HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008 Board of Adjustment DecisionsDoc ID: 021052700002 Tvoe: GEN
Recorded: 01/03/2008 at 10:31:17 AM
• Fee Amt: $12.00 Pace 1 of 2
Kimnson Painterntv CountvaRecorder
Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5230 BK 4 2 4 9 PG 18 7-18 8
DECISION
IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
F,y
WEDNESDAY, 12 DECEMBER, 2007
o
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
a
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Ned Wood and Michael Wright
-fl
MEMBERS ABSENT: Michelle Payne, Edgar Thornton
STAFF PRESENT: Sara Greenwood, Sarah Walz, Emily Farber
OTHERS PRESENT: William McNally
r
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS:
1. EXC07-00009 public hearing regarding an application submitted by Iowa Wireless, LLC, for
a special exception to allow a cell phone tower in the CC -2 zone at 640 Hwy 1 West.
Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is in the CC -2 zone and that cell
phone towers are permitted in the zone by special exception. The Board finds that the
applicant has presented a coverage map demonstrating that the area to be served by the
proposed cell tower has less than adequate cell phone coverage and that there are no other
towers or industrial properties in the area to which cell antennas may be mounted. The
Board finds that the applicant has provided a coverage map showing the anticipated
improvement in cell phone service with the proposed tower in place. The Board finds that
the proposed tower is a 50 -foot black monopole structure, with no guy wires, trusses or
strobe lighting, and that the tower will not rely on a generator as its principle power source.
The Board finds that the tower will be designed to match the color of the light poles in the
parking area, and will include lights mounted at a height of 25 feet to match the lighting in
the parking area. The Board finds that a 3 -foot lightning rod will be attached to the top of the
pole and that the final design of the pole structure will be reviewed by the City's building
department to verify its structural safety.
The Board finds that the adjacent residential zone to the north, which is currently_
undeveloped, is at a higher grade and that the equipment enclosure for the cell tower may
be visible to residential property. The Board finds that the proposed tower will be set back
50 feet from the adjacent residential zone to the north as required by the code. The Board
finds that the applicant has proposed to construct the south face of the equipment enclosure
with a brick wall and that a concrete block wall will form the enclosure on its east side; the
west and north sides of the enclosure will consist of chain link fence.
Conclusions of Law: Based on the coverage maps, the Board concludes that the proposed
tower will improve cellular service in the area. Because the adjacent residential zone is set
at a higher grade, the Board concludes that the change in grade will act to mitigate the
height of the pole as visible to the residential properties. However, the higher grade will
likely make the interior of the equipment enclosure visible to the residential property thus
some additional measures should be taken to screen the equipment enclosure to the west
and north. The Board concludes that the proposed brick and masonry walls (on the south
and east, respectively) along with less conspicuous chain-link fencing (to the north and
west) and additional S3 screening recommended by staff will screen the enclosure and so
such that the cell tower and its equipment should not diminish the value, use or enjoyment
of surrounding property. The Board concludes that because the tower will have not use guy
wires, trusses, strobe lighting, or rely on a generator as its main power source, that the
tower will be relatively inconspicuous and thus should not impact the value, use or
enjoyment of surrounding properties. Because the final design of the structure will be
reviewed by the Building Department to verify its structural safety, and because the tower
will not effect traffic or ingress and egress from the site, the Board concludes that the
proposed tower will not endanger the public health, safety or general welfare. For the above
reasons and because the proposed tower meets all the specific criteria in the code, the
Board concludes that it will not detract or interfere with surrounding uses as contemplated
by the Comprehensive Plan.
Disposition: By a vote of 3-0 the Board approves EXC07-00009, an application for a
communications transmission facility in the CC -2 zone located at 640 Highway 1 West,
subject to compliance with the site plan and specifications regarding tower design as
submitted as part of this application and the following conditions:
1. The west and north portions of the enclosure will be constructed of black chain link
fence.
2. The west and north sides of the enclosure will be screened according to the S3
standard with vegetation that will reach a minimum height of 8-10 feet when mature.
The landscape plan should complement landscaping for the bank and is subject to
planning staff approval.
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.
Ch irperson
STATE OF IOWA )
JOHNSON COUNTY )
AppjovedJ���a¢�wrrtrr�..J
ctt�t.
City Attorney's Office lJ�t3/4,
7._
- - T
1, 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 12th day of December, -2007, am -the
same appears of record in my Office.
Dated at Iowa City, this ole day of , 20
Marian K. Karr, City Clerk
CORPORATE SEAL
V�b
Doc ID: 021126330006 Tvoe. OEN
Recorded: 04/08/2008 at 10:3932 AM
Fee Amt: $32.00 Paae 1 of 6
Johnson Countv Iowa
Kim Painter County Recorder
5K4283 P0312-317
STATE OF IOWA )
) SS
COUNTY OF JOHNSON )
) r
VIII lir
CITY OF IOWA CITY
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826
(319) 3S6-5000
(319) 356.5009 FAX
www.icgow.org
I, Marian K. Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, do hereby state that the Board of
Adjustment Decision dated February 13, 2008, filed on March 31, 2008, Page 960-964, Book
4279, contained incorrect case file numbers for Special Exception item numbers 1, 2, and 3.
The attached document is a corrected version of the February 13, 1008 Iowa City Board of
Adjustment Decision.
Dated at Iowa City, Iowa, this 7th day of April 2008.
w�,2 7!!
Marian -K. Karr
City Clerk
CORPORATE SEAL
,.... ..... ......................... -
._._............,.....,
S
-_-------------__
Doc ID: 021118680005 TVDG: GEN
Recorded;_ 03/31/2008 at 01:37:30 PM
Fee Amt: $27.00 Pace 1 of 5-^
Johnson County Iona
Q
Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Wasl Kim Painter countv Recorder
RK4279 PG960-964
={
=
_-n
DECISION
N
IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
_
—'
's-� j
WEDNESDAY, 13 FEBRUARY 2008
--
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL FEF
n
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ned Wood, Michelle Payne, Edgar Thornton, Karen Leigh
MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Sarah Walz, Emily Farber
OTHERS PRESENT: Shawn Harris, Dave Zahradnik, Kevin Monson, Greg Lacy, Rev. Rudy
Juarez
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS:
5W
1. EXC0000001: A public hearing regarding an application submitted by Overdrive Auto for a
special exception to allow a vehicle repair use in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone at
1021 Gilbert Street Ct.
Findings of Fact:
The Board finds that the subject property is located in the CC -2 zone along Gilbert Court
and more than 100 feet from the nearest residential zone. The Board finds that the subject
property abuts a public zone to the south and railroad tracks to the northwest. The Board
finds that the neighborhood to the south and west of the subject property consists largely of
vehicle repair uses and that the existing building on the property was designed for a vehicle
repair use. The Board finds that there are other social service uses in the neighborhood
including a Johnson County building, Salvation Army and the Crisis Center, which generate
pedestrian traffic along Gilbert Court. The Board finds that the applicant has indicated that
vehicles will not be stored on the property for more than the 45 -day maximum and that most
vehicles will be on the lot for only 48 hours.
The Board finds that the property is not currently in compliance with the commercial site
development standards—that it lacks required setbacks and screening for vehicle use areas
as well as appropriate curbing and a required sidewalk. The board finds that 10 -foot
setbacks with screening to the S2 standard between vehicle use areas and the public right-
of-way, a 5 -foot setback with S2 screening between parking areas and adjacent property,
and screening of outdoor storage areas with S5 solid fencing with S3 landscape screening
outside the fence are also required by the specific standards for the special exception. The
Board finds that the applicant has proposed to insert vinyl lath into the existing 5 -6 -foot
chain link fence in order to provide a solid fence screen around the storage area, which will
be located toward the rear of the property.
Conclusions of Law: So long as the subject property is brought into compliance with the
commercial site development standards—especially the requirements to limit curb cuts,
provide a sidewalk, and separate vehicle use areas from pedestrian area—the Board finds
that the proposed exception will not endanger the public health, comfort, safety, or general
welfare. Based on the character of the neighborhood as an important niche for vehicle repair
uses, and based on the expressed commitment of the applicant to bring the property into
conformance with all commercial site development standards and requirements for the
special exception, the Board concludes that the proposed special exception will not be
injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not
impair property values in the neighborhood,. nor will it impede the normal and orderly
development of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district.
