The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01-12-2005 Board of Adjustment ~,~- CITY OF IOWA CITY IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT January 12, 2005 WEDNESDAY - 5:00 P.M. Emma J. Harvat Hall - Iowa City City Hall . STAFF REPORT CITY OF IOWA CITY Department of Planning & Community Development REVISED AGENDA IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING WEDNESDAY, January 12, 2005 - 5:00 PM EMMAJ. HARVAT HALL A. Call to Order. B. Roll Call. C. Election of Officers. D. Consider the December 8, 2004 Meeting Minutes. E. Special Exceptions: 1. EXC04-00028 Discussion of an application submitted by Systems Unlimited, Inc. for a special exception to permit a school of specialized private instruction on property in the General Industrial (1-1) Zone at 2433 S. Scott Boulevard. 2. EXC04-00029 Discussion of an application submitted by James Clark for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies/decks for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-20) zone at 932 E Washington Street. 3. EXC04-00030 Discussion of an application submitted by James Clark for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies/decks for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-20) zone at 924 E. Washington Street. 4. EXC04-00031 Discussion of an application submitted by James Clark for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies/decks for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-12) zone at 517 Fairchild Street. 5. EXC04-00032 Discussion of an application submitted by James Clark for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies/decks for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-12) zone at 333 E. Church Street. 6. EXC04-00033 Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard setback from 20 feet to 9.5 feet to allow an addition to an existing building located in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 1905 Broadway Street. F. Other: G. Board of Adjustment Information. H. Adjournment. NEXT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING - February 9, 2005 ~'.' ,.,> MINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DECEMBER 8, 2004 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL-IOWA CITY, CITY HALL PRELIMINARY Subject to Approval MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Denis Keitel, Karen Leigh, Vincent Maurer, Michael Wright MEMBERS ABSENT: NONE STAFF PRESENT: Robert Miklo, Sarah Holecek OTHERS PRESENT: Viles Velton, Greg Schrock, Drew Dillman, Ron Kramer, John Nolan, Paul Campo, Dick Brown, Nestor Lobodiak, Dick Larew CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Keitel called the meeting to order at 5:03 PM. CONSIDERATION OF THE NOVEMBER 10. 2004 BOARD MINUTES MOTION: Maurer moved to approve the minutes from November 10, 2004. Wright seconded the motion. Motion passed 5:0. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: EXC04-00022 Reconsideration of an application submitted by Verizon Wireless for a special exception to permit installation of a telecommunication tower site for property located in the Interim Development Single Family Residential (I-DRS) zone at 637 Foster Road. Miklo said that at the last meeting the Board failed to approve the application with a vote of 2 to 2. He added that in the meantime the applicant had provided further information regarding the lighting, which was a concern for some Board members. Miklo said that the height of the tower would also be reduced from 150 feet to 130 feet. Miklo said that communication towers and satellite devices are permitted by special exception in the ID- RS zone, provided the distance of the tower from the property line is equal to or greater than its height above grade. He mentioned that the tower is proposed to be located behind the storage garages for golf carts on the Elks Club property at 637 Foster Road, approximately 400' from the Foster Road right-of-way and 1,500' from the Iowa River. The base of the tower will be obscured by the trees in the area. He said that according to the applicant, the proposed tower will have capacity for three additional wireless providers. The applicant has provided an affidavit that Verizon Wireless has a policy of allowing co- location on their towers. Co-location, while increasing the height of the tower, minimizes the number of future towers that will be necessary to serve the area. Miklo continued the staff report saying that the special exception must be in accordance to the general standards. Miklo said that the specific proposed exception should not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. He mentioned that the setback requirement is meant to address safety concerns if the tower were to fall. These types of towers, he said, are designed to fold in on themselves if they become unstable. Miklo added that under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) preempts local government on regulating radio frequency emissions of telecommunications facilities. Because the FCC regulates radio frequency emissions, a local government may not deny a request to construct a facility based on perceptions that the tower may harm the health of area residents. Miklo stated that the proposed exception should not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. He said that while the tower will be visible from residential properties, it would not impede their use or their further development. Miklo continued by saying that the establishment of the specific proposed exception should not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located. He added that the tower will not affect development or Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes December 8,2004 Page 2 redevelopment of other area properties. He said that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been provided. Miklo said that adequate measures should be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. He added that the applicant notes the site will generate two to four vehicle trips per month per carrier. He mentioned that the existing access to Foster Road will be used, and would not contribute to congestion on area public streets. Miklo said that except for the· specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is located. He mentioned that the use of communication tower should not conflict with other permitted uses in the Interim Development zone. Miklo said that the proposed use should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. He said that the proposed communication tower does not conflict with the use of the property as private open space as designated by the Comprehensive Plan. Miklo said the Comprehensive Plan supports the development of communication technologies within the City. Miklo said that the main impact of the tower is visual. He said that the top of the tower will be visible from properties in the neighborhood and properties on the other side of the Iowa River. He mentioned that the applicant has provided justification for a tower in the area based on wireless service demand, and they stated that the tower will have enough area for four carriers, thus minimizing the chance that additional towers will locate in the area in the future. Miklo said that staff recommends that EXC04-00022 a special exception to permit installation of a telecommunications tower site for property located in the Interim Development Single-Family Residential (I-DRS) zone at 637 Foster Road be approved. Maurer excused himself because he is a member of the Elks Club. Public HearinQ Opened Viles Velton, 8500 W. 11 Oth Street, Suite 300 Overland Park, KS, said that after the October meeting, and after hearing the concerns of persons involved, Verizon Wireless has decided to reduce the height of the tower from150 feet to 130 feet. With regard to the lightning he said that lightning will not be necessary. GreQ Schrock, 821 Normandy Drive, said that he lives across the street from where the site is planned. He said that he took a few pictures in the morning, and the skyline is gorgeous, and the tower will be sticking up in the middle of all that. He said that there are other areas further back were the tower could be placed. He added that the picture that was shown of where the tower will be placed is taken from the side where the trees are the tallest. He said that they are being told that they will not see much of the tower when in fact they will see a lot of the tower. Schrock mentioned that at the last meeting it was said that the foliage will cover most of the tower. He added that there is no foliage at the moment. He said that it would be better to locate the tower in a different place. Drew Dillman, 845 Normandy Drive, said that his house faces directly at the tower. He said that he appreciates the changes that have been made, and they are entirely positive. He said that he hoped that it was mentioned in assurance in writing that they will not add lights to the tower. He said that he would prefer not to have the tower at all, but if they have to have it, they would prefer that it be moved further back from the river along the freeway. He said that he wanted to express the appreciation for the changes made. Ron Kramer, 1135 Pleasant Valley, said that he is one of the trustees of the Elks Club. He said that there are 600 members that use the club. He mentioned that they worked with Verizon to place the tower in a place that is least obtrusive for everybody. He added that if they were to move it further north the tower will intrude in the golf course itself. John Nolan, said that he is one of the trustees of the Elks Club. He said that Verizon will confer a major benefit for the recipients of the tower signal, and that is the best place to put it to serve the University of Iowa community. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes December 8, 2004 Page 3 Paul Campo, 1201 Walnut Street, Kansas City, said that he would like to read some exhibits that he would like to be clear for the record. He mentioned: the Staff Report dated October 13 with attachment 1 to 4, the minutes from the October 13, and November 10th meetings, the letter from Federal Airways and Airspace dated October 15 2004, the letter from Trevor Wood dated November 1 st, the em ail from Trevor Wood dated December 1st 2004, the email from Brice Pufahl dated November 9th 2004, the memorandum from John Yapp dated December 1 st 2004, and the photo simulation picture both at 130 feet and 150 feet. He said that if the email from Brice Pufahl is reviewed, he talks about the capacity issue that drives the tower. Calls are being made and they do not go through because towers have just a certain capacity. Public HearinQ Closed MOTION: Wright moved to approve the special exception EXC04-00022 a special exception to permit installation of a telecommunications tower site for property located in the Interim Development Single-Family Residential (ID-RS) zone at 637 Foster Road subject to maximum height of 130 feet and no lightning. Leigh seconded the motion. Keitel said that he voted previously in favor of the motion. He added that knowing that there would be no required lightning makes him more in favor of this. He said that he is in favor of expanding the technological capabilities of Wireless communications. He said that will vote in favor. Alexander said that she voted against when the issue first came up. She mentioned that she is pleased to see the changes. She said that no one will be happy to have a tower in their neighborhood, and as much as she resists, she recognizes that is a part of the century, and she would vote in favor. Leigh said that she also voted against at the last meeting. She said that she was concerned about lightning. She said that she is very pleased with the changes made. She added that it meets both the general and specific standards, and will vote in favor of the application. Wright would vote in favor of the application. He said that he believes that it meets the general and specific standards required for a special exception. Motion passed with a vote of 4-0. Maurer rejoined the meeting. EXC04-00027 Discussion of an application submitted by First Presbyterian Church for a special exception to permit a 60' by 80' paved extension of their current parking lot for the property in the Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) Zone at 2701 Rochester Avenue. Miklo said that the First Presbyterian Church was built in 1974 when this property was zoned R1A, Single Family Residence Zone. Churches were a permitted use in the R1A zone. In 1983, he said, as part of a citywide rezoning, the City rezoned this property to RS-5, Low Density Single-Family. Religious institutions require a special exception in the RS-5 zone. He added that any extension of the existing church on this property requires approval of a special exception. Miklo mentioned that the applicant is requesting a special exception to enlarge the parking area, to provide an additional of 14 parking spaces. He added that this came to the City's attention when a nearby resident complained about work being done on the property and wondered what it was for. Miklo mentioned that there are some specific standards in the Zoning Ordinance regarding religious institutions. He said that it is required that religious institutions have access to a collector or an arterial street and that religious institutions in the RS-5 zone are required to have a minimum lot area of 40,000 square feet and buildings must be setback of 2 feet for everyone-foot of building height. Miklo said that the existing church and the proposed parking lot meet all of these requirements. He said that because this would be a new parking area, the regulations for off-street parking and loading would apply. The section requires that parking areas be hard-surfaced, provides dimensions for parking aisles and spaces, and references screening and parking lot tree requirements. Miklo said that the portion of the parking area within fifty feet of the residential lot shall be screened from view according to Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes December 8, 2004 Page 4 the screening section of the City Code. The section states that a planting screen of pyramidal arbor vitae may be used, or other evergreen varieties may be used if approved by and spaced according to the City Forester. Miklo added that the planting bed must be separated from the parking area by a curb or barrier such that sand and saltwater runoff would not damage the screening. Miklo mentioned that the applicant has submitted a site plan that shows compliance with the City's screening and parking lot tree standards. Evergreen shrubs are proposed around the perimeter of the area, and along the existing access drive to rear garage. He said that two parking lot trees are proposed, one at north and one at the south end of the parking area. Miklo said that in addition to the specific requirements for religious institutions, there are the general standards that have to be met for a special exception. He said that the specific proposed exception should not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. He mentioned that in staffs view the expansion of this religious institution to include additional parking will have minimal effect on public health, safety, comfort or welfare. He added that the parking area will produce slightly more storm water runoff due to the impervious surface being added, however, the existing drainage patterns are not proposed to change. Miklo stated that the proposed exception should not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. He mentioned that the proposed parking area is an expansion of an already existing area and with the landscaping around the parking area, property values should not be affected. Miklo continued by saying that the establishment of the specific proposed exception should not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located. He said that the proposed paved parking area will not affect development of surrounding properties. Next he said that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Miklo said that all are existing. Miklo said that adequate measures should be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. He mentioned that existing driveways are in place to serve the existing church. Miklo said that except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is located. He said that with implementation of the site plan dated December 1 st 2004, including the landscaping and tree requirements, all other City Codes would be met. Next, Miklo said that the proposed use should be consistent with the short-range Comprehensive Plan of the City. He said that the Northeast District Plan identifies this area as appropriate for institutional uses, which would include religious institutions. Staff recommends that EXC04-00021 , an application submitted by First Presbyterian Church for a special exception to permit a 60' by 80' paved extension of their current parking lot for the property in the Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) Zone at 2701 Rochester Avenue be approved, subject to conformance with parking area site plan dated December 1st, 2004. Public HearinQ Opened Dick Brown, 2905 Saddle Club Road, said that they did not realize that they needed a permit to expand the existing parking lot. He said that they applied for the exception to increase the parking lot. He added that on Sunday mornings people have to park on the streets, and would prefer to have their own parking lot. He said that a couple of letters complain about the application, and. they are the same people that complain about parking on street. Brown says that the light in the parking lot has been there till 1975 and no one complained about it until now. He said that they would do whatever it is necessary to comply with City requirements. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes December 8, 2004 Page 5 Keitel asked if the land is generally sloping toward the southwest. Brown said that nothing drains to the east, but towards the west. Wright asked if the southwest part of the proposed parking lot would be adequately protected from erosion. Brown said that if it required to do something more to stop the erosion than they would have to do it, to protect themselves and surrounding properties. Maurer asked if the land further west is still the property of the church. Brown replied that is just grass and it is the property of the church. Wright asked if the playground equipment belongs to the church. Brown said that it belongs to the daycare center that works out of the church. Nester Lobodiak, 229 Green Mountain Drive, said that he would break his concerns down into two areas, procedural and substantive. He mentioned that procedural aspect, in October he was awakened by construction equipment which started earth moving illegally without benefit of the required special exception. He said that he called the City and got a stop work order issued. The church, as he said, filed application for special exception by mail on approximately November 1 ih. He added that the next day he was personally at the City Hall meeting with John Yapp. They went over the application which was deficient, without conforming to the Zoning chapter. Lobodiak mentioned that he filed an opposition letter on December 2nd showing that there was no effort to comply with the Zoning chapter by the church. He added that in the previous night he found out that the church mailed a site plan the day before he filed the opposition. He said that he was prepared to discuss about how the application does not comply with the City requirements, however, he found out the night before that the church added materials to the application, and did not have time to file any opposition to that matter. Regarding the substantive nature he said that there is a portion of the parking area that would not be screened, and it would directly affect his house. He said that the south-east corner should be screened and it is not. He said that it is not screened because they put a driveway in an area which is currently only grass. He said that he is not happy with the plan and he had only 22 hours to consider it. He said that it is not screened; it does not tell that in fact they will plant arbor vitae, and the planting bed must be separated from the parking area by a curb or barrier such that sand and saltwater runoff would not damage the screening. He said that he does not believe that the site conforms to the site. He said that the application should be tabled to wait for input from neighbors which did not have the revised site plan. Brown said that the driveway that goes to the garage will never be paved. Holecek said that it is traditionally practiced that when the applicant is notified that the application is deficient it will augment the application, and the revised application and site plan presented in front of the Board is what the Board should consider. She said that the persons do have notice, and the right to be heard on the evidence, so she does not believe that it is deficient from this point of view. Dick Larew, said that he is a neighbor and also a member of the church. He said that he was out of the country, and did not know that the church would be expanding the parking lot. He said that he came home and got a note that the City had sent. He said that he has been in construction for many years. He said that he went back to the code and found information readily available from the website, which is a big improvement over the years. He said that he was concerned about some details, and he got the answers from the new plan. He said that he would urge the board to approve the application. MOTION: Maurer moved that EXc04-00027 , an application submitted by First Presbyterian Church for a special exception to permit a 60' by 80' paved extension of their current parking lot for the property in the Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) Zone at 2701 Rochester Avenue be approved, subject to conformance with parking area site plan dated December 1st, 2004. Alexander seconded the motion. Maurer amended the motion to add that the screening requirements are met and extend as far south as the garage. Alexander seconded the motion. Alexander said that she would vote in favor. She said that the application does comply with the requirements for a special exception for religious institutions; the site plan is in compliance with the city Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes December 8, 2004 Page 6 screening and parking lot tree standards. Alexander added that it will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, the proposed exception would not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The establishment of the specific proposed exception would not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Adequate measures would be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. She mentioned that adequate utilities, drainage and access are in place to serve the existing church. Alexander said that the proposed use is consistent with the short-range Comprehensive Plan of the City. Wright said that he would vote in favor. He said that he had some concerns in terms of water run off. He added that it meets the general and specific standards. Keitel said that he would vote in favor for the reasons already stated. He said that as a professional engineer he is not concerned about the stormwater numbers presented from the City engineer. Maurer said that he would vote in favor for the reasons already stated. Leigh said that she would vote in favor for the reasons already stated. Motion passed 5-0. APL04-00004: Miklo reported the appeal was withdrawn. OTHER: The next meeting of the Board will be on January 1 ih 2005. Miklo presented a certificate for Keitel's 5 years of service in the board. Holecek reminded the Board that they have to use the general and specific standards as basis for their decisions, to show the logic of their conclusions. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 6:15 PM. Minutes submitted by Bogdana Rus s:/pcd/minutes/boaI2004/boa 12-08-04.doc STAFF REPORT To: Board of Adjustment Prepared by: Karen Howard Item: EXC04-00028 2433 Scott Boulevard Date: January 7,2005 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Systems Unlimited, Inc. 1556 South 1st Ave, Suite #1 Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Contact Person: William Gorman (319) 338-9212, ext. 126 Requested Action: Approval of a special exception to permit a school of specialized instruction in the <3enerallndustrial (1-1) Zone. Purpose: To allow the applicant to build a new agency service center. Location: 2433 S. Scott Boulevard Size: 3.1 acres Existing Land Use and Zoning: Undeveloped; General Industrial (1-1) Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Undeveloped; General Industrial (1-1) South: Office/Research; 1-1 East: Undeveloped; CI-1 West: Industrial/warehouse; 1-1 Comprehensive Plan: General industrial development Applicable Code Requirements: 14-6H-1, General Industrial Zone 14-6W-2B, special exception review standards File Date: December 14, 2004 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Systems Unlimited, Inc. has made a purchase offer to buy approximately 3.1 acres of land fronting on Scott Boulevard north of the ACT property and across the street from the Scott-Six Industrial Park. The currently undeveloped property is zoned General Industrial (1-1). The applicant intends to acquire this property in order to construct a new agency service center that will be approximately 33,300 square feet in size. 2 In July of 2001 the Board of Adjustment granted a special exception for Systems Unlimited to establish their proposed agency service center on a property located in the Scott-Six Industrial Park along Liberty Drive. At the time, city staff and the Board expressed and discussed with the applicant concerns about industrial truck traffic, noise, and other industrial externalities negatively affecting the operation of the Systems facility and their clients at that particular location. Since that time, as new industrial businesses have moved into the park, it has become more apparent that these factors may become a problem for Systems Unlimited. As a consequence, Systems has decided to purchase instead the property at 2433 S. Scott Boulevard, which they feel will be more insulated from potential industrial externalities. Systems Unlimited, Inc. is a private, non-profit corporation founded in 1971 to "deliver training, support, and services to people with developmental disabilities as an alternative to more restrictive services and environments." The agency provides training in the following areas: jOb acquisition; on-the-job training; pre-employment skills; sheltered work; self-help skills; communication skills; socialization skills; personal care and grooming skills; money management skills, parenting skills and individual family therapy. At the proposed facility they will also provide a significant amount of training for their staff. Due to the complexity of its operations, Systems Unlimited does not fit easily within a specific use category. Part of the proposed facility will be used as administrative offices and part will be used for light industrial work such as paper shredding, recycling and collating. However, much of the facility will be used for training staff and for providing vocational training and skill development services to persons with developmental disabilities. Therefore, staff has determined that the use does fit into the "school of specialized instruction" use category as defined in the Zoning Code. Schools of specialized instruction are permitted in the General Industrial (1-1) Zone if approved as a special exception. The applicant is requesting a special exception and also an extension on the time allotted to establish the special exception. Typically, an applicant must apply for a building permit within 6 months of the grant of a special exception. In this case, the applicant is requesting the Board extend their approval until June of 2006 because they do not intend to break ground on the new facility until late 2005 or early 2006 and the lease on their current facility runs through fall of 2006. Due to this uncertainty, the applicant requests the extended approval period. ANAL YSIS: The purpose of the Zoning Chapter is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare, to conserve and protect the value of property throughout the city, and to encourage the most appropriate use of land. It is the intent of the Zoning Chapter to permit the full use and enjoyment of property in a manner that does not intrude upon adjacent property. The Board of Adjustment may grant relief from the requirements of the Zoning Chapter through a special exception if the action is considered to serve the public interest and is consistent with the intent of the Zoning Chapter. General Standards: 14-6W-2B, Special Exception Review Requirements The applicants' statements regarding each of the seven general standards are included within the attached application. Staff comments on these standards are set forth below and correspond to the standards as lettered in subsection 14-6W-2B of the City Code. 3 a. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare· Operations at the Systems Unlimited facility consist of a combination of administrative office functions, staff training, and vocational and life skills training for persons with disabilities, including some training for light industrial work. Such operations provide beneficial services to the community and pose no danger to the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. b. The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. See a., above. c. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located - Schools of specialized instruction are only permitted in the 1-1 Zone by special exception because they may have aspects that are incompatible with the primary uses intended for this zone. Uses permitted in the 1-1 include building contractor facilities and pre-assembly yards, communications stations, centers and studios, various types of manufacturing, freight yards, wholesale trade, and warehousing and distribution facilities. Uses in a general industrial zone have the potential to generate a significant amount of truck traffic, noise, dust, or vibrations. Proposed Use - The applicant describes in detail how the facility will be used in the attachment to their application (refer to p.2 of the attachment under the heading, Programming Needs/Use of Space). While a small part of the facility will be used for light . industrial uses such as recycling, shredding, and baling of materials, most of the facility will involve vocational training and skill-building services. Staff feels that the proposed use will have little affect on future industrial uses that might locate on surrounding property. However, there is the potential for further industrial development on the lot to the north. Future industrial development on this lot, depending on the type and intensity of the use, may have a negative impact on Systems Unlimited and their clients and employees. Executive Director, William Gorman, has stated that they are aware of this risk and still believe the site to be the best option available for their needs. Staff feels that if the building is carefully located on the lot to provide some space on the north and west sides of the building as a buffer that potential externalities from the adjacent uses will be reduced. Well- placed landscaping may also help in this regard. Parkinq - The attached parking analysis submitted by the applicant indicates that at its peak hour of use, the facility may have a parking demand for up to 72 parking spaces. This peak demand will only occur about twice a month. Otherwise, peak parking demand on a typical day is less than 60 and peaks around 10:30. The site plan submitted shows a 78-space parking lot, which will be adequate to accommodate peak parking demand. Systems Unlimited operates a fleet of 38 private vans that transport clients to and from the site. In addition, many of their clients use Johnson County SEATS as a primary means of transportation. d. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided· According to the final plat of BDI, Fifth Addition, adequate water, sewer, and stormwater facilities are or will be made available to this lot. An 8-foot wide sidewalk has already been built along the west side of Scott Boulevard in this area. Transit service is available on a limited schedule along Scott Boulevard, with a stop in fairly close 4 proximity on the east side of the street at the corner of Scott Boulevard and Liberty Drive. While some employees and clients may use transit, a significant portion of System's clients will arrive by private van service or by Johnson County SEATS. e. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets - Typically, individual access drives onto an arterial street are discouraged, because turning movements to and from individual driveways increase potential vehicular conflicts points along the street. However, since there are no alternative access roads, the lot will require direct access to Scott Boulevard, an arterial street. During morning commute hours (7:30 - 9:00 AM) the applicant has indicated that about 50 vehicles will arrive at the site. The afternoon traffic in and out of the facility is a bit more spread out with approximately 30 vehicles exiting the property from 4:30 - 6:00 PM, the peak afternoon commute hours. The volume of traffic along Scott Boulevard is currently about 6,900 vehicles per day and the street has a capacity for approximately 12,900 vehicles per day, so while direct lot access to an arterial street is not ideal, this amount of turning traffic accessing the site should not unduly affect traffic along Scott Boulevard. In addition, a significant number of trips to the site are on alternative modes. Therefore, private vehicle trips will be reduced. Only one access point will be allowed for this lot. Currently, there is an access drive to the existing U.S. West facility on the property. The applicant has indicated that this driveway to Scott Boulevard will be closed and access to the U.S. West equipment shed will be provided from their internal circulation drive. The location of the new driveway will need to be carefully considered. The new access point to Scott Boulevard must be located at least 25 feet from the north property line in order to ensure that it is spaced at least 50 feet from any future driveway on the adjacent property. This spacing is necessary to meet minimum standards for safe turning movements along the arterial street. The applicant will also need to check the site distance to make sure it is adequate at the point of proposed access and if there are any access points aoross the street from the proposed driveway, the driveways will need to line up or be offset by a safe distance. Staff recommends a condition that driveway location be approved by the City at the time of site plan review to ensure adequate site distance and safe turning movements onto the arterial street. f. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific proposed exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is to be located - The application states that the proposed development will meet all requirements. It should be noted that the proposed special exception is for the use of the site only. The applicant will still be required to meet all other City Code requirements. If the Board grants the special exception approval for an extended period, the applicant should be aware that the zoning and building code requirements may change over time. Any development on the site will be required to meet all regulations in effect at the time the building permit is issued. g. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as amended-The General Industrial Zone is specifically written to allow for schools of specialized instruction as long as the proposed use does not interfere with the primary uses intended for this zone. As stated above, the impacts of the proposed use, traffic, and congestion anticipated for the proposed facility is unlikely to negatively affect other uses permitted in this zone. 5 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that EXC04-00028, a special exception to permit a school of specialized instruction at 2433 S. Scott Boulevard in the General Industrial (1-1) Zone, be approved, provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Only one access point to the subject lot from Scott Boulevard is allowed; and 2. Unless the existing direct street access to the U.S. West facility will be used as an access drive for the proposed use, this existing access must be closed; and 3. To ensure adequate site distance and safe turning movements to and from Scott Boulevard, the location of any new access drive must be approved by the City. Staff also recommends that the Board extend the period allowed to establish the use until June of 2006, without requiring the applicant to request an extension from the Board every six months. ATTACHMENTS: 1 . Location Map 2. Application with attachments Approved by: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner, Department of Planning and Community Development ~ ~ ~ t3 ~ ~ ~ ~ t3 ,... - --, ex> C\J o o o I ~ o () >< w . ~ CQ ~ o u CJ) .. z o ~ ~ u o ~ ~ ~ ~ rJ:J peD EXC. D4- - oõðZg APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENtç2 ....',." ·---··-í SPECIAL EXCEPTION TITLE 14, CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE W ·-n ,.....'..".., "~- -...... J. .r:- :'- u. (~ 5¡~<~ C;""'JIO 5> is' ..r::- +:J) DATE: December 12, 2004 PROPERTY PARCEL NO. Portions of Lots 12 and 11 9-L{~"!J BDI Fifth Addition APPEAL PROPERTY ADDRESS: S. Scott Boulevard APPEAL PROPERTY ZONE: 1-1 APPEAL PROPERTY LOT SIZE: 3.1 acres APPLICANT: Name: Systems Unlimited, Inc. Address: 1556 South 1st Avenue, Suite 111 Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Phone: 319-338-9212 CONTACT PERSON: Name: William Gorman Address: 1556 South 1st Avenue, Suite III Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Phone: 319 '3'38 9?1?, DVf- 1 ?h PROPERTY OWNER:Name: T::!mp~ r. 1<'::!rr Address: 2930 South Industrial Park Road Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Phone: 319-339-9453 Specific Requested Special Exception; Applicable Sectlon(s) of the Zoning Chapter: Special exception to General Industrial Zone (14-6H-l): Schools-Specialized private instruction Purpose for special exception: To allow Systems Unlimited, Inc. to build a new agency Service Center on Lots 12 and 11 (zoned 1-1) along Scott Bouvelard Date of previous application or appeal flied, if any: not for this land; applied and received special exception in 2001 for Lot 27 in the Scott-Six Commercial and Industrial Park (also zoned 1-1) for the same purpose. -2- INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANT: A. Leaal description of property: Portions of Lots 12 and 11, BDI Fifth Addition B. *Plot plan drawn to scale showing: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Lot with dimensions; __ North point and scale; 2. n Existing and proposed structures with distances from property lIi)ísf· 'e:; Abutting streets and alleys; ,-,.