjerg said she also had a problem with the two sentences being disjointed. Starr said based on the significant discussion that took place at the informal meeting, he thought it would be appropriate to defer the item to the next Commission meeting. Gibson said the Commission should be looking for staff to make some progress on the item before then, because he wants to see the issue resolved. Mik!o said the grade would still be measured five feet out from the building. Chait asked which sentence caused the problem. Gibson said it was the relationship between the two. The first sentence determines where to measure and the lowest point, but he was not sure where the measurement was taken according to the second sentence. Bovbjerg said the two sentences are not related unless a person is trying to artificially create a surface in order to make a building taller than it actually should be according to the Building Code. She said her problem was with the phrase, "... to create a higher grade for the purpose of determining. the height of a building..," because that allows a prostitution of the definition and determination, as well as the purpose of defining grade.. She said the purpose of the Building Code and the Zoning Chapter in setting building height limitations is to ensure construction of buildings with heights that fit the area or neighborhood they are built in. The second sentence brings out the rule bending. She said that should not be allowed to happen or there should be a sentence between the first and second sentence saying, "You may put dirt around the building and call that the new grade, however, there are height limitations for the building." Miklo reiterated that grade would still be measured five feet out from the building. Gibson said it is not the 2.5 feet as discussed Monday, but the highest the building could be raised would be 1.25 feet, because it is 1.25 feet from grade. Bovbjerg explained the concept of the continuous slope and other situations where the increase could be more than 2.5 feet. Chait said he agreed with Starr that the Commission should defer the item. He said the first sentence is not necessarily connected to the second sentence. The second sentence is to define what happens when fill occurs. He said the Commission needs to debate the philosophy of allowing artificially established grade and to create sufficient technical standards to do so. Bovbjerg agreed. Supple agreed that there needed to be another sentence added to the revised definition, and was concerned with the terminology that said, "... raising the grade is for the purpose of determining the height of the building..," because a developer could have an aesthetic purpose. Mildo said that this language requested by the Commission at the informal meeting may not be appropriate. Chair noted that the two buildings the Commission saw pictures of on Monday would be allowed under any condition if the definition of GRADE is not used for the Planning and Zoning Commission June 19, 1997 Page 3 purpose of determining building height. Holecek said she agreed, and the language is clear that the artificial grade cannot be used to raise the building height by another story level. Bovbjerg said regardless of the wording, the purpose is to determine a higher building height, and the definition acknowledges that people do that. Miklo said the 'increased building height would only be on a large enough site, where the increase would not be a problem, and the new definition requires more fill dirt and a more gradual slope. Bovbjerg said the Commission should be concerned with keeping buildings from getting too high and not providing a loophole for developers that want to increase building height. Miklo said under the proposed definition, the building height would not be significantly increased on a constrained site. Gibson asked if grade could be measured from the average elevation of the curbline running across the front of the property, or the average of the sidewalk elevation across the property front. Miklo suggested deferring the item so the Senior Building Official could be present to evaluate new suggestions and ideas. Starr said the reason the issue is before the Commission is because previous interpretations conflict with how the Commission feels the issue should have been handled. Miklo said a past building official made the interpretation that allowed the construction and set the precedent. Starr said he wanted to make sure that type of interpretation did not happen again, and some Commission members do not feel the language is 100% clear. Supple noted that the Commission is trying to clarify an issue to stop a precedent caused by the previous interpretations. Chait said the interpretation standard was defined as five feet out from the building, and the people violating the intent went out six feet, creating the present problems. Public discussion was opened. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Bovbjerg moved to defer the code amendment item concerning the definition of GRADE to the July 17, 1997, Commission meeting. Chait seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously by a vote of 7-0. Public discussion of amendments to Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article N, entitled "Off-Street Parking and Loading," to increase the parking requirements for residential uses in the CB-5, Central Business Support Zone. Miklo said the item is proposing to amend the parking requirements from 1 and 1.5 spaces per unit depending on the number of bedrooms in the unit to comply with all other multi-family zones with the exception of the PRM zone. For 1 bedroom and efficiency units it would be 1 space per unit; for 2 and 3 bedrooms, it would be 2 spaces per unit; for 4 bedrooms it would be 3 spaces and for 5 bedrooms it would be 4 spaces. Miklo said the Council is also considering amendments to the parking impact fee for the area south of Burlington Street. He reminded Commission members that they are not reviewing that issue, only the zoning ordinance. Public discussion was opened. Public discussion was closed. Planning and Zoning Commission June 19, 1997 Page 4 Bovbjerg moved to recommend approval of amendments to Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article N, entitled "Off-Street Parking and Loading," to increase the parking requirements for residential uses in the CB-5, Central Business Support Zone, as referenced in the memorandum dated May 1, 1997. Supple seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously by a vote of 7-0. REZONING ITEMS: REZ97-0003. Public discussion of an application submitted by James P. Glasgow for a rezoning from RM-20, Medium Density Multi-Family Residential, and RS-5, Low Density Single-Family Residential, to OSA-20 and OSA-5, Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone, for 1.9 acres located at 1122-1136 N. Dubuque Street. (45-day limitation period: waived to June 19, 1997) Miklo said the applicant requested to defer the item and to waive the limitation to the July 3, 1997, Commission meeting. He said there will be a plan for the Commission to look at that meeting. Supple noted that only four Commissioners will be present at that meeting, and asked if there needed to be two hearings on the issue. Miklo said that given the public interest on this issue, it might be a good idea to have two hearings on the revised plan, even though the Commission has already had one hearing. Starr agreed because the plan being presented is a new one. Bovbjerg said she felt the revised plan should receive two hearings. Supple said she did not want the Commission to hold up the development. Holecek said considering the nature of the public interest in the application and that the Commission's standard procedure is to have two hearings on an application, the applicant would not be. able to accuse the Commission of holding up development. She said due process for the applicant and the public needs to be handled appropriately, and the record shows the number of deferrals requested by the applicant. She said the two- week delay involved with two hearings is not significant compared to the number of deferrals requested by the applicant. Gibson asked Holecek if she thought any process delays had been caused by the Commission. Holecek said no, all the deferrals granted were requested by the applicant. Starr noted that the Commission reviewed the application once at a public hearing, and the applicant requested deferral at the next meeting. Public discussion was opened. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Supple moved to defer the rezoning item REZ97-0003 to the July 3, 1997, Commission meeting. Ehrhardt seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously by a vote of 7-0. REZ97-0006. Public discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development Co., Inc. to rezone 4.806 acres located on Mormon Trek & Westwinds Drive from Neighborhood Commercial (CN-1) to Community Commercial (CC-2). (45- day limitation period: July 12, 1997). Planning and Zoning Commission June 19, 1997 Page 5 Miklo said the request is to change the zone from CN-1 to CC-2. He said for the reasons identified in the staff report, staff does not believe that a CC-2 zoning is appropriate for this area. Instead the appropriate zoning for this area is CN-1, and staff feels that there are reasonable amendments to the CN-1 zone that could be made to provide flexibility in all Iowa City CN-1 zones, and to accommodate the applicant. Miklo said staff recommends that the rezoning request be denied, but that the Commission consider amending the CN~I zone to allow retail and personal service uses limited to 1500 square feet in floor area, and to allow consideration of larger retail and personal services by the Board of Adjustment if it can be shown that the larger uses meet the zoning intent of the CN-1 zone. Miklo said staff is also recommending that some of the design provisions in the CN-1 zone be strengthened. Harry Wolf, Vice President of Southaate Development said Southgate Development has been working on the Walden Square project for approximately nine years. He said they have worked closely with the Commission, Council and staff to try to build a center that meets the intent of the CN-1 zone. He noted the project is currently under construction. Wolf said the most recent market activity has shown an interest from users currently not permitted in a CN-1 zone, and there needs to be more flexibility in the CN-1 zone to accomplish a retail district for the west side of the City. He said the option to pursue a rezoning to CC-2 was presented as the most flexible and expedient to follow, because the area was previously zoned CC-2 in the early 1980s. Wolf said the recommended alternative in front of the Commission could reach the level of flexibility Southgate is seeking with some variation, such as the size recommendation. He said the flexibility is not only in the initial leasing, but also when tenants are changing 5-10 years down the road. He said Southgate is willing to consider staff's recommendation. Starr said the staff recommendation would allow retail or personal service uses, but would limit floor space to 1,500 square feet. Starr asked Wolf if he wanted a larger square footage; if there were interested businesses that needed more space. Wolf said he understood that the intent of the CN-1 zone