The Board concludes that the lath fencing proposed by the applicant is appropriate to meet
the S5 screening standard for an outdoor storage area in this location. The Board concludes
that due to activities associated with the railroad, vegetation is unlikely to thrive along the
rear property line and therefore waives the requirement for S3 landscape screening in this
area.
The Board concludes that by bringing the curb cuts and sidewalks into conformance with the
code requirements the applicant will have taken adequate measures to provide ingress and
egress designed to minimize traffic congestion and that adequate utilities, access roads,
drainage and other necessary facilities are already in place. The Board concludes that by
bringing the property into compliance with the commercial site development standards and
the specific criteria for screening vehicle use and storage areas that the special exception
will conform to all applicable regulations for the zone in which it is located. The Board
concludes that all other aspects of the proposal will be reviewed by the building department
to ensure compliance with the zoning code.
The Board concludes that the Comprehensive Plan supports the location of such uses in
commercial zones provided that they meet the criteria in the code, and that this particular
neighborhood, south of Kirkwood Avenue and north of Gilbert Street, is an established niche
for such uses.
Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves a vehicle repair use in the CC -2 zone at
1021 Gilbert Court subject to submission of a site plan that shows compliance with all
commercial site development standards in the zoning code, including the following
• Compliance with all required setbacks and S2 screening to separate parking
areas, drives and aisles form the public right-of-way and abutting properties.
Planters must be approved by the City Forester to assure appropriate depth and
drainage.
• Compliance with the 5-6 foot solid fence as proposed by the applicant to screen
the outdoor storage area from abutting properties to the south and west and
required S3 landscape screening outside the fence along the south property
line. (S3 screening waived along the west property line.)
• Compliance with access standards (curb cuts) to control vehicle access to the
property.
• Construction of the required north -south sidewalk within the right-of-way as well
as a designated pedestrian access to the building from the public right -of way
• Compliance with off-street parking design standards. O
• A performance guarantee to insure that all required improvements considered=as
part of this exception process are installed in a timely manner. c
IN)
_;
u�
0 op
2. EXCA-0000 —A public hearing regarding an application submitted Regina High School
for a special exception to allow expansion of a school facility in the Low Density Single
Family Residential (RS -5) zone located at 2150 Rochester Avenue.
Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is located in the RS -5 zone and
that all expansions to school facilities of more than 500 square feet require a special
exception. The Board finds that the proposed expansion is for a 630 square foot press box
addition and that the subject property on which the facility is located consists of more than
37 acres. The Board finds that the press box is located behind the school building and will
not be visible from the public street. The Board finds that the existing press box and
proposed addition do not exceed the 35 -foot maximum height standards for the zone and,
being more than 300 feet from neighboring residential property, exceeds all required
setbacks for the use.
Conclusions of Law: Based on the location and limited size of the proposed expansion, the
Board concludes that the proposed use will be compatible with adjacent uses and will not
have significant adverse affects on the livability of the nearby residential uses due to noise,
glare from lights, late night operations, odors and litter. For these same reasons and
because the addition will not generate additional traffic or alter the basic use of the site, the
board concludes that the proposed use 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 vicinity, nor diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood
nor impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property.
The Board concludes that all adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary
facilities are already in place and that the proposed exception will have no impact on ingress
and egress from the site. The Board concludes that the proposed expansion is compatible
with the Comprehensive Plan, which allows educational .facilities in residential zones so long
as they are designed to be compatible with surrounding uses.
Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves a special exception to allow 42'x 15'
addition to the existing press box.
3.. EXC08-00003: A public hearing regarding an application submitted St. Patricks Churclfor
a special exception to allow for special exception to allow construction of a chu r
property in the Low Density Single Family Residential (RS -5) zone located at 43y3a t.
Patrick Drive.
Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is located in the RS-5zdnne. TFae
Board finds that the property has access from a collector street (St. Patrick Drive -Ahe c�
south and will likely have secondary access via a public street to be built at some -int in
the future along the church's north property line. The Board finds that the propomechurch=."
structure will be 47.5 feet high with a bell tower of 113 -feet in height. The Board finds that
the proposed site plan for the church shows building setbacks in considerable excess of
what is required by code.
The Board finds that the site plan for the church shows two parking areas with a total of 160
parking spaces, which is the minimum parking required based on the square footage of the
main sanctuary. The board finds that the site plan meets the required side setbacks for the
parking areas (20 feet), that the parking areas are set behind the front plane of the building
(140 feet back from the front property line), and that all required landscape screening for the
parking areas is shown.
Conclusions of Law: Because the church has appropriate vehicle access, substantially
exceeds building setback requirements, meets or exceeds all setbacks for parking areas,
has limited the size of its parking areas, and provided all required screening for the parking
areas, the Board concludes that the proposed use is designed to be compatible with
adjacent uses. The Board concludes that by dividing the parking into two separate areas on
each side of the church, by setting the parking areas behind the front plane of the building
(with its substantial front and rear setbacks), and providing all required setbacks and
landscape screening for the parking areas, that the parking will not detract from the
residential character of the neighborhood and that it meets the multi -family site development
standards for location of surface parking. For the same reasons, the Board concludes that
the proposed use will not have significant adverse effects on the livability of nearby
residential uses due to noise, glare from lights, or late-night operations, and that the
proposed use is not by nature one that would generate odors or litter.
For all the reasons cited above, the Board concludes that the specific proposed exception
will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, and general welfare;
and will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the vicinity, and will
not diminish or impair property values. For all the reasons cited above, and because the site
plan for the church has dedicated right-of-way for public streets at both its north and south
boundaries and an east -west pedestrian easement and sidewalk across the property, and
because the church faces onto the public square the church site is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and 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.
Because the Church provides its main access via a collector street, and has committed to
building secondary access via a future street located to the north of the property at such
time as the new road is developed by the City, the Board concludes that adequate vehicle
access roads are in place and adequate measures have been taken to minimize congestion
on public streets. The Board concludes that the proposed use meets the requirements of the
RS -5 zone and that through final site plan review the applicant will be required to
demonstrate compliance with all other regulations in the zoning code, including but not
limited to stormwater drainage and lighting.
Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves the application for construction of a facility
for religious/group assembly in the RS -5 zone located at 4330 St. Patrick Drive, subject to
the following conditions:
1. substantial compliance with the site plan and elevations submitted, and
N
2. dedication of rights-of-way and the pedestrian access easement as described in theme
CZA, prior to issuance of a building permit.
—
3. compliance with all other elements of the CZA.
> `• ry
—
J
.:i
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.
Ili I !
Wood,Ned
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 13th day of February, 2008, as the
same appears of record in my Office.
Dated at Iowa City, this 27 day of % 2007
CORPORATE SEAL MarianK Ka City Cle rk7p-''
MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Sarah Walz, Emily Farber
OTHERS PRESENT: Shawn Harris, Dave Zahradnik, Kevin Monson, Greg Lacy, Rev. Rudy
Juarez
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS:
1. EXC00-00001: A public hearing regarding an application submitted by Overdrive Auto for a
special exception to allow a vehicle repair use in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone at
1021 Gilbert Street Ct.
Findings of Fact:
The Board finds that the subject property is located in the CC -2 zone along Gilbert Court
and more than 100 feet from the nearest residential zone. The Board finds that the subject
property abuts a public zone to the south and railroad tracks to the northwest. The Board
finds that the neighborhood to the south and west of the subject property consists largely of
vehicle repair uses and that the existing building on the property was designed for a vehicle
repair use. The Board finds that there are other social service uses in the neighborhood
including a Johnson County building, Salvation Army and the Crisis Center, which generate
pedestrian traffic along Gilbert Court. The Board finds that the applicant has indicated that
vehicles will not be stored on the property for more than the 45 -day maximum and that most
vehicles will be on the lot for only 48 hours.
The Board finds that the property is not currently in compliance with the commercial site
development standards—that it lacks required setbacks and screening for vehicle use areas
as well as appropriate curbing and a required sidewalk. The board finds that 10 -foot
setbacks with screening to the S2 standard between vehicle use areas and the public right-
of-way, a 5 -foot setback with S2 screening between parking areas and adjacent property,
and screening of outdoor storage areas with S5 solid fencing with S3 landscape screening
outside the fence are also required by the specific standards for the special exception. The
Board finds that the applicant has proposed to insert vinyl lath into the existing 5 -6 -foot
chain link fence in order to provide a solid fence screen around the storage area, which will
be located toward the rear of the property.
