Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 Board of Adjustment DecisionsPrepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240 DECISION IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, January 11, 2006 – 5 P.M. EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Karen Leigh, Michelle Shelangouski, Ned Wood, Michael Wright MEMBERS ABSENT: None. _ 4 O 29 STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Robert Miklo, Sarah Walz, Doug Boothroyn p OTHERS PRESENT: Dave Drea, Lillian Davis _ — APPEAL ITEM: m J APLO05-00001 Public hearing regarding an appeal submitted by Dave Drea of a c*'.ision ofthe Building Official finding a violation of 14-6N-1 B -3b(2) of the zoning code by determining th6Rhe yard in question is a "front yard" of the property as a corner lot requires two front yards. (i.e. Dave Drea asserts that a corner lot does not require two front yards and the area in question is not the "front yard" of the property). Findings of Fact: Based on the information presented in the staff report and at the public hearing, the Board finds that: Under the applicable zoning code, the lot in question is a corner lot fronting on two streets— Walnut and Webster. Section 14 -6D -3E -4(a) of the applicable Iowa City zoning code clearly states that lots in the RS - 8 zone require a minimum front yard of 20 feet. Section 14-60-26 of the Code clearly states that "If lots fronting on two (2) or more streets are required to have a front yard, a front yard shall be provided along all streets'. Therefore, the Board finds that the yard in question is a front yard. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the Building Official correctly applied Section 14- 6N -113-3b(3), Off -Street Parking Requirements regarding parking provided in the front yard, which states "For zero lot line dwellings, duplexes and family care facilities, two (2) of the required parking spaces may be provided in the front yard on a regularly constructed aisle, provided not less than 50% of the front yard area shall remain open space free of impervious surface." In making his decision the Building Official correctly relied upon the Dimensional Requirements and General Yard Requirements of the applicable zoning code, particularly Section 14 -6Q -2B, which states that "If lots fronting on two (2) or more streets are required to have a front yard, a front yard shall be provided along all streets' and, under the Dimensional Requirements for the RS -8 zone (Section 14 -6D -3E -4(a)), a front yard of 20 feet is required within in the subject area. I IIIIIII IIIIII III VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII Doc ID: 020206200002 TVDe: GEN Recorded: 02/13/2006 at 12:05:00 PM ^, Fee Amt: $12.00 Paoe 1 of 2 N,.Jy Johnson County Iowa Kim Painter Countv Recorder BK3991 PG15-16 r� Disposition: By a vote of 5-0 the Board upholds the decision of the Senior Building Official regarding the determination that yard in question is a front yard. Karen Leigh, Chlairperson 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 11th day of January, 2006, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this /er day of 2006 CORPORATE SEAL fav aria Karr, City Clerk Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5230 DECISION IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2006 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL Doc ID: 020221210003 TVae: GEN Recorded: 03/03/2006 at 02:59:43 PM Fee Amt: $17.00 Peas 1 of 3 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter Countv Recorder BK3996 Pa736-738 MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Karen Leigh, Michelle Shelangouski, Ned Wood and Michael Wright o _ O 9Z MEMBERS ABSENT: None. n -1 D co STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Robert Miklo, Sarah Walz � J r OTHERS PRESENT: Tim Terry M.s SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: D� co 1. EXC06-00001 public hearing regarding an application submitted by Willowwind School for a special exception to permit a general educational facility and a special exception for the reduction of the rear yard setback from 50 feet to 38 feet for property located in the High Density Single -Family Residential (RS -12) zone at 950 Dover Street. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that since the time of its development the property at 950 Dover has been used for institutional purposes. The Board finds that general educational facilities are allowed by special exception in the RS -12 zone upon meeting both the general and specific approval criteria outlined in the Zoning Code. The board finds that vehicular access to the property is provided along Muscatine Avenue (a 31 -foot arterial) and Dover Street (a 28 -foot collector), which meet the 28 -foot minimum width requirement of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board finds that there is no direct pedestrian access between the property and Muscatine Avenue and that a previous special exception for the property was granted subject to the development of a sidewalk connection. The Board finds that the nearest sidewalk connection to the site ends approximately 100 feet northwest of the property entrance. The Board finds that the established parking lot exceeds the minimum parking for a school of this size and that the location of the parking lot, at the front of the property, is a non -conforming accessory use. The Board finds that landscape and fence screening are established along the west property line, between the parking lot and the neighboring residential properties. The Board finds that parking lots for educational uses located within residential zones are subject to the Multi -family Site Development Standards. The Board finds that the minimum setback requirements for an educational facility in the RS -12 zone are exceeded on all sides of the building with the exception of the rear setback, which is approximately 38 feet. The board finds that the back fapade of the building is blank and that privacy fencing is established along the rear property line of the building. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the proposed generalized educational facility will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and should not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood, as it is similar to other institutional uses that have occupied the property since its development. The specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property. The Board also concludes that appropriate vehicular access and parking facilities are in place to serve this use. The Board concludes that the proposed use of this property is compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will not have significant adverse affects on the livability of nearby residential uses due to noise, glare from lights, late-night operations, odor or litter. The Board concludes that the established 38 -foot setback with the blank rear building fagade, sloping topography, and established privacy fencing along the rear property line meet the intent of the 50 -foot setback requirement by providing a buffer between the more intensive educational use and the neighboring residential property. The Board concludes that a direct sidewalk connection between Muscatine Avenue and the end of the current sidewalk on the east side of Dover Street, north of the site entrance, is necessary to provide safe pedestrian access to the site. The Board concludes that in order to comply with the Multi -family Development Standard, landscape screening to the S2 standard should be established along the Dover Street Frontage. The Board concludes that a site plan is required in order to establish proposed parking, traffic flow, emergency vehicle lanes, and internal landscaping/trees in accordance with all requirements of the Zoning Code. Disposition: By a vote of 5-0 the Board approves special exception EXC06-00001 for a generalized educational facility and a special exception for the reduction of the rear yard setback from 50 feet to 38 feet for property located in the High Density Single -Family Residential (RS -12) zone at 950 Dover Street, subject to submittal of a site plan demonstrating: 1) sidewalk construction along East Dover Street connecting the current sidewalk to Muscatine Avenue; 2) landscape screening along the front of the parking lot on Dover Street; and 3) proposed parking layout, traffic circulation, and landscaping on the site, including identification of a designated fire lane. 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 -4B -5E, City of Iowa City, Iowa. k-� L � k Karen Leigh, Cfiairperson O o 0 P m W -f1 n� 'J f- M-0 I D 4n co 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 6th day of February, 2006, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this 2 % day of PC`cc 2006 , n", � -,-/ Marian K. Karr, City Clerk CORPORATE SEAL 0� N 0 Y :2 T r"w Tl C7 �C-) m -� y u, 00 r Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 3191356-5230 DECISION IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, MARCH 8, 2006 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL Doc ID: 020511890002 Tvoe: GEN Recorded: 04/26/2006 at 01:44:54 PM Fee Amt: $12.00 Paoe I of 2 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter Countv Recorder BK4015 PG623-624 MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Michelle Shelangouski, Ned Wood and Michael Wright MEMBERS ABSENT: Karen Leigh. _s O STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Robert Miklo, Sarah Walz yn ti OTHERS PRESENT: Dick Brown, Mary Lee Dixon, Nestor Lobodiak =, NCn m 1 SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: D w EXC06-00003 Discussion of an application submitted by First Presbyterian Church fdPa special exception to permit installation of a columbarium, a structure containing niches for storage of cremated remains, for use by the church members for property located in the Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS -5) zone at 2701 Rochester Avenue. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that, under the Iowa City Zoning Ordinance, columbaria are permitted by special exception as an accessory use for religious institutions in the RS -5 zone by meeting both the specific and general criteria outlined in the Zoning Code. The Board finds that vehicular access to the property is along Rochester Avenue and Mount Vernon Drive, which both meet the 28 -foot minimum width requirement specified for religious uses. The Board finds that minimum setback requirements are exceeded on all sides of the building, including the front setback along Rochester Avenue—the proposed site for the columbarium. The Board finds that the columbarium is small in scale in comparison to the church building and is located away from view of adjacent residential properties. The Board finds that, since memorial services and funerals are already part of the church's function, the columbarium will generate minimal additional traffic to the site. The Board finds that the columbarium will have no significant adverse affect on the livability of nearby residential properties due to noise, glare from lights, late-night operations, odors, or litter. The Board finds that while the proposed use meets all other required standards for a special exception, the applicant has not demonstrated that the columbarium will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the surrounding neighborhood. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that, because the applicant has failed to provide persuasive evidence that the proposed use will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood, the application has not met the general standards for granting a special exception, set forth in Section 14-413-3 of the Zoning Code. Disposition: By a vote of 2-2, Shelangouski and Wood voting no, the Board failed to approve special exception EXC06-000013 to permit installation of a columbarium, a structure containing niches for storage of cremated remains, for use by the church members for property located in the Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS -5) zone at 2701 Rochester Avenue. Karen Leigh, CfiaiPperson STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY Approved by: City Atto ney's Offic I, Marian Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, do hereby certify that the Board of Adjustment Decision herein is a true and correct copy of the Decision that was passed by the Board of Adjustment of Iowa City, Iowa, at its regular meeting on the 8th day of Fe ary, 2006, as the same appears of record in my Office.