HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/25/2009 MINUTES OF THE WATERLOO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING HELD ON
AUGUST 25, 2009, IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL
Chairperson Anfinson called the regular monthly meeting of the Waterloo Board of
Adjustment to order on Tuesday, August 25, 2009, at 4:00 p.m. Board members in
attendance were: Holdiman, Mixdorf, Goldsberry, Mohr and Anfinson. Staff in attendance
was Noel Anderson, Aric Schroeder and Shane Graham. There were 6 people from the
public in attendance.
I. Approval of the Agenda fnr August 7i, 7009
It was moved by Goldsberry, seconded by Holdiman, to approve the agenda as submitted. Motion
carried unanimously.
II. Appal of the Minntec of the Rev-liar Meeting on July 2R,2009_
It was moved by Holdiman, seconded by Mohr, to approve the minutes as submitted. Motion
carried unanimously.
III. 'Derision Ttenic
1. Request by the Dan Levi on behalf of Buzz Anderson at 414.5 Kimball Ave for a special
permit to allow for the construction of a mini-storage development in a "C-2" Commercial
District.
Schroeder gave the staff report, noting that the Zoning Ordinance, based on an amendment in
2004, requires that mini-storage facilities in a"C-2" Commercial District obtain a special permit,
issued by the Board of Adjustment, after a recommendation from the Planning&Zoning
Commission. Such facilities in less restrictive districts do not require issuance of a special
permit. The special permit is required in the "C-2" District, in part, due to the fact that areas
zoned "C-2" tend to be in high visibility areas and along major thoroughfare. The Ordinance
states that in considering such a request, the Board will review and consider the proposed
location for "compatibility of surrounding, highest and best use of land, and proximity to a
major thoroughfare". The intent of the provision was to discourage mini-storage development
in areas that are "out front" or highly visible, with the intent that those areas should be
preserved for a higher and better use of the land. With this request, the site is directly adjacent
to Highway 20, and in close proximity to Kimball Avenue, however the proposed mini-storage
would be located at the back of the property, behind other existing and proposed commercial
developments. Therefore the request would appear to meet the intent of the Ordinance.
Schroeder noted that the site plan shows the proposed layout of the mini-storage facility, which
would include 5 buildings totaling 18,900 square feet. The site plan also shows a proposed
office building between the proposed mini-storage buildings and Kimball Avenue that would
be split off on a separate lot. The surrounding properties are primarily commercial
development, and the proposed location of the mini-storage facility is located behind existing
and proposed developments, therefore appearing to be consistent with the intent of the
Ordinance. It would appear that all zoning requirements would be met, including setbacks.
The site plan does not show what areas will be vehicular use areas, however any vehicular use
areas will be required to be hard surfaced, and must be setback 5' from property lines. Also, a
landscaping plan and a drainage and detention plan will be required prior to issuance of a
building permit. Schroeder indicated that Engineering has noted that the office building, which
is also shown on the submitted site plan but is not part of the special permit request, would not
be permitted to have access from Kimball Avenue, and would also need to gain access from
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
August 25,2009 Minutes
opposition to the request, noting that the church that they attend nearby (Queen of Peace) has a
Spanish minister, and that they didn't think that the church was necessary in that location.
Graham noted that staff recommends approval of the request, as it would not have a negative
impact on the surrounding area, and would be a good buffer between the commercial uses to
the south and the residential uses to the north, it is in conformance with the Comprehensive
Plan and Future Land Use Map, and would be a good infill development, and the variance to
the parking requirements would not have a negative impact on the area, as they are reducing
the required amount by only 1, and there is available on-street parking, and the variance to the
setback requirements would not have a negative impact on the area, as it would meet the
setback requirement as if it were a commercial building in that zoning district, and staff is
proposing to amend the Ordinance which would make the setbacks legal.
Holdiman questioned how the occupancy is determined, as the plan says 144 and the staff
report says 148, and Schroeder noted that it is based on the square footage, and noted that the
left side of the site plan near the alter area shows 4 more occupants,for a total of 148. Duane
Svoboda, the architect for the applicant, noted that they could reduce the alter size in order to
make the building smaller so they can meet the parking and setbacks,but would prefer not to.
Jack Black,227 Downing Ave, questioned where the services are currently being held, and Joel
Lindaman indicated that services are held at the Meals on Wheels building, and they share
room with Harvest Vineyard Church,but they need a morning service, of which they currently
cannot do. Mr. Black questioned why the applicant picked this site, and Mr. Lindaman noted
that he thought it would be a good site and it became available for him to purchase so he
bought it.
It was moved by Mohr, seconded by Holdiman, to approve the special permit to allow for the
establishment of a religious facility, and a variance to the 29'6"setback requirement to allow
a 20'setback, and a variance to the 37 parking stalls required to allow 36 parking stalls.
Motion carried unanimously.
SPECIAL PERMIT AND VARIANCE REQUESTS APPROVED.
3. Request by Robert Denny at S of 2.375 T.ngan Avn for a variance to the 25' rear yard setback
requirement in the "C-2" Commercial District, to allow for the construction of a new
commercial building,with a rear yard setback of 10', 15' less than the minimum required.
Graham gave the staff report, noting that the applicant is proposing to construct a new 5,800 SF
3-tenant commercial building on the property in question,which is zoned "C-2" Commercial
District. The rear yard setback requirement in the "C-2" Commercial District is 35',however
there is a provision that states if the front yard setback is increased over the 20' minimum, then
the rear yard setback can be shortened by the same amount,with a minimum rear yard setback
of 25'. The building would be located 10' from the north property line,which is 15' less than the
minimum required. The rear yard is considered off of the north property line because a corner
lot's rear yard is defined as being opposite of the narrow dimension street frontage, and the
narrow dimension of the property is off of Heath Street. The building will face Logan Avenue to
the east, so the 10' setback would appear to match the setback of the building to the north. The
building could be moved to the south in order to meet the setback requirement, however the
site plan shows a dumpster enclosure in that location south of the building, and there is the
entrance to the property, which is situated directly north of the entrance to Hy-Vee. Based on
the fact the building would not be out of character with the area, as it would have a similar
setback along the north property line as the building to the north, and the fact that the property
is uniquely shaped, requiring the entrance drive to be located farther to the west, the request
3
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
August 25,2009 Minutes
noted that there is a pylon sign at the entrance to the property,but the sign is so small that there
is no benefit for him. Bradford noted that other buildings in the area have signs on 2 or more
sides of the building. Anfinson questioned if any other tenants in the strip mall would want to
place signs on the rear of the building, and Bradford indicated that maybe a couple would,but
most of the businesses are locally owned and it would be fairly expensive to put another sign
up. Holdiman commented that a precedence has been set already with the Vision store and
Advance Auto Parts building.
It was moved by Holdiman, seconded by Goldsberry, to remove the condition on the property
not allowing any wall signs on the rear of the building, to allow signage on all 4 sides of the
building. Motion carried unanimously.
REQUEST APPROVED.
IV. Discussion Items
There were no discussion items.
V. Ad]nnrnment
It was moved by Holdiman, seconded by Goldsberry, to adjourn the meeting at 4:52 p.m. Motion
carried unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Shane M. Graham,
Planner II
5