Conclusions of Law: So long as the subject property is brought into compliance with the
commercial site development standards—especially the requirements to limit curb cuts,
provide a sidewalk, and separate vehicle use areas from pedestrian area—the Board finds
that the proposed exception will not endanger the public health, comfort, safety, or general
welfare. Based on the character of the neighborhood as an important niche for vehicle repair
uses, and based on the expressed commitment of the applicant to bring the property into
conformance with all commercial site development standards and requirements for the
Doc ID: 021118680005 TVDe. GEN
Recorded: 03/31/2008 at 01:37:30 PM
Fee Amt: $27.00 Peas 1 of 5
Johnson Countv Iowa
Q
0
�,
Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Wasl Kim Painter County Recorder
Q
13K4279 PG960.964
{
DECISION
N
IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
7
WEDNESDAY, 13 FEBRUARY 2008
F-
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL FFF
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ned Wood, Michelle Payne, Edgar Thornton, Karen Leigh
MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Sarah Walz, Emily Farber
OTHERS PRESENT: Shawn Harris, Dave Zahradnik, Kevin Monson, Greg Lacy, Rev. Rudy
Juarez
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS:
1. EXC00-00001: A public hearing regarding an application submitted by Overdrive Auto for a
special exception to allow a vehicle repair use in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone at
1021 Gilbert Street Ct.
Findings of Fact:
The Board finds that the subject property is located in the CC -2 zone along Gilbert Court
and more than 100 feet from the nearest residential zone. The Board finds that the subject
property abuts a public zone to the south and railroad tracks to the northwest. The Board
finds that the neighborhood to the south and west of the subject property consists largely of
vehicle repair uses and that the existing building on the property was designed for a vehicle
repair use. The Board finds that there are other social service uses in the neighborhood
including a Johnson County building, Salvation Army and the Crisis Center, which generate
pedestrian traffic along Gilbert Court. The Board finds that the applicant has indicated that
vehicles will not be stored on the property for more than the 45 -day maximum and that most
vehicles will be on the lot for only 48 hours.
The Board finds that the property is not currently in compliance with the commercial site
development standards—that it lacks required setbacks and screening for vehicle use areas
as well as appropriate curbing and a required sidewalk. The board finds that 10 -foot
setbacks with screening to the S2 standard between vehicle use areas and the public right-
of-way, a 5 -foot setback with S2 screening between parking areas and adjacent property,
and screening of outdoor storage areas with S5 solid fencing with S3 landscape screening
outside the fence are also required by the specific standards for the special exception. The
Board finds that the applicant has proposed to insert vinyl lath into the existing 5 -6 -foot
chain link fence in order to provide a solid fence screen around the storage area, which will
be located toward the rear of the property.
Conclusions of Law: So long as the subject property is brought into compliance with the
commercial site development standards—especially the requirements to limit curb cuts,
provide a sidewalk, and separate vehicle use areas from pedestrian area—the Board finds
that the proposed exception will not endanger the public health, comfort, safety, or general
welfare. Based on the character of the neighborhood as an important niche for vehicle repair
uses, and based on the expressed commitment of the applicant to bring the property into
conformance with all commercial site development standards and requirements for the
special exception, the Board concludes that the proposed special exception will not be
injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not
impair property values in the neighborhood, nor will it impede the normal and orderly
development of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district.
The Board concludes that the lath fencing proposed by the applicant is appropriate to meet
the S5 screening standard for an outdoor storage area in this location. The Board concludes
that due to activities associated with the railroad, vegetation is unlikely to thrive along the
rear property line and therefore waives the requirement for S3 landscape screening in this
area.
The Board concludes that by bringing the curb cuts and sidewalks into conformance with the
code requirements the applicant will have taken adequate measures to provide ingress and
egress designed to minimize traffic congestion and that adequate utilities, access roads,
drainage and other necessary facilities are already in place. The Board concludes that by
bringing the property into compliance with the commercial site development standards and
the specific criteria for screening vehicle use and storage areas that the special exception
will conform to all applicable regulations for the zone in which it is located. The Board
concludes that all other aspects of the proposal will be reviewed by the building department
to ensure compliance with the zoning code.
The Board concludes that the Comprehensive Plan supports the location of such uses in
commercial zones provided that they meet the criteria in the code, and that this particular
neighborhood, south of Kirkwood Avenue and north of Gilbert Street, is an established niche
for such uses.
Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves a vehicle repair use in the CC -2 zone at
1021 Gilbert Court subject to submission of a site plan that shows compliance with all
commercial site development standards in the zoning code, including the following
• Compliance with all required setbacks and S2 screening to separate parking
areas, drives and aisles form the public right-of-way and abutting properties.
Planters must be approved by the City Forester to assure appropriate depth and
drainage.
• Compliance with the 5-6 foot solid fence as proposed by the applicant to screen
the outdoor storage area from abutting properties to the south and west and
required S3 landscape screening outside the fence along the south property
line. (S3 screening waived along the west property line.)
• Compliance with access standards (curb cuts) to control vehicle access to the
property.
• Construction of the required north -south sidewalk within the right-of-way as well
as a designated pedestrian access to the building from the public right -of way
• Compliance with off-street parking design standards. O l
J
• A performance guarantee to insure that all required improvements considered as
part of this exception process are installed in a timely manner.
72m
,5"
2. EXC00-0000'— A public hearing regarding an application submitted Regina High School
for a special exception to allow expansion of a school facility in the Low Density Single
Family Residential (RS -5) zone located at 2150 Rochester Avenue.
Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is located in the RS -5 zone and
that all expansions to school facilities of more than 500 square feet require a special
exception. The Board finds that the proposed expansion is for a 630 square foot press box
addition and that the subject property on which the facility is located consists of more than
37 acres. The Board finds that the press box is located behind the school building and will
not be visible from the public street. The Board finds that the existing press box and
proposed addition do not exceed the 35 -foot maximum height standards for the zone and,
being more than 300 feet from neighboring residential property, exceeds all required
setbacks for the use.
Conclusions of Law: Based on the location and limited size of the proposed expansion, the
Board concludes that the proposed use will be compatible with adjacent uses and will not
have significant adverse affects on the livability of the nearby residential uses due to noise,
glare from lights, late night operations, odors and litter. For these same reasons and
because the addition will not generate additional traffic or alter the basic use of the site, the
board concludes that the proposed use 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 vicinity, nor diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood
nor impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property.
The Board concludes that all adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary
facilities are already in place and that the proposed exception will have no impact on ingress
and egress from the site. The Board concludes that the proposed expansion is compatible
with the Comprehensive Plan, which allows educational facilities in residential zones so long
as they are designed to be compatible with surrounding uses.
Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves a special exception to allow 42' x 15'
addition to the existing press box.
VJ
3. EXC08-00003. A public hearing regarding an application submitted St. Patrick's Church for
a special exception to allow for special exception to allow construction of a church for
property in the Low Density Single Family Residential (RS -5) zone located at 4330 St.
Patrick Drive.
Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is located in the RS -5 zone. The
Board finds that the property has access from a collector street (St. Patrick Drive) to the
south and will likely have secondary access via a public street to be built at some point in
the future along the church's north property line. The Board finds that the proposed church
structure will be 47.5 feet high with a bell tower of 113 -feet in height. The Board finds that
the proposed site plan for the church shows building setbacks in considerable excess of
what is required by code.
The Board finds that the site plan for the church shows two parking areas with a total of 160
parking spaces, which is the minimum parking required based on the square footage of the
main sanctuary. The board finds that the site plan meets the required side setbacks for the
parking areas (20 feet), that the parking areas are set behind the front plane of the building
(140 feet back from the front property line), and that all required landscape screening for the
parking areas is shown.
Conclusions of Law: Because the church has appropriate vehicle access, substantially
exceeds building setback requirements, meets or exceeds all setbacks for parking areas,
has limited the size of its parking areas, and provided all required screening for the parking
areas, the Board concludes that the proposed use is designed to be compatible with
adjacent uses. The Board concludes that by dividing the parking into two separate areas on
each side of the church, by setting the parking areas behind the front plane of the building
(with its substantial front and rear setbacks), and providing all required setbacks and
landscape screening for the parking areas, that the parking will not detract from the
residential character of the neighborhood and that it meets the multi -family site development
standards for location of surface parking. For the same reasons, the Board concludes that
the proposed use will not have significant adverse effects on the livability of nearby
residential uses due to noise, glare from lights, or late-night operations, and that the
proposed use is not by nature one that would generate odors or litter.
