Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011 Board of Adjustment DecisionsN 0 Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-529 c— DECISION ip�� IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2010 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: CAROLINE SHEERIN, BARBARA ECKSTEIN, WILLIAM JENNIN&S MEMBERS ABSENT: ROBERT ANDERSON, LE ANN TYSON. STAFF PRESENT: SARA GREENWOOD HEKTOEN, SARAH WALZ OTHERS PRESENT: DUANE MUSSER, CLIFFORD REIF, KRISTEN BREAUX SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: EXC10-00009: Discussion of an application submitted by Reif Oil Company for a special exception to allow a drive-through facility located in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone at 2580 Naples Avenue. The Board concludes that the number of drive-through lanes, stacking spaces and paved areas necessary for the drive-through facility will not be detrimental to or detract from or unduly interrupt pedestrian circulation or the commercial character of the area where it is located based on the following findings: • The proposed site plan shows space for up to six cars to access the single drive-through lane at one time before stacking onto the parking aisle for the convenience store. • The drive-through facility is located to the rear of the commercial site with traffic circulating behind the building. • The drive-through will not conflict with other public drives or other vehicle areas if marked at both the entrance and exit end with appropriate signage indicating one-way circulation. • The subject property is surrounded on all sides by commercial development or highway such that it is not adjacent to or readily visible from residential properties. The Board concludes that the proposed drive-through facility allows for safe pedestrian access, and efficient and safe vehicular circulation on the site based on the following findings: • The proposed site plan shows a sidewalk along Naples and a pedestrian walkway from the parking spaces on the south end of the lot to the building. • It is in the City's future plans to include a sidewalk/trail extension to the Naples Avenue/Highway 1 intersection, at which point a signalized pedestrian crossing will be installed. The Board concludes that lighting for the drive-through facility will comply with the outdoor lighting standards set forth in Article 14-5G, and that lighting will not conflict with adjacent residential areas, based on the following findings: • The property lighting will be reviewed by. the building department as part of the permitting process. All code standards must be met in order for an occupancy permit to be issued. I IIIIIII IIIIII III VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII Doc ID: 022094330005 Type: GEN Kind: DECISION Recorded: 01/26/2011 at 11:37:34 AM Fee Amt: $29.00 Pace 1 of 5 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter Countv Recorder BK4716 P0832-836 • The subject property is surrounded on all sides by commercial development or highway such that it is not visible from any residential zones. Based on the submitted site plan, the Board concludes that the drive-through lane is set back at least 10 feet from adjacent lot lines and public rights-of-way and is screened from view of adjacent roads along the southeast property line by a retaining wall and change of topography such that S2 screening would be ineffective. The Board finds that all other paved areas on the commercial site are screened from adjacent properties and rights-of-way with S2 screening as required by code. Based on findings provided above, the Board concludes that the transportation system is capable of safely supporting the proposed use in addition to the existing uses and that it will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Based on findings provided above, the Board concludes that the drive-through facility will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substanuly diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood o impede the normal and orderly = development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zonjtn which such property is located. z cNii The Board concludes that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/o9Vc€%a cities have been or are being provided based on the following findings: I£ F_ w. � .. • Naples Avenue is designed to support the levels of traffic that will be generated byRle commercial use proposed. • The building official, in consultation with the City Engineer, has reviewed the plan and determined that all required drainage is provided. The Board concludes that adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets based on the following finding: Because the drive-through is located to the rear of the rear of the site, with traffic circulating behind the commercial building, there is ample space for vehicles to stack before reaching other active areas of the commercial use (such as gas pumps) or the public street. The Board concludes that, except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific proposed exception for a drive-through facility, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is to be located, based on the following find: • An application has been submitted for final site plan review and building permit. The Building Official has reviewed the plan and determined that all applicable zoning requirements not reviewed here are satisfied. All applicable zoning requirements must be met in order for an occupancy permit to be issued. The Board concludes that the proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended based on the following finding: • The Southwest District Plan identifies this area as appropriate for Highway -oriented commercial development. DISPOSITION: By a vote of 3-0 (Anderson, Tyson absent) the board approved the special exception to allow a drive-through facility in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone at 2580 Naples Avenue, subject to the following conditions: • Substantial compliance with the site plan submitted; and • The entrance and exit ends of the rear drive should be clearly marked with appropriate signage to indicate the one-way circulation of the drive. EXC10-00011: Discussion of an application submitted by Kristen Breaux for a special exception to reduce the front principal building setback requirement to allow reconstruction of a porch on property located in the RS -8 zone at 1122 E. Washington Street. The Board concludes that the situation is peculiar to the property in question based on the following findings: • The existing porch is original to the house and does not conform with the current required front setback. • While half of the properties along the same, frontage are also set back less than 15 -feet from the right-of-way line this property does not benefit from setback averaging because the immediately adjacent properties conform with the setback standards. The Board concludes that there is practical difficulty in complying with the setback requirements based on the following findings: • A porch is in keeping with the character of the original portion of the house, however because the house is established within 3 feet of the setback line, a porch installed in conformity with the setback regulations would not function as a porch but rather as a stoop.. Most other houses along this frontage, and in the surrounding neighborhood, have front porches. The Board concludes that granting the special exception will not be contrary to the purpose of the setback regulations based on the findings provided above and the following findings: • The porch shall be constructed within the footprint of the existing porch and shall not bring the structure any closer to the street or reduce separation