-, Surrounding land uses, Including the location and record ow.1tr~óf eiéh property opposite or abutting the property In question; :;, '~i~ Parking spaces and trees - existing and proposed. r3 ~ 6. r rSubmlsslon of an 82" x 11" bold print plot plan Is preferred.] (f) C. Review. The Board shall review all applicable evidence regarding the site, existing and proposed structures, neighboring uses, parking areas, driveway locations, highway and street access, traffic generation and circulation, drainage, sanitary sewer and water systems, the operation of the specific proposed exception and such other evidence as deemed appropriate. (Section 14-6W-2B1, City Code). In the space provided below or on an attached sheet, address the areas of Board review which apply to the requested special exception. In this narrative statement, set forth the grounds offered as support for the special exception. see attached letter D. The applicant Is required to present specific Information, not just opinions, that the aeneral standards for the arantinCl of a special exception (Section 14-6W-2B2, City Code), enumerated below, will be met: 1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare. The proposed use is consistent with a school of Rpeci~li7.pn pri'T~rp instruction (non-degree) which is set forth in 14-6-D-2 of the City Code of Ordinances. -3- 2. The specific proposed exception will not be Injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property In the Immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish and Impair property values In the neighborhood. The proposed exception is consistent with the I-I zone and the applicant will comply with all applicable conditions and restrictions. The seller supports this special exception. 3. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not Impede the normal and orderly development and Improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted In the zone in which such property is located. The proposed exception is supported by the seller and will stimulate and promote the orderly development of the area. The applicant will comply with all applicable conditions and restrictions. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. The Service Center will meet all applicable conditions and restrictions. 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide Ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. The proposed exception includes on-Rite parking. A vehic1I1Rr pRrkin~ analysis has been enclosed as an attachment. ,"'--,.') ¡f"-, ';:.Jt "".:':::¡" ..:_~ ~!~"] I... ) .r.- ~ " ~=) -.:.::---- ji is> ,-TJ ""-" "J ..... ~- co -4- 6. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific proposed exception, In all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone In which It Is to be located. [Depending on the type of exception requested, certain specific conditions may need to be met. The applicant will demonstrate compliance with the specific conditions required for a particular use, as provided In City Code Section 14-6L-1, Special Exception Enumerated Requirements; Section 14-6N-1, Off-Street Parking Requirements; Section 14-6Q, Dimensional Requirements, or Section 14-6R, Tree Regulations, as appropriate.] The General Industrial Zone expressly anticipates that Special Exceptions for Schools of Specialized Instruction should be allowed. See attached letter. 7. The proposed use will be consistent with the short-range Comprehensive Plan of the City. The applicant i~ ~w~rp of no inrnnQiQ~ønç~9~ b9~~~U thQ prQPQ~Qd exception and the short-range Comprehensive Plan of tne r.ity of To~~ City. E. List the names and mailing addresses of the record owners of all property located within 300 feet of the exterior limits of the property Involved in this appeal: NAME ADDRESS Mid-American RlIilc1ing T.T.r. 2351 SQgtt iÞ'd. ð, IQua City 52240 ------ ------~-Hi\îfierTca-n Co llegë""le stîlfg "Prografu-;--rlfC:---Z777-SCotT 131vã:-S-,-Towa -CH\i '5ZT4U-- T & R Investments, Inc.' 2401 Scott Blvd. S. Tow~ r.ity S2240 Streb Investment Partner!':hip T.r. 1 A rnmmø....çial DrinQ, Igu;¡ Citj' 52246 . --j. (.",',':,i £-2 ~::.:: n ....;;....... =-~ ~-I;;;."-,. !..,~' ~i: r~.... -'-~'... C) -II }(: ':-.<"'~ r- .¡::- -,-, -:¡:'; -"i"~;'I , ¡ ¡ ;,~.J ~'-:'''' ~-: ¡ r",\ ~"_,) ;;::: ;:_~ :i> ~ - - l'"Y"\ ç -5- NOTE: Conditions. In permitting a special exception, the Board may Impose appropriate conditions and safeguards, including but not limited to planting screens, fencing, construction commencement and completion deadlines, lighting, operational controls, Improved traffic circulation requirements, highway access restrictions,' Increased minimum yard requirements, parking requirements, limitations on the duration of a use or ownership or any other requirement which the Board deems appropriate under the circumstances upon a finding that the conditions are necessary to fulfill the purpose and Intent of the Zoning Chapter. (Section 14-6W-2B3, City Code). Orders. Unless otherwise determined by the Board, all orders of the Board shall expire six (6) months from the date the written decision Is filed with the City Clerk, unless the applicant shall have taken action within the six (6) month period to establish the use or construct the building permitted under the terms of the Board's decision, such as by obtaining a building permit and proceeding to completion In accordance with the terms of the permit. Upon written request, and for good cause shown, the Board may extend the expiration date of any order without further public hearing on the merits of the original appeal or application. (Section 14-6W-3E, City Code). Petition for writ of certiorari. Any person or persons, jointly or severally, aggrieved by any decision of the Board under the provisions of the Zoning Chapter, or any taxpayer or any officer, department or board of the City may present to a court of record a petition for writ of certiorari duly verified, setting forth that such decision is Illegal, In whole or In part, and specifying the grounds of the illegality. (Section 14-6W-7, City Code). Such petition shall be presented to the court within thirty (30) days after the filing of the decision In the office of the City Clerk. Date: December 12 2004 ,- Systems Unlimited. Inc. by W~.;z.~ Slgnature(s) of Applicant(s) Executive Director Date: ,I t;.,. :;;... .-- '20!!-9~.iPfJ.. (?, ~ Slgnature(s) of Property Owner{s) If Different than Applicant(s) ppdadmin\appboase.doc Ô ;~T: 0 .,J::=-. -..:.-,.~ (..'.' -.: .¡ ì -- .0:.- c5 ;.5 þ 7""7 I rs> - co SOl THIRD LOTS C'1 X ¡¡; .... tv 0. VI » z VI "I f$¡ '" '" » (f '" ;:: ", z .... & 11 FIFTH & 12 I iiJ ARCHITECT ADDN. SYSTEM S UNLIMITED -0 r N 0 ~ ~ -I 0J -->. 0 -0 -Þ r » z § S~. p ~~ ~ 1°) s ~ ~ z ~ '~ OJ '" 8' <D u\ 0 ~. (y, ~. p:! ~ '" 00 '" '" ",' " <:v ") ,(}f OJ g; !" ~ .,. "'l 8 ~ '" ~ SG~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ¡¡;" ~;-; "'-... ~~ ~~ âg~ '" ~[';: ~~ ~~ ",'" ~~ ~'" ~~ ~:;:j ",,' ~'" "'-... ....." ~ '" '" '" ~ '" ,86'9,a 3.6<:,>'0.00$ OJ o ~ I\.) - -1 :r: :::0 o J> o o -1 o Z ~ ,99"ZOt 3.6<:,>:0.00$ .// \..... -....--------- JOHN F. SHAW I 314_eo.rt Iowo aty,lA 52240 J',... J>0 ~ , $< """, ' '-::> J'"" .9* -::- 1"<>~'" --31.. ~ :;;; '" ,00'0<; ~ ~~ M.6l,£0.OON ~~ ",,,, """" 15; fì::; OJ ",,"i ~~ 0 0 ~~ g :ï1'" I~ ",'" ï1 » ~:ï1 0 ",,¡;¡ ï1 t\<ö: -1 ~." :r: '" ~f£ » ~~ 0 '" "í:!J .. 0 C> ~~ Ò> ~g -I "1 ;;¡", 0 ..¡'" '" Z z ",- OJ ::;:'" Q "'>'" ui "'-.. '" '" ':d " '" . " r1 ..,. .... (,.¡ '" to q '" x ¡¡; .... '" q VI :>- .2 VI '" ~ ;0 '" :>- ~ ;:: r1 2 .... tj_________~: ·····:Ooó ---------------------------------------------------_..--------- Otl\i^31n081108S unlißùt:eå ~ ~ 1 ~ 1556 So"th'" A",",. low, Œy, low' 52240. '"0",319-338-9212 · "'" 319-341-9443· -w.,,'.m9 CHANGING LIVES - ONE AT A TIME Board of Adjustment City of Iowa City Iowa City, Iowa 52240 December 12, 2004 RE: Application for Special Exception by Systems Unlimited, Inc. Portions of Lots 12 and 11, BDI Fifth Addition ë5 5~P ~5 Dear Board of Adjustment Members: 5Jf ~ ...:..- Systems Unlimited, Inc. has made a purchase offer to buy approximately 3.1 acres of landco (portions of Lots 12 and 11, BDI Fifth Addition along Scott Boulevard. The purchase of this land is contingent upon the City of Iowa City's approval of the intended use of this property by Systems Unlimited, Inc. as a School of Specialized, Private Instruction (an allowed Special Exception for the General Industrial Zone (L-l ). We believe that Systems Unlimited's intended use fits squarely within the parameters established by the City of Iowa City's comprehensive planning regime and that the Special Exception requested was expressly anticipated by the City of Iowa City when it approved all applicable zoning ordinances. In addition, since Systems Unlimited has a signed agreement for its current service / office space through October 2006, Systems Unlimited does not plan on breaking ground for the new Service Center until the Fall of 2005. Therefore, we request that the Special Exemption be effective until June 2006 so that we do not need to come back to the Board of Adjustment every six months to extend the Special Exemption. Systems Unlimited will still need to go through the Building Permit process with the Housing Inspection Unit of the City ofIowa City. This process will ensure that Systems Unlimited will comply with any Building Code changes that might take place after the granting of a Special Exemption by the Board of Adjustment. - ....- Background Systems Unlimited, Inc. was incorporated as a non-profit, tax-exempt corporation in 1971 to deliver training, supports and services to people with developmental disabilities as an alternative to more restrictive alternative services and environments. Systems Unlimited, Inc. celebrated its 30th anniversary of delivering quality / cost effective services on June 3, 2001. Systems Unlimited, Inc. began with the provision of residential services to children and adults but over the years has expanded its service provision to include a full array of supports and services. The entire thrust of Systems Unlimited, Inc. is to provide training to people with disabilities and / or their families. Training and counseling includes skill development in the following areas: job acquisition; on-the-job training; pre-employment skills; sheltered work; self-help skills, communication skills; socialization skills; personal care and grooming skills; money management; parenting skills and individual family therapy. In addition, Systems Unlimited, Inc. must devote a significant amount of time to the training of its staff. Systems Unlimited has a curricula of 35 classes available for its employees. Classes include such subject areas as: First Aid; Fire and Disaster; Seizures; Consumer Rights; Positive Behavioral Practices; Abuse and Mandatory Reporting; Medication Administration (2 levels of training); CPR; Management; Problem Solving; Supervision; Time Management, Values; Train the Trainer; Mission of Systems Unlimited; Competency Based Training; Physical Support; Leadership; Team Building, Problem Solving, Documentation, Transportation, etc. Systems Unlimited, Inc. started with a $20,000 grant in 1971 and currently has a complement of 630 staff serving over 1,000 children / adults or family members in 45 cities in east central Iowa. The majority of Systems Unlimited's staff work at numerous supported living / residential sites and thus only come to the office on an intermittent basis for staff training. Because of the expansion of services over the years, Systems Unlimited has outgrown its current rental space (two buildings). Multiple staff are utilizing the same office space for service provision, counseling and service coordination. Systems Unlimited has even resorted to "home officing' of some its staff in order to deal with the limited space. After a careful review of its options, the Board of Directors and Management Staff concluded that it would be more cost effective in the long run to build a new agency Service Center to replace its current rental space (two buildings) in Iowa City. (Systems Unlimited also has rental space for service provision in Cedar Rapids, Monticello, Washington, Muscatine and Burlington). For the past year, Systems Unlimited has been looking for a suitable site for its proposed new Service Center. An architect was engaged and schematic drawings have been completed. It became obvious that approximately three (3) acres of land would be needed for the new Service Center. Few options for such a lot size are available in Iowa City that are also within the financial resources of the agency. Portions of Lots 12 and 11, BDI Fifth Addition meet these requirements. Programming Needs / Use of Space The proposed schematic design (copy attached) indicates that roughly two-thirds of the first floor of the Service Center will be devoted to Employment Systems (the Employment / Vocational program of the agency) and one-third will be devoted to Family Systems (the Family Therapy / Family Centered Services program of the agency). Large training areas are supplemented with a sheltered employment area subcontract work consisting of paper shredding and recycling as well as assembly and collating of packets and brochures). These operations might well be considered light industrial. Most offices are utilized for skills training, counseling and service coordination. Due to the nature of our business, the hallways are wider to allow for the easy passage of wheelchairs. Space has also been allotted for a future seniors program. Employment Systems also has a significant amount of space devoted to restrooms to accommodate the pers~l care needs of many of the people it serves. ~ _../,-- /? ,.; - .s::- is> ..."":- Q) The second floor will be devoted to the Supported Living program, several large training rooms, smaller training and interdisciplinary meeting rooms, human resource and accounting / finance functions and several administrative offices. Most of the rooms which would appear to be offices are actually space for Supported Living Coordinators and Counselors who meet with people with disabilities, family members and / or county case managers and provide skills training, counseling and / or service coordination on a one-to-one basis. Proposed Site and Applicable Zoning Provisions Lots 12 and 11, BDI Fifth Addition are zoned General Industrial (L-I). Section 14-6H-ID enumerates possible Special Exceptions. Schools of specialized private instruction are specifically listed. The mission of Systems Unlimited (a private, non-profit agency) is specifically to provide specialized instruction to people with disabilities and thus falls well within the intent of this specific Special Exception category. There are no specific standards for schools of specialized instruction beyond the general standards which have already been addressed within the Appeal Application. A vehicular parking analysis has been provided as an attachment. We have allotted a total of 78 parking spaces for the Service Center, which will more than meet our present parking needs and will also allow for future service expansion and on-site parking. Conclusion We believe that the Board of Adjustment's approval of this application for a Special Exception for Systems Unlimited's Service Center as a School of Specialized Instruction is entirety consistent with the intent and purpose of the City of Iowa City's General Industrial Zone. The proposed Service Center fits squarely within criteria applicable to the Board's consideration of applications for Special Exemptions. Systems Unlimited will comply will all current and future zoning ordinances for the L-I Zone. Since Systems Unlimited is appropriately engaged in long range planning and has entered into a long-term lease with its current landlord, we believe it is reasonable to request that the Special Exception be extended until June 2006. Systems Unlimited intends to break ground in the fall of 2005 in order to have sufficient time to complete construction and move into the new Service Center timed with the end of its current lease. Systems Unlimited will still need to go through the Building Permit process with the Housing Inspection Unit of the City ofIowa City. This process will ensure that Systems Unlimited will comply with any Code changes that might take place after the approval of a Special Exception by the Board of Adjustment. This process will assure that the Service Center constructed by Systems Unlimited will protect the interests of the general public and other property owners. (7 ~'-- .¡::- ""-. ,7-1 , I ,s; --- - Q) @2002 Jolin F. Shaw AlA Architect !,.,.') ......1 £-. r-.... ¡;:r------------a-----------------q o ~¿C) ·"T'~ --". _c"~· -,,"" , 1 ! ¡ I ¡ '-- ------- --- -on c·-~) - """~'""\ . j '.-""-, ,.....' ", .-- - TO] -:} 1'0 q "11 ~ :ii en ... q "11 ~ 0 0 :D "V w ~ q > Z .:::- co rnO 111=- 5 JJ!! .!U~ Ii ¡ 11111 A NEW SERVICE CENTER SYSTEMS UNLIMITED, INC. IOWA CITY, IOWA I Ii I o ARCHITECT - JOHN F. SHAW AlA 0 _ I. .....,.. ITIIEIT l&1li.. "A CIIT. awA ... PH n.a&.U44 Fa n.IIIAI4I ............. q tþ m ":! C) 0 z q 0 ,. .... 0 0 ::u w 88 q ." .... > z " C) 2002 John F. Shaw AI^ Architect .. .~. -, i !'-J '~. ) ,...,...." i ! I - - .:.:- - - U) " I 111=1 IIIIIII 1 8:JI!~ II III!!! I" A NEW SERVICE CENTER SYSTEMS UNLIMITED, INC. IOWA CITY. IOWA o ARCHITECT - JOHN F. SHAW AlA 0 l .. .....-nll1I11I!IT U11! 'lIS W, lIlY. DWA ..... '" ......... PI ___ .......... PARKING ANALYSIS Systems Unlimited has conducted a vehicular parking analysis for the proposed Agency Service Center. The goal of the analysis was to quantify the static traffic load, Le. the number of cars on site at any given time of day. This analysis is based on actual utilization with a factoring in of some staff expansion prior to the construction of the Service Center. Thus, we believe this to be a worst-case analysis. Figure 1 is a typical schedule of one week's activities at Systems Unlimited, Inc. Of course, actual scheduling will differ; nevertheless, in keeping with our worst-case analysis, the schedule presented here is a reasonable overestimation of the eventual peak-period activities of the Service Center. We are planning to have 78 parking spaces available at the Service Center. The following trends and special circumstances are as follows: 1. The peak period for parking is at 10:30 a.m. with 57 cars needing parking. The number of cars drops down and again rises to 42 at 1 :30 p.m. and 43 at 2:30 p.m. Please note that within Figure 1, I = in and 0 = out. 2. We have intermittent usage on every other Monday, the 3rd Wednesday of each month, the 3rd Monday of each month and the 3rd Tuesday of each month for staff meetings, staff trainings and Board of Directors meetings. These special circumstances are noted at the bottom of Figure 1. These special circumstances will "peak" the parking need at 72 spaces twice a month at 10:30 a.m. Again, this is a worst case scenario. 