���a� Dated at Iowa City, this J-14 day of *±f L 12006 Marian K. Karr, City Clerk CORPORATE SEAL FCD^ CtJ D = N � 7� -T- N Cn i 11 FTI a D w w Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5230 DECISION IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, MAY 10, 2006 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL I IIIIIII IIIIII III VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII Doc ID: 020568050004 TVDe: GEN Recorded: 06/20/2006 at 12:01:42 PM Fee Amt: 822.00 Paoe 1 of 4 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter County Recorder SK4040 PG83-86 MEMBERS PRESENT: Karen Leigh, Carol Alexander, Michelle Shelangouski, Michael Wright MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Sarah Walz _ 0 r.n � =n � N€dloond TI D — OTHERS PRESENT: Jason Hilsman, Dick Brown, Robert Crane, Sandra Rasles, Mary Lou Gay, Ed Morgan, Mary Lee Dixon, Nestor Lobodiak SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: EXC06-00008 Discussion of an application submitted by Ace Auto Recyclers for a special exception to permit a salvage yard for property located in the proposed Heavy Industrial (1-2) zone east of South Riverside Drive. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the salvage yard established on the property has operated in violation of zoning ordinances and conditional zoning requirements placed on the property for a number of years. The Board finds that salvage yards are allowed by special exception in the 1-2 zone upon meeting both the general and specific approval criteria outlined in the Zoning Code. The Board finds that the proposed salvage yard is located more than 1,000 feet from residentially zoned land in Iowa City. The board finds that surrounding land uses are industrial or public property closed to the public. The Board finds that the proposed site plan will bring the salvage yard into compliance with the requirements of the current Zoning Code. The Board finds that fencing and landscaping specified in the site plan meet the requirements of the code and will screen the salvage yard from view from adjacent properties and from Riverside Drive. The Board finds that the salvage yard will be set back more than 300 feet from the road as specified in the Zoning Code. The Board finds that the salvage yard is surrounded by other industrial uses and public land that is closed to the public. The Board finds that a blue line stream corridor is present on a portion of the property and that a significant portion of the salvage yard is within the 100 -year floodway. The Board finds that outdoor storage of tires provides habitat for disease carrying mosquitoes and thus poses a significant public health concern. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the proposed salvage yard will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Because the property is surrounded by other industrially zoned land and public property closed to the public, the Board concludes that the salvage yard will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and should not substantially diminish or impair property values in area. The Board also concludes that the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property. The Board concludes that the proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, which recommends this area for industrial use. The Board concludes that the proposed fence and landscaping and the location of the salvage yard 300 feet back from the public right-of-way provide the intended buffer between the salvage use and the neighboring property and will improve the appearance of the property from South Riverside Drive. The Board concludes that salvage yards are associated with certain environmental issues and that the location of the salvage yard in proximity to a stream corridor and within the 100 -year floodway warrant some additional assurances with regard to DNR permits and the manner in which tires and other salvage is stored on the site. Disposition: By a vote of 5-0 the Board approves special exception EXC06-00008 to allow a salvage yard in the proposed Heavy Industrial (12) zone east of S. Riverside Drive, subject to: 1. City Council approval of the 12 zoning; and 2. The applicant must apply for a building permit in order to establish the salvage use. Additionally, prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant must: 3. Install all landscaping and screening improvements as specified in the approved site plan except for those adjacent to the proposed building in the 11 zone. The spruce trees on the west and south side of the fence shall be planted in a staggered pattern, 20 feet on center. They shall be a minimum of 2" in caliper at the time of planting unless an alternative is approved by the City Forester. The area designated by the blue line as a stream corridor must remain outside the fenced area of the site and a 15 -foot buffer must be left between the fence and the blue line drainage way. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for the new building, all other required landscaping, as indicated in the site plan, must be installed; and 4. The applicant must provide a maintenance plan for keeping the required 15 -foot firebreak clear of trees and shrubs; and 5. The applicant must bring all DNR permits related to the salvage and auto parts operation as well as storm water up-to-date and have such permits filed with the City. Further, after establishing the salvage use, the continuation of the use is subject to the following conditions: 6. No salvage (including tires, cars, or parts) may be stored outdoors on any portion of the N applicant's property outside of the fenced area; and C) 7. Outdoor storage of tires (whole or partial) is limited to no more than 600 tires and all tires —i ) must be covered by a tarp to prevent mosquito habitat. Tires may not be stored ,within 1100 — feet of a property line; andZr `T 8. Vehicles must be crushed and removed from the site on a regular basis. O EXC06-00003 Discussion of an application submitted by First Presbyterian Church fpU a special exception to permit installation of a columbarium, a structure containing niches for storage of cremated remains, for use by the church members for property located in the Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS -5) zone at 2701 Rochester Avenue. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that, under the Iowa City Zoning Ordinance, columbaria are permitted by special exception as an accessory use for religious institutions in the RS -5 zone by meeting both the specific and general criteria outlined in the Zoning Code. The Board finds that vehicular access to the property is along Rochester Avenue and Mount Vernon Drive, which both meet the 28 -foot minimum width requirement specified for religious uses. The Board finds that minimum setback requirements are exceeded on all sides of the building, including the front setback along Rochester Avenue—the proposed site for the columbarium. The Board finds that the columbarium is small in scale in comparison to the church building and is located away from view of adjacent residential properties. The Board finds that, since memorial services and funerals are already part of the church's function, the columbarium will generate minimal additional traffic to the site. The Board finds that the columbarium will have no significant adverse affect on the livability of nearby residential properties due to noise, glare from lights, late-night operations, odors, or litter. The Board finds that the proposed site plan will screen the columbaria from view from public rights-of-way and from neighboring residential properties. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the proposed columbarium will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, and will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity. The specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property. The Board also concludes that appropriate vehicular access and parking facilities are in place to serve the religious institution and that the columbarium will not significantly increase use of the site. The Board concludes that the proposed use of this property is compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will not have significant adverse affects on the livability of nearby residential uses due to noise, glare from lights, late-night operations, odor or litter. Because the columbarium is small in scale, set back from the road, and screened from view from public rights-of-way and neighboring properties, and because the applicant meets all other general and specific requirements in the code, the Board concludes that neighborhood property values will not be substantially diminished or impaired. Disposition: By a vote of 5-0, the Board approved special exception EXC06-000013 to permit installation of a columbarium, a structure containing niches for storage of cremated remains, for use by the church members for property located in the Low Density Single - Family Residential (RS -5) zone at 2701 Rochester Avenue. t� Karen Leig , chairperson _ v 0 �n C-) — 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 May, 2006, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this /'/ `�4— day of 2006 Marian . Karr, City Clerk CORPORATE SEAL _ O N O 1 1 C -ON - 1 �'� FTI 1 D — N EXC06-00007 Discussion of an application submitted by Terry Gillette for a special exception to permit a side yard reduction to allow a second floor addition to be located within one foot of the property line for property located in the Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS -8) zone at 920 E. Davenport Street. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the original house on this property was established prior to current zoning law and setback requirements. The Board finds that the original building is located within 1 foot of the property line and is a nonconforming structure. The Board finds that there is approximately 8 feet of space between the applicant's house and the house on the abutting lot where the new addition was constructed. The Board finds that the applicant created an enclosed second floor addition above an existing first floor enclosed structure and has not extended the footprint of the original building within the required setback. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the addition to the second floor does not extend the non -conformity, because the first -floor footprint was already established. Because the addition to the building did not extend the footprint of the building, the Board concludes that the setback reduction is not contrary to the purpose of the setback regulations. The board concludes that the location of the structure so close to the property line is a peculiar situation and that there would be practical difficultly complying with the requirements. T he Board concludes that reducing the setback requirement for the new addition is not contrary to the purpose of the setback requirements because the addition to the second floor does not further reduce light or air or the separation for fire protection and access, nor does it reduce the privacy between the dwellings. Because the first floor footprint below the addition was established prior to the current setback standards, the new second floor addition does not alter the relationship between buildings nor does it deviate from the general building scale or placement within the neighborhood. The Board concludes that the reduced setback for the second floor addition will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Because the first floor footprint below the addition existed prior to the current setback standards, the Board concludes that addition as established will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and should not substantially diminish or impair property values in the area. The Board concludes that the specific proposed exception will I IIIIIII IIIIII III ulll VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII ISI IIII IIII Doc ID: 020597440006 Tvoe: GEN Recorded: 07/14/2006 at 11:16:23 AM Fee Amt: $32.00 Pace 1 of 6 Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5230 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter County Recorder SK4053 PG511.516 IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, June 14, 2006 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Karen Leigh, Carol Alexander, , Ned Wood and Michael VICNht r� 0 C MEMBERS ABSENT: Michelle Shelangouski. r —_ STAFF PRESENT: Mitch Behr, Sarah Walz _ Ii TI , � J OTHER: r\? SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: ry EXC06-00007 Discussion of an application submitted by Terry Gillette for a special exception to permit a side yard reduction to allow a second floor addition to be located within one foot of the property line for property located in the Medium Density Single -Family Residential (RS -8) zone at 920 E. Davenport Street. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the original house on this property was established prior to current zoning law and setback requirements. The Board finds that the original building is located within 1 foot of the property line and is a nonconforming structure. The Board finds that there is approximately 8 feet of space between the applicant's house and the house on the abutting lot where the new addition was constructed. The Board finds that the applicant created an enclosed second floor addition above an existing first floor enclosed structure and has not extended the footprint of the original building within the required setback. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the addition to the second floor does not extend the non -conformity, because the first -floor footprint was already established. Because the addition to the building did not extend the footprint of the building, the Board concludes that the setback reduction is not contrary to the purpose of the setback regulations. The board concludes that the location of the structure so close to the property line is a peculiar situation and that there would be practical difficultly complying with the requirements. T he Board concludes that reducing the setback requirement for the new addition is not contrary to the purpose of the setback requirements because the addition to the second floor does not further reduce light or air or the separation for fire protection and access, nor does it reduce the privacy between the dwellings. Because the first floor footprint below the addition was established prior to the current setback standards, the new second floor addition does not alter the relationship between buildings nor does it deviate from the general building scale or placement within the neighborhood. The Board concludes that the reduced setback for the second floor addition will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Because the first floor footprint below the addition existed prior to the current setback standards, the Board concludes that addition as established will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and should not substantially diminish or impair property values in the area. The Board concludes that the specific proposed exception will cii._En 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. The Board concludes that the reduction in the side setback requirement for the second floor additioP PH 2: 12 as established, in all other respects conforms to the applicable regulation or standards of the zone I which it is located. The Board concludes that the reduction of the side setback for the second story addition is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves special exception EXC06-00007 to reduce the minimum side setback requirement in order to allow a second story addition already established at 920 East Davenport Street subject to the applicant securing an access easement for maintenance of the property from the owner of the adjacent property at 922 East Davenport. EXC06-00009 Discussion of an application submitted by Professional Muffler, Inc for a special exception to permit the reestablishment of a vehicle repair use and to reduce the street side setback requirement for property located in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone at 708 S. Riverside Drive. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that vehicle repair uses are non -conforming in the CC -2 but may be permitted by special exception upon meeting both the general and specific approval criteria outlined in the Zoning Code. The Board finds that the vehicle repair shop is located more than 100 feet from the nearest residential zone. The Board finds that the proposed site plan is designed to minimize views of the vehicle use areas and storage. The Board finds that the applicant has proposed no outdoor storage and that vehicles will not be stored on the site for more than 45 days. The Board finds that applicant's property is a corner lot and that in the CC -2 zone a 10 -foot setback is required along both the Benton and Riverside Street rights-of-way. The Board finds that the design recommendations in the Southwest District Plan recommend locating the vehicle repair areas away from the street. The Board finds that the right-of-way adjacent to the applicant's property on the Benton Street side includes a section of the Iowa River Corridor Trail and a landscaped green space, which is maintained by the City and that the established green space gives the building the appearance of being setback from the street. The Board finds that the reduced setback along West Benton Street will not reduce opportunities for privacy or safety nor will it conflict with the general building scale and placement of structures in the vicinity. Conclusions of Law: The proposed vehicle repair 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 immediate vicinity and should not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The Board concludes that proposed site plan brings the property into closer compliance with the Zoning Code with regard to parking, screening and setbacks and meets the specific requirements for the special exception, and the aesthetic goals included in the Southwest District Plan. The specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property. The Board concludes that necessary facilities to serve this use are in place. The Board concludes that the proposed use of this property is compatible with the surrounding commercial area, which includes other vehicle repair uses, and is consistent with theFILFO Comprehensive Plan and the Southwest District Plan. W6 JUL 13 Pii 2. 12 The Board concludes that there is practical difficulty in meeting both the 10 -foot setback from West Benton Street and the designing the site with repair areas facing away-p4n ith�-f street. The Board concludes that a 5 -foot reduction in the street side setbacks$tong, West ;-, Benton Street will provide space for safe and efficient vehicle circulation for the vehicle a repair area. The Board concludes that the proposed reduction in street side setback along West Benton Street will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare; will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity; and should not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property. Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves special exception EXC06-00009 an application to permit a vehicle repair use and a reduction of the street side setback requirement for property in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone at 708 South Riverside Drive subject to submittal of a final site plan demonstrating all required landscaping and proposed parking layout and traffic circulation and subject to Design Review approval of the final architectural design (elevations) of the new building. EXC06-00010 Discussion of an application submitted by PIP Printing for a special exception to permit more than 5,000 square feet of light manufacturing for property located in the Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone at 2650 Mormon Trek Boulevard. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the property at 2650 Mormon Trek is located in the Intensive Commercial (CI -1). The Board finds that the printing facility is categorized as technical light manufacturing and that this use is limited to 5,000 square feet in the CI -1 zone. The Board finds that up to 15,000 square feet of technical light manufacturing may be permitted by special exception in the CI -1 zone upon meeting both the general and specific approval criteria outlined in the Zoning Code. The Board finds that the applicant is requesting light manufacturing for up to 12,400 square feet of space. The Board finds that the proposed use will create no emissions of smoke, particulate matter, chemicals, or offensive odors, and the proposed use will not cause noticeable vibrations and will not require bulk storage of flammable materials. The Board finds that printing facilities are not a prohibited manufacturing use in the CI -1 zone. The Board finds that the proposed printing operation is enclosed completely within a building. The Board finds that the site will generate traffic similar to office uses permitted in the zone, with few retail customers visiting the site, and that no semi -truck traffic is anticipated by the applicant. The Board finds that surrounding lots are undeveloped but that the commercial subdivision is designed for the intensive commercial uses permitted in the CI -1 zone, and that the applicant will be required to submit a final site plan for review by the building official to ensure that all zoning requirements are met. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that proposed use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, and the proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and should not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property. The Board concludes that the commercial subdivision in which the site is located is designed to provide adequate ingfess andlegress for this type of commercial use. The Board concludes that the proposed use of this property is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan, which provides for intensive commercial development in this area. The Board finds that the proposed lot prov s,appropriate transportation and utility infrastructure for intensive commercial uses and will coliform to City': Codes. Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves EXC06-00010, to permit a printing facility of up to 12,400 square feet in size in the Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone on property located at 2650 Mormon Trek Boulevard, EXC06-00010 Discussion of an application submitted by Willowwind School for a special exception for the expansion of a general education facility, a reduction in the rear setback requirement, and the reconfiguration of the parking lot and play areas for property located in the High Density Single -Family Residential (RS -12) zone at 950 Dover Street. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is located in the High Density Single -Family Residential (RS -12) zone wherein building additions of more than 500 square feet for general educational facilities are permitted by special exception upon meeting both the general and specific approval criteria outlined in the Zoning Code. The Board finds that all additions to the school and changes to the parking lot must comply with the Multi -family Site Development Standards and all other applicable requirements in the code. The Board finds that the applicant is proposing a series of additions to the school totaling more than 2,900 square feet. The Board finds that the applicant is also proposing to remove a portion of the established parking lot and to relocate a play area to this portion of the property. The Board finds that the applicant has also proposed a play are for Pre -K and Kindergarten students in the area between the school building and the abutting residential properties to the west. The Board finds that the additions proposed for the south, west, and east sides of the building meet or exceed the setback requirements for general educational facilities in the RS -12 zone. The Board finds that the required rear setback for general educational uses in the RS -12 zone is 50 feet. The Board finds that the current non -conforming rear setback of 38 feet for the established building was reduced with the previous special exception to establish the school at this site. The Board finds that the additions proposed on the north (rear) side of the building would require an additional 8-10 foot reduction in the rear setback. The Board finds that the reduction in the size of the parking lot will bring the property into better compliance with the code, as large parking lots are a concern highlighted in standards for general education facilities in the single-family residential zones. The Board finds that there is a history of flooding for the abutting residential properties to the west of the site due to drainage problems associated with the large parking lot. The Board finds that neighboring property owners have expressed concern about the potential for reduced privacy and increased with school activity concentrated on the western portion of the property. The Board finds that the applicant has not shown any practical difficulty in complying with the setback requirement. The Board finds that the deeper setback required for educational facilities is intended to address the intensity associated with the use—noise, traffic, etc.— and to provide space for privacy for the adjacent residential properties. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the proposed changes to the site and building additions will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. The Board concludes that all the proposed exception for the site redesign and building additions will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and should not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The Board concludes that additional S3 screening and recommended fencing along the west side of the property will mitigate any negative effects or safety concerns associated with the relocation of the play area and site redesign and that the flooding issues associated with the established parking lot should be addressed by the applicant in the final site plan to be reviewed by the Building Official. The proposed additions and site changes will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property as it is currently fully developed. The Board concludes that the proposed use of this property is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan which provides for the location of institutional uses within residential neighborhoods. The Board concludes that the applicant has failed to satisfy the specific requirements for reducing the setback, and that the reduction in the rear setback would be contrary to purpose of the setback requirement. Disposition: By a vote of 4-0, the Board approves EXC06-00011, an application for a special exception allowing an expansion of a general educational facility in the High Density Single - Family Residential (RS -12) zone be granted subject to submittal of a site plan demonstrating the recommended S3 screening and fencing as well as the prior required sidewalk construction along the east side of Dover Street connecting the current sidewalk to Muscatine Avenue, and proposed parking layout, traffic circulation, and landscaping on the site, including identification of a designated fire lane. By a vote of 4-0 the Board denies an application for a special exception to allow a reduction in the rear setback requirement for a general educational facility in the RS -12 zone be approved. Alexander seconded the motion. 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 -4B -5E, eDi y of Iowa City, Iowa. 0 <— c n r— W a. LJ _ Z Approved by: D ro Karen Leigh, Chairftrson -7 City Attorney's(Office STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY I, Marian Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, do hereby certify that the Board of Adjustment Decision herein is a true and correct copy of the Decision that was passed by the Board of Adjustment of Iowa City, Iowa, at its regular meeting on the 8th day of February, 2006, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this 1-3 day of � 2006 MarianR--Karr, City Clerk CORPORATE SEAL O N O ` J C1i W 1 �5� S D� N N Prepared by Sarah Walz, Senior Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5230 DECISION IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, July 12, 2006 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL Doc ID: 020629170004 Tv De: GEN Recorded: 06/09/2006 at 11:45:54 AM Fee Amt: $22.00 Pace 1 of 4 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter County Recorder BK4067 PG478-481 MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Karen Leigh, Michelle Shelangouski, and Michael Wright MEMBERS ABSENT: Ned Wood STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Walz, Mitch Behr, Rick Fosse, Drew Westberg [[�� ti OTHERS PRESENT: John Jadryev, Chuck Baker, Chris Stephan, Jim Walters, Wally Tabor, Gary Sanders, Nancy Carlson, Chris Degroot, Sarah Swartzendruber, Adam Btihn, n Larson, Brian Alexander, Diedre Fleener, Mary Chival I -< r— SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: 1. EXC06-00012 —A public hearing regarding an application submitted by Wal -Mali Stores- Inc., for a special exception for the placement of fill in the floodplain on property located4A the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone on Ruppert Road. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the applicant has proposed a large scale change to the flood plain. The Board finds that the applicant has provided insufficient evidence that flood waters will not be dispersed to the detriment of other properties. The Board finds that fill is an option for commercial development of the site in the floodplain. The Board finds that the proposed placement of fill would remove the majority of site from the floodplain and thus any subsequent building on the site would not be subject to floodplain regulations. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that, given the scale of the proposed fill, the special exception will be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, and welfare. The Board concludes that, given the scale of the fill, that the special exception will be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the vicinity and will impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property. Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board denies the application. 2. EXC06-00013—A public hearing regarding an application submitted by St. Wenceslaus Church for a special exception to permit an addition to a religious institution (a handicapped accessible entrance) for property located in the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone at 630 E. Davenport Street. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is located in the RNS-12 zone. The Board finds that the proposed addition meets all setback standards for the zone. The Board finds that the proposed addition will not alter the use or occupancy load of the church, nor the amount of traffic generated by church functions. The Board finds that improving accessibility to buildings throughout the community is a major goal cited in the Comprehensive Plan. The Board finds that the scale and design of the proposed addition -T1 F- 71 complements the established church architecture and is compatible with the neighborhood residential character. Conclusions of Law: Because the proposed exception meets all the specific criteria listed in the code, the Board concludes that the proposed addition to the church will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, and will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and should not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The Board concludes that the proposed addition will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property. The Board concludes that necessary parking and access facilities to serve this use are in place. The Board concludes that the proposed addition is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan, which encourages greater accessibility to all buildings in Iowa City. Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves EXC06-00013, to Permit an addition to a,., religious institution (a handicapped accessible entrance) for property located in t1w Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone at 630 E. Davenport Street; subject to general conformance with the submitted site plan and building design illustrations. _. 3. EXC06-00014—A public hearing regarding an application submitted by Three Bwls, LLC,,for - a special exception to reduce the required front yard setback from 10 feet to 0 fe66t to all" commercial buildings to be built closer to the sidewalk in conformance with the Conditional Zoning Agreements for Olde Towne Village, and a special exception to allow drive-through lanes for a bank on property located in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone south of Rochester Avenue and East of Scott Boulevard. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is located in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone, which requires a principal building setback of 10 feet. The Board finds that the property is also subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA) that requires that buildings abut the sidewalks. The Board finds that the proposed design of the commercial center must also comply with a concept plan contained in the North District Plan. The Board finds that by reducing the setback to 3 feet, the applicant is able to provide 11 -foot sidewalks with all required landscaping and pedestrian amenities. The Board finds that the drive-through facility is setback more than 70 feet from the Scott Boulevard right-of-way (ROW) and more than 40 feet from the Rochester ROW. The Board finds that the drive-through canopy is integrated into the overall structure and design of the bank building and will be screened from view by a landscaped area and a portion of the canopy structure. The Board finds that the ATM structure does not have any of the design features of the bank building. The Board finds that the transportation system is adequate to support traffic exiting and entering the site, and that the drive-through lanes are set back more than the required 10 feet from adjacent lot lines and public ROWs. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the setback situation is peculiar to the property in question due to the CZA requirements regarding pedestrian orientation, and that this peculiarity has created a practical difficulty for the applicant to construct commercial buildings of a viable size and meet all other standards of the Zoning Code and requirements of the CZA. The Board finds that the reduction of the setback from 10 feet to 3 feet will not be contrary to the purpose of the setback regulations for the commercial zone. The Board concludes that the proposed special exceptions will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, and will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and should not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The Board concludes that proposed exceptions will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property. The Board concludes that the proposed special exceptions are compatible with the Comprehensive Plan, and the Northeast District Plan which contemplated such a commercial development at this site. Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves EXC06-00014, to permit a reduction in the principal building setback from 10 feet to 3 feet on all interior streets (Eastbury Drive, Westbury Drive, and Middlebury Road) for Lots 40-49 of Old Towne Village in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone located south of Rochester Avenue and east of Scott Boulevard, subject to an approved site plan showing minimum 11 -foot wide sidewalks, tree wells and other street landscaping, and pedestrian connections and crosswalks. By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves a special exception to permit a drive-through facility for a financial facility to be located on the lot at the corner of Rochester Avenue and Scott Boulevard in Olde Towne Village with hours of operation limited to between 8 am and 7 pm (this limitation would not apply to the ATM), subject to staff approval of a final site plan with a detailed landscaping plan, ATM enclosure and building elevations. Dn c EXC06-00015— A public hearing regarding an application submitted by Four Oaks Fami yy and Children's Services for a special exception to permit construction of an office building =; for General Community Service Use (youth counseling, treatment, and recreabotr) for —� property located in the Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone at 1916 Waterfront Dftve. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is located in the Intensive Commercial (CI -1), and that General Community Service uses are allowed in the zone upon meeting the specific criteria listed in the Code. The Board finds that Four Oaks has operated a youth group living use on the site for more than ten years with no known negative impacts on the zone. The Board finds that the applicant is proposing a 3,000 to 3,500 square foot addition for general community service use, and that this will not alter the use or maximum occupancy permitted for the established residential facility (group living use) on the site. The Board finds that the addition will not significantly increase traffic to the site and that the existing parking area has sufficient space to serve the proposed addition. The Board finds that the subject site is accessible by public transit. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the proposed addition will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, and will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and should not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The Board concludes that proposed addition will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property. The Board concludes that the proposed special addition is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan, which includes goals and strategies to improve access to Social Services. Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves EXCO6-000154, to permit an expansion for a General Community Service use on property located in the Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone at 1916 Waterfront Drive be approved. 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 14-46-5E, City of Iowa City, Iowa. hairperson STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY Approved by: >/z74dC.- ity Attorne 's Office 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 the13`" day of July, 2006, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this day of , 2005 Marian K. Karr, City Clerk _ N O U i (� m GAJ I J � 3 — TE SEA rZir 'Tl R j'V� rT! n 52 Prepared by Drew E. Westberg, Planning Intern, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5230 G DECISION IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 9, 2006 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Wright C1 —: =:c J G Karen Leigh, Michelle Shelangouski, Ned Wbod STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Robert Miklo, Drew Westberg OTHERS PRESENT: Mark Danielson, Tracy McWane, Lorena Lovetinsky SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: IIIIII III III VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII Doc ID: 020666250003 TVDe: GEN Recorded: 09/18/2006 at 12:41:58 PM Fee Amt: 617.00 Pace 1 of 3 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter County Recorder 4082 Pa917-919 1. EXC06-00018: public hearing regarding an application submitted by Tracy and Scott McWane for a special exception to allow a non -conforming roof -top sign to be reinstalled on property located in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone at 526 S. Riverside Drive. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the legal non -conforming sign was a roof -top sign affixed to the roof canopy. The Board finds that the applicant's non -conforming sign existed prior to its destruction by the April 131" tornado, in which the rooftop sign was destroyed. The Board finds the applicant has submitted documentation and evidence of the historic nature and cultural significance of the sign, including images of the sign at the original store location in the late 1950s and at the current location where it was relocated in 1961, and copies of articles and features from local and national publications testifying to the signs cultural and nostalgic significance. The Board finds that the sign was unique to the time period and to the local the Diary Queen franchise. The Board finds that the applicant has proposed to rebuild the sign in the exact visual likeness of the original sign, to reinforce the rooftop connection to the sign, and to provide additional structural support upon the recommendation of the Building Official. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the sign is unique, specific to this business and part of the property's historic identity. The Board concludes that the new sign will be constructed as nearly as possible to the original sign using photographs of the original. The Board concludes the sign will not be hazardous, as it will be affixed to the building via methods subject to approval of the Building Official. The Board finds that installation of the sign will not impede the normal and orderly development of the area, nor will it impede visibility as it is set back 60 feet from Riverside Drive. The Board finds that adequate utilities are already in place, as well as adequate points of ingress and egress. The Board finds that the exception is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, which encourages the preservation of Iowa City's cultural heritage. Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves EXC06-00018 an application submitted by Tracy and Scott McWane for a special exception to allow a non -conforming roof -top sign to be reinstalled on property located in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone at 526 S. Riverside Drive subject to: 1. The Building Official's determination of a safe and secure mounting. 2. The submission to the building official of a site plan showing all required elements for bringing the parking area into conformance with the design and landscape screening requirements in the Zoning Code. 2. EXC06-00016 — Public hearing regarding an application submitted by Lorena Lovetinsky for a special exception to reduce the required front yard adjacent to Village Road to allow a six foot high fence for property located in the Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS -5) zone at 1208 Tyler Court. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the applicant's property is a double fronting lot, fronting on Tyler Court and Village Road. The Board finds that in the RS -5 zone are required to provide a 15 -foot front setback. The Board finds that the Zoning Code requires that if a lot fronting on two or more streets is required to have a front setback, then a setback equal to the front setback must be provided along all streets and that this setback is considered a front setback for the purposes of the Code. The Board finds the. applicant has a six-foot high privacy fence within the required 15 ft. setback off of Village Road. The Board finds that the Code prohibits fences over four feet within the front principal building setback. The Board finds that an illegal non -conforming fence across Village Road from the applicant's property was in the same situation and was required to reduce the fence height to four feet. The Board finds that as a means to establish privacy for double fronting lots, the Code provides for a landscaped hedge as an alternative to the six foot privacy fence within the setback. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the situation is not peculiar to the property as there are many double fronting lots in the Village Green subdivision. The Board concludes that there is no practical difficulty in complying with the Code as all other fences located along Village Road are in compliance with the height restriction. The Board concludes that, due to its height and location within the required front yard setback, the current non- conforming fence could be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity property and it could impair property values in the neighborhood due to differences in appearance. Disposition: By a vote of 3-0-1 (Shelangouski recused) the Board denies EXC06-00016, an application submitted by Lorena Lovetinsky for a special exception to reduce the required front yard setback adjacent to Village Road to allow a six foot high fence for property located in the Low Density Single -Family Residential (RS -5) zone at 1208 Tyler Court. 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, C airperson STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY Approved . owl 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 August, 2006, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this /'4 day of S e-p4,L Lv- 2006 2t- Maribin K. Karr, City Clerk CORPORATE SEAL I Prepared by Sarah Walz, Planning Associate, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240: 319/356-5230 DECISION IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, September 13, 2006 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL 1111111 llgll Ill 11111 11111 11111 11111 11111 11111 illll 11111 11111 llill 11111 IIII IIII Doe ID: 020684210002 Tvoe: GEN Recorded: 10/10/2005 at 11:37:07 AM Fee Amt: $12.00 Paas 1 of 2 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter Countv Recorder 13K4090 PGI 08-/ O9 MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Karen Leigh, Michelle Shelangouski, Ned Wood, Michael Wright MEMBERS ABSENT: NONE D` n STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Sarah Walz OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Downer C5m SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: y w 1. EXC06-0001 P: public hearing regarding an application submitted by Oaknoll Christian Retirements Services for a special exception to allow off-street parking on a separate lot for property located in the High Density (RM -44) zone at 1116 Oakcrest Street. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the proposed parking lot is within the same RM -44 zone as the principal use (Oaknoll Residential facility), and is within 300 feet of the entrance to the facility. The Board finds that the current lot has 19 parking spaces, and the proposed lot will provide for 20-23 spaces. The Board finds that the applicant has indicated that the lot will be for permit parking by only Oaknoll residents, staff and visitors, and will be posted and enforced. The Board finds that the applicant has proposed 10 -foot landscaped buffers as required in the Multi -family Site Development Standards in the code for the north, south, and east boundaries of the lot. The Board finds that the residential properties to the rear of the parking lot are above grade and will have a view down into the lot. The Board finds that there is a well established oak tree at the rear of the property and that the neighboring residential property owners have expressed interest in preserving the tree as an amenity to the neighborhood. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the nominal increase in parking indicated in the proposed site plan for the lot will not have a detrimental effect on vehicular or pedestrian safety or circulation. The Board concludes that because parking lots have the potential to erode the residential character of the neighborhood and because the principal use to which the parking is accessory is off-site, that a masonry wall screen as described in the S2 standard in the Code is appropriate, and that the wall should complement to the adjacent Oaknoll parking structure in order to signal the relationship between the two uses. The Board concludes that the oak tree at the rear (north) of the property adds to the residential character of the neighborhood and the applicant should make reasonable efforts to preserve the tree. The Board concludes that all other screening proposed by the applicant is in conformance with the requirements in the Code and that the design and layout of the parking area will be required the meet code standards through the site review process prior to paving. Disposition: By a vote of 5-0 the Board approves EXC06-00019, an application submitted by Oaknoll Christian Retirement Services for a special exception to allow off-street parking on a Ncc separate lot for property located in the High Density (RM -44) zone at 1116 Oakcrest Street, subject to 1. The 10 -foot landscaped buffer at the front of the lot should contain a combination of S2 landscaping and a masonry wall that complements the design of the adjacent Oaknoll structured parking facility on Oakcrest and George Streets. 2. Landscaping to the S2 standard on the east and north sides of the parking lot and making reasonable efforts to preserve the established oak tree on the north side of the parking lot. Any construction or landscaping activity in the root zone of the oak tree or modification of the retaining wall around the oak tree shall be subject to the approval of the City Forester. Consistent with the foregoing, such landscaping shall not be required within the drip line of the oak tree. If, despite such reasonable efforts, such tree dies, Oaknoll may construct and use the parking spaces in accordance with the site plan but shall, as a condition thereof, landscape the area formerly occupied by the tree to the S3 standard. 3. The parking area shall be used by permit, for shall be used only by Oaknoll staff, employees, residents, and visitors, and should be appropriately posted, monitored and enforced by Oaknoll. 4. Submission of a final site plan showing the required screening (as specified above), preservation of the oak tree, and the design and layout of the parking area in compliance with the design and construction standards for off-street parking as listed in the code. 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, Chai erson 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 September, 2006, as the same appears of record in my Office. y � day of r;�4'�'�d-�t> , 2006 Dated at Iowa City, this O c �i o Marian K. Karr, City Clerk i7 rn r NOTARIAL SEAL w Prepared by Sarah Walz, Planning Associate, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5230 DECISION IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2006 IOWA CITY -JOHNSON COUNTY SENIOR CENTER 1 ee- I IIIIIII IIIIII III VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII Doc ID: 020704790003 Tvoe: GEN Recorded: 11/06/2006 at 02:35:14 PM Fee Amt: $17.00 Paoe 1 of 3 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter Countv Recorder BK4099 PG247.249 MEMBERS PRESENT: Karen Leigh, Michelle Shelangouski, Ned Wood and Michael Wright MEMBERS ABSENT: Carol Alexander. STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Sarah Walz, Karen Howard OTHERS PRESENT: John Menninger, Sarah Hanley, Johannes Ledolter, Anna Quant, Marilyin Rosenquist, Alison Abreu, Randy Fieselman, Joyce Summerwill, Malcom Rohrbough, Jose Fernandez, Jose Abreu, Romy Bolton APPEALS: 1. APL06-00003: A public hearing regarding an appeal submitted by J. Alberto and Alison Abreu, John and Trisha Koza, Erik and Marilyn Rosenquist, Joe and Lynn Cannon, Frieda Rummelhart, Joyce and Dick Summerwill, John and Randee Fieselman, Dick and Linda Mordaunt, Aileen Leichty, Marge and Dick Hoppin, George and Miriam Bedell, Anna and Lenny Kangas, Jose Fernandez, Ann Clark, Wayne Balmer, Lance Lichtor, Sarah Hanley, Malcolm Rohrbough, Eddie Rosenquist, Marlene Weaver, Bruce and Mary Gantz, Patricia Meier, Benjamin Chaukley, Bernardine Knight, and Naftaly Stramer from the Building Official's decision pertaining to the regulation of accessory apartments and the specific issuance of an occupancy and rental permit for an accessory apartment at 322 Mullin Avenue. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that accessory apartments are specifically listed in the Zoning Code as an example of accessory uses typically associated with Household Living Uses (14 -4A -3A-3). The Board finds that accessory apartments are permitted in the single-family zones in owner -occupied Single Family Dwellings and in buildings accessory to these same dwelling types, provided that certain conditions are met (14 -4C -2A). The Board finds that the occupancy standard for accessory apartments is specifically provided for in the zoning code, and that the standard places a limit on the number of unrelated persons allowed on a property based on the household definition pertaining to single family zones (144C -2A -2(c) and definition of "household", 14-9A-1). The Board finds that the Code permits a number of accessory uses allowed in single family homes that provide financial benefit to the owner -occupant, including daycare uses, bed and breakfast inns, and home occupations (14 -4A -3A-3). The Board finds that the specific restrictions under which accessory apartments are allowed are provided in the Code and are enforced through the rental permitting process. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the intent of the accessory apartment ordinance is clearly and unambiguously addressed in the Zoning Code as written. The Board concludes that because the Zoning Code specifically lists Accessory Apartments as an accessory household use and because the Zoning Code lists all of the specific restrictions under which accessory apartments are allowed in the RS -5 zone, the interpretation of the Building Official was correct in issuing an occupancy and/or rental permit for an accessory apartment in the RS -5 zone at 322 Mullin Avenue. The Board concludes the financial benefit provided by a non -owner occupied accessory apartment is compatible with the requirement that an accessory use contribute to the "comfort, convenience, or necessity of the principal use." The Board concludes that the legislative intent regarding accessory apartments is clear within the Zoning Code and that there has been no error in issuing an occupancy and/or rental permit for a non -owner occupied accessory apartment as an accessory use in a Single Family, RS -5, Zone. The Board further concludes that because the occupancy standard is clearly defined within the approval criteria for accessory apartments, there has been no error in interpreting the regulations to permit the rental of an accessory apartment to a person who is not a member of the principal housekeeping unit. Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board denies the application submitted by J. Alberto Abreu et al for an appeal of the Building Official's decision pertaining to the regulation of accessory apartments and the specific issuance of an occupancy and rental permit for an accessory apartment at 322 Mullin Avenue. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: 1. EXC06-00021 — A public hearing regarding an application submitted by Romy Bolton and Julia Moffitt for a special exception to allow a reduction of the required front yard setback for property located in the Low Density Single-family (RS -5) zone at 302 W. Park Rd. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is located on a corner lot and that the Zoning Code requires a15 -foot front yard setback along both the Beldon Avenue and Park Road frontages. The Board finds that the subject structure currently sits approximately two (2) feet from the property/right-of-way line on Beldon Avenue. The Board finds that the only way to bring the structure into compliance is to remove a large portion of the established house. The Board finds that the proposed changes to the house, removing the existing driveway (which is hazardous) and carport to construct an addition to the home, would set the house back four (4) feet further from the property/right-of-way line and therefore diminish the existing nonconformity. While the proposed addition will extend two (2) feet further north from the footprint of the established house, the overall improvement to safety and reduction in nonconformity is acceptable. The Board finds that the property contains a non -conforming, hazardous driveway located ten (10) feet off the intersection of West Park Road and Beldon Avenue. The applicants propose to build a fully -compliant garage to the rear of the house and re-establish the currently non -conforming, hazardous driveway at that location. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that by setting the new addition back four (4) feet farther from the property line, the proposed house addition will reduce the overall noncompliance with the fifteen (15) foot setback standard. The Board concludes that the situation of the existing house located within two (2) feet of the street right-of-way line is peculiar, given that all other homes along the frontage comply with the setback requirement. The Board concludes that there is practical difficulty in complying with the setback standards since the entire existing addition is currently within the required setback. The Board concludes that by removing the existing addition, driveway and carport and replacing it with a new addition placed four (4) feet farther from the property line, the applicants will improve safety and reduce the structure's overall non -conformity with the setback requirement. The Board concludes that because the proposed setback reduction will be along the street frontage, the Special exception will not be contrary to the purpose of the setback, standards with regard to light, air, separation for fire protection and access, nor will it reduce opportunities for privacy or negatively affect the relationship between structures in the neighborhood. The Board concludes that the negative impact of reducing the required setback for the new addition to the house is mitigated by the increase in the actual setback of the new addition to six (6) feet from the street right- of-way line. Further, the improved design and construction of the new addition to match the architecture of the original portion of the house has a positive impact on the neighborhood over the existing carport. The Board concludes that the removal of the non -conforming, hazardous driveway at the front of the property will improve ingress and egress and safety on the property. Lastly, the Board concludes that building a fully -complaint garage to the rear of the house and re-establishing the currently non -conforming driveway at the rear of the property will positively impact this and N neighboring property values. Cj iJ N _JI CJ7 CT Disposition: By a vote of 4-0 the Board approves an application submitted by Romy Bolton and Julia Moffitt for a special exception to allow a reduction of the required principal building setback from 15 feet to 6 feet for property located in the Low Density Single-family (RS -5) zone at 302 W. Park Rd., subject to general conformity with the submitted site plan as and removal of the driveway access at the front of the property. 