from the adjacent properties. • An open air front porch will provide a greater sense of openness, light and air than the existing enclosed porch and will not reduce space for firefighting or opportunities for privacy between dwelling units. • An open air porch will be distinct from the living portion of the house more compatible with the character of the frontage along which the subject property is located as most houses feature open air front porches. L Z7 N H = � C � co The Board concludes that any potential negative effects resulting from the setback exception are mitigated to the extent practical based on the findings above along in addition to the following findings: • The roof of the proposed porch shall have a 3:12 slope, the minimal slope necessary to provide adequate drainage, and the eaves of the porch shall be at a height level with those of the house, according to the terms of the September 2010 special exception for this property. • Because the porch will extend significantly further forward than the adjacent house to the east and will be highly visible along the street, the porch design shall be reviewed and approved by staff in order to ensure that the design is architecturally and aesthetically compatible with other homes in the immediate neighborhood in which it is located. N • Because other houses along this frontage feature open air porches, the porch sh%not be enclosed with windows or walls, although screens are acceptable. a z The Board finds that the proposed porch will be located more than 3 feet,J" Me c aN property lines.F�� �� er A N = Based on findings provided above, the Board concludes that the specific prprpsea ex ptjpn will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or g9nerarwelfare;lII not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity; and VArnot substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood and that the 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 Board finds that all utilities, access roads, and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided, and that the conditions stated with approval of the prior special exception shall be incorporated in to this special exception since those conditions address issues of storm water drainage related to the porch. Because the property is a single-family home, the Board concludes that the proposed special exception to reduce the setback for the purpose of constructing an open air porch will have no impact on ingress or egress from the site. The Board concludes that as part of the building permit process, in addition to design approval from the Director of Planning and Community Development, the Building Department will review a final drawing of the proposed porch in order to ensure that all other aspects of the proposed construction conform to the regulations or standards of the zone. The Board finds that while the Comprehensive Plan does not address this issue, it does encourage reinvestment in properties. Disposition: By a vote of 3-0 (Anderson, Tyson absent) the Board approved the special exception to reduce the required front, principal building setback from 15 feet to 8 feet for property located in the Medium Density Single -Family (RS -8) zone at 1122 East Washington Street, subject to the following conditions: The setback reduction be for the purpose of constructing an open air porch to replace the existing porch; • The new porch shall fall within the footprint of the existing porch and therefore its dimensions shall be no larger than 9.6 feet deep and 19.6 feet wide; In all other aspects the new porch shall comply with the conditions of the previous special exception (September 2010); At no time in the future may the porch be enclosed with windows or walls without an additional special exception; and The final porch design is to be approved by the Director of Planning and Community Development prior to issuance of a building permit. TIME LIMITATIONS: All orders of the Board, which do not set a specific time limitation on Applicant action, shall expire six (6) months from the date they were filed with the City Clerk, unless the Applicant shall have taken action within such time period to establish the use or construct the improvement authorized under the terms of the Board's decision. City Code Section 14-8C-1 E, City of Iowa City, Iowa. Caroline Sheerin, Chairperson STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY Approved by: L kfe" City Attorney's Office I 1 as ll I, Marian Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, do hereby certify that the Board of Adjustment Decision herein is a true and correct copy of the Decision that was passed by the Board of Adjustment of Iowa City, Iowa, at its regular meeting on the 10th day of November, 2010, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this 2 4- 44A- day of -Qg�_e 20_ZZ Marian : Karr, City Clerk 0 SEAL s ` CORPORATE �n n x z fl � R N O L'�1 Doc ID: 022102510006 Type: GEN Kind: DECISION Recorded: 02/08/2011 at 01:06:10 PM Fee Amt: $34.00 Pace 1 of 6 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter County Recorder BK4720 PG492-497 STATE OF IOWA ) ) SS COUNTY OF JOHNSON ) � r � ``+tdfM_ CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (319) 356-5000 (319)356-5009 FAX www.lcgov.org I, Marian K. Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, do hereby state that the Board of Adjustment Decision dated November 10, 2010, filed on January 26, 2011, Book 4716, Page 832- 836, contained an incorrect case file number. The attached document is a corrected version of the November 10, 2010, Iowa City Board of Adjustment Decision. Dated at Iowa City, Iowa, this 7th day of February 2011. CORPORATE SEAL Marian)(—Karr City Clerk \material Cee— N O Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, 1A52240; 319/356-52N a in k,4 Z = DECISION lad �Ln IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2010 0 -n EMMA J. HARVAT HALL a MEMBERS PRESENT: CAROLINE SHEERIN, BARBARA ECKSTEIN, WILLIAM JENNIN& MEMBERS ABSENT: ROBERT ANDERSON, LE ANN TYSON. STAFF PRESENT: SARA GREENWOOD HEKTOEN, SARAH WALZ OTHERS PRESENT: DUANE MUSSER, CLIFFORD REIF, KRISTEN BREAUX SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: ro a EXC10-00099: Discussion of an application submitted by Reif Oil Company for a special exception to allow a drive-through facility located in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone at 2580 Naples Avenue. The Board concludes that the number of drive-through lanes, stacking spaces and paved areas necessary for the drive-through facility will not be detrimental to or detract from or unduly interrupt pedestrian circulation or the commercial character of the area where it is located based on the following findings: • The proposed site plan shows space for up to six cars to access the single drive-through lane at one time before stacking onto the parking aisle for the convenience store. The drive-through facility is located to the rear of the commercial site with traffic circulating behind the building. • The drive-through will not conflict with other,public drives or other vehicle areas if marked at both the entrance and exit end with appropriate signage indicating one-way circulation. • The subject property is surrounded on all sides by commercial development or highway such that it is not adjacent to or readily visible from residential properties. The Board concludes that the proposed drive-through facility allows for safe pedestrian access, and efficient and safe vehicular circulation on the site based on the following findings: • The proposed site plan shows a sidewalk along Naples and a pedestrian walkway from the parking spaces on the south end of the lot to the building. • It is in the City's future plans to include a