3. Johnson County SEATS will drop off small numbers of individuals with disabilities at 8:00 a.m., 8:30 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. but they do not need to park. They will return at 2:30 p.m., 3:00 p.m. and 3:30 p.m. to pick up individuals to transport them back to their places of residence. Again, no parking will take place. We believe our plan to develop 78 parking space for the Systems Unlimited Service Center will meet our needs now and for the future and portions of Lots 12 and 11 will allow us to develop additional parking spaces if needed, far into the future. is §Q -11 -.; - ..¡::.. ..,~._- fS) ~ \.0 =::L 7:00 7:30 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 10:00 57 10:30 11 :00 11 :30 12:00 12:30 1 :00 li'¡ 1 :30 2:00 Lf3 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 8:00 8:30 9:00 ~I Mondav ;2- :J:- í-o- q -.I. 2j.: ð q .I ..:2-(1 (,-..I. 1- 0 c,-x L.f ..:r: ::'-n S-::r- ') - ð J-;:L 7-0 ~ :.r... 1(...- 0 :2-:r. I~- ("') '7 - :J:. I ~- CJ Iv - z. , c;-- ñ 1-::;; .5"-ð S-;L f,-n ? - ::r:. S"- 0 5"-;r.. 5"- 0 S'-::r: I ""F)- Q' ii-I '7- 0 1-2 /2.-0 I-I In-O t~-{ )..-0 1- 0 Tuesday ,,2 -.I- f - 0 ?-I ;;'~-'T'" ::2-0 q -.:I. ':;-0 b L 1-0 c'-.x '--I-I. .:2-0 ~;¡: .2-0 !:"-:::r.. "'7 - 0 8-.I. J~ -0 ~-.:t IJ -() r¡ - :c.. I,À - 0 1'1 .I S-o '7 -:I "¡--o S--.I b-O ?-.:r s--o y-x 5-0 S"-:I /Î - 0 y-x '")-0 I::r.. 12 - 0 I-I /0 - 0 l-.:;r ~-O ;;"-0 1-0 ~~~_/~~. ~~ Wednesday .L -".::¡... 1- 0 1-.I ;¡.. 6 - ...;.. " - 0 9..r. ~-o ~ ;¡: 1- 0 G-.I y-.:r. ,2-0 S-;I ;:2-0 S"-..:r 1)- Q i? -.:I: " - 0 ~ ..:r I ~- 0 "2-r I'J...-O I 'f-::r S'"-o r¡-:r s=-o S-.:r t:,-o ') .z. .s--o Y-;I. ~-o S--.:I. I~- 0 '-I-I 0-0 1 -..I 1:;2-0 I -.:r. /D-O (-:I ¿; - 0 2. -f) 1-0 Thursday .)..-:r.. /- 0 9-I .2 ~ -..I ~-o 9-;:r ;æ-o ~:r. /- 0 G-.I 1I-..I .2-0 S-.z .:1.-0 ..s--.:!:;. ')-0 g .:t: I~- 0 .2 -..I. / J - 0 ')--:r: IJ.. - 0 l'l-.:J: $-0 ?-:¡; or - () S--.z ~-(::;) '7 -..:I: S"-o S:I 5"-0 S"-.I I?--o L./-::I. '}-o I-X 1.:1. 0 ¡-.:z: 10- 0 1- :r ,-() ;¿ -0 1-0 Fridav .:;¿ - J - 0 ?-.I ;Z~- .:r. ""'-0 q-:z ~-o ~- .:r /-0 G -..I Lf-;:r. .:2 0 ,S"-;r. .20 S-:z ? 0 i' -..:r Ie:,-o .2 ~ 13-0 r-¡ -..:r I~- 0 I "f-;X S- - 't) ?-z ,S-- C .s;.:r "'-0 "I-I 5"-0 S-::r S--r;¡ S- .:r: I?- 0 t.¡ -..z. ') 0 I-:L. };¡.--o I-X )0-0 I -..L. ~ -0 :L -0 1-0 Saturday I - :r:. )L /:2 I. 1.2 - 0 J - 0 J - 0 c~ l:;~< (-) --, :.::.:; !,'- "-b- ,-:. '-;- ~;::; - J~ ~ ..r.::: ~ 1 () -=- a;..;;J::, Sunday --- - _. -.- I -.:r. 1-0 .2..-T ,- 0 J - 0 ,:;::; i~~' . n --- - r-- "..~-,~ :t~ rT'] ¡Y' i.__J --- .-- .:::-- \.0 -- J-,,~1b?~ ~_ * ~ ~'~~r" -IS"~ .~_~. ?'()()~~ (~.....,,4tf,+;) / S' ~, O"'~;. ".;t~ /V (j 0 ;.1 ^ ~ ~t iA!-c~.J-~¡-1 ~ ,....,.,~ - IS- c,...>-"-C2- ~ ~ '1 t4 M (~ þ..... ~) I S~ ~ ~. ~,..., ~, _/- ,) -IE- S~'}-~rf ~~~- ¡7~:-r.-o?C ':"]0 ;ðÞ1(~~ -..ù ~ _ n -r... ,. _ L _ , .. _ J '? ~-<... r~ 0:::1: 1::s P.l? /j' . 7,...,1., -b:.,-:,......:....... } STAFF REPORT To: Board of Adjustment Prepared by: Robert Miklo Item: EXC04-00029 932 Washington Street Date: January 12, 2005 EXC04-00030 924 Washington Street GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: James A. Clark 414 E. Market Street Iowa City, IA 52245 Contact Person: same as above Phone: 319-338-8391 Requested Action: Reduction of required front yard setback from 10 feet to 6 feet 2 inches. Purpose: To allow an addition of balconies and entrance porches Location: 924 and 932 Washington Street Existing Land Use and Zoning: Multi-family residential with a Conservation Overlay zone, RNC-20/0CD. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Residential, RNC-20/0CD South: Residential, RNC-20/0CD East: Residential, RNC-20/0CD West: Residential, RNC-20/0CD Applicable Zoning Code sections: 14-6D-2E-4a (minimum front yards in RNC-20) 14-60-4B (special exceptions possible) 14-6W-2B (spec. exception review standards) Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for residential development at 16-24 dwelling units per acre. File Date: December 15, 2004 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The building at 924 Washington Street was built in 1977. The Building at 932 Washington Street was built in 1980. At the time of construction both properties were zoned Neighborhood Conservation (RNC-20) zone. A Conservation Di$trict overlay zone was applied to the area in 2003. The overlay zone requires that exterior building alterations be reviewed and approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. 2 The applicant is proposing to remodel the façades of these buildings. His plans call for the addition of balconies, small entry porches and changes to the rooflines to eliminate the mansard roof. The buildings are located 10 feet from the front property line. The normally required setback in the RNC-20 zone is 20 feet. However, because other buildings within this block are located closer than 20 feet to the property line, the applicant was able to make use of set back averaging provision of the zoning ordinance to erect the building closer to the street. The applicant is now seeking a further reduction of 3 feet 8 inches to allow the installation of the balconies and entrance porches. The resulting front yards would be 6 feet 4 inches. ANAL YSIS: The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare, to conserve and protect the value of property throughout the city, and to encourage the most appropriate use of land. It is the intent of the Ordinance to permit the full use and enjoyment of property in a manner that does not intrude upon adjacent property. The Board may grant relief from the requirements of the Zoning Chapter through a special exception if the action is considered to serve the public interest and is consistent with the intent of the Zoning Chapter. Specific Standards: 14-6Q-4-B, Exceptions to Established Setbacks Subsection 60-4-B of the Zoning Chapter states that a special exception may be granted by the Board of Adjustment modifying yard requirements when the owner or lawful occupant of property demonstrates that such person's situation is peculiar to the property in question, that there is a practical difficulty in complying with the dimensional requirements of the Chapter, and that the conditions of Article W of the Zoning Chapter (Board of Adjustment Powers and Procedures) can be met. Peculiar Situation: These properties are peculiar because of the wide right-of-way (r.o.w.) of Washington Street in this vicinity. The r.o.w is 100 feet wide compared to the 60-foot wide r.o.w. common for most streets in this part of the city. The wide r.o.w. results in a 25 foot wide open space between the sidewalk and the property line that gives the appearance of a greater front yard than what actually exists. Just to the east of 932 Washington Street the r.o.w. reduces down to 60 feet and the houses are closer to the sidewalk. If the set back is reduced to 6'4", these two buildings will still be set back farther from the street than the buildings located to the east within this block. These properties are also peculiar in that they are fairly large apartment buildings located within a block of buildings that were originally built as single-family homes. Although some houses in this vicinity have been converted to apartments, they still maintain the outward appearance of single- family dwellings. There are also several single-family homes remaining in this area. The applicant's proposed remodeling will help provide more architectural articulation and thus break up the mass of the building to make it more compatible in appearance with the other buildings in the neighborhood. Practical Difficulty: If the requested special exceptions are not granted, the applicant could leave the buildings as they are; however, the Comprehensive Plan does encourage the redesign of the facades of mansard roof-type apartment buildings such as this. Specifically, the Preservation Plan (page 85) states "For the long term, work toward finding a means of improving the appearances and compatibility of the designs of the numerous "mansard-plexes" in the North Side. These buildings are not likely to be razed and replaced until well into the 21st century and there may be a creative design solution to reduce their negative impact on the balance of the streets." Although these buildings are not located in the North Side, the policy of encouraging the remodeling of this type of building to be more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood would be a wise policy for most of the city. These buildings could 3 continue to exist "as-is" without this special exceptions. However, it does appear that the special exceptions would make these buildings more usable and more aesthetically pleasing in relation to the smaller scale buildings within this neighborhood. General Standards for the Granting of a Special Exception: In addition to determining whether the situation is unique and if there is a practical difficulty in complying with the Zoning Ordinance, the Board must find that the applicant meets several standards spelled out in chapter 14-6W-2B. The applicant's statements regarding each of the seven general standards are included within the attached application, and Staff's findings are below. A. The specific exception will not. be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Staff finds that the proposed exceptions will have limited effects on public health, safety, comfort and welfare. The additions are small (approximately 64 square feet in area - total). They will be open rather than enclosed and therefore should have minimal effect on visibility and the open appearance of the front yard. B. The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The additions will help to make the design of these large buildings more compatible with their smaller scale neighbors. The additions will not directly affect use or enjoyment of neighboring properties. Staff does not feel that the proposed alterations will substantially affect the neighborhood. C. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located. The surrounding properties are currently developed. Many buildings in this block are located closer to the sidewalk than the proposed additions to these buildings Staff finds that neighboring properties should not be negatively affected. D. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. The proposed exceptions will not increase the population density or affect the use of municipal facilities. E. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. No change in the ingress or egress is proposed. F. Except for the specific regulation and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific proposed exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is to be located. With the exception of the front yard setback, these properties conform to the other requirements of the RNC-20 zone. G. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as amended. Staff finds that the exception and renovation conforms to the City's Comprehensive Plan, specifically the Preservation Plan, which encourages the remodeling of buildings such as these to make them more compatible with the historic building stock in the surrounding neighborhoods. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that EXC04-00029 and EXC04-00030, applications for special exceptions to reduce the required front yard from 10 feet to 6 feet 4 inches in the areas indicated on the site plans for additions to the existing buildings in the Neighborhood Conservation (RNC-20) zone located at 924 and 932 Washington, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plans submitted with the application and subject to approval of the elevation drawings by the Historic Preservation Commission. 4 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Application Documents Approved bY:~¥~ Karin Franklin, Director Department of Planning and Community Development ~ ~~~~// ~ lL ~( I I T/ t=j t I ! .- :Q~~) rj r 5: '\(-/ I I ~I-- ~CS--) r I r L.--- V -- wI __ -.- -- I z I .- / tl) I~I UI .. I -.J I -... 181 I. / IOI~ "" \5: I - - ! 1 A~ .... N ' t\ - . I U .=:, \ L¿ ...J..S 11 V'j V'j n S .--.- ~D ~~ ¡Þ - (b ~ t3 ~, ~ ~ ~ t3 .....1 w :::: ') I - I VJ « 5: I I \ """ -L:::: -ubNd3^O~ v , 1'-' N o ~D~ IH is 3~OOO I R Qj CJ¡ C: d. Qj Qj ---- Qj - ... . 1,"",,:- ""II~ -== ..c:;; . r -. . I--- 7 7 ~ f--- ~ - \ - - - .-- I i I-- I-- w l.') I-- o u < H ~~ ~L ~It~ o C') o o o I ~ o Ü >< w - - - +-' CJ) c: o +-' 0) c: ..c:: en co 3: w ~ C\J 0) .. Z o ÞO-C ~ U o ~ ~ f-4 ÞO-C rJ:J ~~~~~-¡/ ~ ~ ~( I I U!~~/ t=j t =0, ~ - ~ ~"l_ I I -- 70G rl r '--- ~ -- ~ I~I -- -r- ~ I:::: // ,-) 151 VI .... 1:S I -- :§I IT / / ~ 151 /' / -- I 1/ Á ..... N .~ ' 1:/L- t '\ l L ~lIV1V1nS ._ :-~~) u. ~ G ~I I ~, ~ ~ ~ G - w > ~) - c ) ~ I I C) \ T ::r:: U! « 5 '" , v ~= u~N~3^O~ \' Lr-\ In -. -- .&.. C -- ~ -, II ......... -. ~ v........ V II - \ \ \\ \\ '" ~ -"-'-' '-' v J I I I - - == - t- .. JI \\ \ - \ \ \ C\I I \ 0 ^AI llH ~eJ~ I; R I lS 3~OOO Q) th c:: Ii. Q) Q) ------ Q) - .... . "": - ""IIIII~~ == ..... . -- - / I == - - - \ - - I- r-- Jt; w (') W .--J .--J o U < 0) C\I o o o I V o Ü x w - - - - - - +-' en c: o +-' 0) c: ..c: en ct3 3: - I .. 'W ~~ t [- .~ - Z = LU _ _ C\I .. ~~ ~ ~~ I ~ L 5 ~c ~ n R It~ ~ '--- 0) c -- Q.. Q.. C\1 ~ ~ +-' -- Ü C\1 ~ o - '+- o ~ +-' -- Ü !~ I~ I! ~I ~~ 8~ n. æõ ~ 8 ,- :" ,- Q) «ï I (.) . ø --. APPEAL TO THE EXQ([J-(-([Q1[J2~ BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TITLE 14, CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE W DATE: 12/15/04 PROPERTY PARCEL NO. See Attached Exhibit "A" APPEAL PROPERTY ADDRESS: 932E. Washington APPEAL PROPERTY ZONE: APPEAL PROPERTY LOT SIZE: APPLICANT: Name: James A. Clark Address: 414 E. Market St., Iowa City, IA Phone: 319-338-8391 or 319-631-1869 CONTACT PERSON: Name: James A. Clark Address: 414 E. Market St., Iowa City, IA Phone: 319-338-8391 or 319-631-1869 Phone: 319-338-8391 or 319-631-1869 -nl (-') PROPERTY OWNER:Name: James and Loretta Clark Address: 414 E. Market St., Iowa City, 01 'U -- (A:> (....'1 Specific Requested Special Exception; Applicable Section(s) of the Zoning Chapter: 14-6V-3-E Reduction Front Yard Purpose for special exception: To allow small decorative balconies/deck (3'8" x 7'8") to remove mansard look by redesigning building facade. Date of previous application or appeal flied, if any: Minor Modifièation filed -2- . INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANT: A. Leaal description of property: See Attached Exhibit "A". B. "'Plot plan drawn to scale showing: 1. Lot with dimensions; 2. North point and scale; 3. Existing and proposed structures with distances from property lines; 4. Abutting streets and alleys; 5. Surrounding land uses, Including the location and record owner of each property opposite or abutting the property In question; 6. Parking spaces and trees - existing and proposed. rSubmlsslon of an 82" x 11" bold print plot plan Is preferred.] C. Review. The Board shall review all applicable evidence regarding the site, existing and proposed structures, neighboring uses, parking areas, driveway locations, highway and street access, traffic generation and circulation, drainage, sanitary sewer and water systems, the operation of the specific proposed exception and such other evidence as deemed appropriate. (Section 14-6W-2B1, City Code). In the space provided below or on an attached sheet, address the areas of Board review which apply to the requested special exception. In this narrative statement, set forth the grounds offered as support for the special exception. See Application Attachment. ~ ::~~: () r::...... -~'; ...3 ,.......,::; .~.. ~ (~':,;- _L:.-- c:~ ~ i C") --Tl --, I;" (,]1 - ¡--, v D. 1"'-"', ..J.. " I -,. _ . ..~_-') "'f'~;: /...... c..J The applicant is required to present specific Information, not Just oPi~ons, trim the aeneral standards for the arantina of a special exception (Section 14-6W-2B2, City Code), enumerated below, will be met: ~""-'J 1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare. See 14-6Q-3-K - See Application Attachment. These three balconies are above each other; therefore are interpreted as being covered, therefore not allowed in required front yard. See Also Exhibit "B" -3- 2. The specific proposed exception will not be Injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property In the Immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish and Impair property values In the neighborhood. The 10' set back is an average set back - many of the houses to the north have less than a 10' set back. See Attached Exhibit "B" for additional information. 3. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not Impede the normal and orderly development and Improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted In the zone In which such property Is located. Washington Street is ad 00 , right of way. See Attached Exhibit "B" for additional information. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. All existing infrastructure is in place and the special exception will not require changes. 5~ Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. Will not affect traffic on public streets. ........,,, ç~ :::';;0 ...j:..,;:o.--', ~;:;'",~+J ef:;;;~~ C-) ::..11 C.J) W c...'1 -4- 6. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific proposed exception, In all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone In which It Is to be located. [Depending on the type of exception requested, certain specific conditions may need to be met. The applicant will demonstrate compliance with the specific conditions required for a particular use, as provided In City Code Section 14-6L-1, Special Exception Enumerated Requirements; Section 14-6N-1, Off-Street Parking Requirements; Section 14-6Q, Dimensional Requirements, or Section 14-6R, Tree Regulations, as appropriate.] No change in parking, trees, dimensional requirements - the small decorative balconies/decks 3'8" x 7'8" allow emergency fire exit, provide a more friendly and pleading appearance - change the architectural look of thebuilding facade. Improve safety of street (visibility) at night. The addition of the balconies/ decks should add to the health, safety and comfort of both the occupants of the building and persons' livin.gandwalking in and to the area. The balconies/ decks will help revitalize and improve the general look of the bUllding. See Application Attachment for additional information. 1. The proposed use will be consistent with the short-range Comprehensive Plan of the City. The small decorative balconies/deck 3'8" x 7'8" will allow only 2 chairs, a very small table, small grill for 2-3 people - more of a design value than a functional value. E. List the names and mailing addresses of the record owners of all property located within 300 feet of the exterior limits of the property involved in this appeal: NAME ADDRESS See Attached Exhibit "C" b"~.. ... ¡"'.'", §Ëc) '£:::'1' -'----, r', (~.,-...... -":,.,. ¡ C~'~j -n ) ,;:::: U'I "'r:: (--)2 <"":::;::./"...... <;";;:,. > -0 :tt .