is to provide a mix, and to control that mix. He said they would like to move forward with the project, and they would like to work with staff if possible. He said they could continue living with the office options, even though the parking would be more generous under the CC-2 zone. Wolf said he and Southgate feel somewhat limited with the current CN-1 zone. He said if the sizes for floor space for retail and personal service can become relatively large, he and Southgate would accept the CN-1 zone. Starr asked what zone Fareway was located in. Miklo said in the CN-1 zone, but grocery stores are spelled out as a use that is permitted not to exceed 30,000 square feet. He said the zone spells out some uses that can exceed the square foot limit. He said the 1,500 square foot size restriction only applies to businesses not currently permitted in the zone. Miklo pointed out that the Board of Adjustment's special exception process could provide more flexibility concerning the square foot size restriction. Planning and Zoning Commission June 19, 1997 Page 6 Supple asked Wolf what size he considers large enough for retail or personal service space. Wolf noted that the special exception process through the Board of Adjustment is time consuming and expensive, and they would prefer to avoid it if possible. Wolf said the average size of store occupied by current tenants and the size preferred by those that have expressed interest, including Fareway and the Credit Union is 4,500 square feet; without Fareway and the Credit Union, the average square footage is 3,000 feet. He said he would like to pursue keeping the average at 3,000 square feet. Gibson asked if Wolf could talk more specifically about store activities. Wolf said Southgate has signed on a drug store/pharmacy that occupies 11,000 square feet. Miklo said drug stores do not have a size restriction, and asked what the average square footage would be excluding the drug store. Wolf said it would be approximately 2,400 square feet. Supple asked if the drug store was the only exceptionally large store. Wolf said there is a 6,000 square foot video store, a 1,500 square foot hair salon, a 3,200 square foot dry cleaner/laundromat and the ability to have up to 15,000 square feet of restaurants. Wolf .said he came up with 15 users, nine of which would be 1,500 square foot users. Miklo noted that dry cleaners and laundromats do not have size restrictions. Gibson said he could imagine a store that occupied less than 1,500 square feet that had a community-wide appeal. He said that it is more important to consider the type of store to determine square footage. Starr said while the Commission is not trying to prevent development, it is trying to maintain the intent of the CN-1 zone to keep the area a neighborhood center as opposed to opening the area up to community- wide services. Gibson asked what provisions are associated with appealing to the Board of Adjustment. Miklo said that an individual must apply for a special exception, make an argument that their application deserved a special exception and met the intent of the zoning ordinance. In this case the applicant would need to show that the proposed use would serve primarily the surrounding neighbors. Gibson noted that the process is very flexible compared to some other zoning procedures. Bovbjerg asked what kind of timing and money that process involves. Miklo said it is a 30-60 day process, with an application cost of 8275 and the applicant must present building plans, which have most often already been drawn up for building or other permits. Supple asked if the building tenant changed from one business that received extra square footage from the Board of Adjustment to another business, would Southgate have to reapply for the second business to occupy the extra square footage. Miklo said yes. Gibson said it is difficult to write a rule to satisfy everyone, because it depends on the circumstances of purpose and tenant size. He said those two components need to be considered together. Miklo said the 1,500 square foot limitation is based on uses typically found in the CN-1 zone in Iowa City and nationwide. He said that most were below 1,500 square feet. Public discussion was opened. Planning and Zoning Commission June 19, 1997 Page 7 Public discussion was closed. Motion: Gibson moved to defer the rezoning item REZ97-0006 to the July 3, 1997, Commission meeting. Bovbjerg seconded the motion. Bovbjerg said whether it is best to rezone or to change requirements of the existing zone is a good question. She said it is similar to the situation the Commission had before in deciding whether to rezone a specific property or consider ordinance amendments for childcare centers throughout Iowa City. The motion carried unanimously by a vote of 7-0. Starr directed staff to put the CN-1 amendment recommendations on the July 3, 1997, Commission agenda. OTHER: Starr appointed Supple as the Planning and Zoning representative to the Airport Zoning Commission. CONSIDERATION OF THE JUNE 5, 1997, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES: Motion: Bovbjerg moved to approve the amended minutes from the June 5, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Ehrhardt seconded the motion. The passed unanimously bv a vote of 7-0. 1997, motion OTHER BUSINESS: Miklo said staff is currently taking the Comprehensive Plan to various community groups and neighborhood associations to elicit public comments on the plan. He said staff would like to put the issue back on the July 17, 1997, Commission meeting agenda for a public hearing. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION INFORMATION: Supple said Johnson County is also reviewing its Comprehensive Plan around July 17, 1997. Starr asked if there were any joint meetings between City staff and County zoning staff concerning the Comprehensive Plan. Miklo said the staffs are keeping each other informed. He noted that the Fringe Area Agreement is in place; it addresses some of those extraterritorial issues. Gibson said he would be gone for the June 30, 1997, and July 3, 1997, Commission meetings. Shire said he would also miss the June 30 and July 3 Commission meetings. Planning and Zoning Commission June 19, 1997 Page 8 ADJOURNMENT: Motion: Supple moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:29 p.m. Gibson seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously by a vote of 7-0. Lea Supple, Secretary Minutes submitted by Traci Howard. ppdadmin\mins\pz619.doc DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES MONDAY, JUNE 30, 1997 - 4:00 P.M. LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CIVIC CENTER Subject to Approval MEMBERS PRESENT: Gary Nagle, Phil Reisetter, Randy Rohovit, Clara Swan, Daryl Woodson MEMBERS ABSENT: Bill Nowysz, Karyl Larson STAFF PRESENT: David Schoon, Bob Miklo, Jim Schoenfelder, Traci Howard OTHERS PRESENT: Mark Anderson RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommend by a vote of 5-0, to approve the design plans for Phase One of the raised platform and ramp along the Olinton Street side of Old Capitol Mall. AMENDMENTS TO JUNE 16, 1997 MINUTES: On the first page under the section "Recommendations to City Council" the second condition of the fourth recommendation should read "projecting signs not be illuminated. CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Rohovit called the meeting to order at 4:14 p.m. CONSIDERATION OF THE FINAL DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FOR THE RAISED PLATFORM AND RAMP FOR TACO BELL: Schoon called Sandra Pancoe of FRCH Design Worldwide for a conference call so she could explain the ideas to Committee members and answer any questions. Pancoe said that the plaza will be accessible from the street, and will be 24 inches high to meet Taco Bell's floor level. She said the raised platform and stairs will be made of concrete and their will be two sets of stairs and a ramp to access the restaurant. Pancoe said the planters and patio front will be made out of brick that matches the side of the building, and there will be metal railings along the stairways. She said that in Phase 1 of the project, the plaza will only extend to the first three tenants past Taco Bell. She said that in Phase 2 of the project, the railing on the narrow end will be removed and the plaza will be continued to the end of the building where it will slope into a ramp. Pancoe said there will be planters and benches along the walkway as well. Woodson asked if the planters had been moved back 12 inches to stay out of the public right- of-way. Pancoe said yes, and she wanted to remind Committee members that drawings for the upper building facade were just ideas and not part of the Phase I plan they were considering. She said that only the platform and the railings were to be considered, not the other signage or bay windows. Anderson asked if Pancoe had received a commitment from the mall owners to proceed with Phase 2 of the project. Pancoe said that FRCH Design Worldwide had recently signed a contract with Heitmann Properties to work on the second phase. She did note that she could not promise that the second phase would look like the Phase 1 drawings, especially with the facade signage and banners because the plans have to be approved by Heitmann Properties. Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, June 30, 1997 Page 2 Woodson asked if the second phase of the plaza would be consistent with the first phase. Pancoe said it would be consistent. Swan asked if the color of the railing would be different from the color of the facade, and if it would be consistent with the second phase and colors on the rest of the facade. Pancoe said the railings are planned to be a dark green, and the plan is to have that color on the canopies and the cables holding the canopies. Pancoe said it was her goal to incorporate the color all the way along the plaza area. She said the current store front frames are painted brown, and their color has not been discussed. Anderson asked if there would be outdoor seating on the plaza area. Pancoe said that she hoped a tenant would put caf6 tables on the area. She also said that benches have been indicated on the Phase 2 plan. Woodson asked if the ramp planned for Phase 1, and the ramp planned for Phase 2 qualify as handicapped accessible. Pancoe said yes, that the slope is also needed to drain water away from the building. Schoon said that Ron Boose, Senior Building Inspector, told him that there is a state law regarding spacing between handicapped accessible ramps, and the ramps scheduled for Phases 1 and 2 may be too far apart. Schoon told Pancoe as she works on Phase Two she should contact Boose for more detailed information concerning the ramps. Anderson asked what the distance was between the face of the planters and the curb. Pancoe said all she knows is that they are 12 inches inside the right-of-way. Woodson asked what the distance was between the building facade and the ramp railing. Pancoe said it is approximately five feet from the column enclosure to the ramp railing. She said that since the Taco Bell store front comes out at an angle, they have given Taco Bell the option of removing the angle and having their store front flush with the building facade. The extra space would be converted to more outdoor seating. Woodson asked if they were developing street frontage or a second set of