sidewalk/trail extension to the Naples Avenue/Highway 1 intersection, at which point a signalized pedestrian crossing will be installed. The Board concludes that lighting for the drive-through facility will comply with the outdoor lighting standards set forth in Article 14-5G, and that lighting will not conflict with adjacent residential areas, based on the following findings: • The property lighting will be reviewed by the building department as part of the permitting process. All code standards must b,e'rpet in order for an occupancy permit to be issued. Doc ID: 022094330005 Type: GEN Kind: DECISION Recorded: 01/26/2011 at 11:37:34 AM Fee Amt: $29.00 Pace 1 of 5 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter County Recorder SKA71 R PGRSP-R36 • The subject property is surrounded on all sides by commercial development or highway such that it is not visible from any residential zones. Based on the submitted site plan, the Board concludes that the drive-through lane is set back at least 10 feet from adjacent lot lines and public rights-of-way and is screened from view of adjacent roads along the southeast property line by a retaining wall and change of topography such that S2 screening would be ineffective. The Board finds that all other paved areas on the commercial site are screened from adjacent properties and rights-of-way with S2 screening as required by code. Based on findings provided above, the Board, concludes that the transportation system is capable of safely supporting the proposed use in addition to the existing uses and that it will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Based on findings provided above, the Board concludes that the drive-through facility will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substanttgly diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood o impede the normal and orderly = development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zon&;tn which such property is located. z aii N s cn V � Iy The Board concludes that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/ oR'rlecdgsa Rities have been or are being provided based on the following findings: • Naples Avenue is designed to support the levels of traffic that will be generated bycMe commercial use proposed. • The building official, in consultation with the City Engineer, has reviewed the plan and determined that all required drainage is provided. The Board concludes that adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets based on the following finding: • Because the drive-through is located to'the. rear of the rear of the site, with traffic circulating behind the commercial building, there is ample space for vehicles to stack before reaching other active areas of the commercial use (such as gas pumps) or the public street. The Board concludes that, except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific proposed exception for a drive-through facility, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is to be located, based on the following find: • An application has been submitted for final site plan review and building permit. The Building Official has reviewed the plan and determined that all applicable zoning requirements not reviewed here are satisfied. All applicable zoning requirements must be met in order for an occupancy permit to be issued. The Board concludes that the proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended based on the following finding: K • The Southwest District Plan identifies this area as appropriate for Highway -oriented commercial development. DISPOSITION: By a vote of 3-0 (Anderson, Tyson absent) the board approved the special exception to allow a drive-through facility in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone at 2580 Naples Avenue, subject to the following conditions: Substantial compliance with the site plan submitted; and The entrance and exit ends of the rear drive should be clearly marked with appropriate signage to indicate the one-way circulation of the drive. EXC10-00011: Discussion of an application submitted by Kristen Breaux for a special exception to reduce the front principal building setback requirement to allow reconstruction of a porch on property located in the RS -8 zone at 1122 E. Washington Street. The Board concludes that the situation is peculiar to the property in question based on the following findings: • The existing porch is original to the house and does not conform with the current required front setback. • While half of the properties along the same, frontage are also set back less than 15 -feet from the right-of-way line this property does not benefit from setback averaging because the immediately adjacent properties conform with the setback standards. The Board concludes that there is practical difficulty in complying with the setback requirements based on the following findings: • A porch is in keeping with the character of the original portion of the house, however because the house is established within 3 feet of the setback line, a porch installed in conformity with the setback regulations would not function as a porch but rather as a stoop.. Most other houses along this frontage, and in the surrounding neighborhood, have front porches. The Board concludes that granting the special exception will not be contrary to the purpose of the setback regulations based on the findings provided above and the following findings: • The porch shall be constructed within the footprint of the existing porch and shall not bring the structure any closer to the street or reduce separation from the adjacent properties. • An open air front porch will provide a greater sense of openness, light and air than the existing enclosed porch and will not reduce space for firefighting or opportunities for privacy between dwelling units. • An open air porch will be distinct from the living portion of the house more compatible with the character of the frontage along which the subject property is located as most houses feature open air front porches. L z v o CD The Board concludes that any potential negative effects resulting from the setback exception are mitigated to the extent practical based on the findings above along in addition to the following findings: • The roof of the proposed porch shall have a 3:12 slope, the minimal slope necessary to provide adequate drainage, and the eaves of the porch shall be at a height level with those of the house, according to the terms of the September 2010 special exception for this property. • Because the porch will extend significantly further forward than the adjacent house to the east and will be highly visible along the street, the porch design shall be reviewed and approved by staff in order to ensure that the design is architecturally and aesthetically compatible with other homes in the immediate neighborhood in which it is located. N • Because other houses along this frontage feature open air porches, the porch Ai not be enclosed with windows or walls, although screens are acceptable. `v Z The Board finds that the proposed porch will be located more than 3 feet, "Me Qf property lines. Based on findings provided above, the Board concludes that the specific pr roses. exL ian will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or gnerarwelfare; -*'Will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity; and w9pnot substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood and that the 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.Board finds that all utilities, access. roads, and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided, and that the conditions stated with approval of the prior special exception shall be incorporated in to this special exception since those