~--.., ",--",' w en -5- . NOTE: Conditions. In permitting a special exception, the Board may Impose appropriate conditions and safeguards, Including but not limited to planting screens, fencing, construction commencement and completion deadlines, lighting, operational controls, Improved traffic circulation requirements, highway access restrictions, Increased minimum yard requirements, parking requirements, limitations on the duration of a use or ownership or any other requirement which the Board deems appropriate under the circumstances upon a finding that the conditions are necessary to fulfill the purpose and Intent of the Zoning Chapter. (Section 14-6W-2B3, City Code). Orders. Unless otherwise determined by the Board, all orders of the Board shall expire six (6) months from the date the written decision Is filed with the City Clerk, unless the applicant shall have taken action within the six (6) month period to establish the use or construct the building permitted under the terms of the Board's decision, such as by obtaining a building permit and proceeding to completion In accordance with the terms of the permit. Upon written request, and for good cause shown, the Board may extend the expiration date of any order without further public hearing on the merits of the original appeal or application. (Section 14-6W-3E, City Code). Petition for writ of certiorari. Any person or persons, jointly or severally, aggrieved by any decision of the Board under the provisions of the Zoning Chapter, or any taxpayer or any officer, department or board of the City may present to a court of record a petition for writ of certiorari duly verified, setting forth that such decision is illegal, in whole or In part, and specifying the grounds of the Illegality. (Section 14-6W-7, City Code). Such petition shall be presented to the court within thirty (30) days after the filing of the decision In the 0 he City Clerk. Date: Dec.... If;; ,20 Signature(s) of Appllcant(s) Date: ,20_ Slgnature(s) of Property Owner(s) If Different than Applicant(s) ppdadmln\appboase.doc º ;:::: () J>=~'l o f1"1 (-, -Tl U1 s-y (..11 N EXHIBIT "B" REASONS FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION 1. Will rejuvenate the viability ofE. Washington Street. 2. Will improve the lifestyle and desirability of the E. Washington Street neighborhood which has been declining in the past 5 years. 3. Will make E. Washington Street more pleasing and friendly to live on. 4. Will create a new acceptance to live in the E. Washington Street area. 5. Will help take away the stereotype (look alike syndrome) of the areas of E. Washington Street. 6. Will help the buildings become more attractive in the E. Washington Street areas. 7. Will create a new face and acceptance ofE. Washington Street area. 8. Will be very helpful in architectural designing ofthe exteriors of the buildings on E. Washington Street. 9. Will be major influence in bringing the E. Washington Street area buildings up to date inside and QUt. James Clark Q W ()1 N f"',,~) -Tl c.n CLARK SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPLICATION ATTACHMENT Information Provided by Applicant C. The Board's review in this matter should focus upon the improvement to the structure and the neighborhood by the proposed special exception. Each property affected was built in the early to mid 1980's and is of similar, if not identical, architecture. The Applicant proposes to add what are primarily decorative balconies to the dwelling units in the front of the structure. These will be approximately 3~ feet in depth which will allow occupants of the dwelling units to step onto them for fresh air, but will be too shallow for group gatherings. The balconies/decks would be clad in metal and would allow for grilling on the deck and clear the clutter of grills from the front yard of the property. The cosmetic effect will be at tracti ve and to add some buildings. to make relief to the the buildings more fronts of the The area in which these structures are situated has been developed within the past two decades for multi-family residential housing and the addition of these balconies/decks has virtually no impact upon infrastructure, property use, or public services in the area. 0.1. The proposed special exception will enhance, rather than be a detriment to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. The addition of the balconies will allow occupants of the dwelling units additional access to fresh air and will provide an emergency egress in the event of fire or other casualty. The streets in front of the properties will be more visible from the dwelling units due to enlargement of the opening from window size to deck door size. This should provide an additional feeling of safety and connectedness to persons on the street, particularly at night. The special exception should add to the health, safety, and comfort of both occupants of the building and other persons in the area. 0.6. As previously noted, the reason for the special exception is to allow small balconies to be added to the front of the building. There is no enlargement of the habitable are;?J:; of the structure or impact on land use. The proposed ~iti~ of balconies / decks complies with all current zoning arf~ ~iJr'diin9:._ codes, except for the front yard set back. .~) 11 (":' <.11 .!...~-"-J [',...... """(J \\Server\shared\WPDOCS\REALEST\Clark\Special Exception\Application Attachment 2 12~~~~Pd:J2 <;: /'", ú') 5> c;, N -<J' C) """"'-----.4,- //~ OJ !í-J ~N ~,....' . , 1_"",,} r ¡ : NL..!-.:. --- LL M ::c 0- Uj , ~ l ~ hJ'- , ~ t=<:r ( " '-,,' .....,./ -s~ o 1 I-r- ~~3::::=~Ë ~ ~ H_ ~-J- t- I-I--~ .!;;::ê I-I-r- - l- I-- - -f-- f-' 1-_ H J--I _ H _t-I h:... ¡-- - f-I-_ --_I--r-;-tl-- f- l- f-- - f--_ r-- ....,1-_ f- J- ~!....J - t- I-f- t- -- - f--_ 1--1 _r-f- I- -1-,- r-f- ';::: - __h_ t'- _I- - I- ,..--_'- I-h_ r-- t-I-- ~'- _ f-,- -I- f-I- 1-"'" - I-f-_ 1-_ ___ __h'-_f-r-- 1-- '-_I-f-:-I-I-- f-_I-f-I-J-...... f- _ r-,-- ¡-¡--H_ >--d 1-1- i-i- f- f- ~ ;::: I--')-I-Ì::I- H h I-rl- ,. I I. j !( ':\ \ ~ \ \\ '- I I I LU[ J Dê5 I I I 111c::J I I ~ ~ . ...... ef) z o ...... (9t: I zco ~ IlJ1 ef)N « 3= x , , I , I I I I I I )-, ill: 0' wi >' o .! O:::W 0..1- 0..< <0 . W N ~ 0'> I 1--1 C) z 5 ...J .... :J ([ o O:::...J « o- N ZU u.. <W o 1-0.. o (f'/J) o I- Z o ex: lL. I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I I I I I I ...J I , I < D.,æ ..... Z¿:W ex: .......... I wOæl- I- Wl-O < ,. x: .....; (\j (Yì (j) w a.. >- I- ""';(\j (J) Z DD 0 3: ~zæ æ ...J.....O 0_ .....00 I- Z3: ~(j)O (j) I <)- "";(\j(Yì ...J DOOU ..... :JOOZ I I I < a::: <00< I I I ~3:3:LL ~ I I I >- I I I Z ....;(\j(Yì~ Q I I I 0 ...J , I I U a I I I ...J U , I , < CD (f)(f) (J) (f)zæ W z:2:W ..... ":2::Jt:J ~ f-() (j) :J...J Z WOcD I- ...J 0 < I (/) 1-< x ex: oUI ...J WOcD 0 I I ...J o:::æo~ Q. U...J...J - < Q. oWW -I ~ U ;=H- U :J oWW Z<o:::o (/) 0 I-- l- e) 80:::1-0::: 3:(f)(J) Z >- ..... ""';NM-:t Z 'N(Y) Z 0....... .... < U I I I l- I ..J , I , W I < I I I ex: I m I I I L I I I ¡ . "0 I _3 14 " I 5 -« - IJl i I i -ç I ('.(1 N! I to !)(, G"\ - .1 1... T J , I' I î 13 - 1- o ..,.- ,... I .1E. I ~ I ~ ¡.1L ¡ 1.l. .¡ I X I 1J)! . (¡(), . ¡-; - oJ.. _ --! _ _ ..L.. __I...J.- -0; () <;'\; + -01 «5i ~ . o \9 I ! i " II Ii Ii 'I I! H 1\ ¡ I ¡ I! '5.of f-.)ll 5 -r ¡ N 6 131- ¡;;.c:ï . i ¡ i I -()' ·1 ú:)¡ ,ðj i 55.0: ._ '_·"'__"_·_n_.._ L.r ~""'-, , . (>< ! ~. \2eI2" 1Q ( ~ 932. ~L:)L, J ~LOT -- 2..0.0 80.0' I I i I, I I I 1(, I ~ 112 I I \ 1 .L 1. PAl<: K.\ t-l6 I I I J -r .J ...;. - L-r ! ·<;))<,18 I . Lf¡z. '-1 -.- -! I ·.&.,~:Ii!5'. J..'1.. L___-. T T I I 1..±.~1£1 \, .. E;,O. d J,! I I o ~ I 11 I ! f j I ! I w ..... :/ ~ Çl. 'l..o.o' 3 lJJ f-\, ~ H; \ /'-.{ Co -r ot.../. t:. '---r=::::7 ~ Á- i',.j o :~ -n CJl <:.,.) cn N ....A, . ......."wI_ 0-.: "'...-¡ J \ViA!. M... . I''''~''"~i í__" LL ..:r Ln .. M . . , . . . . . I I I I I I I I , I )-, m: 0' WI >' o .! O:::W (1...f- (1...< <0 N - C) Z .... o ...J .... :J m o O:::-.J «< 0..... zU a:: «W o f-CL o (f)U1 o I- Z o a:: IJ.. I I I I fJ) I W I a. I >- ! I- I I I : I ~ D I 0::: .... ZLW a:: 0-< 0-< I WOO::: f- I- (ñf-O < .. 1. ....; (\ (Y) ....;(\ 1"11[::::1 (f) Df:S Z GG 0 0-< 2Szo::: 0::: 3: -.Jo-<O ....... 00-< -00 111c::J f- Z3: ~U)O (f) I < ...J GooêJ "";(\(Y) ..... :J002 < a::: <00< I- >- ~3:3:lL. 0::: (/) z ....;Nc:vi~ 0 0 ...J U I I I 0 Z ...J I ! I U 0 < I I I m I I I I- <;) Z - (f)(f) :r: IJ) (f) (f)ZO:::: (/) .. W Z:EW «) ..... « ... I- fJ) tJ) L:JD 3: l/) :J-1Z <'I ù) WOCD t- -10< f-< X 0::: OUI . ...J WOCD 0 U-1-1 W ...J O:::O::::O~ a.. < U~ì-u a. oWW "\t ~ Z<o:::O :J oWW C) 80:::r-0::: fJ) 0 f- f- N 3:(f)(f) 1 Q) z >- .... "";(\(Y)"t Z ·N(Y) z 0- .... < U ! I I t- ...J I I I W < I I I a::: m I I I 1~~~;i ~:'~~{~;~ ~¡~~¡ ~:\.:;l.~,:; -_,r,,;~""'-"'~' >!'..... .'" 1ii'1I! '...... ........Jp~~"l1...."""lr ï.ïiilllir·'iniI; "'.i' ìh{ :it~{¡¡Ìitíìiti.¡¡.:'..'<~ ".' '''':''·':-''~'''···-'''·''''',·~:'\r-.''·õ-i:''''''(,'''¡''''''''·'''''.·''''''ø''',''''''·_";,,,,,:,,,,,,,,,,,_.:........ .~. '............... ',,' . ".' ~, 19 '":.:> '1"e- fL4N ~ t<- . · 92..4 f· WASt1r(\jc~.lûI'J (9ll '6HôL<-)~, Fr;,~',..'i- PÆ~{N6, ~PÅC~7 _ -.1"& -, . ð/J A ¿'.7t:PAflA/E" (.t::rt PeR.. 8X(2.91 ~ðO¿t ) -,.~ ~ " r ;-~4 r ,1,d ~A(-~~ . . ... . ... . . .. 'f _ ., \II <:P . f J. I 'I ~M .' ...\ "'~~ ' y . «~ ...( f t&.. . \\S.\~ ;l.r r - .~ _ .1__ '" wt , ~ þ- - ~ -. \ . ~ * * ~ ~ >\:~ þ - -. --.-.-.. ·'-..'0_..__. ~ \ ('-10 $1 ~ r:-1 " ~ <::;. ? ~ ~ ~ .L .'" S1 f\ ~ ~~ ~. ::"--.. ~ (") ~ 'j" ~ "'-. iT- .,- ~ =r ~ ... '- "") J .....----. ::x: ~ 0 C c.J)1 en Z ~ 0 _C) [ññ] ~ ~ i¡ í ~ --L - N £ñii] :"fIJ ~§ 0 c::=J Ç,,,,^ 00 i c=:g ~"F ~~ r:ñ:ñJ I ' 5 m .. :xl r---- u < c:~_~ .':J 1 0 õ ;) no: '- -....-.' ',I' "" ~ã~~ f ~ ~ ...tf' ~~; ~ r t f 3- #. r Ú ::.",.1 - , ~ ( .Á "Q. If" ,. "' .. -1 þ!C ~ 1" <- 'If 5..~ ~... &. ".... . to ~~ r ~ f.... 11 ."" t ~ ~~ tf .! d 3 t '\ ~f ~ .."J ::<~_.,............'" .....y.. ,",,,,,., ,"..,"",<".~,...~...?" -.. "'~"" '~>"¡¡t'¡h"""f~""~;':"f.(iJ<¡:¡¡:\,,;,"""'" ';"",¡'¡¡'¡j.i:,~:",';''i''".¡'''¡'':;.(''''\''µ''''''''~;\t'¡;1IiAit''''."",; "",.~..., "". . . . " . .-.:. '.-. i;¿ C-." -":1- '1Þ In <- -- þ 'S.. ~i) ..1> 9...> =' 't.. \.~ .,... Oì ::J ~~ C::' \f\ .r:-~ --'Tl r- ~ ~,."_.~, :"··jZ c.r. ,¡;:- V"- ~ ~ (' j .... V Þ - -' ('f\ t )( .. " ~ M r J ~ r ¿ ~ ~. ". II ':" . . ".' ;:¡, ~., .' ~' o .. " ... -r STAFF REPORT To: Board of Adjustment Prepared by: Robert Miklo Item: EXC04-00031, 517 Fairchild Street Date: January 12, 2005 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: James A. Clark 414 E. Market Street Iowa City, IA 52245 Contact Person: same as above Phone: 319-338-8391 Requested Action: Reduction of required front yard setback from 10 feet to 6 feet 6 inches. Purpose: To allow an addition of balconies and entrance porches Location: 517 Fairchild Street Existing Land Use and Zoning: Multi-family residential, RNC-12 Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Residential, RNC-12 South: Residential, RNC-12 East: Residential, RNC-12 West: Residential, RNC-12 Applicable Zoning Code sections: 14-6D-2E-4a (minimum front yards in RNC-12) 14-60-4B (special exceptions possible) 14-6W-2B (spec. exception review standards) Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for residential development at 8-16 dwelling units per acre. File Date: December 15, 2004 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This building was built in 1973 when this area was zoned R3-A, Multi-Family Residential Zone. As part of a city-wide rezoning in 1983 the area was rezoned to the Low Density Multi-Family (RM-12) zone. In 1994 the area was rezoned to Neighborhood Conservation (RNC-12) zone. 2 The intent of the RNC-12 zone is preserve older neighborhoods that have a predominately single-family appearance. New multi-family buildings are not permitted unless the property contains multi-family buildings that were conforming to the previous zone. The applicant is proposing to remodel the façade of this building. His plans call for the addition of balconies, two small entry porches and changes to the roofline to eliminate the mansard roof. The building is located 10 feet from the front property line. The normally required setback in the RNC-12 zone is 20 feet. However, because other buildings within this block are located closer than 20 feet to the property line, the applicant was able to make use of set back averaging provision of the zoning ordinance to erect the building closer to the street. The applicant is now seeking a further reduction of 3 feet 6 inches to allow the installation of the balconies and entrance porches. The resulting front yard would be 6 feet 6 inches. ANAL YSIS: The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare, to conserve and protect the value of property throughout the city, and to encourage the most appropriate use of land. It is the intent of the Ordinance to permit the full use and enjoyment of property in a manner that does not intrude upon adjacent property. The Board may grant relief from the requirements of the Zoning Chapter through a special exception if the action is considered to serve the public interest and is consistent with the intent of the Zoning Chapter. Specific Standards: 14-6Q-4-B, Exceptions to Established Setbacks Subsection 60-4-B of the Zoning Chapter states that a special exception may be granted by the Board of Adjustment modifying yard requirements when the owner or lawful occupant of property demonstrates that such person's situation is peculiar to the property in question, that there is a practical difficulty in complying with the dimensional requirements of the Chapter, and that the conditions of Article W of the Zoning Chapter (Board of Adjustment Powers and Procedures) can be met. Peculiar Situation: This property is somewhat peculiar in that it is a fairly large apartment building located within an area of smaller single-family homes. The applicant's proposed remodeling will help provide more architectural articulation and thus break up the mass of the building to make it more compatible in appearance with the existing buildings in the neighborhood. Practical Difficulty: If the requested special exception is not granted, the applicant could leave the building as it is; however, the Comprehensive Plan does encourage the redesign of the facades of mansard roof-type apartment buildings such as this. Specifically, the Preservation Plan (page 85) states "For the long term, work toward finding a means of improving the appearances and compatibility of the designs of the numerous "mansard-plexes" in the North Side. These buildings are not likely to be razed and replaced until well into the 21st century and there may be a creative design solution to reduce their negative impact on the balance of the streets." Although the building could continue to exist "as-is" without this special exception, it does appear that the special exception would make the building more usable and more aesthetically pleasing in relation to the smaller scale buildings within this neighborhood. General Standards for the Granting of a Special Exception: In addition to determining whether the situation is unique and if there is a practical difficulty in complying with the Zoning Ordinance, the Board must find that the applicant meets several standards spelled out in chapter 14-6W-2B. The applicant's statements regarding each of the seven general standards are included within the attached application, and Staff's findings are below. A. The specific exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Staff finds that the proposed exception will have limited effects on public health, safety, comfort and welfare. The additions are small (approximately 100 3 square feet in area - total). They will be open rather than enclosed and therefore should have minimal effect on visibility and the open appearance of the front yard. B. The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The additions will help to make the design of this large building more compatible with its smaller scale neighbors. The additions will not directly affect use or enjoyment of neighboring properties. Staff does not feel that the proposed alteration will substantially affect the neighborhood. C. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located. The surrounding properties are currently developed. Many buildings in the adjacent blocks are located as close to the street as the proposed additions to this building. Staff finds that neighboring properties should not be negatively affected. D. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. The proposed exception will not increase the population density or affect the use of municipal facilities. A portion of this property is lacking a sidewalk adjacent to North Market Square. To complete the public sidewalk network in this neighborhood the sidewalk should be extended to the south property line. E. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. As noted above a public sidewalk should be installed, otherwise adequate facilities exist to serve the addition and no change in the ingress or egress is proposed. F. Except for the specific regulation and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific proposed exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is to be located. The zoning code requires the screening of parking lots. The current parking lacks screening. Staff recommends that a hedge be required along the east side of the parking lot. As noted above the missing public sidewalk should be installed adjacent to North Market Square. G. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as amended. Staff finds that the exception and renovation conforms to the City's Comprehensive Plan, specifically the Preservation Plan, which encourages the remodeling of buildings such as this to make them more compatible with the historic building stock in the surrounding neighborhoods. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that EXC04-00031, an application for a special exception to reduce the required front yard from 10 feet to 6 feet 6 inches in the areas indicated on the site plan for additions to the an existing building in the Neighborhood Conservation (RNC-12) zone located at 517 Fairchild Street, be approved, subject to general conformance with the elevation drawings and site plans submitted with the application and installation of a hedge along the east side of the parking lot and a sidewalk adjacent to North Market Square. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Application Documents Approved by: Karin Franklin, Dire tor Department of Planning and Community Development (V\ if) ::UW1 I LlJ LW WJ L1-J ~ '-- T"'" l ^\iMH~IH lS ~ON~3^O~ -<E:: - C't) 0 - I II I 0 0 I - oq- - 0 - ü - >< - - W ~ .-- \ ~ I I L I lS S\iJnl - J- I - - - - T - '-- -~ 113HI II ~ I II - - ~ l ) \iMH~IH lS -C\nnrl t: ~~~ ~ ,.- 1- hi ~ Q) ----- t3 Cjco- 1- CJ C 0 1- I..-...tJ-C::- ~ 1- Q ~ r\:ft II 1: I ~ ........ Q) I ~ --C:: Q) '-- - -+-"'~CJ lS NO )NHOr '-- '-- ::J ~ - I I () CJ a- I I <~V) I-- - ,.. - - O~ +-' t: - CJ) - ~ m1 - f-- 'tJ I O~ .c t3 - I I T ¡---L.- ü ~ ~ '«1 r- LL. .... (J) ~ I I ~I-. r- I I r- --1,\ I ....... (J) --' Z T"'" r- (J) I ----l 0 LO (J) r- r- ~~ 0:::: Ü . . ::r:: 0 Z r- Z U Cì - 0:::: Z :::2 0 =:) W r- 0 ~ ::r:: II « I~ > I I 0 ~ IT « --.J ~ U Li- CD 0 ~ u I L ~ II II -LI r- 0 ¡-: ~ I ¡:¡; ~ ~ rJ) I I I 1'-- I I I 0) c .