For all the reasons cited above, the Board concludes that the specific proposed exception
will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, and general welfare;
and will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the vicinity, and will
not diminish or impair property values. For all the reasons cited above, and because the site
plan for the church has dedicated right-of-way for public streets at both its north and south
boundaries and an east -west pedestrian easement and sidewalk across the property, and
because the church faces onto the public square the church site is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and 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.
Because the Church provides its main access via a collector street, and has committed to
building secondary access via a future street located to the north of the property at such
time as the new road is developed by the City, the Board concludes that adequate vehicle
access roads are in place and adequate measures have been taken to minimize congestion
on public streets. The Board concludes that the proposed use meets the requirements of the
RS -5 zone and that through final site plan review the applicant will be required to
demonstrate compliance with all other regulations in the zoning code, including but not
limited to stormwater drainage and lighting.
Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves the application for construction of a facility
for religious/group assembly in the RS -5 zone located at 4330 St. Patrick Drive, subject to
the following conditions:
1. substantial compliance with the site plan and elevations submitted, and
N
2. dedication of rights-of-way and the pedestrian access easement as described in then
CZA, prior to issuance of a building permit.
3. compliance with all other elements of the CZA.
a <
N
FTI
L
!y %
N
Ln
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.
A 10i 1� In;
Ned Wood, Chairperson
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 13th day of February, 2008, as the
same appears of record in my Office.
Dated at Iowa City, this J % day of 20 OF
flus[ -x% K� - ?��44i
CORPORATE SEAL Marian K. Karr, City Clerk
C7
N
,17
m
x
DO
f
Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5230
DECISION
IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 13, 2008
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Michelle Payne, Edgar Thornton, Ned Wood
MEMBERS ABSENT: Karen Leigh (recused)
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Sarah Walz
OTHERS PRESENT: Bob Miller
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS:
Doc ID: 021131350002 TVDe: GEN
Recorded: 04/14/2008 at 11:41:33 AM
Fee Amt: $12.00 Page 1 of 2
Johnson County Iona
Kim Painter Countv Recorder
BK4285 PG 826-827
1. EXC08-00005 public hearing regarding an application by Mercy Hospital for a special
exception to reduce the principal building setback from 10 feet to 0 feet on the north side of
the property, located in the CO -1 zone at 500 East Market Street.
Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the Mercy Hospital building is the only structure along
this frontage and that it extends for nearly the entire two block frontage (approx. 600 feet)
along Bloomington Street, between Gilbert and South Johnson Streets). The Board finds
that the hospital's architect has indicated that the interior of the building may not be
retrofitted to accommodate the larger elevator, which is required in order to meet
International Building Code and Life Safety Code requirements. The Board finds that the
property line is approximately 4 feet from the existing sidewalk and that the addition,
including covered stair and entrance, will be approximately 40-45 feet long. The Board finds
that the majority of the hospital building is set 9 feet from the property line.
The Board finds that the Bloomington Street right-of-way is a wide right of way,
approximately 80 feet, and that the addition proposed is to be located close to the
intersection with Van Buren Street, which is also an 80 -foot right-of-way. The Board finds
that all but one of the properties across the street from the hospital are also in the CO -1
zone. The board finds that the subject entrance to the building is a secondary entrance and
that the proposed modifications to the building addition will not alter the amount of traffic or
general use of the subject entrance for the hospital. The Board finds that a final site plan
must be approved by the building department to ensure that all lighting and other features of
the addition meet standards of the zoning code. The board finds that the Comprehensive
Plan recognizes Mercy Hospital as an important institutional use in the community but
acknowledges conflicts due to parking demand generated by the use.
Conclusions of Law: Because the 600 -foot long hospital structure is the only building on the
two -block frontage of Bloomington Street and is located within the 10 -foot setback, and
because the building cannot be retrofitted to accommodate the required elevator, the Board
concludes that the situation is peculiar to the property and that there is practical difficulty
complying with the setback standards. For these same reasons and because the addition
will not alter the use of this entrance or generate additional traffic around this entrance to the
hospital, and because the proposed addition represents only a small portion of the building,
and because the Bloomington Street right-of-way is a wide right-of-way, the Board
concludes the special exception will not be contrary to the purpose of the setback
fC�
regulations; will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or
general welfare, nor will it be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the
immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values nor impede
the normal and orderly development of surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone.
The board concludes that adequate utilities and access roads are already provided to the
site and that no additional measures are needed to provide ingress and egress to the site as
the new addition will not alter the use or traffic generated by the site and is consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan. The board concludes that all other aspects of the proposal not
discussed in this hearing will be reviewed by the building department for compliance with the
code.
Disposition: By a vote of 3-0 the Board approves EXC08-00005, an application for a setback
reduction from 10 feet to 0 feet along the Bloomington Street frontage for property located in
the CO -1 zone at 500 East Market Street be approved subject to substantial compliance
with the site plan submitted.
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 fled 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.
4,v Ids
• ••• •-
son ---
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 12th day of March, 2008, as the
same appears of record in my Office.
Dated at Iowa City, this // day of 20 4�79'
MaAan K. Karr, City Clerk
CORPORATE SEAT.
Doc ID: 021202080004 Tvoe. GEN
Recorded: 06/24/2008 at 01:21:55 PM
Fee Amt: $22.00 PeGe 1 of 4
Johnson Countv Iowa
Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-52 Kim Painter Count Recorder
DECISION BK4316 PG32-35
IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
WEDNESDAY, MAY 14, 2008
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL FeF
MEMBERS PRESENT: Michelle Payne, Edgar Thornton, Ned Wood and Caroline Sheerin
.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Karen Leigh
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek and Sarah Walz
+C-)
OTHERS PRESENT: Shawn Lueth, Trevor Huffaker m
3
O�
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: ��
q
D
G
1. EXC08-00007: Public hearing regarding an application submitted by Hoover Heights
rn
Investors for a special exception to establish a drive-through facility in the CC -2 zone on Lot
49 of Olde Towne Village.
Findings of Fact: The board finds the proposed drive-through is to be located in the
northwest corner of lot 49 and that the single drive-through lane is located behind the
restaurant building. The board finds that the proposed 15 -foot wide drive through lane is set
back 20 feet from Rochester Avenue and 10 feet from the adjacent commercial property to
the west and that the site plan shows the required 10 -foot buffer of S2 landscape screening
within these setbacks. The board finds that there is a significant change in grade from the
Rochester Avenue right-of-way and the drive-through location such that the use will be
partially screened from the road by the change in grade.
The board finds that the proposed site plan shows two stacking spaces at the service
window and up to three stacking spaces at the order board. The board finds that property
located north of lot 49 is zoned ID -RS and is described in the Northeast District Plan as
future single-family residential development. The board finds that all lighting for the
proposed use must be reviewed by the building department to insure compliance with the
standards in the code.
The board finds that all access to the commercial development is limited to one access point
from Scott Boulevard via Westbury Drive and a point from Rochester Avenue via Eastbury
Drive. The board finds that adequate utilities, drainage and other facilities are in place for
the commercial development. The board finds that the Northeast District Plan and the
conditional zoning agreement for the property describe this area as a neighborhood
commercial center with an emphasis on pedestrian design.
Conclusions of Law: Based on the proposed location of the drive-through, the 20 -foot
setback from Rochester Avenue and the proposed S2 landscape screening, a limitation on
the hours of operation of 6 A.M. to 12 A.M. and staff review of proposed lighting for the use,
the board concludes that the drive-through will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of
the property in the immediate vicinity, nor will it diminish property values in the
neighborhood. For the above reasons along with the location of the 15 -foot wide single
drive-through lane to the rear of the restaurant building, the number of stacking spaces
provided and the limited access from Rochester Avenue and Scott Boulevard, the board
concludes that proposed drive-through will not be detrimental or endanger the public health,
safety, comfort, or general welfare. For all of the above reasons, the board concludes that
the special exception will not impede the normal and orderly development of surrounding
property.
The board concludes that all adequate utilities, drainage, and access roads for the
commercial site are already being provided and that the limitations on access from
Rochester Avenue and Scott Boulevard via the private streets (Westbury and Eastbury
Drives) will provide ingress and egress so as to minimize congestion on public streets. The
board concludes that the building department will review all other aspects of the plan for
zoning compliance. The board concludes that based on the location of the drive-through
lane, its separation from other uses on the lot and its limitation to one-lane only, the
proposed exception complies with the Comprehensive Plan and its emphasis on the ZE
pedestrian oriented design of the commercial development. n _
Disposition: By a vote of 3-1, Wood voting against, the Board approves the special.' w
exception subject to substantial compliance with the site plan submitted and subject to
restricting the use of the drive-through facility to the hours of 6 A.M. to midnight. O I
D r_
c.