conditions address issues of storm water drainage related to the porch. Because the property is a single-family home, the Board concludes that the proposed special exception to reduce the setback for the purpose of constructing an open air porch will have no impact on ingress or egress from the site. The Board concludes that as part of the building permit process, in addition to design approval from the Director of Planning and Community Development, the Building Department will review a final drawing of the proposed porch in order to ensure that all other aspects of the proposed construction conform to the regulations or standards of the zone. The Board finds that while the Comprehensive Plan does not address this issue, it does encourage reinvestment in properties. Disposition: By a vote of 3-0 (Anderson, Tyson absent) the Board approved the special exception to reduce the required front, principal building setback from 15 feet to 8 feet for property located in the Medium Density Single -Family (RS -8) zone at 1122 East Washington Street, subject to the following conditions: • The setback reduction be for the purpose of constructing an open air porch to replace the existing porch; • The new porch shall fall within the footprint of the existing porch and therefore its dimensions shall be no larger than 9.6 feet deep and 19.6 feet wide; • In all other aspects the new porch shall comply with the conditions of the previous special exception (September 2010); • At no time in the future may the porch be enclosed with windows or walls without an additional special exception; and • The final porch design is to be approved by the Director of Planning and Community Development prior to issuance of a building permit. TIME LIMITATIONS: All orders of the Board, which do not set a specific time limitation on Applicant action, shall expire six (6) months from the date they were'fiied with the City Clerk, unless the Applicant shall have taken action within such time period to' establish the use or construct the improvement authorized under the terms of the Board's decision. City Code Section 14-8C-1 E, City of Iowa City, Iowa. Caroline Sheerin, Chairperson STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY Approved by: (>, City Attorney's Office I as `Il I, Marian Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, do hereby certify that the Board of Adjustment Decision herein is a true and correct copy of the.Decision that was passed by the Board of Adjustment of Iowa City, Iowa, at its regularrneeting on the 10th day of November, 2010, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this day of ,,- 20� MarianX Karr, City Clerk c CORPORATE SEAL ��n z r � w O CD Page 1 of 1 Marian Karr From: Marian Karr Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 2:35 PM To: Sara Greenwood Hektoen; Sarah Walz Subject: RE: BOA decision I'll just cross off the number, add new number, initial the change, and send this afternoon if that okay with everyone? From: Sara Greenwood Hektoen Sent: Monday, January 31, 20112:33 PM To: Marian Karr; Sarah Walz Subject: RE: BOA decision Better re-record so that there is no confusion with land records/abstracts. From: Marian Karr Sent: Monday, January 31, 20112:32 PM To: Sarah Walz Cc: Sara Greenwood Hektoen Subject: RE: BOA decision Question is whether it needs to be re-recorded? SGH — what do you think? I can change on my copy but it wouldn't match the Recorder files ..... I'd prefer re-recording. Marian From: Sarah Walz Sent: Monday, January 31, 20112:23 PM To: Marian Karr Subject: BOA decision Marian, I recently (I believe last Friday) dropped off a BOA decision for filing. As it turns out one of the cases is referenced under the wrong number. Reif Oil should be case # EXC10-00010; it is listed as EXC10- 00009. How can I get this corrected? Thanks. Sarah Sarah Walz Associate Planner Planning and Community Development City of Iowa City Iowa City, IA 52240 319/356-5239 sarah-walz@iowa-city.org 2/7/2011 Doc ID: 022241280006 Type: GEN Kind: DECISION Recorded: 07/18/2011 at 02:56:08 PM Fee Amt: $32.00 Pace 1 of 6 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter Countv Recorder BK4778 PG538-543 Prepared by Nick Benson, Planning Intern, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240;319/356-5230 DECISION IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, June 8,'2011 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Caroline Sheerin, Barbara Eckstein, Brock Grenis, Adam Plagge MEMBERS ABSENT: William Jennings STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Sarah Walz, Nick Benson OTHERS PRESENT: Dan Hiserote, Joseph Dobrian SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: 1. EXC11-00002:A public hearing on an application submitted by Dan Hiserote for a special exception to allow a drive-through facility in the Community Commercial (CC - 2) zone at 1015 Highway 1 West. The Board concludes the number of drive-through lanes, stacking spaces and paved area necessary for the drive-through facility will not be detrimental to adjacent residential properties or detract from or unduly interrupt pedestrian circulation or the commercial character of the area where it is located based on the following findings: • The proposed site plan shows space for up to seven cars to access the drive-through at one time before stacking into the easternmost parking aisle. • The drive-through is located at the rear of the site, behind the building, and drive-through vehicle circulation is separated from other traffic entering or exiting Lot 3 as well as other shopping center traffic. • Because the property is served by a private drive, the proposed drive- through is unlikely to have an impact on public rights-of-way, which are located more than 600 feet away. • Drive-through circulation is directed behind the building, toward other land zoned for commercial development. The proposed drive-through is bordered by 50 feet of stormwater detention facility and another commercial (CI -1) property. • The drive-through is not readily visible from any residential zones due to its location and screening provided along the stormwater facility in addition to the required perimeter screening around the site. • The site plan shows that the pavement along the drive-through will be marked with directional arrows, and signs posted at the entrance and exit to the drive-through. A "Do Not Enter" message is marked on the pavement where the drive-through meets the cross access with the Walmart parking area to the east. The proposed site plan shows that pedestrian connections from the shopping center and across Lot 3 are located away from the drive- through. Pavement markings will be required in this area as part of site plan approval. The drive-through lane meets the required 10 -foot setback standards on the north, west, and east ends of the property and the required S2 perimeter screening is proposed in these areas. Based on the 50 -feet separation provided by the stormwater facility for the shopping center and required trees shown on the Walmart site plan, the Board concludes that the required south setback should be reduced from 10 feet to 0 feet. The Board concludes the transportation system is capable of safely supporting the proposed use in addition to the existing uses in the area based on the findings provided above as well as the following findings: • The property is accessed via a private drive from State Highway 1—both are designed to accommodate the levels of traffic generated by CC -2 uses. • The drive-through lane is located more than 600 feet from the entrance to the shopping center and is set to the rear of Lot 3, such that drive-through traffic will not back up onto public roads. • The drive-through circulation is not in