- 0.. 0.. ct1 ~ ~ +-- .- o ct1 ~ a - "'f- a ~ +-- .- o l~ 11 ~'!: ; c ~~ 0 ~ .9\i1 ~~ .so ¡e- o. o.C ~ g ..... =" ..... Q) ãi Q tIJ APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ~~or ~oto -b 1>CDJnlL{ SPECIAL EXCEPTION .. . TITLE 14, CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE W E;<{!([J-t - tc()ô I DATE: 12/15/04 PROPERTY PARCEL NO. See Attached Exhibit "A" APPEAL PROPERTY ADDRESS: 517 Fairchild Street APPEAL PROPERTY ZONE: APPEAL PROPERTY LOT SIZE: APPLICANT: Name: James A. Clark Address: 414 E. Market St., Iowa City, IA Phone: 319-338-8391 or 319-631-1869 -- CONTACT PERSON: Name: James A. Clark C) "'" 0 ::~:::: ,,' Address: 414 E. Market St., Iowa City, I~" :--) --":~~-l C'') Phone: 319-338-8391 or 319-631-1869 " -', ::;1 ;;:T: » PROPERTY OWNER:Name: James and Loretta Clark Address: 414 E. Market St., Iowa City, IA Phone: 319-338-8391 or 319-631-1869 Ç) ~ ¡ I c..n r-- >:1 ---l ' ~ . , . . -...... w en ü\ Specific Requested Special Exception; Applicable Section(s) of the Zoning Chapter: 14-6V-3-E Reduction Front Yard Purpose for special exception: To allow small decorative balconies/deck (3'6" x 7'10") to remove mansard look by redesigning building facade Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any: Minor Modification filed -2- INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANT: A. Leaal description of property: See Attached Exhibit "A". B. *Plot plan drawn to scale showing: 1. Lot with dimensions; 2. North point and scale; 3. Existing and proposed structures with distances from property lines; 4. Abutting streets and alleys; 5. Surrounding land uses, including the location and record owner of each property opposite or abutting the property in question; 6. Parking spaces and trees - existing and proposed. rSubmisslon of an 82" x 11" bold print plot plan Is preferred.] C. Review. The Board shall review all applicable evidence regarding the site, existing and proposed structures, neighboring uses, parking areas, driveway locations, highway and street access, traffic generation and circulation, drainage, sanitary sewer and water systems, the operation of the specific proposed exception and such other evidence as deemed appropriate. (Section 14-6W-2B1, City Code). In the space provided below or on an attached sheet, address the areas of Board review which apply to the requested special exception. In this narrative statement, set forth the grounds offered as support for the special exception. [f'IO' Buildin has an average set back of the houses on both side. Set back t '- 0'" now ~" . Remaining houses to the Block to the East and West have much smal.ler . set backs. See Applicaton Attachment for additional information. ,....'-, '--..¿ ";"~ (.1 '..,.. : D. The applicant is r~~uired to present SP~ciflc Information, not just OPi~~~S, t~ th;;º "eneral standards for the "r~ntln" of a special exception (Section 14~"2B2¡J'CitY'-rì Code), enumerated below, will be met: ;:,'- \-\: : . .,) .-', 1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or ~d~nge<r'the public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare. » ~ See 14-6Q-3-K - These three balconies are above each other, therefore are interpreted as being covered therefore not allowed in required front yard. See Exhibit "B" and Application Attachment for additional information. -3- 2. The specific proposed exception will not be Injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property In the Immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish and impair property values In the neighborhood. The 10' set back is an average set back - many of the houses to the north have less than a 10' set back See Attached Exhibit "B" for additional infonnation. 3. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and Improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone In which such property Is located. Fairchild Street is an 80' right of way and is totally developed. The effect will be primarily visual and should not impact development of neighboring properties. See Attached Exhibit "B" for additional infonnation 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. All existing infrastructure is in place and the special exception will not require changes. 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. will not affect traffic on public streets. () ~':: (') )-~:io :...._~J r~·"· , ï:~. ., ..c:.~ (,"::.') T';'¡ {'''" 1 '-ij "-. ... UI -0 _:.:... '''-1 "-'~ w c..n (1\ -4- 6. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific proposed exception, In all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone In which it is to be located. [Depending on the type of exception requested, certain specific conditions may need to be met. The applicant will demonstrate compliance with the specific conditions required for a particular use, as provided in City Code Section 14-6L-1, Special Exception Enumerated Requirements; Section 14-6N-1, Off-Street Parking Requirements; Section 14-6Q, Dimensional Requirements, or Section 14-6R, Tree Regulations, as appropriate.] No change in parking, tree, dimensional requirements - the small decorative balconies/decks 3'8" x 7'10"allow emergency fire exit, provide a more friendly and pleasing appearance - change the archItectura~ ~OOK or ~~e bul1ðlng facade. Improve safety of street (visibility) at night. The addition of the balconies/ decks should add to the health, safety and comfort Of both the occupan~s of the building and persons living and walking in and to the area. The balconies/ decks will help revitalize and improve the general looks of the bUIldIng. See Application Attachment for additional information. 7. The proposed use will be consistent with the short-range Comprehensive Plan of the City. The small decorative balconies/deck 3'8" x 7'10" will only allow 2 chairs, a very small table, small grill for 2-3 people - more of a design value than a functional value. E. List the names and mailing addresses of the record owners of all property located within 300 feet of the exterior limits of the property involved in this appeal: NAME ADDRESS See Attached .Exhbit "C" 'f"'. , ,,") o :~Eo ~::;> =:,"'¡ '..-..-' c::~:) .... I ,''', =n Cì' ::.'1 (, ~:<~ F~--~; Ul '- -n -þ.,;.". \ T1 I -, !..j ~¿:~ ~/'" :¡:; (.;.) rn O't -5- NOTE: Conditions. In permitting a special exception, the Board may Impose appropriate conditions and safeguards, including but not limited to planting screens, fencing, construction commencement and completion deadlines, lighting, operational controls, Improved traffic circulation requirements, highway access restrictions, Increased minimum yard requirements, parking requirements, limitations on the duration of a use or ownership or any other requirement which the Board deems appropriate under the circumstances upon a finding that the conditions are necessary to fulfill the purpose and Intent of the Zoning Chapter. (Section 14-6W-2B3, City Code). Orders. Unless otherwise determined by the Board, all orders of the Board shall expire six (6) months from the date the written decision Is flied with the City Clerk, unless the applicant shall have taken action within the six (6) month period to establish the use or construct the building permitted under the terms of the Board's decision, such as by obtaining a building permit and proceeding to completion in accordance with the terms of the permit. Upon written request, and for good cause shown, the Board may extend the expiration date of any order without further public hearing on the merits of the original appeal or application. (Section 14-6W-3E, City Code). Petition for writ of certiorari. Any person or persons, jointly or severally, aggrieved by any decision of the Board under the provisions of the Zoning Chapter, or any taxpayer or any officer, department or board of the City may present to a court of record a petition for writ of certiorari duly verified, setting forth that such decision is illegal, in whole or in part, and specifying the grounds of the illegality. (Section 14-6W-7, City Code). Such petition shall be presented to the court within thirty (30) days after the filing of the decision In the office of the City Clerk. Date: 7) 15C- J ~ Date: ,20 . Slgnature(s) of Property Owner(s) If Different than Appllcant(s) ppdadmin\appboase.doc -T1 UI v ,-n ; I i :~-"''''''.~ \,-.~ w C'1 0'\ EXHIBIT "B" REASONS FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION 1. Will rejuvenate the viability of Fairchild Street. 2. Will improve the lifestyle and desirability of the Fairchild Street neighborhood which has been declining in the past 5 years. 3. Will make Fairchild Street more pleasing and friendly to live on. 4. Will create a new acceptance to live in the Fairchild Street area. 5. Will help take away the stereotype (look alike syndrome) of the areas of Fairchild Street. 6. Will help the buildings become more attractive in the Fairchild Street areas. 7. Will create a new face and acceptance of Fairchild Street area. 8. Will be very helpful in architectural designing of the exteriors of the buildings on Fairchild Street. 9. Will be major influence in bringing the Fairchild Street area buildings up to date inside and out. James Clark '. , U1 -0 -e' » U1 G'\ 0) -.-, I I :,-n .·-1 . . I~~",,' CLARK SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPLICATION ATTACHMENT Information Provided by Applicant C. The Board's review in this matter should focus upon the improvement to the structure and the neighborhood by the proposed special exception. Each property affected was built in the early to mid 1980's and is of similar, if not identical, architecture. The Applicant proposes to add what are primarily decorative balconies to the dwelling units in the front of the structure. These will be approximately 3~ feet in depth which will allow occupants of the dwelling units to step onto them for fresh air, but will be too shallow for group gatherings. The balconies/decks would be clad in metal and would allow for grilling on the deck and clear the clutter of grills from the front yard of the property. The cosmetic effect will be to make attracti ve and to add some relief to buildings. the the buildings more fronts of the The area in which these structures are situated has been developed within the past two decades for multi-family residential housing and the addition of these balconies/decks has virtually no impact upon infrastructure, property use, or public services in the area. 0.1. The proposed special exception will enhance, rather than be a detriment to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. The addition of the balconies will allow occupants of the dwelling units additional access to fresh air and will provide an emergency egress in the event of fire or other casualty. The streets in front of the properties will be more visible from the dwelling units due to enlargement of the opening from window size to deck door size. This should provide an additional feeling of safety and connectedness to persons on the street, particularly at night. The special exception should add to the health, safety, and comfort of both occupants of the building and other persons in the area. 0.6. As previously noted, the reason for the special exception is to allow small balconies to be added to the front of the building. There is no enlargement of the habitable area of the structure or impact on land use. The proposed aq9itioª~of balconies/decks complies with all current zoning an~~ilaâng codes, except for the front yard set back. ~;~) () -'<. =~ C) U) \ \Server\shared\WPDOCS\REALEST\Clark\Special Exception\Application Attachment 2 121:5«4r";\,ipd ri j \, --",... --n ""¡-'¡ i I S~5~ ~ ..J> (...) CJ1 C1'\ '-0 I..î.) <") 0... t.r:> LL '1 J . : "r--r-;") 2Ji '. <J A I \ I ¡ i ï I t'J'O} I :-:."":-' J..;;..... -1 'j ¡ ¡ I '0 ! I '~I I «) j ~," 1 I~ i j ! ,- ,(¡ 1-04 \ i ¡ .. I r-----T----- I -9. i I : I I it· 1- L...- h - ~1 '1 I ". , i 1\ I I I ¡ ,) '2~ ¡-t2 r- " u l {-J. "/ :. . ¡.- ,oj , , '1 ~, j- W '1 - '2 ':r I '" I, I , ~ PI· l{) , .......... '1'-" j I .' '. I ." I.. I. ,. I \ l,q '="": .........--~.... .---- h-t:,t " , /. 'ì.x.~~> -; c~' At:. tz.c~:::\ _ ':'¡ ," :::.,' i~'r ..:. Z:;... t;~ ~__~Q ß" .Jr:}O\ ~.' ....~-... .,,;·,,---......".0.-. ..~ -~.- .~"...., ",!.,~ " 'l- I ,'. .~ < r- /'~ :z ~j /"\ .J 'J UJ ,-I -..... ...J -L ~:'J- (. ~'. z· (L ,11 ¡>_ 0, ?t c- ", .. ....... f, \ -1' !O <. <i. I ~ -." \~ ·~l 1- 0' . -L' ÇL. . ,: Ll_ \.D l!') Cry I · , . , . . · . · , , . · . . · . 0 i== 1;'MtC · . . · , · , , . . I-' -~ · . h ( H ' , · . . ~I ~ ~ ~I - II ~ =~I mB · . . · . · . , , . '#:f¡ Illiill EE§ I I · , , . . · , , , . J ' , , ~ ~ fêI 81 ~ tt3 ~ Ô HHH ,.,., HHH ~ D p""i h ~ H H \=1 I-' I-' h H D D D I H * j ::..J -. ;:;;¡ · ' ~I ~ ~ BI ~ ~ I-' I-' U 1M I ~ ~ ~EE§ I .u...u...\ ' iffii 1-11-1 LJ IIU III 1-1 ~ ....,- ... .. i u ï <0 .. U"I N 3"': -(I) I- <Q >-l UJJ: Œ~ 1-< ZLL ~t:: LLU"I I I I I I I I I I , -;.:: gro, C)o: ZW1 >, 80.. -oJ crw ~ 0.. I- :J 0.. < m<o o cr-l « o~ "ZU Q::<W 01- 0.. O(J)(f) o , ......;(\ Z I' 0'1 Q:: , I IA.. I I z o 3: f!:; o~ .1- Z3: ooJ: <>- ::!§ODU «OOZ !t:a:::OO< >-3:3:3:u.. Ô"';NI'1..t U I I I I -oJ I I I , < 1'1 I m I I I , (J) W I-() "wo i:o (/)1-< x -oJwoaJ ~oca:::01C: 3:~;::!i-u ClO<a:::O zuQ::l-cr Z"';NI'1'<f <' II , I I- I I I I W, , I I 0:: , , I I I I I I ili I W I Q. I >- I ... i' ..J I , I <D ,0:: æt;~~ WOOCI- I-(ijl-O < " ::L"';(\J(Y) (f) D~ t;zo:: -!~o ~oo ~(ijo ...;C\.Í(TÌ I I I I I I If : : : o I I I -oJ I I I o I I I U I , I (f)(f) ({ZOC z::EW "::E:JD (/):J-!z I--!o< 5ouJ: Q.u-!-! o..OWW :JOWW (/)01-1- >-3:(f)(f) Š.-<C\.Í¡r) U I , I ..J 1 I , < II I m I I I STAFF REPORT To: Board of Adjustment Prepared by: Robert Miklo Item: EXC04-00032, 333 Church Street Date: January 12, 2005 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: James A. Clark 414 E. Market Street Iowa City, IA 52245 Contact Person: same as above Phone: 319-338-8391 Requested Action: Reduction of required front yard setback from 12'2" to 8'8". Purpose: To allow an addition of balconies and entrance porches Location: 333 Church Street Existing Land Use and Zoning: Multi-family residential, RNC-12 Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Residential, RNC-12 South: Residential, RNC-12 East: Residential, RNC-12 West: Residential, RNC-12 Applicable Zoning Code sections: 14-6D-2E-4a (minimum front yards in RNC-12) 14-6Q-4B (special exceptions possible) 14-6W-2B (spec. exception review standards) Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for residential development at 8-16 dwelling units per acre. File Date: December 15, 2004 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This building was built in 1978 when this area was zoned R3-A, Multi-Family Residential Zone. As part of a city-wide rezoning in 1983 the area was rezoned to the Low Density Multi-Family (RM-12) zone. In 1992 the area was rezoned to Neighborhood Conservation (RNC-12) zone. The intent of the RNC-12 zone is preserve older neighborhoods that have a predominately single-family appearance. New multi-family buildings are not permitted unless the property contains multi-family buildings that were conforming to the previous zone. 2 The applicant is proposing to remodel the façade of this building. His plans call for the addition of balconies, two small entry porches and changes to the roofline to eliminate the mansard roof. The building is located 12 feet 2 inches from the front property line. The normally required setback in the RNC-12 zone is 20 feet. However, because other buildings within this block are located closer than 20 feet to the property line, the applicant was able to make use of set back averaging provision of the zoning ordinance to erect the building closer to the street. The Applicant is now seeking a further reduction of 3 feet 6 inches to allow the installation of the balconies and entrance porches. The resulting front yard would be 8 feet 8 inches. ANAL YSIS: The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare, to conserve and protect the value of property throughout the city, and to encourage the most appropriate use of land. It is the intent of the Ordinance to permit the full use and enjoyment of property in a manner that does not intrude upon adjacent property. The Board may grant relief from the requirements of the Zoning Chapter through a special exception if the action is considered to serve the public interest and is consistent with the intent of the Zoning Chapter. Specific Standards: 14-6Q-4-B, Exceptions to Established Setbacks Subsection 6Q-4-B of the Zoning Chapter states that a special exception may be granted by the Board of Adjustment modifying yard requirements when the owner or lawful occupant of property demonstrates that such person's situation is peculiar to the property in question, that there is a practical difficulty in complying with the dimensional requirements of the Chapter, and that the conditions of Article W of the Zoning Chapter (Board of Adjustment Powers and Procedures) can be met. Peculiar Situation: This property is somewhat peculiar in that it is a fairly large apartment building located within a block of buildings that were originally built as single-family homes. Although some of the other buildings in this vicinity have been converted to apartments, they still maintain the outward appearance of single-family dwellings. There are also several single-family homes in this neighborhood. The applicant's proposed remodeling will help provide more architectural articulation and thus break up the mass of the building to make it more compatible in appearance with the existing buildings in the neighborhood. Practical Difficulty: If the requested special exception is not granted, the applicant could leave the building as it is; however, the Comprehensive Plan does encourage the redesign of the facades of mansard roof-type apartment buildings such as this. Specifically, the Preservation Plan (page 85) states "For the long term, work toward finding a means of improving the appearances and compatibility of the designs of the numerous "mansard-plexes" in the North Side. These buildings are not likely to be razed and replaced until well into the 21st century and there may be a creative design solution to reduce their negative impact on the balance of the streets." Although the building could continue to exist "as-is" without this special exception, it does appear that the special exception would make the building more usable and more aesthetically pleasing in relation to the smaller scale buildings within this neighborhood. Staff has made some suggestions to the applicant regarding the elevation drawings. We have recommended that he not cover portions of the brick on the first and second floors with vinyl siding. He has agreed to revise the elevation drawings to remove the siding adjacent to the entry doors and plans to submit revised drawings. General Standards for the Granting of a Special Exception: In addition to determining whether the situation is unique and if there is a practical difficulty in complying with the Zoning Ordinance, the Board must find that the applicant meets several standards spelled out in chapter 14-6W-2B. The applicant's statements regarding each of the seven general standards are included within the attached application, and Staff's findings are below. 