2. EXC08-00008 — Public hearing regarding an application submitted by Parkview Church for a
special exception to allow an addition to a church facility in the RS -5 zone at 15 Foster
Road.
Findings of Fact: The board finds that the church is located in the RS -5 zone at the
intersection of Foster Road and Dubuque Street, both of which meet or exceed the 28 -foot
width requirement. The board finds that the proposed site plan shows compliance with the
required front (20 feet), side (20 feet) and rear (50 feet) setbacks for churches located in the
single family zone.
The board finds that the church is proposing a 12,825 square foot addition along Taft Road
and that the south elevation of the church is longer than 200 feet. The board finds that the
proposed elevation of the addition fagade is broken into distinct sections, each measuring
less than 50 feet, and that these sections feature projections and recesses and
corresponding variation in materials and roof line as required by code.
The board finds that the current parking area for the church is non -conforming with regard to
perimeter landscape screening and that the code requires that the screening be brought into
compliance at the time an addition is built. The board finds that the church is not required
nor is it proposing any additional parking and that the construction of the proposed addition
will eliminate up to 25 parking spaces. The board finds that the applicant has indicated the
addition is an extension of current uses and will not increase the overall occupancy of the
building.
The board finds that there is inadequate drainage in the southeast portion of the parking
area such that a trench has developed between the parking area and the Taft Speedway
drainage area.
Conclusions of Law: The board concludes that the proposed addition and the existing
church structure meet the specific setback and vehicle access standards in the code. For
i
this reason along with the limited size of the addition in proportion to the existing structure,
the proposed addition shows the required elements necessary to meet the multi -family site
development standards that are intended to reduce the mass of the building, and the
proposed site plan indicates installation of the required S2 landscape screening around the
perimeter of the parking area, the Board concludes that the proposed addition is designed to
be compatible with the adjacent uses.
As there is no additional parking proposed for the use nor any requirement for additional
parking, and the applicant is required to provide perimeter S2 screening for the parking
area, the board concludes that the parking area will not erode the single family residential
character of the neighborhood and that the proposed perimeter screening will minimize any
noise or glare due to vehicle traffic associated with the parking area.
For all of the above reasons and because the applicant has indicated that the uses
contained in the addition will not generate significant new traffic to the site nor the need for
additional parking, the board concludes that the specific proposed exception will not be
detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, nor will it be
injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity or substantially
diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. For these same reasons, the board
concludes that the proposed addition will not impede the orderly development of the
surrounding area and the present ingress and egress from the site do not need alteration.
The board concludes that all utilities and access roads are already in place and that the
building department will review the drainage system and all other aspects of the proposed
plan to insure compliance with other aspects of the code and to insure appropriate drainage
for the property. Because the addition for the church meets all other criteria for the special
exception the board concludes that it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, which
encourages the location of institutional uses in residential neighborhoods so long as they
comply with the standards in the zoning code.
Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves the application for a special exception to
allow a 12,825 square foot addition to the church building for classroom and related uses
subject to submittal of a landscaping plan to bring the non -conforming parking area into
compliance with current perimeter screening requirements and subject to improvements to
the drainage system for the southeast portion of the parking area. Further, the Board
approves an extension to the special exception making it valid for a period of eighteen (18)
months.
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. _;
<
3;Q-
o
>
-G
v
/I /; /a/�y
Ned Wood, Chairperson
i -23 d$'
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 May, 2008, as the same
appears of record in my Office.
Dated at Iowa City, this .23 rd day of -1-" N E , 20 0 oQ
Mariaty Clerk
CORPORATE SEAL
o
-iceW
-< r
M
m
�A
o
V
• Doc ID: 021265370006 TVDO: GEN
Recorded: 08/28/2006 et 11:16:43 AN
Fee Amt: $32.00 Pece 1 oT 6
Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, W 52240:3191356-5230 Johnson Countv Iowa
Kim Painter County Recorder
DECISION BK4344 PG353-358
IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 11, 2008
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Edgar Thornton, Caroline Sheerin,
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ned Wood
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Sarah Walz, Sarah Greenwood-Hektoen p; a
OTHERS PRESENT: Royce Chestnut, Tammy Kramer, Rev. Orlando Dial, Melvin Shaw
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS:
1. EXC08-00009: a public hearing regarding an application submitted by Royce Chestnut for a
special exception to reduce the required front principal building setback for property located
in the RS -8 zone at 425 Clark Street.
Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is located in the Clark Street
Conservation District and the house is considered a contributing structure within the Clark
Street Conservation District. The Board finds that the historic architecture of the house
would normally include a front porch and that historic documents show that the house did
have a front porch in the past, which was later removed . The board finds that in 2007 the
applicant was granted a certificate of appropriateness by the Historic Preservation
Commission ("HPC') to construct a front porch. The board finds that many houses along this
portion of Clark Street maintain their historic styles and include front porches, and the
historic architecture of this house would normally feature a front porch.
The board finds that the front entrance of the house is approximately 2 feet above grade and
that the existing stoop for the house is so small that opening the front door requires one to
back off the front stoop. The board finds that subsequent to HPC approval, the applicant
removed an awning that provided shelter at the front entrance in anticipation of constructing
the front porch, before the building permit was denied based on the setback.
The board finds that the required front setback in the RS -8 zone is 15 feet and that the
subject house is set at 13 feet. The board finds that the subject street frontage is more than
900 feet long, more than twice the average block length, and that houses established along
this street frontage have a wide variety of setbacks such that setback averaging cannot be
applied to provide a remedy for the subject property. The board finds that a number of the
houses on the northern portion of the block, which are the oldest structures, have setbacks
of less than 15 feet, including the 3 houses directly to the south of 425 Clark Street. The
board finds that the adjacent house at 427 Clark Street, which is set at 13 feet, also had a
front porch at one time and the house at 431 Clark, which has a front porch, is set at 6 feet.
The board finds that the subject lot is 33 feet wide, which is less than the 40 -foot width
required in the RS -8 zone and that vehicle access is provided via a driveway on the south
side of the house. The board finds that Clark Street is a 60 -foot right-of-way.
Conclusions of Law: The board concludes that the situation is peculiar to the property for the
following reasons: the subject property is located in a conservation district and is
r—
i it
0
o
Karen Leigh, Michelle Sli lapgogqki
0--'
tV
cr
m
>
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Sarah Walz, Sarah Greenwood-Hektoen p; a
OTHERS PRESENT: Royce Chestnut, Tammy Kramer, Rev. Orlando Dial, Melvin Shaw
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS:
1. EXC08-00009: a public hearing regarding an application submitted by Royce Chestnut for a
special exception to reduce the required front principal building setback for property located
in the RS -8 zone at 425 Clark Street.
Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is located in the Clark Street
Conservation District and the house is considered a contributing structure within the Clark
Street Conservation District. The Board finds that the historic architecture of the house
would normally include a front porch and that historic documents show that the house did
have a front porch in the past, which was later removed . The board finds that in 2007 the
applicant was granted a certificate of appropriateness by the Historic Preservation
Commission ("HPC') to construct a front porch. The board finds that many houses along this
portion of Clark Street maintain their historic styles and include front porches, and the
historic architecture of this house would normally feature a front porch.
The board finds that the front entrance of the house is approximately 2 feet above grade and
that the existing stoop for the house is so small that opening the front door requires one to
back off the front stoop. The board finds that subsequent to HPC approval, the applicant
removed an awning that provided shelter at the front entrance in anticipation of constructing
the front porch, before the building permit was denied based on the setback.
The board finds that the required front setback in the RS -8 zone is 15 feet and that the
subject house is set at 13 feet. The board finds that the subject street frontage is more than
900 feet long, more than twice the average block length, and that houses established along
this street frontage have a wide variety of setbacks such that setback averaging cannot be
applied to provide a remedy for the subject property. The board finds that a number of the
houses on the northern portion of the block, which are the oldest structures, have setbacks
of less than 15 feet, including the 3 houses directly to the south of 425 Clark Street. The
board finds that the adjacent house at 427 Clark Street, which is set at 13 feet, also had a
front porch at one time and the house at 431 Clark, which has a front porch, is set at 6 feet.
The board finds that the subject lot is 33 feet wide, which is less than the 40 -foot width
required in the RS -8 zone and that vehicle access is provided via a driveway on the south
side of the house. The board finds that Clark Street is a 60 -foot right-of-way.