conflict with pedestrian access to the restaurant. Based on the findings above, the Board concludes that the specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, and 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. For these same reasons, the Board concludes that the 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 CC -2 zone. The Board concludes that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided based on the following findings: • All necessary utilities are available at this site. The Building Official, in consultation with the City Engineer, will review the plan for the proposed restaurant as part of the larger shopping center development. All drainage for the shopping center is directed to the stormwater facility along the east and south sides of the shopping center. The Board concludes that adequate measures have been taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets, based on the following finding: • Traffic from the drive-through will not stack onto public streets or neighboring properties. Since the drive-through is located to the rear of the rear of the site, with traffic circulating behind the commercial building, there is ample space for vehicles to stack before reaching the circular drive for the shopping center. The Board finds that the proposed exception in not in conflict with the Comprehensive plan because the Southwest District Plan identifies this area as appropriate for Highway -oriented commercial development. Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approved the special exception to allow a drive-through facility in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone at 1015 Highway 1 West, subject to the following conditions: • Substantial compliance with the site plan submitted, including signage and pavement markings indicating the one-way circulation of the drive and marking of the pedestrian areas; • Installation of landscaping along the adjacent stormwater facility as specified in the Walmart site plan; and • Approval by the Building Official of the lighting plan and any signage for the site By a vote of 4-0 the Board approved an extension of the special exception time limit from 6 months to 12 months as the proposed use cannot be constructed on the site until such time as demolition of the existing structure is completed and the site is prepared for redevelopment. 2. EXC11-00003:- Public hearing regarding an application submitted by Joseph Dobrian for a special exception for a reduction of the front setback requirement to allow construction of a deck at 1015 Second Avenue. The Board concludes that the situation is peculiar to the property in question based on the following findings: The Second Avenue right-of-way is 75 feet wide, which is unusually wide for a residential street of its length and traffic volume. Even with the deck constructed, there will still be 12 feet between the edge of the deck and the sidewalk. • At 4,000 square feet, this property is significantly smaller than what is traditionally found in RS -5 zones, and in fact would not meet the minimum lot size requirements for RS -5 today. The Board concludes that there is practical difficulty in complying with the setback requirements based on the following findings: • The property is small in comparison with most other properties in the RS -5 zone, and smaller than what would be allowed under the current zoning ordinance. This limits space for outdoor seating. The Board concludes that granting the exception would not be contrary to the purpose of setback regulations, based on the facts above and the following findings: • The purpose of the proposed setback reduction is for construction of an uncovered deck only and will not bring the principal building any closer to the street. • The proposed uncovered deck will have side setbacks that exceed the 5 feet required by the zoning code. • Other principal buildings along this frontage are set back a similar distance from the right-of-way line. The Board concludes that any potential negative effects resulting from the setback exception are mitigated to the extent practical based on the following findings: • By limiting the width of the deck to no more than 22 feet and eliminating handrails (except along deck steps) as suggested by the applicant, the deck will be consistent with a front porch and compatible with the size and architecture of the house and surrounding properties. Based on the findings above, the Board concludes that the specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, and will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity. For these same reasons the Board concludes that the proposed special exception will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood and will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the RS -5 zone. The Board concludes that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided based on the following findings: The neighborhood is fully developed with all necessary access roads, drainage and other necessary facilities and alleys. • The sidewalk in the Second Avenue right-of-way ends at the southern edge of the subject property and does not extend to the final two houses of the block. The Board concludes that adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets based on the following findings: • The proposed deck will be located roughly 12 feet back from the sidewalk and will not obscure visibility for vehicles accessing the alley to the north. • The subject property is a single-family residence and does not generate significant traffic. The Board concludes that, 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 RS -5 zone. The plan for the deck must be submitted for a building permit before construction may commence. The Board concludes that the proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, which encourages re -investment in older neighborhoods like the neighborhood in which the subject property is located. Disposition: By a vote of 3-1 the Board granted the special exception EXC11-00003 to reduce the front setback requirement from 10 feet to 4 feet to allow for construction of an uncovered deck at the property located in the Low -Density Residential (RS -5) zone at 1015 Second Avenue, subject to the following conditions: • The deck width shall be no larger than 22 feet. • The deck design must complement the architectural style of the house, complying with the following requirements: o If the deck is constructed more than 1 foot off the ground, screening along the base of the structure must be provided. o The deck will not include handrails except for along the front and side steps. o Final deck design is subject to staff approval. o The setback reduction is for the purpose of an uncovered deck only and the deck may not be covered or enclosed at any time in the future without an additional special exception. TIME LIMITATIONS: All orders of the Board, which do not set a specific time limitation on Applicant action, shall expire six (6) months from the date they were filed with the City Clerk, unless the Applicant shall have taken action within such time period to establish the use or construct the improvement authorized under the terms of the Board's decision. City Code Section 14-8C-1 �, City of Iowa City, Iowa. Approved by: irperson .