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. L Karen Leigh, Chair erson STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY =_M 661 -PA I, Marian Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, do hereby certify that the Board of Adjustment Decision herein is a true and correct copy of the Decision that was passed by the Board of Adjustment of Iowa City, Iowa, at its special meeting on the 4th day of October, 2006, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this o2 day of 2006 Marib". Karr, City Clerk CORPORATE SEAL O chi (Page 1 of 3) Prepared by Sarah Walz, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240 DECISION IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT = MONDAY, November 27, 2006 – 5 P.M. IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY, MEETING ROOM A — 1 MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Karen Leigh, Michelle Shelangouski, Michael Writt MEMBERS ABSENT: Ned Wood (Wood recusing himself due to conflict of interest'' C STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Sarah Walz OTHERS PRESENT: John Hudson, Sandra Hudson, Mike Pugh, Rob Phipps, Hillary Sale, various others (See also minutes from November 16, 2006 for testimony and evidence presented) AIM M [WT VAR06-00001 Consideration of an application submitted by John and Sandra Hudson for a variance from the zoning requirements to allow up to twenty (20) residents for a rooming house located in the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone at 932 E. College Street. (Public hearing closed on November 16, 2006 and Board deliberations deferred to the present special meeting date and time). Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the property at 932 East College Street is a rooming house in the RNC -12 zone that, in the absence of a variance, is currently allowed a maximum occupancy of thirteen (13) roomers under the grandfathering provisions of the zoning code. The Board also finds that the property currently provides two off-street parking spaces, and that the property is unable to physically accommodate the number of off-street parking spaces required under the current code. The Board finds that the applicant has proposed to address parking through the use of the City shuttle bus service. The Board finds that the property was rezoned from RNC -20 to RNC -12 in 2000 with the clear intent to stabilize and preserve the predominantly single family character of the neighborhood. The Board finds that the applicants' assertion that the structure is intended for use by an "intentional community", as defined by the applicants, is not substantively different from a rooming house. The Board finds that in 1997, Leighton House L.C. was granted a density variance (VAR97- 0004) to allow up to thirty (30) roomers, and that the variance was specifically granted to the Leighton House L.C. entity on condition that it provide resident management in compliance with all aspects of the July 1997 Leighton House L.C. business plan. Further, the 1997 density variance was a carefully crafted compromise designed to achieve restoration of the structure while balancing the interests of the neighborhood. As part of the compromise, the 1997 density variance was conditioned upon compliance with the multiple provisions of the Leighton House L.C. business plan, and therefore the variance was conferred specifically to Leighton House L.C. to ensure continued compliance with the business plan upon a change in ownership. Thus, the variance is not automatically transferable to successors in title to the[arIIII�Ii�NIIIIII��InII���INI�IUIIIIiIIaNIII�IU�IIIIIIp1HH Doc ID: 020730360003 TOO: GEN Recorded: 12/13/2006 at 10:35:33 AM Fee Amt: $17.00 Pace 1 of 3 Johnson county IONS Kim Painter Countv Recorder EK4110 PG48.50 (Page 2 of 3) Notwithstanding favorable evidence and testimony regarding the current occupants, the Board finds that the proposed variance would be a permanent grant of rights to the property, and would not require specific methods for operating the rooming house, would not guarantee operation of the rooming house by a specific owner nor guarantee occupancy as an "intentional community' by a specific group of renters. The proposed variance would simply increase the number of occupants allowed in this grandfathered, nonconforming rooming house. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that no variance to the strict application of the zoning chapter may be legally approved unless the applicant demonstrates that the proposal meets all five (5) criteria for the approval of a variance as listed in the zoning code (14 -4B -2A). As to the first criterion, the Board concludes that the proposed variance will be contrary to the public interest and will threaten neighborhood integrity. The Board concludes that allowing a total of twenty (20) roomers in the structure has the potential to result in additional traffic and demand for on -street parking, which will threaten neighborhood integrity and have adverse effects on adjacent properties. The Board concludes the applicants' proposal to ameliorate the parking pressures through the use of the City Shuttle service is only a partial solution that does not adequately address the issue of adequate parking for the additional seven (7) roomers. The Board concludes that granting the variance would not be in harmony with the intent to stabilize and preserve the predominantly single family character of the neighborhood as expressed through down zoning the neighborhood to its existing RNC -12 zone in the year 2000; rather, granting the variance would directly contravene the intent of down zoning the neighborhood to RNC -12, . The Board concludes that increasing occupancy also would be contrary to the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan —to stabilize and preserve the character of the neighborhood —as the proposed increase will likely create additional congestion, noise, and neighborhood parking problems. The Board concludes the applicants have failed to prove that the property in question cannot yield a reasonable rate of return if required to comply with the requirements of the Zoning Code. The Board concludes that the current value of the property, as presented in the applicants' financial analysis and in evidence presented at the public meeting, is based on the owner's capital investment choices given their ability to rent the property to thirty (30) roomers as part of the previous variance. The Board concludes that any financial hardship associated with the property is not unique to the property itself, but rather, the result of investment choices made by the current owner under the business plan to which the 1997 variance is subject. The Board concludes that there is nothing unique about the inherent characteristics of the property that warrants granting special privileges to this property that other rental properties in this neighborhood do not enjoy. The Board concludes that the applicant has not submitted sufficient evidence to show the application of the Zoning Chapter to this property substantially diminishes the property's value, prevents a reasonable rate of return, or results in unnecessary hardship. Thus, the Board concludes that the applicants have not produced sufficient evidence to demonstrate that their application meets all the elements necessary to grant a variance in this case, particularly given the rigorous standards that must be met to legally grant a variance. - Disposition: By a vote of 0-4, the Board denies VAR06-00001, a variance application10 alldou up. . to twenty (20) roomers for the property at 932 East College Street in the Neighborhood _ Conservation Residential (RNC -12) zone. !i ? ` co Y =� J (Page 3 of 3) r Karen Leigh, Ch rperson STATE OF IOWA ) JOHNSON COUNTY ) 0 1 Wrl rf*mwWgso�,moi' r •� 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 a special meeting held on the 27th day of November, 2006, as the same appears of record in my Office, Dated at Iowa City, this day of Z 4ee , 2006 Marian -K. Karr, City Clerk CORPORATE SEAL Prepared by Sarah Walz, Planning Associate, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5230 DECISION IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2006 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL _ Gv__ I IIIIII IIIIII II VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII Doc ID: 020734300005 Tvoe: GEN Recorded: 12/19/2006 at 10:59:35 AM Fee Amt: $27.00 Pace 1 of 5 Johnson Countv Iowa Kim Painter Countv Recorder BK 4111 PG812-816 MEMBERS PRESENT: Karen Leigh, Michelle Shelangouski, Ned Wood, Carol Alexander, and Michael Wright MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Sarah Walz, Karen Howard OTHERS PRESENT: Jeff Raines, Tim Lynch, Glen Siders, Bill Franz, John Beasley, Jim Menloe, John Esten, Ann Esten, Tobu Wilson, Mike Cervantes, Susan Lutgendorf, Phillip Lutgendorf, Nancy Carlson, Tim Weitzel, John Hudson, Sandra Hudson, Mike Pughe, Michael Zimmer, Lisa Ann Johnson, Meg Barron, Tom Bender, Susan Bender, Esther Baker, David Lyndon, Todd Lyndon, Greg Downs, Daniel Peoples, Rob Phipps SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: 1. EXC06-00022 A public hearing regarding an application submitted by First American Bank for a special exception to allow a bank drive-through for property located in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone at Hawk Ridge Drive and Highway 1. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is located in the Community Commercial (CC -2) zone and that drive-through facilities are allowed in this zone by special exception. The Board finds that properties to the north and west of the site are undeveloped and zoned for residential and commercial development. The Board finds that the applicant proposes to locate the drive-through facility along the eastern property line. The Board finds that the Zoning Code requires and the applicant has proposed S3 landscaping between the commercial use (to the east) and the residential property (to the north). The Board finds that the proposed drive-through facility includes two lanes for drive-through service, an ATM lane, and a bypass lane and that the service and ATM lanes accommodate 4 stacking spaces. The Board finds that the applicant has proposed underground storage for stormwater run-off on the site. The Board finds that the traffic study conducted for the area indicates that Hawk Ridge Road and the frontage road/driveway are appropriately designed to handle the projected traffic volume generated by this use. The Board finds that the applicant has proposed pedestrian access to the site via a sidewalk to the south of the frontage road and via a sidewalk connecting the bank site to the undeveloped commercial property to the west. The Board finds that the applicant's final site plan will be reviewed for compliance with all other requirements of the City Code, including the lighting standards, as part of the site review process. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the required S3 screening indicated in the applicant's site plan will mitigate the effects of the commercial activity on the adjacent residential zone to the north, and that the number of drive-through lanes, stacking spaces, and paved area necessary for the drive-through facility will not be detrimental to or negatively impact the property values of adjacent residential properties nor detract from the pedestrian or commercial character of the area. The Board concludes that the transportation system is capable of safely supporting the proposed use in addition to the existing uses in the area. The Board concludes that the proposed landscape screening, traffic design, and stormwater structure insure that the general criteria for the special exception are met, including that the proposed use will not impede future development of the surrounding commercial and residential property; that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and necessary facilities will be provided; and that ingress and egress to the site will minimize traffic congestion. Disposition: By a vote of 5-0 the Board approves an application submitted by First American Bank for a special exception to allow a bank drive-through for property located in the Community Commercial (CC2) zone at Hawk Ridge Drive and Highway 1 subject to substantial compliance with the finally approved site plan. 2. EXC06-00023 Discussion of an application submitted by USCOC of Greater Iowa Inc. for a special exception to allow the construction and operation of a communications transmission facility in the Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) zone at 755 Mormon Trek Boulevard. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the proposed cell phone antenna will be housed within a clock tower to be constructed in the Walden Square shopping center, which is located in the Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) zone. The Board finds that the clock tower is designed to complement the architecture of the existing development while camouflaging the antenna. The Board finds that the shopping center is surrounded on all sides by residential neighborhoods. The Board finds that the applicant has provided evidence in its coverage maps that service is substandard in this area. The Board finds that the proposed clock tower is set back from the adjacent residential zones more than the distance required in the code and that the equipment associated with the cell antennas would be housed in a garage identical to those that already exist behind the commercial building. The Board finds that there is no strobe lighting associated with the tower and that the tower will not use a back- up generator as its principal power source. The Board finds that, while there is space for an additional user in the structure, the limited height of the structure may offer limited capacity for additional users. The Board finds that the proposed clock tower is designed to preserve the existing handicap lift serving the existing commercial building, as well as the established pedestrian walkway, which connects the commercial area to the residential neighborhood to the west. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the applicant has met the specific criteria for locating a camouflaged cell tower in the Neighborhood Commercial zone. The Board concludes that the design elements included in the sketch proposed by staff will appropriately camouflage the cell antenna. The Board concludes that because clock tower will camouflage the cell antennas in a manner that complements and enhances the surrounding commercial center, the special exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of the other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. The Board concludes that by meeting all the specific criteria for the special exception, and by designing the tower to maintain safe access to the existing handicap lift and sidewalk to the south of the commercial building, the cell phone tower will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. The Board concludes that because the surrounding property is already fully developed and because the clock tower/cell tower will not generate traffic to the commercial center, that all other general criteria for the special exception have been met. Disposition: By a vote of 5-0 the Board approves an application submitted by USCOC of Greater Iowa Inc. for a special exception to allow the construction and operation of a communications transmission facility in the Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) zone at 755 Mormon Trek Boulevard subject to the following conditions: • Maintaining a continuous pedestrian sidewalk access to Walden Square from the west and ramp access to the handicap lift. • The applicant must provide a contractual agreement to insure maintenance of the clock and tower including a provision for such maintenance if the applicant, U.S.C.O.C., discontinues use. • Staff approval of the tower design in general compliance with the design submitted by the staff. • The applicant must agree to remove all equipment from the tower and garage if the applicant's use of the site is discontinued. 3. EXC06-00025 Discussion of an application submitted by Frantz Construction Co. for a special exception to allow a reduction in the required front yard setback from 13.5 feet to 0 feet in the High Density Multi -Family (RM44) zone at 724 N. Dubuque Street. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is a former fraternity house located on a corner lot in the RM -44 zone. The Board finds that all surrounding property is fully developed. The Board finds that the applicant is proposing to convert an existing fraternity house into 3 condominium units, a less -intensive use. The Board finds that the Brown Street right-of-way is 80 feet wide, twenty feet wider than the standard right-of-way, and the public sidewalk is located 20 feet from the property line. The Board finds that the current building is located 5.77 feet from the property line, which is within the 13.5 -foot required front setback along Brown Street. The Board finds that the two other buildings along this frontage are located 0 and 7 feet from the property line. The Board finds that the building currently has a metal fire egress structure on the north side of the building, and that the applicant is proposing to replace these non -conforming fire escapes with balconies on the first, second, and third floors. The Board finds that the proposed balconies will extend out approximately 5 feet from the building. The Board finds that the applicant is proposing to create required parking within the ground level of the building. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that the proposed setback reduction meets the specific criteria required in the Code. The Board concludes that because the building is already located within the required front setback along Brown Street there is practical difficultly complying with the setback regulations. Because the subject property is a corner lot it does not receive the full benefit of setback averaging. The Board concludes the situation is peculiar because, while all other buildings along the Brown street frontage are located within the required front setback, the subject building is required to be setback further than all other buildings along the frontage. Because properties along this frontage are already established close to the right of way, the Board concludes that the proposed setback reduction will reflect the general placement of houses in the area and will promote a reasonable relationship between buildings. Because the subject property is a corner lot that abuts an unusually wide street right-of-way, the Board concludes that granting the exception will not reduce light or air or the separation necessary for fire access and protection nor the opportunity for privacy between dwellings. The Board concludes that the removal of the non- conforming fire escapes will improve the aesthetic appearance of the building and that the proposed balconies will help to screen the ground floor garage entrances to the building. The proposed setback reduction meets all of the specific criteria in the Code and will be subject to the conversion of the property to a less intensive use and will be limited to the construction of balconies. Therefore the Board concludes that the proposed setback reduction meets all of the general criteria for the special exception, and specifically concludes that the proposed setback reduction will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of property in the immediate vicinity and will not diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. Disposition: By a vote of 5-0 the Board approved the special exception subject to the following conditions: • The setback reduction will only apply if the property is converted from a Group Living Use to a Multi - Family Use. To that end, this special exception will become effective upon issuance of a building permit to convert the building from a Group Living Use to a Multi -Family Use; • The minimum front setback along Brown Street is reduced from 13.5 feet to 0 feet for the first and second levels of the building expressly for the purpose of constructing balconies in general conformance with the design proposed by the applicant; • The minimum front setback along Brown Street is reduced from 13.5 feet to 0 feet for the lower garage level expressly for the purpose of constructing columns to support the first floor balcony in general conformance with the design proposed by the applicant. The wall of the main structure within which the garages are located must remain at a minimum setback of 5 feet; • The minimum front setback along Brown Street is reduced from 13.5 feet to 5 feet for the third level of the building for the express purpose of constructing a balcony in general conformance with the design proposed by the applicant. Said balcony will not extend beyond the northern wall of the existing structure; • The front setback reductions are approved only for the length of the building along the Brown Street frontage as proposed by the applicant; and • A covenant is recorded with the property that the subject balconies may not be enclosed. Evidence of such recording must be submitted prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. APPEAL: 1. APL06-0004 Discussion of an application from John Roffman for an appeal of the decision made by the Historic Preservation Commission to deny a Certificate of Appropriateness for a proposed building to be located in the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-20) zone and Conservation District Overlay (OCD) zone at 923 Iowa Avenue. Findings of Fact: The Board finds that the subject property is located in the RNS-20 zone and is also part of a Conservation District Overlay (OCD) zone. The Board finds that the original building on the site included 9 one -bedroom units and that this building was destroyed in the April 2006 tornado. The Board finds that the newly proposed building includes 6 three-bedroom apartments. The Board finds that the guidelines that apply to the proposed building are found in section 10.0 of the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook. The Board finds that the Historic Preservation Commission concluded that the proposed building met all of the guidelines except for building height and mass. The Board finds that the width of the proposed building exceeds that of the demolished structure, though the overall height of the proposed structure is smaller in comparison to the demolished structure. Notably, however, the proposed structure increases the footprint of the building to the rear, adding approximately twenty-nine feet (29') of building into the rear yard. The Board finds that the proposed building met all requirements of the Zoning Code, including density, and that the Historic Preservation Commission has no authority to regulate the density. The Board finds that, in its deliberations, the HPC discussed the issue of density as well as the size of the proposed building in relation to the size other residential properties in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. Conclusions of Law: The Board concludes that while the HPC discussed the issue of density, it also discussed the size of the proposed structure in relation to the demolished structure as well as to surrounding buildings when denying the certificate of appropriateness based on the building height and mass guideline. Therefore, the Board concludes that the HPC's action was not arbitrary or capricious. Disposition: By a vote of 2-2 the Board denies John Roffman's appeal from the decision of the Historic Preservation Commission to deny a Certificate of Appropriateness for a proposed building to be located in the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-20) zone and Conservation District Overlay (OCD) zone at 923 Iowa Avenue. 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 -6C -1E, City of Iowa City, Iowa. .r Carol Alexander, Vice Chairperson STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY 1J W11 /I ,1 KEN , = 0 =11sou-now I, Marian Karr, City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, do hereby certify that the Board of Adjustment Decision herein is a true and correct copy of the Decision that was passed by the Board of Adjustment of Iowa City, Iowa, at its special meeting on the 16th day of November, 2006, as the same appears of record in my Office. Dated at Iowa City, this Jr day of 2006 Mari4n K. Karr, City Clerk CORPORATE SEAL