Conclusions of Law: The board concludes that the situation is peculiar to the property for the
following reasons: the subject property is located in a conservation district and is
r—
i it
0
designated as a contributing historic structure; historic documents show that at one time the
house included a front porch and the architectural style of the house would normally feature
a porch; there is a wide variation in established setbacks along this long street frontage,
which precludes setback averaging as a basis for relief from the required setback; and
surrounding properties feature setbacks that are less than the required 15 -foot setback.
Because the front stoop is small and unsheltered and because the lot is unusually narrow
with vehicle access provided from the front of the property, the board finds that there is
practical difficulty in complying with the setback requirements.
The board finds that because the setback reduction is for an open air porch only and
because Clark Street is a 60 -foot wide right-of-way, granting the reduction will achieve the
intent of the zoning ordinance to maintain light, air, and separation for fire protection and
access for fire fighting and will not reduce opportunities for privacy between buildings.
Because a number of surrounding buildings have setbacks that are less than 15 feet, and
because the reduction is for an open air porch and not an enclosed addition, the reduced
setback will reflect the general building scale and placement of structures in the
neighborhood and will promote a reasonable physical relationship between buildings. For all
the reasons stated above, and based on HPC approval of the porch design, the board
concludes that any negative effects resulting from the setback reduction will be mitigated by
creating a more aesthetically pleasing and historically appropriate front entrance to the
house.
For all the reasons cited above, the board concludes that the proposed exception will not
detrimental 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 vicinity or substantially diminish
property values. Likewise the board concludes that the proposed setback reduction will not
impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property
for uses permitted in the zone. The board concludes that all adequate utilities, access roads,
drainage and/or necessary facilities are already provided and that there will be no impact on
ingress or egress from the subject property. The board concludes that the proposed
exception conforms to all other applicable regulations or standards of the zone and that it is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, which encourages the restoration of historic
structures in Iowa City neighborhoods. 0
Disposition: By a vote of 3-0 the Board approves EXC08-00009 an application for --a special r
exception to reduce the required front principle building setback from 15 feet to 7 fee€fore
property located in the RS -8 zone at 425 Clark Street to allow construction of an open airy
porch subject to compliance with the elevations and site plan submitted and approved b)�- r�
the Historic Preservation Commission. c)
D -
2. EXC08-00010: a public hearing regarding an application submitted by Tammy Kramer for a
special exception to reduce the required front principal building setback for property located
in the RS -5 zone at 300 Kimball Road to allow required parking to be located within said
setback.
Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is required to provide a 20 -foot
setback. The board finds that because the property includes an accessory apartment, the
applicant must provide 2 required parking spaces and that only one of the required spaces
may be provided in the front setback. The board finds that the subject property has two
parking pads located in the front setback—one with space for four cars and one with space
for two cars. The board finds that there is no on -street parking allowed on the subject portion
of Kimball Road, but that there is good visibility along this portion of the road. The board
finds that the subject house backs up to a steep ravine and constructing a parking space
outside the 20 -foot setback may require the removal of a mature tree and will consume any
remaining, useable open space. .
The board finds that the steep topography of the neighborhood and the restrictions on
parking along this portion of Kimball road have created a situation in which most parking
within the neighborhood is provided in the front setbacks of most neighboring properties.
Conclusions of Law: Based on the topography of the of the subject property, the Board
concludes that the situation is peculiar to the property and that there is practical difficulty
complying with the setback requirements for parking as installation of the additional required
parking would consume what little level ground and useable open space remains on the
property. Because the reduction in the required setback is for the purpose of
accommodating required parking only, which is already constructed, the board concludes
that the special exception will not be contrary to the purpose of the setback regulations,
which are intended to preserve space, privacy, light and air, and flexibility for future
development between buildings. For the above reasons, and because other properties in the
neighborhood have similar topography and because on -street parking is prohibited along
this portion of Kimball Road, the Board concludes that the setback reduction will not create
an unreasonable relationship between residences.
For all the reasons cited above, and because the subject property has space to
accommodate at least 6 off-street parking spaces, the board concludes that the specific
proposed exception will not be detrimental 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. For these same reasons the board concludes that the establishment of the
proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement
of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which the property is located
and that it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Disposition: By a vote of 3-0 the Board approves EXC08-00010, an application to(7duce tl e
required front principal building setback from 20 feet to 0 feet for property Iocated:�@000
Kimball Road with the condition that the setback reduction is for the purpose of >
accommodating required parking only.
--i" v
[-- ; di
_ m a �
OM
3. EXC08-00011: a public hearing regarding an application submitted by Bethel AME cc urcTi
for a special exception to allow for the expansion of a church facility, a special �xceptigto
waive or modify the site development and dimensional standards related to setbacks that
would prevent use or occupancy of a property listed on the National Register of Historic
Place and a special exception to allow a reduction in parking for property located in the
RNS-12 zone at 411 and 425 South Governor Street.
Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is listed on the National Register
of Historic places and is located in a Historic Conservation District. The Board finds that
because of its National Register status the church is eligible for a historic preservation
exception, which allows the board to waive or modify any dimensional or site development
standard servesto protect and preserve significant historic properties as well as the use or
occupancy of the property. The board finds that the existing church structure, which
measures 20 by 30 feet, has not been enlarged or substantially altered since is construction
in the 1860s. The Board finds that the church has proposed to construct an addition to the
historic building that will expand its occupancy from 40 to 150 persons. The board finds that
the proposed design for the addition has received a certificate of appropriateness from the
Historic Preservation Commission, which considered the height, orientation on the site and
relation to the existing structure, materials, etc., as part of its evaluation criteria. The board
finds that the street -facing fagade of the church addition is less than 50 feet in width and that
the proposed addition emphasizes the historic structure as a focal point, is constructed of
materials and in a style reflecting the historic architecture of the church, and that it uses only
clear story windows on the north side of the building.
The board finds that the size of the subject property and the location of the church building
on the property make it difficult to construct a historically appropriate addition while also
meeting the setback and off-street parking requirements for the use. The board finds that
the established church building is located within the required front and north side setback (5
feet). The board finds that while the proposed addition will meet the required front and south
side setback requirements, it will have a setback of only 10 feet on the north side (20 is
required), and 27 feet at the rear of the church (50 is required).
The board finds that the proposed addition faces its main entrance to the south, where the
church building is set 50 feet from the property line. The board finds that a public alley is
located to the rear of the property and that the three lots located immediately to the west of
the alley are deep lots, and that two of the lots do not rely on the alley for vehicle access.
The board finds that vehicular access to the site is provided via South Governor Street,
which exceeds the 28 -foot standard in the code. The board finds that the existing church
provides no off-street parking but that an arrangement with the City allows on -street parking
along the west side of South Governor Street during Sunday services. The board finds that
there is capacity for up to 45 cars on the west side of South Governor with some additional
capacity on the east side of the street. The board finds that the addition to the church
requires 17 additional spaces, that the proposed site plan provides only 8 off-street parking
spaces, and that the parking spaces will be provided to the rear of the church building along
the public alley. The board finds that the church has proposed a one-way entry drive along
the south side of the property with a drop-off area adjacent to the church entrance. The
board finds that the church will make use of the alley to circulate cars to and from its parking
area. The board finds that the alley is an unimproved, gravel alley that provides no-
stormwater drainage. The board finds that the subject property is sloped such that it would
naturally drain into the alley.
Ti
The board finds that the proposed site plan shows a 10 -foot side setback and indicates
All
prairie grasses for screening. The board finds that S2 screening is required to buffer the
0
residential neighbor to the south from the noise and activity associated with the d6ia and_3
drop off area.
Conclusions of Law: Due to the location of the established building on a small lot and the
preservation requirements for creating a historically appropriate addition, the board
concludes that modifying the setback and parking requirements is necessary to preserve
the historic use and occupancy of the building. The board concludes that the proposed
addition mitigates the reduced side setback to the north by facing all activity to the south
side, where the setback exceeds the 20 -foot requirement, and by using only clear story
windows on the north side of the building, which will help to preserve a sense of privacy for
the adjacent property. The board concludes that the site plan, which places the parking to
the rear of the structure, as well as the design of the church addition, which has received
HPC approval, meets the multi -family design standards.
The board concludes that the current capacity for on -street parking along South Governor
Street is sufficient to accommodate the growth of the church. The board concludes that the
use of the alley to circulate vehicles to the church's parking spaces will potentially have
negative impact on the alley, therefore it is appropriate for the applicant to agree to waive
any protest of future assessments to improve the alley to the rear of the property.