��q r1TZlViYiur�itr��>G=�y'l1Pi City Attorney's Office STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY I, Marian Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, do hereby certify that the Board of Adjustment Decision herein is a true and correct copy of the Decision that was passed by the Board of Adjustment of Iowa City, Iowa, at its regular meeting on the 8th day of June, 2011, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this IS d?t� day of s —,20 0�1tKisr� 9e. z44z arian K. Karr, City Clerk UVN CORpSEA�- Or62 i � 1 OC -19 o off/ Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 31' 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 Doc ID: 022281090003 Type: GEN Kind: DECISION Recorded: 08/25/2011 at 03:28:38 PM Fee Amt: 817.00 Paos 1 of 3 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter Countv Recorder BK4796 PG558-560 DECISION c IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT C:)n C WEDNESDAY, August 17, 2011 D� C EMMA J. HARVAT HALL C*) N MEMBERS PRESENT: Caroline Sheerin, Barbara Eckstein, Brock Grenis, Adam Plagge, William Je111tFs 3M • l T STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Sarah Walz, Nick Benson o� o N OTHERS PRESENT: Wim Murray, Kirk Murray, Lee Eno, Julie Riggert, Annie Pedersen, R. R. Mt. Vernon (name illegible) SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: 1. EXC11-00004: A public hearing on an application submitted by Wim and Kirk Murray for a special exception to reduce the rear principal building setback for property located in the Medium -Density, Single -Family Residential (RS -8) zone at 1026 Fairchild Street. The Board concludes that the situation is peculiar to the property based on the following findings: • As a square corner lot, either property line may be designated as the rear lot line, however, because the existing house is set so deeply into the lot that property is unable to provide a 20 -foot rear setback from either property line. • The setback from Center Street is 39 feet, more than 2 times the standard 15 -foot setback requirement. • The existing first -floor of the house is already established 12 feet from the rear property line, within the required 20 -foot rear setback. • The property is smaller than the typical lot in the zone—the subject lot is 4,900 square feet. The Board concludes that there is practical difficulty complying with the setback requirements based on the above findings and the following: • The deep setbacks from the street place some limitations on where an addition might be constructed. • A logical location for an addition would be above the existing first floor of the structure, however this portion of the structure is located within the required rear setback. The Board concludes that granting the special exception will not be contrary to the purpose of the setback regulations, based on the following findings: • The subject lot abuts the side of the adjacent property rather than the rear such that it functions as a side setback. • The surrounding neighborhood is characterized by small lots with densely built housing—it is not unusual for homes in the immediate area to have side setbacks of 10 feet or less. • The footprint of the house will not change at the ground level—it will retain a 12 foot setback. • The proposed addition is located above the existing first floor of the house and cantilevers out 2 feet beyond the existing north wall of the house • The house is modest in size and the proposed addition would add just 143 square feet of living area. rEs • The proposed height of the north -facing windows is 5'6" to the sill and the windows will not open and will have glass that allows light in but not views out. The Board concludes that any potential negative effects resulting from the setback exception are mitigated to the extent practical based on the following findings: • The submitted site plan and elevations show an addition that is designed to complement the architecture of the original house, matching the existing roofline and pitch and using wood siding. • The proposed windows are mounted at a height of 5'6" and will not open and will have glass that allows light in but not views out. N zn an C= � m rn "" N The Board concludes that the application satisfies the general standards based on the findings above along with the following: The proposed addition would be located 10 feet from the rear (north) property line and 5 feet from the side (west) property line and the ground level setbacks would remain unchanged. The subject neighborhood is fully developed with all necessary utilities, access roads, drainage and other facilities in place. In order to secure a building permit, the applicant must submit a site plan to the building official at which time the plan will be reviewed to ensure conformance with all other zoning requirements. The Comprehensive Plan encourages re -Investment in Iowa City's older neighborhoods DISPOSITION: By a vote of 5-0 the Board approves EXC31-00004, a special exception to reduce the rear setback requirement for the principal structure from 20 feet to 10 feet, subject to the following ccMitions: 1. The setback reduction applies to the proposed addition only; E3 c 2. Substantial compliance with the site plan and elevations submitted by the contractol�"I C`!'t' N r� 3. North Facing windows will be mounted at a height of 5'6' and will not open; —tom t ,<r– a M 4. The window glass will be translucent to allow light in but not views out–to be approv19yy stain TIME LIMITATIONS: N a', All orders of the Board, which do not set a specific time limitation on Applicant action, shall expire six (6) months from the date they were filed with the City Clerk, unless the Applicant shall have taken action within such time period to establish the use or construct the improvement authorized under the terms of the Board's decision. City Code ection 14 -8C -1E, Cit of Iowa City, Iowa. A VMVeol Caroline Sheerin, C airperson CityAtt rney' ffice STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY I, Marian Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, do hereby certify that the Board of Adjustment Decision herein is a true and correct copy of the Decision that was passed by the Board of Adjustment of Iowa City, Iowa, at its special meeting on the 17th day of August, 2011, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this o23 day of — f 2011 D Mari w K. Karr, City Clerk CORPORATE SEAL ysiduo 4 3 �Zo Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5230 DECISION IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Caroline Sheerin, Barbara Eckstein, Will Jennings, Brock Grenis, Adam Plagge 1. EXC11-00007 a public hearing regarding a special exception to allow a wet -batch concrete manufacturing plant in the General Industrial (1-1) zone on Independence Road, north of 420`h Street and south of Liberty Drive. The Board finds and concludes that the proposed use meets the specific requirement that it must be located at least 500 feet from any residentially zoning property in that the nearest residential zone is approximately 2000 feet from the subject property. The Board finds and concludes that all proposed outdoor storage and work areas are located and screened to adequately reduce the noise, dust, and visual impact of the proposed use from surrounding properties, based on the proposed site plan and staff recommendations, which provide for the following : • S3 evergreen screening will be provided along all sides of the plant, including the area between the stormwater detention basin and the plant, in order to screen views of the site, towers, equipment and storage and to minimize dust. • Tall, fast-growing deciduous poplar trees will be planted along the interior of the site and within the S3 evergreen screening to further minimize dust and views of the towers and other equipment and storage at the facility and truck activity on the site. The Board finds and concludes the traffic circulation and access points for the proposed plant are designed to prevent hazards to adjacent streets or property and that adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets based on findings and conclusions provided above and the following: • The site