leasabilities. Pancoe said the space depends on future leasing, but if the angle is removed there will be a good five to six feet extra for the walkway. Anderson said he liked the concept of changing the wall face. Nagle asked what the plans were for the concrete. Pancoe said that brick will be used on the vertical surfaces, and concrete will be used on the ramp and stairs. Woodson said that Committee asked to see the entire plan for the facade several months ago, and that he does not like approving the plans piece by piece. Nagle asked if the awnings would be canvas. Pancoe said the awnings would probably be metal, but said that she could not promise material type until Heitmann Properties reviews the plans and goes through the pricing process. Nagle moved to approve the design plans for Phase One of the raised platform and ramp along the Clinton Street side of Old Capitol Mall. Woodson seconded the motion. Pancoe apologized for not showing an entire plan at once, and said her firm got a late start on the project. Swan said she thought the plans would work well and will improve the area. Swan said she liked the consistency and incorporation of the colors to achieve design continuity for the entire block while letting individual store fronts express their individuality. Rohovit asked if the upper level bay windows would be used. Pancoe said it is possible, but it depends on the costs of the windows. She said that the windows will break up the facade, but if they go unleased they may look abandoned. Woodson suggested doing something to break up the building facade. Pancoe said she needed to speak with the City more about allowable signage or a seasonal display to break up the facade. The motion carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, June 30, 1997 Page 3 Schoon noted that the City Council would be holding a special meeting at 7 a.m. on Wednesday, July 2, to consider the design. He said that he would attend the meeting to represent the Committee. Swan asked if the agenda could be amended to consider the June 16, 1997, meeting minutes before she had to leave the meeting. CONSIDERATION OF THE JUNE 16, 1997, MEETING MINUTES: Swan said that on the first page under the section, "Recommendations to Council" the second condition of the fourth recommendation should read, "projecting signs not be illuminated." Reisetter moved to approve the June 16, 1997, meeting minutes as amended. Swan seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0. (Swan left the meeting at 4:40 p.m.) DISCUSSION OF THE IOWA CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Senior Planner Robert Miklo presented a slide show featuring neighborhood design in Iowa City and other communities, and discussed the City Comprehensive Plan with Committee members. Miklo explained that the 1997 Comprehensive Plan is totally new and its policies and programs were devised from input and the mission statement developed by the Iowa City Beyond 2000 task forces and subcommittees. He said the plan is used by City Officials, Boards and Commissions, the City Council to address where and how land should develop in Iowa City. Miklo said the plan recognizes that neighborhoods are the building blocks for the City, and staff has tried to develop strategies to handle design in both newer and older neighborhoods. He said that the older neighborhoods provide good models for designing the newer neighborhoods, and that one proposed plan goal is to have a mixture of housing types in a neighborhood, like single-family and multi-family. He said that the plans calls for the creation of neighborhood centers or focal points in a residential setting, developing friendly community shopping centers and blending commercial areas into residential areas, which can be seen in the new Walden Square development on the west side of the City. Miklo said some ideas staff has developed includes: having house and building fronts face the streets instead of building fences to separate the neighborhood from arterial streets, designing narrower streets and setting houses closer to the street for more efficient land use, tucking garages to the back or sides of residences instead of letting the garage take up the majority of the house front, keeping open space as a focal or organizing point in the neighborhood and designing neighborhoods around natural features, not removing them. Miklo said if the plan is adopted by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, some subdivision and zoning regulations would have to be redrafted. Reisetter asked if the incorporation of multi-family housing into neighborhoods would be city wide. Miklo said that is what staff hopes for, although there will still be specific zones for high, medium and low density housing. Reisetter asked how staff will go about getting homeowner feedback. Miklo said a map in the plan divides the City into 10 subdistricts, and the plan calls for a detailed plan of each district. Miklo said staff wants a grassroots effort from community residents of each district to get support and acceptance of the plans. Reisetter asked if narrowing the street width was acceptable for the fire department. Miklo said the fire department would like wide streets, but they only need 20 foot wide streets to get their trucks and equipment through. Anderson asked when alleys would be used, and if staff expects Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, June 30, 1997 Page 4 any problems with people parking on the streets to decrease street width. Miklo said the alleys and narrowing streets would be used on shorter streets. Nagle asked why staff was wanting to make the streets narrower and lessen the setback for housing. Miklo said both