3 A. The specific exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Staff finds that the proposed exception will have limited effects on public health, safety, comfort and welfare. The additions are small (approximately 64 square feet in area - total). They will be open rather than enclosed and therefore should have minimal effect on visibility and the open appearance of the front yard. B. The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The additions will help to make the design of this large building more compatible with its smaller scale neighbors. The additions will not directly affect use or enjoyment of neighboring properties. Staff does not feel that the proposed alteration will substantially affect the neighborhood. C. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located. The surrounding properties are currently developed. Many buildings in the adjacent blocks are located closer to the street than the proposed additions to this building. Staff finds that neighboring properties should not be negatively affected. D. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. The proposed exception will not increase the population density or affect the use of municipal facilities. E. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. Adequate facilities exist to serve the addition and no change in the ingress or egress is proposed. F. Except for the specific regulation and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific proposed exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is to be located. With the exception of the front yard setback, this property conforms to the other requirements of the RNC-12 zone. G. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, as amended. Staff finds that the exception and renovation conforms to the City's Comprehensive Plan, specifically the Preservation Plan, which encourages the remodeling of buildings such as this to make them more compatible with the historic building stock in the surrounding neighborhoods. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that EXC04-00032, an application for a special exception to reduce the required front yard from 12.2 feet to 8.6 feet in the areas indicated on the site plan for additions to the an existing building in the Neighborhood Conservation (RNC-12) zone located at 333 Church Street, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plans submitted with the application revised elevation drawings. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Application Documents Approved by: Karin Franklin, Director Department of Planning and Community Development ~ ~ t3 ~ ~ ~ ~ t3 I 1 L 1 " --- L --r ïiiiiIiiii jjiIIIiiij ~I - lS NJ(jn8 Nìf^ I- Ul Ul o ~ <C ZL o ex:: T 1 lS 1(jJ8ll~ ~ --- liT I -.... 11) L 1- ~1 .-- r---1.-'- lS NNll I ~ r- f-- ~ I I - - - I I I 1 ~I- Ul I U L ex:: IP~ l T - I ~= ~ I ~ o Ü >< w Q) ----- Uc.::OI-- CJ c.:: 0 ~CJ--c.::- ~ ¿ (U ... --..L.. v ~ -C:: n , CD -+-...., 'U "-- "-- ~ CJ () "-- ::J <~cX - LI [[= 5ti 6JJ~- ----' .... - --- W-~0l lO= ~o ~~ II" r ~ L ~~ I ~~ I ~ .....~ - I-- f--1 I--- ~---L- 1- I I ~ ~ - LI IT I +-" i- CJ) .c u - :J .c Ü W C") C") C") - - o - T I_I U ~ ¡-~ I~ .. Z o ÞOOOOOC ~ U o ~ ~ ~ ÞOOOOOC en 0> C -- Q.. Q.. co ~ ~ -- ü co ~ o - '+- o ~ +-' -- Ü ~~ I¡ ~'ë ð I~ ;c ., oj 2J J~ ~ fa " " ...- Q) ãš o tn -" APPEAL TO THE EÞCaY--\-œø3'P BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT -X-C.oDí phot-o SPECIAL EXCEPTION -tD TCQ onl¡ TITLE 14, CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE W PROPERTY PARCEL NO. See Attached Exhibit "A" DATE: 12/15/04 APPEAL PROPERTY ADDRESS: 333 E. Church Street APPEAL PROPERTY ZONE: APPEAL PROPERTY LOT SIZE: APPLICANT: Name: James A. Clark Address: 414 E. Market St., Iowa City, IA Phone: 319-338-8391 or 319-631-1869 CONTACT PERSON: Name: James A. Clark Address: 414 E. Market St., Iowa City, IA ~( :'~> ::' Phone: 319-338-8391 or 319-631-1869 C~) - ~~___j .r ' - .' ,-, - " " i --- "- '-...../ - PROPERTY OWNER:Name: James and Loretta Clark :=~; ./ ....- » Address: 414 E. Market St., Iowa City, IA Phone: 319-338-8391 or 319-631-1869 Specific Requested Special Exception; Applicable Section(s) of the Zoning Chapter: 14-6V-3-E Reduction Front Yard C--J ¡ .; -T'1,," \.. ." ~ I en 1'-rl {.....) L'l c- Purpose for special exception: To allow small decorative balconies/deck (316" x 7110") to remove mansard look by redesigning building facade Date of previous application or appeal filed, if any: :M:inor Modification filed -2- INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANT: A. Leaal description of property: See Attached Exhibit "A" B. *Plot plan drawn to scale showing: 1. Lot with dimensions; 2. North point and scale; 3. Existing and proposed structures with distances from property lines; 4. Abutting streets and alleys; 5. Surrounding land uses, including the location and record owner of each property opposite or abutting the property in question; 6. Parking spaces and trees - existing and proposed. rSubmission of an 82" x 11" bold print plot plan is preferred.] C. Review. The Board shall review all applicable evidence regarding the site, existing and proposed structures, neighboring uses, parking areas, driveway locations, highway and street access, traffic generation and circulation, drainage, sanitary sewer and water systems, the operation of the specific proposed exception and such other evidence as deemed appropriate. (Section 14-6W-2B1, City Code). In the space provided below or on an attached sheet, a,ddress the areas of Board review which apply to the requested special exception. In this narrative statement, set forth the grounds offered as support for the special exception. Building has an average set back of the houses on both side. Set back now 12'2". Remaining houses to the Block to the East and West have much smaller setbacks. Granting of a special exception will have no impact upon neighboring uses, pa~king areas, driveway locations, highway and street access, traffic aeneration and circulation, drainaae, sanitary sewer and water systems. S~e Application Attachment D. The applicant is required to present specific information, not just opinions, that the çweneral standards for the çwrantinçw of a special exception (Section 14-6W-2B2, City Code), enumerated below, will be met: 1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or ~anger~~he public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare';2: C) 0"'"" See 14-6Q-3-K - These three balconies are above each other, tþ~~~or~ --11 .", ,".". en . '. ~,. -'.. -0 ..~,._-, "'-.J are interpreted as being covered therefore not allowed in r~~~d ~> » U1 .¡:- front yard. See attached Exhibit "B" for additional infonnation. See also Application Attachment. -3- 2. The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish and impair property values In the neighborhood. The 12'2" set back is an average set back - many of the houses in the block to the East and West have much less than a 1212" set back See attached Exhibit "B" for additional information. 3. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property Is located. Church Street is an 80' right of way and is totally developed See attached Exhibit "B" for additional information. The effect will be primarily visual and should not impact development of neighboring properties. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. ~ All existing infrastructure is in place and the special exception will not require changes. 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. Will not effect traffic on public streets. r-,.) 9 "'~.;;¡o. ,..--, .....:.- ..... .' -.,;0. ~_.- ... -', c~ C"¡ -~,,.-.L-1 I f Ul -0 ¡-rì ---."~ w (J"I .t:'" -4- 6. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific proposed exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone In which it Is to be located. [Depending on the type of exception requested, certain specific conditions may need to be met. The applicant will demonstrate compliance with the specific conditions required for a particular use, as provided in City Code Section 14-6L-1, Special Exception Enumerated Requirements; Section 14-6N-1, Off-Street Parking Requirements; Section 14-6Q, Dimensional Requirements, or Section 14-6R, Tree Regulations, as appropriate.] No change in parking, tree, dimensional requirements - the small decorative balconies/decks 3'8" x 7'10"allow emergency fire exit, provide a more friendly and pleasing appearance - change the archltectural lOOK or the buliðlng facade. Improve safety of street (visibility) at night. The addition of the balconies/ decks should add to the health, safety and comfort of bOth the occupants of the building and persons 1i ving and walking in and to the area. The balconies/ decks will help revitalize and improve the general looks of the bUlldlng. See Application Attachment. 7. The proposed use will be consistent with the short-range Comprehensive Plan of the City. The small decorative balconies/deck 3'8" x 7'10" will only allow 2 chairs, a very small table, small grill for 2-3 people - more of a design value than a functional value. E. List the names and mailing addresses of the record owners of all property located within 300 feet of the exterior limits of the property involved in this appeal: NAME ADDRESS See Attached Exhibit "C" '"-" .~~: ',;: ¡. t;::~ C.J :2: C) :'~:'~~ =-! (~'"'''\ _.".~ "':'~~j t'--- [--"f -Tl I , ~ ~, .--' U1 -ry ,'Tì -é:. ¡d\ ~;~ );-: '_..-~ '''./ w rn &"* -5- NOTE: Conditions. In permitting a special exception, the Board may impose appropriate conditions and safeguards, Including but not limited to planting screens, fencing, construction commencement and completion deadlines, lighting, operational controls, Improved traffic circulation requirements, highway access restrictions,' increased minimum yard requirements, parking requirements, limitations on the duration of a use or ownership or any other requirement which the Board deems appropriate under the circumstances upon a finding that the conditions are necessary to fulfill the purpose and intent of the Zoning Chapter. (Section 14-6W-2B3, City Code). Orders. Unless otherwise determined by the Board, all orders of the Board shall expire six (6) months from the date the written decision is flied with the City Clerk, unless the applicant shall have taken action within the six (6) month period to establish the use or construct the building permitted under the terms of the Board's decision, such as by obtaining a building permit and proceeding to completion in accordance with the terms of the permit. Upon written request, and for good cause shown, the Board may extend the expiration date of any order without further public hearing on the merits of the original appeal or application. (Section 14-6W-3E, City Code). Petition for writ of certiorari. Any person or persons, jointly or severally, aggrieved by any decision of the Board under the provisions of the Zoning Chapter, or any taxpayer or any officer, department or board of the City may present to a court of record a petition for writ of certiorari duly verified, setting forth that such decision is illegal, in whole or in part, and specifying the grounds of the Illegality. (Section 14-6W-7, City Code). Such petition shall be presented to the court within thirty (30) days after the filing of the decision in the office he City Clerk. Date: DG?c /5' ,20td.!( Signature(s) of Applicant(s) Date: ,20_, Signature(s) of Property Owner(s) if Different than Applicant(s) ppdadmin\appboase.doc ë5 ~~ CJ r' ~" , -' JJ c.n ',.,"-',...,,-... : i ¡ W C/1 .;;:- EXHIBIT "A" 333 E. Church Street Legal Description: Commencing at the northeast corner of Lot 1 in Block 55 in Iowa City, Iowa, according to the recorded plat thereof, thence south 80 feet, thence west 46 feet, thence South 70 feet to the north line of the alley, thence west along the alley 34 feet to the southwest corner of said Lot 1, thence north 150 feet, thence east 80 feet to the place of beginning. Also the east 30 feet of the north 104 feet of Lot 2, and the south 46 feet of said Lot 2, in Block 55, in Iowa City, Iowa, according to the recorded plat thereof, subject to a right for ingress and egress over the following portions thereof: Commencing at the northeast corner fo Lot 1, in Block 55, in Iowa City, Iowa, according to the recorded plat thereof, thence south 80 feet, thence west 46 feet, thence south 70 feet to the north line of the alley, thence west 82 feet 4 inches to the point of beginning, thence north 46 feet, thence west 22 feet, thence south 46 feet, thence east 22 feet to the point of beginning. Tax Parcel No: 10-10-14-0001 North: Natonya R. Walker Jeffrey S. and Carol A. Edberg Molly R. Ramer Tina M. and Larry R. Woodsmall Abutting and Opposite Owners: -n,' 1i..... ( ") U1 South: Robin L. Davisson Douglas B. Critser and Lisa C. Koizumi Miller and Hawkins Roy E. Reynolds and Marcy E. Rosenbaum G.) cn ..¡;;- East: Bruce A. and Lisa D. Brechtel Jay and Holly Tapper Steven L. Droll and James L. Brenneman West: James A. and Loretta C. Clark Catherine A. Schneider EXHIBIT "B" REASONS FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION 1. Will rejuvenate the viability of E. Church Street. 2. Will improve the lifestyle and desirability of the E. Church Street neighborhood whréh,í ~ been declining in the past 5 years. 3. Will make E. Church Street more pleasing and friendly to live on. 4. Will create a new acceptance to live in the E. Church Street area. 5. Will help take away the stereotype (look alike syndrome) of the areas ofE. Church Street. 6. Will help the buildings become more attractive in the E. Church Street areas. 7. Will create a new face and acceptance ofE. Church Street area. 8. Will be very helpful in architectural designing of the exteriors of the buildings on E. Church Street. 9. Will be major influence in bringing the E. Church Street area buildings up to date inside and out. James Clark .... -T1 <-"'''-~.J en (,,:¡ en ,¡:- CLARK SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPLICATION ATTACHMENT Information Provided by Applicant C. The Board's review in this matter should focus upon the improvement to the structure and the neighborhood by the proposed special exception. Each property affected was built in the early to mid 1980's and is of similar, if not identical, architecture. The Applicant proposes to add what are primarily decorative balconies to the dwelling units in the front of the structure. These will be approximately 3~ feet in depth which will allow occupants of the dwelling units to step onto them for fresh air, but will be too shallow for group gatherings. The balconies/decks would be clad in metal and would allow for grilling on the deck and clear the clutter of grills from the front yard of the property. The cosmetic effect will be to make attractive and to add some relief to buildings. the the buildings more fronts of the The area in which these structures are situated has been developed within the past two decades for multi-family residential housing and the addition of these balconies/decks has virtually no impact upon infrastructure, property use, or public services in the area. 0.1. The proposed special exception will enhance, rather than be a detriment to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. The addition of the balconies will allow occupants of the dwelling units additional access to fresh air and will provide an emergency egress in the event of fire or other casualty. The streets in front of the properties will be more visible from the dwelling units due to enlargement of the opening from window size to deck door size. This should provide an additional feeling of safety and connectedness to persons on the street, particularly at night. The special exception should add to the health, safety, and comfort of both occupants of the building and other persons in the area. 0.6. As previously noted, the reason for the special exception is to allow small balconies to be added to the front of the building. There is no enlargement of the habitable area of the structure or impact on land use. The proposed additi~;of balconies/decks complies with all current zoning anE2b~il~ing codes, except for the front yard set back. ::;~) 0<~ C-) il c) -<: ~":1C'\ UI 12~~D~;:~Pd :!2 o :::,¿ -w.. ~;;:/"" W 5> j-'-- : \\Server\shared\WPDOCS\REALEST\Clark\Special Exception\Application Attachment 2 iT] , , . ~.,,~-} ¡,-.j (,,'1 UI -..,~ -f ~ f .J; r':¡";: ) ~ v u , (\'\ ~\\ t-i'' lL '" l(") U') M """'":- ....,.:- "- lJ") (-, L'J C::J !~ -"\ '--.' "'...~ .....<,.. <::;: o tJ ¡.-: rJ) :I: ZV 2~ t-:I: <v i:üu.i ..J w":x: 1")- "'1")1 %,\0 <>1") v œl")I/l U.r?N '- Î I I I I I I . t .! I ~>-I ~aI, - 1 0°1 ZW, ->. 9~w - 0.... ~ 9:ti o 1r..J « 0- NZü õ<w 01-& O(f) . ..;'" t- ~ a: I&. z o 3 ~ c- ..... ~~ Cl)J: >- ;::!goouz «00 1ra::00< ~~~IL ~""C\Ìcrì"¡ o 'I U II ..J I I ~ I' (f) !!:! 1-. -woå:l UlI-<X ..JwOID ~a::a::o)¿ 3:~d¡"'u ~8~~~ Z~Nrri-q: ;: I I I I ... I I I I W I I I I IX I I I I I I I I . I I I I I I ù) I I I æ I I: >- I I I I- I i I ..J I I I <eI ,a:: ii~!;~ WO a:: I- t-ûjl-O < .. :C...(\{'I) U) ell:) ~za:: ö:!