plan shows access to the concrete batch plant from Independence Road, which is designed and constructed to support the type of vehicles and traffic associated with industrial uses. • 420'h Street has been upgraded with public utilities, curb and gutters and turn lanes to allow for increased industrial traffic. • The office and wet batch plant are located on the northern half of Lot 35 and to the rear of the site so that truck movement within the site will not impact adjacent streets. I IIIIIII IIIIII III VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII Doc ID: 022316230006 Type: GEN Kind: DECISION Recorded: 10/05/2011 at 12:29:22 PM Fee Amt: $32.00 Pace 1 of 6 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter Countv Recorder SK4812 PG639-644 N O MEMBERS ABSENT: None. o = bn o STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Sarah Walz, Nikaia Feltes >Zq r OTHERS PRESENTING: Sam Gilbaugh, Steve Streb, Steve Ballard, -<rn— n. m rn SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: o 1. EXC11-00007 a public hearing regarding a special exception to allow a wet -batch concrete manufacturing plant in the General Industrial (1-1) zone on Independence Road, north of 420`h Street and south of Liberty Drive. The Board finds and concludes that the proposed use meets the specific requirement that it must be located at least 500 feet from any residentially zoning property in that the nearest residential zone is approximately 2000 feet from the subject property. The Board finds and concludes that all proposed outdoor storage and work areas are located and screened to adequately reduce the noise, dust, and visual impact of the proposed use from surrounding properties, based on the proposed site plan and staff recommendations, which provide for the following : • S3 evergreen screening will be provided along all sides of the plant, including the area between the stormwater detention basin and the plant, in order to screen views of the site, towers, equipment and storage and to minimize dust. • Tall, fast-growing deciduous poplar trees will be planted along the interior of the site and within the S3 evergreen screening to further minimize dust and views of the towers and other equipment and storage at the facility and truck activity on the site. The Board finds and concludes the traffic circulation and access points for the proposed plant are designed to prevent hazards to adjacent streets or property and that adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets based on findings and conclusions provided above and the following: • The site plan shows access to the concrete batch plant from Independence Road, which is designed and constructed to support the type of vehicles and traffic associated with industrial uses. • 420'h Street has been upgraded with public utilities, curb and gutters and turn lanes to allow for increased industrial traffic. • The office and wet batch plant are located on the northern half of Lot 35 and to the rear of the site so that truck movement within the site will not impact adjacent streets. I IIIIIII IIIIII III VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII Doc ID: 022316230006 Type: GEN Kind: DECISION Recorded: 10/05/2011 at 12:29:22 PM Fee Amt: $32.00 Pace 1 of 6 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter Countv Recorder SK4812 PG639-644 The Board finds and concludes that the specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare based on the findings and conclusions provided above and the following: • The nearest residential zone is north of the railroad, approximately 2,000 feet from the subject property, which far exceeds the requirement that the proposed use must be located at least 500 feet from any residentially zoned property. • The proposed plant is located in an industrial area, in the middle of the Scott -Six Industrial Park, and all but one of the adjacent properties are zoned for industrial use. • The commercial (CC -2) zone further to the west of Lot 35 is located more than 800 feet from the property. • The proposed plant is served by streets designed to support industrial uses. • Distance along with the required landscape screening should minimize dust and noise from the site, reduce the visual impact of the towers, and screen views of the outdoor storage and equipment. • The wet batch facility is designed to minimize dust normally associated with concrete facilities and the dust output is regulated by the EPA. • Staff consulted with the Iowa State Extension Office in Johnson County with regard to impact on the location of such a facility adjacent to cropland. The crop specialist indicated that he is not aware of any impacts beyond dust associated with gravel, similar to that of cropland located along gravel roads. The Board finds and concludes that 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 based on the findings and conclusions provided above and the following: • The applicant will pave the first 50 feet of the drive as contained in the approved site plan and will be required to pave the remainder of the drive within 2 years of the issuance of the occupancy permit. • Based on current zoning and the comprehensive plan, future surrounding land uses will likely be industrial and the precise value for these mostly undeveloped properties is speculative. • Development of properties within the subject industrial area may require concrete and the proposed use would provide ready access to materials needed for development of these areas. The Board finds and concludes that the 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 based and that the proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan based on the findings and conclusions above and the following: o • The area in which the subject property is located is zoned for industrial uses 4#4heig—uth District Plan identifies surrounding land as appropriate for industrial uses. TigUly IQ also improved the infrastructure in this area to support the expansion of industri5pa4eS. • Future residential development will be north of the railroad. "1M r =Crn m The Board finds and concludes that all necessary utilities are available at the sitegathiji 0 Independence Road and 420`" Street are paved and designed to support industr]al traffic and that a storm water basin is proposed on the southwest portion of Lot 35 to accommodate storM water from the site. The Board finds and concludes that an application must be submitted for final site plan review and building permit and that the Building Official must review the plan to determine that all applicable zoning requirements not specifically addressed here are satisfied. Therefore, all applicable zoning requirements must be met in order for a building permit to be issued and the proposed exeption will conform to applicable regulations and standards of the zone in which it is located. The Board finds and concludes that the use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended, in that, as indicated above, this area is identified as appropriate for industrial growth, with a buffer between potential future residential uses. Disposition: By a vote of 5-0 the Board approves EXC11-00007 a special exception to allow a concrete manufacturing plant In the General Industrial (1-1) zone on Independence Road, north of 420`s Street and south of Liberty Drive, subject to the following conditions: • Substantial compliance with the site plan submitted with the addition of the following enhanced landscaping: o S3 screening is provided along the northern edge of Lot 35 and in the area between the stormwater detention and the concrete plant. This shall include evergreen screening toward the exterior of the plant site with taller, fast-growing deciduous trees closer to the plant. o Taller varieties of treesshall be planted closer to the plant with evergreens to the exterior. o All areas outside the driveway and batch facility and loading area should be landscaped with turf grass or other appropriate vegetative ground cover. • Approval is for a wet -batch mix facility only. • In addition to the proposed driveway paving (first 50 feet) the applicant shall pave the remainder of the drive within 2 years of the issuance of the occupancy permit. 