would provide compact development, require less city maintenance, make it easier to work with and around environmentally sensitive areas, slows down traffic and holds down rental costs. Anderson asked why staff wanted a mix with multi- and single-family housing. Miklo said it would provide a more compact development, and he noted that there needed to be a balancing act to get a more comfortable housing mix. He said that small buildings and keeping housing to scale would provide more housing choices for an area. Schoon noted that the housing mix is designed to get families from 'different backgrounds, sizes, makeups, ages and incomes to interact. (Woodson left at 4:57 p.m.) Rohovit asked if the Parks and Recreation Department was involved in designing open space for a neighborhood. Miklo said the plan recognizes the need for open space and the Parks and Recreation Department will work on the details for each area, but the plan has not detailed any open spaces. Schoon says the Parks and Recreation Department designates a need for open spaces in specific areas. Rohovit asked what the current regulation was. Miklo said there is a required three acres of open space for every 1,000 residents. He said that if an open area is accepted by the Parks and Recreation Department within a subdivision, the area is dedicated as open space, but if the open area is not acceptable a fee must be paid. Reisetter asked if the open spaces were maintained and insured by the Homeowner's Associations. Miklo said no, that the open spaces are public areas. Reisetter asked if this housing mix was only for new developments. Miklo said that staff would not be rezoning older neighborhoods. Nagle said he did not like the idea of narrower streets because he thought they were for larger cities. Miklo said the design principles suggested by the Comprehensive Plan are based on older neighborhoods. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION: Nagle asked the status of the Iowa City Transit Interchange facility. Schoon said the Council wants to start from scratch to determine the building design and how to meet the various needs of the public and drivers. He said that the Council will discuss it at their next work session on July 14. Schoon introduced Jim Schoenfelder and said that he will be taking over for Schoon as staff assistant for the Committee. Rohovit presented Reisetter with a certificate of service since this would be his last Committee meeting. Rohovit said that he saw the cart the Committee previously discussed, and noticed that none of the suggested changes had been made to it. Schoon said he would talk to the City Manager's office about it. Design Review Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, June 30, 1997 Page 5 Schoon gave an update concerning the plastic white fences and posts in the Pedestrian Mall that the Committee had previously discussed. He said that the Parks and Recreation. Department had wanted to used something temporary and inexpensive in the area, so if any Committee members had any other ideas they should contact Schoon. Schoon said a design team should be in place by September 1 to study the streetscape in the Pedestrian Mall and downtown. ADJOURNMENT: Reisetter moved to adjourn the meeting at 5:16 p.m. Nagle seconded the motion, The motion carried unanimously by a vote of 3-0. Minutes submitted by Traci Howard ecodev/min/d mO630,doc MINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS MONDAY, MAY 5, 1997 - 4:30 P.M. LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: 1. CALL TO ORDER BUSS, CARLSON, HAMAN, MAAS, ROFFMAN, STASKA ANDERSON, BOOSE, ZUCKWEILER SUZANNE HOOFNAGLE The meeting was called to order at 4:34 p.m. by Chairman Carlson. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 7, 1997 MEETING Staska moved to approved the minutes of the April 7, 1997 meeting as submitted. Haman seconded. The motion carried unanimously 6-0. HEAR REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 14-5E-17 K 4 OF THE IOWA STATE HOUSING CODE (CEILING HEIGHT) FOR THE PROPERTY AT 621 WALNUT STREET Carlson asked if there was any discussion on this item. There being no discussion, Haman moved to grant the variance as requested. Buss seconded. The motion carried unanimously 6-0. Boose indicated that staff was discussing the possibility of an administrative review of variances requested for this section of the Housing Code. Boose stated that any proposed procedure change would be brought to the Board for approval. HEAR APPEAL OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR'S INTERPRETATION OF IOWA STATE BUILDING CODE SECTION 16.705(3)a EXCEPTION NUMBER 3.3 This appeal was withdrawn by applicant. 5. OTHER BUSINESS Boose indicated that the response to the Home Builders' letter had been presented to City Council and the first two items had been referred back to the Board for further study. As the Home Builders would like to be present for discussion on these items, Boose said he would inform the Home Builders when the items would be on the agenda, probably in June. Maas asked if any progress had been made toward developing a licensing exam through Block & Associates for fire sprinkler installers. Boose indicated that no progress had been made, but he would continue to work with Block to develop an appropriate licensing exam. Boose stated that when an exam is developed, a sample could be presented to the Board for review. Iowa City Board of Appeals May 5, 1997 page two 6. ADJOURNMENT Roffman moved for adjoumment at 4:56 p.m. approved and the meeting adjourned. Minutes submitted by Kathy Zuckweiler. Buss seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously Approved: Robert Carlson, Board Chair Date