Additionally, because the property drains toward the alley, the church should take all
practical steps to direct storm water drainage away from the alley. The board concludes that
by directing the roof drainage toward the front of the property, where storm sewer service is
available on South Governor Street, and by using pervious pavement for its drive and
parking areas, the church has taken adequate steps to address the issue of drainage.
The board concludes that the one-way drive will provide adequate circulation for the limited
amount of parking available on the site and that adequate measures have been taken to
provide ingress and egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. The
board concludes that, given the intensity of activity associated with church uses, S2
landscape screening is necessary to buffer the residential property to the south from noise
and glare.
The board concludes that by mitigating the setback reduction to the north as described
above, and by addressing the drainage issues associated with the site, the proposed
exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general
welfare and adequate drainage will be provided. For the reasons stated herein, the board
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. For the reasons stated herein, and because the
special exception allows the preservation and continued use of a significant historic
structure within a historic neighborhood, the board concludes that the proposed exception
will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding
property for uses permitted in the zone and that it is consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan.
Deposition: By a vote of 4-0 the board approves EXC08-00011, an application for a special
exception to allow expansion of a religious/private group assembly use in the RNS-12 zone
and to allow a special exception to waive or modify the dimensional or site development
standards related to setbacks that would prevent use or occupancy of a property listed on -
the National Register of Historic Places and a special exception to reduce the minirnum;�.-- i
parking requirements for property at 411 and 425 South Governor Street, subject to:
1. Staff approval of a system for draining as much of the roof as is practical ly�Cssibl
away from the alley and toward Governor Street where storm sewer servicoi>
available. "
2. Investigation by Johnson County Soil and Water Conservation District for potentialain
garden in the open space area between the church and the driveway.
3. The driveway should be designed to maximize drainage toward Governor Street.
4. Paving in the drop-off area shall be reduced to a maximum width of 12 feet.
5. Submission of a final landscape plan for the 10 -foot buffer area to the south of the
church drive showing a combination of evergreen trees and shrubs and grasses to
provide a year-round S2 screening. Final design to be approved by staff.
6. The applicant must sign an agreement to waive any protest for future assessments to
improve the alley to the rear of the property.
7. Restoration of the exterior of the original church structure.
8. Substantial compliance with the site plan submitted. p
TIME LIMITATIONS:
�n
r
V
►�
M
OX
's
C�
r —
JI
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.
Ned Wood , Chairperson
STATEE 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 11th day of June, 2008, as the
same appears of record in my Office.
Dated at Iowa City, this 7 day of , 20
��� e. 74wlr-4�
Marian K. Karr, City Clerk
CORPORATE SEAL
coybosviuEvr
oQq�
0
Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5230
DECISION
IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
WEDNESDAY, July 9, 2008
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
Doc ID: 021276300005 Tvoe: GEN
Recorded: 09/11/2008 at 10:23:32 AM
Fee Amt: $27.00 Pace 1 of 5
Johnson Countv Iowa
Kim Painter Countv Recorder
BK4348 PG643-647
MEMBERS PRESENT: Karen Leigh, Carol Alexander, Michelle Payne, Ned Wood, and
Caroline Sheerin
MEMBERS ABSENT: Edgar Thornton.
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holocek, Karen Howard, Sara Greenwood Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT: Robin Chambers, Mark McCallum, Bu Wilson, Esther Baker, -Michelle
Campo, Hillary Sale
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS:
1. EXCO8-00012 A public hearing regarding an application submitted by Richard and Robin
Chambers for a special exception to reduce the required front principal building setback
from approximately 21 feet to approximately 14 feet for property located in the RS -5 zone at
907 Fifth Avenue.
Findings of Fact: The board finds that the subject property is located in the RS -5 zone. The
board finds that the subject lot was formerly part of a larger lot that was divided in half,
resulting in a square lot (75 x 80 feet) that is smaller than surrounding lots. The board finds
that at 75 feet, Fifth Avenue is a wide right-of-way. The board finds that the subject property
is located in a neighborhood with many older homes that feature front porches.
The board finds that the applicant has proposed to construct a roof over an existing front
deck, and, while uncovered decks are allowed to extend into the setback, covered porches
must comply with the front principal building setback requirement. The board finds that there
are just three houses established along the subject frontage, and that setback averaging
determines the required front principal setback to be 20 feet -15 feet is the standard
requirement in the zone.
The board finds that all utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary facilities are
already being provided; and that all other aspects of the proposal will be reviewed by the
building department for compliance with the code.
Conclusions of Law: The board concludes that the situation is peculiar and that there is
practical difficulty in complying with the setback standards due to the shape and size of the
lot (its shallow depth) and the relative lack of sufficient private open space in the back yard.
The board concludes that because the proposed addition is an open air porch, rather than
an enclosed addition, and because the requested reduction is along a wide right-of-way, that
the proposed reduction will maintain space for light, air, and separation for fire protection
and fire fighting. For the reasons sited above and because the setback reduction will not
encroach on the two adjacent properties, the board concludes that the setback reduction will
not reduce opportunity for privacy between dwellings, will reflect the general building scale
and placement of structures in the neighborhood, and will promote a reasonable physical
relationship between buildings and residences. Because the neighborhood is already fully
developed, and because the setback reduction will not encroach upon the side or rear
setbacks, the board concludes the reduction does not diminish the flexibility to site a building
so it is compatible with buildings in the vicinity.
For the reasons given above, the board finds that the proposed special exception will not be
detrimental to or endanger the 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 proposed exception will not impede the normal and
orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the
district in which the property is located. The board concludes that because of the extra wide
right-of-way and the extent of the setback reduction, that the special exception will have no
impact on ingress or egress. The board concludes that the front porch will make the house
more attractive and more in keeping with the neighborhood in which it is located.
Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves the special exception to reduce the
required front principal building setback from approximately 21 feet to approximately 14 feet
for property located in the RS -5 zone at 907 Fifth Avenue, subject to the porch being
constructed and maintained as an open-air porch.
2. EXC08-00013 —A public hearing regarding an application submitted by Mark McCallum for
a special exception to allow a change of use under the non -conforming use regulations in
order to convert a non -conforming rooming house to a 13 -unit apartment building for
property located in the RNS-12 zone at 932 East College Street.
Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is a non -conforming rooming
house with a maximum occupancy of 13 roomers. The board finds that the building was
originally constructed as a sorority/rooming house and that neither use is permitted in the
Neighborhood Stabilization (RNS-12) zone, in which the property is located. The board finds
that the RNS-12 zone acknowledges the mix of residential uses in the neighborhood, but is
intended to preserve the predominately single-family residential character of the
neighborhood. The board finds that the subject neighborhood is also a Conservation District,
the intent of which is to encourage the retention, rehabilitation and appropriate rr'a!fttenance
of existing buildings, particularly those that contribute to the historical, architectural, ander
aesthetic qualities of the neighborhood. The board finds that the subject structure is a
historic structure. 10
d�
The board finds that the structure has approximately 8,700 square feet of floor aCea, ancfthe
applicant is proposing no expansion to the existing building. The board finds that flie
applicant has proposed to convert the property to a 13 -unit apartment building, a use this
not permitted in the RNS-12 zone, and that the proposed maximum occupancy for each
dwelling unit would be one person. The board finds that the applicant has proposed to
convert common areas within the building to private dwelling space, and that large common
areas associated with rooming houses may sometimes invite over -occupancy or large
parties and gatherings that can disrupt the neighborhood. The board finds that the subject
property has some history of over -occupancy.
The board finds that the required parking for a 13 -room rooming house is 10 spaces, while
the required parking for an apartment building with 13 one -bedroom dwelling units is 13
spaces. The board finds that the off-street parking requirement for apartments does not
contemplate the restriction on occupancy proposed by the applicant. The board finds that
there are two parking spaces provided on the site. The board finds that the rooming house
use was grandfathered in over time and that the zoning code permits the use to continue
with a credit (ghost parking) for the 8 spaces that cannot be provided on site.
Conclusions of Law: The board concludes that the proposed use will be located in a
structure that was designed as a sorority or rooming house, uses which are not allowed in
the RNS-12 zone.
The board concludes that the proposed conversion to a 13 -unit apartment building will be of
equal or lesser impact than the current rooming house with a maximum occupancy of 13
roomers for the following reasons:
1. The proposal is to limit the occupancy of the building to the same number of persons
as permitted under the current non -conforming use, 13 residents.