2. EXC11-00009 —Public hearing regarding an application submitted by Bean Shack for a special exception to allow a drive-through facility to be located in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone at Gateway One Plaza at the corner of South Riverside Drive and Highway One West. The Board concludes that number of drive-through lanes, stacking spaces and paved area necessary for the drive-through facility will not be detrimental to adjacent residential properties or detract from or unduly interrupt pedestrian circulation or the commercial character of the area where it is located; that the transportation system is capable of safely supporting the proposed use in addition to the existing uses in the area; and that adequate measures have been or will be taken to egovide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets baFd on the following findings: n o —� C-3 • The Gateway One shopping center is not adjacent to any residential propertiexpr�ione; • The proposed site plan shows space for up to 3 cars to access the drive-through tntheWast X7 the coffee stand before stacking into the drive aisle. _<r - of M X.- • • Vehicles accessing the coffee stand's west window will stack along the circulat rivaat serves the lot. c • The site plan indicates approximately 38 feet between the stand and the north edge of the drive, which provides sufficient space for vehicles to stack at the drive-through without blocking the access to the parking rows or inhibiting the flow of traffic in the circular drive. • The drive-through coffee stand is away from the most active portion of the parking area and traffic, which tends to be closer to the retail uses and the main entrances to shopping center. • The drive-through is located approximately 180 feet from the shopping center's main entrance, providing ample space for stacking within the private parking area. • The applicant anticipates that the peak times for the drive -up will be in the morning, most likely before 10 a.m., which will minimize potential conflicts with the retail uses that characterize the shopping center. • The proposed drive-through will be accessed from within the private parking area. • Highway 1 and South Riverside Drive, including the frontage road, are designed to accommodate traffic generated by retail commercial uses. • The use is small in size and limited in the traffic it will generate, including pedestrian traffic. The Board finds that the drive-through lanes are set back more than 20 feet from the nearest lot lines and public right-of-way and that existing shrubs within the right-of-way, south of the frontage road, satisfy the screening requirement. The Board finds that any exterior lighting, including lighted signage, must be reviewed by the Building Department as part of the permitting process. All lighting and sign standards must be satisfied in order for an occupancy permit to be issued. The Board concludes that the specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare; 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 based on the findings provided above and the following: • The proposed drive-through is located away from other commercial uses within the shopping center and is setback more than 300 feet from commercial property on the opposite side of Highway 1. • The shopping center provides more than the required minimum parking and has ample parking to serve all existing uses. The Board concludes that the 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 based on the following findings: • A similar coffee stand existed on the site for several years without impact on adjacent businesses or vehicle circulation within the lot. • The stand is limited in size to 10 x 15 feet. The Board finds that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities h@W been or are being provided based on the following findings: C-) • Electrical service is available for the stand, but City water service is not. The stan`0111 avide its r own water in compliance with requirements from the State Health Departmenv-< i :74 C-).4- • All other facilities and drainage are provided for the shopping center.Gr— b r l -� • Entrance roads and drives that serve the shopping center are designed to sup*?? a @els co traffic that will be generated by the commercial shopping center, including the use pro(losed. (_n The Board finds that the parking area for the shopping center is not in compliance with the code requirements: its lacks terminal islands for the parking rows, shade trees, perimeter screening, pedestrian facilities, etc. However, based on the limited size and intensity of the proposed coffee stand and the previous existence of a drive-through coffee stand at this location, the Board concludes it is reasonable to allow the proposed use despite the non -conformities of the larger site and that it would be unreasonable to require the larger site to become conforming based on this de minimis addition. The Board finds that the Building Official will review the plan to determine that any zoning requirements not specifically addressed here, including all requirements for lighting and signage, are in compliance with the zoning code. All applicable zoning requirements must be met in order for a building permit to be issued. The Board concludes that the proposed exception is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, which identifies this area as appropriate for Highway -oriented commercial development and thus the Board concludes Disposition: By a vote of 5-0 the board approved EXC11-00009 a special exception to allow a drive- through coffee stand in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone, located in the Gateway Plaza Shopping Center at the corner of Highway 1 West and South Riverside Drive subject to the following conditions: • Substantial compliance with the site plan submitted, including the 38 -foot setback from the north property line and a curbed and landscaped terminal island to be located 50 feet south of the coffee stand. • The coffee stand is limited in size to 10 x 15 feet. • Pavement markings indicating the one-way circulation of the parking aisles along with demarcation of the stacking space for drive-through; • Approval by the Building Official of the lighting plan and signage for the use. TIME LIMITATIONS: All orders of the Board, which do not set a specific time limitation on Applicant action, shall expire six (6) months from the date they were filed with the City Clerk, unless the Applicant shall have taken action within such time period to establish the use or construct the improvement authorized under the terms of the Board's decision. pity Code Section 14 -8C -IE, City of Iowa City, Iowa. by: Chairperson 50tyAtt ey's is /6 _,&� CD - ry—C i :fir a rn � 0 aT^ O STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY I, Marian Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, do hereby certify that the Board of Adjustment Decision herein is a true and correct copy of the Decision that was passed by the Board of Adjustment of Iowa City, Iowa, at its regular meeting on the 14th day of September, 2011, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this T CORPORA E SEAL day of 49—'eL4'1 2011 '/�iLGslilr� %(-.1�/ Marian K. Karr, i y Clerk c N O o { Y �rn j e ui 451000 Com" �3►° Lb