ãg ~(j)o ...N(f) I I I I I I ó! I I I o I I I ..J I I I o I I I U III (f)(f) (f)za:: z:CW ":¡::::JeI !J)ï35~ OU!: u..J..J OWW Ulo~~ ~(f)(f) ?i 'Nrr> 0- U'II ..J I I I < I I I ID I I I STAFF REPORT To: Board of Adjustment Prepared by: John Yapp Item: EXC04-00033 1905 Broadway Street Date: January 12, 2005 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Southgate Companies PO Box 1907 Iowa City, IA 52244 Contact Person: Glenn Siders Phone: 337-4195 Requested Action: Reduction of required front yard setback from 20 feet to 9.5 feet for property in the CC-2, Community Commercial zone. Purpose: To allow for the addition of support columns for a glass canopy proposed to be attached to an existing building. Location: 1905 Broadway Street, north side of Pepperwood Plaza Property Size: Property size: 61,927 sq. ft. Existing Land Use and Zoning: Commercial; CC-2 Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Highway 6 South: Commercial; CC-2 East: Commercial; CC-2 West: Commercial; CC-2 Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as commercial. Applicable Code Requirements: 14-6E-5E(4a), minimum front yard in the CC-2 zone 14-60-4B. exceptions to established setbacks 14-6W-2B, general standards for special exceptions File date: December 16, 2004 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The applicant is requesting a special exception for a front yard reduction to allow support columns for a building canopy to be placed within 9.5 feet of public right-of-way. The proposed building canopy is part of façade improvements to the structure at 1905 Broadway, and part of 2 the overall improvements being made in the Pepperwood Plaza commercial area. These site improvements are part of the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District requirements, which were established for Pepperwood Plaza in 2003. The City's Design Review staff have approved the design of the overall improvements, and have encouraged Southgate to pursue the canopy/support column design for the 1905 Broadway Street structure. ANAL YSIS: The purpose of the Zoning Chapter is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare to conserve and protect the value of the property throughout the City, and to encourage the most appropriate use of land. It is the intent of the Chapter to permit the full enjoyment of property in a manner that does not intrude upon adjacent properties. The Board of Adjustment may grant relief from the requirements of the Zoning Chapter through special exceptions if the action is found to be in accordance with the regulations found in 14-6L-10, pertaining to religious institutions in the RS-5 zone, and the general standards for special exceptions as set forth in Section 14-6W-2B. Specific Standards: 14-6Q-4B Exceptions to Established Setbacks Section 14-6Q-4B of the Zoning Chapter states that a special exception may be granted by the Board of Adjustment to modify yard requirements when the owner of the property demonstrates that the situation is peculiar to the property in question, there is practical difficulty in complying with the dimensional requirements of the chapter, and that the general standards for special exceptions are met. The applicant has noted several ways in which this is a peculiar situation. While this building is set back 20 feet from the Hollywood Boulevard right-of-way, the street pavement at this location has been removed and the right-of-way is occupied by a public trail and landscaping. Normally building setbacks are required to maintain a sense of openness, visibility, and adequate area for utilities and other site improvements between the structure and the street. In this case, however, the street has been removed. The applicant makes the point that the property to the east has incorporated part of the vacated Hollywood Boulevard into their property, and paving on the adjacent site extends to the old right- of-way line. This has the effect of the site at 1905 Broadway Street appearing to be set back farther than the adjacent site, due to differences in where the setback is measured. The fact that the street paving for Hollywood Boulevard has been removed, and the adjacent segment of right-of-way has been vacated, contributes to this being a peculiar situation. Other site improvements shown on the applicant's site plan, including the sidewalk connection to the Highway 6 Trail, and the parking lot landscaping, are part of the site plan evaluated and approved as part of the Tax Increment Financing District requirements. General Standards: 14-4B-4B, Special Exception Review Requirements The applicant's statements regarding each of the seven general standards are included within the attached application. Staff comments are listed below, and correspond to the standards as listed in the zoning ordinance. a. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. In this case, encroaching into the front yard setback with canopy support columns will not endanger the public health or safety. The U:\special exceptions\1905 Broadway.doc 3 columns will be set back approximately 50 feet from the Highway 6 Trail, and approximately 100 feet from the Highway 6 pavement. They will not interfere with visibility for users of the trail or the highway. b. The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The improvements to the façade, along with the other site improvements and investments being made to Pepperwood Plaza, should increase the property value. c. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located. The proposed improvement will not impede development on adjacent properties. d. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. All are existing. e. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. No additional changes to ingress or egress are being proposed. f. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific proposed exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is to be located. The changes proposed for this building have been reviewed by the City Design Review Committee. g. The proposed use will be consistent with the short-range Comprehensive Plan of the City. The South District Plan identifies this area as commercial. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that EXC04-00033, a special exception for a front yard reduction to allow support columns for a building canopy to be placed within 9.5 feet of public right-of-way for the structure in the CC-2 zone at 1905 Broadway Street, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plan dated December 16, 2004. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location map 2. Special Exception application Approved by: ~ ~Åí Robert Miklo, Senior Planner, Department of Planning and Community Development U:\special exceptions\1905 Broadway.doc - II I - r 1~ ~,~~ >--- := f-t:j (:::.'- ~~~~ ~ =J=="~- ~ ~~~~ r~-~ '- ~ -~I--- T:] --.r-- d'-'--" _ ___ 5 ) - 'j ;-:;¡¡ 8=1. - L.--1 1-- -= '=jcb _¡¡~ I >--:: 1<: ~ t?1ž§ ~ - ,.D I- 0 f-UJ - 'J / ~ $ ê3 f-- ~ tf..- 0 -æ -I--- JJ};J h 0 '- '- ~'-- ~ -'--" .~ ~ I-- ê I -'- gl-4'""= I I I = I l I 51---J I í ... f I ~ \ .. / 0- -, '--- L T tJO I.:lOtJ::JN\l8 I 'yl( _ ~>- , - I I T T ï\ n--rr- !I r----i g I I I III, l r---) ~v I.. I I ~ I T ~ >- 'I IS S"va .J~I " ;:; ~ -¡;¡ .' _ i " 1 I - ~ &::; ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ § t; ~..;.o 1 I.. I I I ~ I ~ JIIIIIIJJ7 is w ' :- ~ S2 J:ITITJIJ ~~ t /rX. ~ ~ 1~lliIIII7 C"" \lMO\lOtJ8 ~~V ~ =. 1--, ~~~ ~ i v, ~ ,. 7 I r -- l.--- }-- i-- () L..J Q! Q "< ~ I C\I o o 1--- NA ,.. ::E I.~ - == = ~ ;:;:~'" '" ~ 0:: « II !~~gl 1-->-_ ,,""I;{I--- I- i')j - - ~\...~ I-- ~ ...,....J 6.V- '=~~~ -~\( - rIfT' ,~ó~ _I-- L--< _ _ t--.. .-- - '-- u Ílì-r- I & & "< [< ~ ,.... ~ /- I -. 1 I A / illPT 1--.-- IS >In>103>1 0 III - f1L- o \ I -~ « N - -- ~ (f) (f) o 0:: U It- - f- ~~ ~- ~ «I--- 1:£ '::::~ - Cf) Cf) o o o I ~ o Ü >< w " +-" (f) ~ ~ "'0 ctS o "- CD LO o 0') or- ž o Þ-4 ~ U o ~ ~ f-I Þ-4 rJ':J z< aI- l-- o...ea llJ~ ~llJ llJ ~ ~ ¡..:: ~ ¡....:-~ 00\.!ì0 ~tñ~~ ~:JDa -< ~O Dei gea \D~ cr- CD I ~ , ¡ i ¡ i ~ ~ #])1...,.... i'.. "..... ,,~] ~~ i . I." ~~ I : . ~C) '-- - .. \.!ì !zllJ <~ 00... ä:~ ~0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ¡..::~~ Lclzo I-~~ Gci~ OC<ei <0llJ I~ ~0 ~~ I ~ (~-- -", ¡:: \I ¡=-: LJ ~o '6 AM 11: 51 ~;;::;>__ 'ì'ÙOI,Ot.I, I ~':-:/' c ~ < ,/ ...\ i . ^ ..... " ''''''- IO~~ \~\T( lOW" ,ø~ // ø <;/C/' /~ ~:!f!I" \ ...-:::; ..~\\ I~ )( Ii ~~ I! ! ~ AIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~ ,",11111 1I111 1III1 IliA Pc..D e:.'tt: 04'" ööö ~~ APPEAL TO THÉ BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SPECIAL EXCEPTION TITLE 14, CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE W DATE:'\:)E.c.e.",~t:.. \'\. z.~ PROPERTY PARCEL NO.~~" \ C>2.z. \0 \0 \S' APPEAL PROPERTY ADDRESS: l O¡ C 5' t) e.oA~A "( Sor. APPEAL PROPERTY ZONE: ~ ¿ z... APPEAL PROPERTY LOT SIZE: ~ I, Q,2ï S~ ,:r. APPLICANT: Name: SOL.-t..,-~.....-re.. (> ~ ~,,~ c.... Address:~ 0 It.Ð-. \C\O"1.. ,r~ ~ . S'2'%'I&4 -1,\01 Phone: ~ ~ ï - 4 \ '\$'" Cì ~º Phone: ~3Î . If I qS- \<1D' ~~ saz....&4 - 'ìO~ 'iì \. ¡ CONTACT PERSON: Name: Gr Lê ~ S.%. be¡. IE- CEa. .,- Address: ~O ~D~ X:õ'» .......:;d¡,.., :'T1 -'I ',-J - eft o PROPERTY OWNER: Name: Address:"?O ~ \ C\ 0 \ c::t::~ t!..:r::r-t iÞZUot 14 - ,t1 0' Phone: 3 ~, - '{ \~$ Specific Requested Special Exception; Applicable Section(s) of the Zoning Chapter: Ke~_ ..r~t1I.H' 'i~t.D S.-rS"C.K -a-6a&A.œEMBJrltr' 7fJ· 41 0"'" L.E.-$-t!.~...':\ ,. S r 'J Purpose for special exception: ""'-0 ~"""ó04.1 Pt>r::. $uPI-cJe..T ~I.U.M¡.J~ roc. ~..e.tÐtIo{ ø; þ~~ iÙ>. Date of previous application or appeal filed, If any: j Q t2.1i &.t.J" Ð&A. '5. A PÞLJ,G.4~5Þ -2- -' INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANT: A. Leaal descrlDtlon of property: ~oT~ I $"IJJÓb(. t- 'B&.øc.~ f '6 te4)£ 2.M~ -.,) Ú·1o.>'r'& ~ Q, r--:> ,~>",.".:J ~ ~. t:1 en c"') - -r\ - r"--- 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Lot with dimensions; F) North point and scale; Z Existing and proposed structures with distances from property 1i1Ìiš; Abutting streets and alleys; Surrounding land uses, Including the location and record owner of each property opposite or abutting the property In question; Parking spaces and trees - existing and proposed. .,.....- ::D~ ,'-¡ì , \ r-' ',j B. *Plot Dlan drawn to scale showing: (J' - - ., <J1 c> 6. rSubmlsslon of an 82" x 11" bold print plot plan Is preferred.] C. Review. The Board shall review all applicable evidence regarding the site, existing and proposed structures, neighboring uses, parking areas, driveway locations, highway and street access, traffic generation and circulation, drainage, sanitary sewer and water systems, the operation of the specific proposed exception and such other evidence as deemed appropriate. (Section 14-6W-2B1, City Code). In the space provided below or on an attached sheet, address the areas of Board review which apply to the requested special exception. In this narrative statement, set forth the grounds offered as support for the special exception. Sae 14 rt'" A-t.. H ~ 1) P 4~ e.14 -r..;r v ~ . D. The applicant Is required to present sDeclflc Information, not just opinions, that the aeneral standards for the arantlna of a sDeclal exceDtlon (Section 14-6W-2B2, City Code), enumerated below, will be met: 1. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare. -r~G. P.UA LoP Io(.8tb T""crs 5t.a:c....oz: JJG.. J::c:. i=>L. 4'- £ f.1)S W6ðµ C~ P I..GT.¡;¡;( ~êrCðt.Jø(S;...c2.Q). -¡;¡~ --a.., ,: ~ Lt:- \f>,..,. ,.~,.) ~'-~~b It~ 1) .... t..IIIJOSLA~ê';) n -E,,..>'t4/44Jt.£ T Hé ~tJS~h''''' -3- 2. The specific proposed exception will not be Injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property In the Immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish and Impair property values In the neighborhood. ~~ ~I. "P~~~ I' aIM ~ é. tJ1/'t!!;ñI&.1rc.. ~l.C_ t¡Jt<ltIIPc../S {;.(6 tpe.øP~P( t/M-ué-s. "1"r; 11-Irs ?ua~T,( A,.:JJ) Su£~'7 'Pt.tJP~r.:r~S. þÐ':l"~~~ 'j:) ~ ðP t!J1( rJ:4t;. rp"~r ~1ßrt) 'í"Hê A&IOØÐnJ t..o-uJ AN)o "Twé- -P~f»/)s:eo ...xMP~~r- Wk4.c..o c..ð-MPL,;J:,.,ð...,J r ...~S~ 7)&~lÞÞ~t;a'"::¡.fJ ru6 A~ 3. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not Impede the normal and orderly development and Improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted In the zone In which such property Is located. ~&...~ of ...,.....6 s"".e.eÞU~ "Pe.;p6-LrJ:G-'!::> J../ A 1/i:. "þ66J tÆrc.:6J.Þr~ L. J 1IH¡;1,e~A I}IJt> Ad7 £.. X..:r. ç T.:z;: tJ tF; . 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. ~ ~~ ...::J:S )1\ "" ~..,c.:c ~ r .,J:""~ "'E~(...~ -rÑ~ ...~"'s 1+c..L.. IAT.;ec..a:.r.:r~S .:;:r:µ p...1J4.C..6. S;ðCAo..,..N(j.....~ H14-S ..:r..st"" 1~:€ ST6t.tC..,.""4eo --r 1-1':;' 61J1",&(lft sC.(u.ðM~ "P A-¿ G1:. Jo.'4 A~~ ..:x~c."'IAf)a:~ A ~ "))J:.~c..r 14U.1! $ (),:-¡:. 0'" J.l1Ji-( (,. 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. ~L.'::' p.s.e: s~ f\.>Orè. :Ii "\ ~;; C) ~O ""'"r~"3t w..··..O" ....... ~,.! C-:} 4:""'" c::J r-q CO) !l --".' (j) ,- x- -j¡;¡¡" "'1 : I t"--, '0 - CJ1 o '>- -4- -- 6. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific proposed exception, In all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone In which It Is to be located. [Depending on the type of exception requested, certain specific conditions may need to be met. The applicant will demonstrate compliance with the specific conditions required for a particular use, as provided In City Code Section 14-6L-1, Special Exception Enumerated Requirements; Section 14-6N-1, Off-Street Parking Requirements; Section 14-6Q, Dimensional Requirements, or Section 14-6R, Tree Regulations, as appropriate.] J~U.J:b~ of c.ð'tKP&4.~CAe......x~ 5H~ cµ S..:c.T6 -:¡::::>~. ~ pp~~µ,.. W.dl:.L.L. 86- ?~ 'Fði... I4P~ QC.(<&SQ:'~ / C-.t-t:!::L£.p.-r.c...I4-"'~ " 7. The proposed use will be consistent with the· short-range Comprehensive Plan of the City. ..-rHE: "'Y~oseh... ;¡:.~ c.~5IoUrlfUr kW-""" "Ttt& ~Hðer· ~~6 ~d'Wtpag.H&,usz.&J1!!& YL.;a~" þ" ~~l'....u.."",.&d)Ù'cH· T"., 6- .>6.ù ~ A ~ð'f>..¡ f"ð'e- wtoUc.iM -r-'H.:U. .sP~...'- G)((..EJØ~ AP~~tIW~ ~s. E: ~ &?&Â .:;c..s ~ D ¡¡ "1(6 Sr~FF ':Þss,1:G..J "Z.c:-UJ:.Ð-V ~ ........:a: rre «!" $-CS1. ~'ð ...':("''''..1:'' -r~L.c.NH""'" rt1..""o '> List the names and mailing addresses of the record owners of all property located within 300 feet of the exterior limits of the property Involved in this appeal: E. NAME ADDRESS .c -¿ ---- S-€t::' 1+1""Tï4 '-IH é1) o <"' -"'Q ;::-"110 -,:...,..,,, ..'- _,.J ç,:::':',J C:.J ,- C.ì p-¡ Ç-) -11 (n ~JIiJIII -- _~t.... iTj . .... .......; r;""'j C) 22 5'".......... <.... » r-¡ I . '....J - UI -5- - '-- NOTE: Conditions. In permitting a special exception, the Board may Impose appropriate conditions and safeguards, including but not limited to planting screens, fencing, construction commencement and completion deadlines, lighting, operational controls, Improved traffic circulation requirements, highway access restrictions, Increased minimum yard requirements, parking requirements, limitations on the duration of a use or ownership or any other requirement which the Board deems appropriate under the circumstances upon a finding that the conditions are necessary to fulfill the purpose and Intent of the Zoning Chapter. (Section 14-6W-2B3, City Code). Orders. Unless otherwise determined by the Board, all orders of the Board shall expire six (6) months from the date the written decision Is flied with the City Clerk, unless the applicant shall have taken action within the six (6) month period to establish the use or construct the building permitted under the terms of the Board's, decision, such as by obtaining a' building permit and proceeding to completion in accordance with the terms of the permit. Upon written request, and for good cause shown, the Board may extend the. expiration date of any order without further public hearing on the merits of the original appeal or application. (Section 14-6W-3E, City Code). Petition for writ of certiorari. Any person or persons, jolntiy or severally, aggrieved by any decision of the Board under the provisions of the Zoning Chapter, or any taxpayer or any officer, department or board of the City may present to a court of record a petition for writ of certiorari duly verified, setting forth that such decision is illegal, In whole or in part, and specifying the grounds of the Illegality. (Section 14-6W-7, City Code). Such petition shall be presented to the court within thirty (30) days after the filing of the decision in the office of the City Clerk. Date~c...-E" ~ ~e. \ l,.. ,20~ SXÞ~e.s .~d~ Date:~.~ ll.. 10."$ ~ a ) of Property Owner(s) ifferent than Applicant(s) ppdadmln\appboase.doc t""........' 0 '1...-.".,.1 C-:) <....... -L,- ....> 0 !.:=J j.;: =::-,'1 p') -n r> (-."J ~- . , CT\ : - iT] i m )::»0 -.., 0 :':J =r,:- , . 7~ '-.-/ ~ - .. » (..11 '-'t. SouthGate ~ - (~ ~ ~-,.....;.'O' ~- December 16, 2004 Board of Adjustment Special Exception application 1905 Broadway Street Narrative, Section C. We are before the Board of Adjustment to ask for a Special Exception to reduce the Front Yard Setback requirement to 9.5 feet. This reduction would allow the installation of a glassed canopy approximately 10' in size to be attached to an existing building. To be more specific, the support members, columns, would be allowed to be placed for the canopy. This building is part of a complete make-over of Pepperwood Plaza Mall. The entire complex is currently under construction and represents a totally new appearance. With the help of the City in the granting of up to 1.75 million dollars in T. I. F. money, we are able to re-design the entire complex and provide all new building fronts and a newly configured parking layout including landscaping. This brings the complex closer in line with today's zoning requirements. The total amount of construction work including this structure will exceed 5 million dollars. Not only are we being asked to allow the canopy improvement, but the City's Design Review Staff who has approved the design of the complex has asked us to apply. It is there desire to have the canopy as part of the building facade. This building currently sets 20' from the property line which is the requirement for this zone. The property line abuts the old Hollywood Boulevard R-O- W which is unique to our neighbors to the east. The R-O-W that adjoins that property was vacated and deeded over to them which are not the case with our property. A new building was just erected on the adjoining property within the past year and just recently, rezoned CC2. The parking for that building projects north of our property by several feet which cause our building to look somewhat out of place. The Bank C::J rr-¡ (-") -<1 I (J"\ ~-n .--1 \....J t:"': -ik¡.. - - .. U'\ SouthGate Development 755 Mormon Trek Blvd Po. Box 1907 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone (319) 339,9320 Fax [31913394201 Property to the west which is currently being completely reconstructed has done so in conjunction with our project showing a new and safer access point off of Keokuk Street. In doing that, we have eliminated some rather problematic old access points. This was a planned effort on both parties' behalf to improve the traffic circulation pattern in the entire area. To complement this improvement, there is now direct access off of Highway 6 By-pass, something we having working towards the past several years. All of the above narrative indicates that the granting would not be detrimental to the neighboring uses, parking areas, or traffic generation. Because this is an existing structure, all of the utilities are in place and are more than adequate. The granting would not be detrimental to the surrounding uses but would be the opposite and enhance them. I will be present at the meeting when this comes before you and would be more than happy to respond to any questions. Sincerely dL-- r:.. ~ Glenn R. Siders Construction Coordinator o ::E > CJ fTi o -n 0'\ ,- ! :;j t . . ,--1 <...} :Þt" =< - .. (....", John Yae¡> Subject: E-mail from City Design Review Committee staff to Applicant -----Original Message----- From: Julie Tallman [mailto:Julie-Tallman@iowa-city.org] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 5:03 PM To: Glenn Siders Cc: Loren Brumm; Tim Hennes; Shelley McCafferty; Jann Ream Subject: Goodwill Industries 1905 Broadway The proposed canopy, which is supported by columns and not the exterior building wall, may not project into the required front yard. The design and composition of the canopy does not allow it to be supported by the exterior building wall. Staff Design Review Committee (SDRC) prefers the canopy as part of the building facade, because the canopy is a widely-used component of the overall re-design of Pepperwood Mall. However, we acknowledge that zoning code prohibits the canopy as it is currently designed. We agree that Southgate Development will apply for a Special Exception to the Board of Adjustment, for a front yard reduction to allow the canopy. You will need to contact the City Clerk for an application for a Special Exception, to request a front yard reduction from twenty feet to ten feet for the width of the canopy. Revised plans will not be necessary; we will make a plan review note that the canopy is not approved as part of this project until and unless a Special Exception for a front yard reduction is granted by the Board of Adjustment. I hope this information is helpful. 1