2. By reducing the large common areas and combining additional bedrooms and space
into single apartment units, the change in use will discourage over -occupancy and
will reduce opportunities for nuisance activities, such as excessive noise and
overflowing garbage resulting from house parties or other large communal
gatherings that are often associated with rooming houses that feature large common
areas.
3. Since the proposed use will not increase the occupancy beyond what is currently
allowed it seems unlikely that the new use will increase parking congestion in the
neighborhood. _
0
Because the building has more than 8,700 square feet of floor area, the board concludes .
that it is suitable for the proposed use, and that by establishing a maximum occupancy of
13, the proposed conversion will not increase the intensity of use. Because the applicant'
has proposed no enlargement of the building, the board concludes that the proposed
i it
conversion will not enlarge the non -conforming use.
O
The board concludes that the specific proposed exception will not be detrimental or o
endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare because the new use is n6P
expected to generate additional traffic beyond the demand associated with the current use.
Because the proposed conversion will incorporate most of the existing common areas into
separate, private apartments, the board concludes the conversion will reduce the likelihood
of nuisance activities that are sometimes associated with rental properties featuring large
amounts of shared space—parties, excessive noise, overflowing garbage, etc.—and thus
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 all the
reasons stated above, 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. The
board concludes that because no additional parking is proposed, there is no change to
ingress or egress and that, because the neighborhood is fully developed and because there
is no expansion proposed for the structure itself, that all utilities, access roads, drainage
and/or necessary facilities have been provided.
Because the applicant is proposing a 13 -unit apartment building with a maximum occupancy
of 1 resident per unit, the board concludes that the proposed conversion is unlikely to
generate any additional traffic beyond what would be expected of the 13 -resident rooming
house. For this same reason, and because the parking requirements for apartments do not
contemplate the proposed limit on occupancy, the board concludes that the applicant should
not be required to provide additional parking. For this reason, and because there are no
changes proposed for the exterior of the building and no increase in its permitted
occupancy, 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 zone on which it is to be
located.
The board concludes that the proposed exception is consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan, which encourages the adaptive re -use and preservation of historic structures so long
as the use is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
Disposition: By a vote of 3-0 (Wood recused) the Board approves a special exception to
allow conversion of a non -conforming Independent Group Living Use to a non -conforming
Multi -Family Use located at 932 East College Street, subject to the following conditions:
1. The converted use, specifically a Multi -Family Use, may not exceed a maximum total
occupancy of 13 residents and said occupancy limit will be recorded on the rental permit
for 932 East College Street.
2. The converted use shall consist of 13 single -occupant multi -family dwelling units.
3. In order to establish the conversion, the applicant must apply for a rental permit.
4. Upon the applicant applying for a building permit to establish the conversion, variance
VAR97-00004 shall be extinguished and no rights shall continue to exist thereunder.
5. Additionally, upon steps being taken to establish the conversion, any right to re-establish
a rooming house on the property shall be extinguished. The conversion shall be
completed within three years of application for the building permit. o
6. The special exception is also contingent upon: y_
_ r
A. All parking of motorized or non -motorized vehicles must be located to the rear a x a
(north) side of the building. o
B. A fence must be erected in the front (south) side of the building, to ensure_ -that it iF
not used for parking.
00
C. The cement pad in the front (south) of the building will be eliminated.
D. All common space, with the exception of the front entryway, front parlor, laundry
facilities and hallways, will be eliminated.
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.
Approved by:
Michelle Payne, Cha person
City Attorney's Office '57/17 111c2e
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 9th day of July, 2008, as the same
appears of record in my Office.
Dated at Iowa City, this 7` day of 20
�--, rl - )moi
CORPORATE VEAL Maria . Karr, City Clerk
`=3
y
-i0
-O
_Cr-
4�
_
D
p
co
Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5230
DECISION
IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2008
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Edgar Thornton, Caroline Sheerin, Karen Leigh
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ned Wood
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Sarah Walz,
OTHERS PRESENT: Russ Arlen
SPFCIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS:
Doc ID: 021303180003 TVDe: GEN
Recorded: 10/21/2008 at 10:41:11 AM
Fee Amt: $17.00 Pace I of 3
Johnson Countv Iowa
Kim Painter Countv Recorder
BK4359 PG121.123
V-ee-
V
3
i�
"'
O
v
—
1. EXC08-00015 a public hearing regarding an application submitted by Harriet Gooding
requesting a special exception to reduce the required front principal building setback from 25
feet to 20 feet for property located in the RS -5 (Low -Density, Single -Family) zone at 2402
Lakeside Drive.
Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is located on a corner lot in the
RS -5 zone and abuts an RM -44 zone to the east. The board finds that the principal building
is set back 27 feet from the street right-of-way line and that the only other structure on this
frontage is a multi -family building in the RM -44 zone, which is set back 25 feet from the street
right-of-way line and located more than 100 feet from the subject house. The board finds
that the required setback in the RS -5 zone is 15 feet; and 20 feet in the RM -44 zone—a
difference of 5 feet. Due to setback averaging, the required setback for the single-family
house is 25 feet. The board finds that, absent a special exception, the proposed open air
porch must comply with the required principal building setback.
The board finds that the subject parcel is 82 feet deep with the rear yard facing into the
shallow side yard of the single-family property to the north. The board finds that the
requested setback has no impact on side or rear setbacks. The board finds that all access
roads, utilities, drainage and other necessary facilities are already provided for the subject
property. The board finds that vehicle access is provided via a driveway to the east of the
house and that the garage is set back more than the required 25 feet from the street right-of-
way line.
Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the situation is peculiar in that only two
principal structures are located along this frontage, and those buildings are in different zones
(RS -5 and RM -44) and the two principal structures along the frontage are separated by a
distance of more than 100 feet. The board finds that there is practical difficulty complying
with the setback requirement due to the shallow depth of this parcel. The board concludes
that there is practical difficulty in complying with the setback standard given the deep setback
at the front (south) side of the subject lot, which leaves little private open space for
constructing a porch to the rear of the property.
The board concludes that granting the special exception will not be contrary to the purpose of
the setback regulations for the following reasons:
• Because the reduction requested is for the front (streetside) setback and because
the resulting setback will be 20 feet (5 feet more than the RS -5 requirement) the
exception will not reduce the space for light, air, and separation for fire protection
and access along Lakeside Drive.
• Because the reduction will allow for an open-air front porch, rather than an enclosed
addition, the structure has less effect on the sense of separation for light and air.
• Because the proposed setback reduction does not encroach on properties to either
side, and because the resulting front setback remains 5 feet more than is required in
the zone and is separated from neighboring properties across the street by the 66 -
foot Lakeside Drive right-of-way, it will not diminish the opportunity for privacy
between buildings.
• Because the only other residence along the frontage is the multi -family building to
the east, which is located more than 100 feet from the subject house, the reduction
in the front setback will not create an unreasonable physical relationship between
buildings and will reflect the general building scale and placement of structures in
the neighborhood.
• Because the resulting difference in setback would continue to be 5 feet further back
from the street right-of-way line than required by code, and because the code
requirements indicate a 5 -foot difference in setbacks between the two zones (15
feet in the RS -5 and 20 feet in the RM -44), the special exception will not be contrary
to the setback regulations.
For all the reasons cited above, the board concludes that any potential negative effects
resulting form the setback exception are mitigated to the extent practical. For the reasons
cited above, the board concludes that the proposed exception will not reduce visibility for
traffic or 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 impair property values in the neighborhood. For the reasons cited
above, and because the surrounding neighborhood is fully developed, the proposed special
exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the
surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone, and that the proposed exception will
have no impact on ingress or egress from the property. The board concludes that the
proposed special exception meets all requirements of the zoning code and that all other
aspects of the proposal will be reviewed by the building department for compliance with the
code.
Disposition: By a vote of 3-0 the Board approves EXC08-00015 an application submitted by
Harriet Gooding requesting a special exception to reduce the required front principal building
setback from 25 feet to 20 feet for property located in the RS -5 (Low -Density, Single -Family)
zone at 2402 Lakeside Drive, subject to the porch being constructed and maintained as an
open-air porch.
O
�
n y
h
ti
�`P�
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.
Karen Leigh' hairperson
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 10th day of September, 2008, as
the same appears of record in my Office.
Dated at Iowa City, this D day of , 20,v e
Mari K. Karr, City Clerk
CORPORATE SEAL
1.