HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/28/2009 MINUTES OF THE WATERLOO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING HELD ON
APRIL 28, 2009, IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL
Acting Chairperson Mohr called the regular monthly meeting of the Waterloo Board of
Adjustment to order on Tuesday, April 28, 2009, at 4:00 p.m. Board members in attendance
were: Mohr, Goldsberry, Holdiman and Mixdorf. Member absent was Anfinson. Staff in
attendance was Noel Anderson, Shane Graham, Chris Western and Adam Poll. There were
approximately 28 people in attendance.
I. Approval of the Agenda for April 28, 2009.
It was moved by Holdiman, seconded by Goldsberry, to approve the agenda as submitted. Motion
carried unanimously.
II. Apprja.val_cd_theZdautes_cf_the_Regular_Meetingnn March 74 7(111(
It was moved by Mixdorf, seconded by Holdiman, to approve the minutes as submitted. Motion
carried unanimously.
III. llecicion ItPmc
1. Request by Deborah Peterson at W of 802 Rainbow Dr for a special permit to allow for a
rubble fill site for the purpose of leveling the lots for future development.
Poll gave the staff report, noting that the applicant is requesting the special permit in order to
fill and grade two lots, which are located adjacent to their existing business at 802 Rainbow
Drive. The lots are currently vacant and the leveling of these lots would allow for future
development. The site plan submitted shows the existing contours of the property, and the area
to be filled. The Special Permit section of the Zoning Ordinance requires that the applicant also
supply information regarding the number of cubic yards necessary, the final elevations and an
estimated length of time to complete the filling. Poll indicated that the application shows 1,250
cubic yards of fill to be used and the final elevation will be between 856 to 853 feet, which will
not be any higher than the current elevation of property. The lots are to be filled and graded
within two months of receiving the permit as most of the fill is already on the property.
Poll noted that the Planning &Zoning Commission reviewed the request at their regular
meeting on April 7, 2009, in which the special permit was recommended for approval. Poll
indicated that staff recommends approval of the request, as the request would not appear to
have a negative impact on the area, as the existing and proposed elevation of the property
would not change, and it would have a positive impact by providing for the development on
the site, and subject to the condition that only clean fill be brought onto the site, and that no fill
material shall be placed on the adjacent DOT right of way or their nearby detention pond.
Mixdorf questioned if the DNR would have to review the request, and Anderson noted that the
Health Department would review it and not the DNR. Holdiman questioned what clean fill
was, and Anderson noted that some fill contains concrete, and clean fill is basically clean dirt.
Anderson noted that although it is a rubble fill application, the Ordinance considers anything
more than 25 cubic yards of fill as a rubble site. Glenn Peterson, owner of the property,
indicated that he recently purchased the lots, and the fill would level the property, which would
make easier to mow and take care of.
It was moved by Mixdorf, seconded by Goldsberry, to approve the special permit, subject to
the condition that only clean fill be brought onto the property, and that no fill be placed on
the adjacent DOT right-of-way or their nearby detention pond. Motion carried unanimously.
SPECIAL PERMIT REQUEST APPROVED.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
April 28,2009 Minutes
property.
Julia Baldwin, executive director for Angel House, indicated that there would be 4-5 sleeping rooms
with 15 persons at most on the property, and that there would be only 3 staff on the site during the
day, with 1 in the evening and overnight. Baldwin indicated that the residents would be there
voluntarily, and they would have to go through a referral process and then a screening process.
Baldwin indicated that it wont be a flophouse, and that the women will be busy looking for jobs,
and not just hanging around. Baldwin noted that these women are homeless or near homeless,so
they don't have cars, so parking shouldn't be an issue. Baldwin noted that they are getting bids in
to install a security system, as that was a concern noted by the Planning & Zoning Commission. Joel
Harris, owner of the property, noted that he has 6 parking stalls available on the adjacent lot at 1321
W 4th St, and only 2 tenants. Harris commented that the proposed use would be a good fit for the
neighborhood. Mohr questioned how long the lease would be for, and Harris indicated that there is
no lease in place yet, but that it would probably start with a 5-year lease. Dan Hillman, 1948
Randolph St, who is a local realtor, noted that the majority of the area is single-family homes, not
multi-family and commercial like staff indicated. Hillman noted that the use would decrease the
value and marketability of the homes in that area. Hillman commented that parking would be an
issue, and that there are better places for this use than the property in question. Harris commented
that one way or another, the property would be put back into service, whether it is for the use in
question, or for renters. Anna Shower,520 Vermont St, commented that if the request isn't
approved, the property owner admitted that he would bring in drug addicts to be his tenants again.
Shower noted that the landlord could refuse tenants if they are known drug dealers or prostitutes.
Nassir Sahir, 518 Denver St, noted that the police department does nothing, so this use should not
go there. Sahir commented that there is no way to make sure the home is supervised. Sahir
submitted a petition in opposition with about 45 names on it. Sahir was concerned with parking,
and that it is not the right location and would have a negative impact on the area. Clair Metcalf, 535
Denver St, noted that there are lot of children in the area, and that there are a lot of single-family
homes in that area and that this is not the right spot for the group home. Ralph Beaver, 233 Cutler
St, father of the owner at 521 Vermont St, is concerned with past renters in that house. Beaver noted
that there is a concern for parking there, and questioned who would be in control if there were a
problem there. Dianna Powell, 521 Vermont St, questioned who would fund and run the home, and
if they are qualified to do it. Baldwin indicated that she has a bachelor's degree in criminology from
UNI and also an associate's degree in criminal justice from Hamilton College, and has worked at
Pathway's for 31/2 years. Baldwin noted that there would be a board of directors. Mohr questioned
where the funding would come from, and Baldwin noted that it would come from community
grants and state funding. Holdiman questioned if there would be sex offenders there, and Baldwin
noted that they couldn't. Dulce Orozco, 518 Denver St, indicated concern that the applicant hasn't
always followed the law herself, and indicated concern that the people staying there would be
coming from prison. Steve Kapler, 529 Vermont St, noted that this is a fragile neighborhood, and
that the concept is good, but the location is bad. Baldwin commented that if she cant locate here,
then where? Baldwin indicated that she has the personal knowledge of addiction and turning her
life around. Baldwin noted that the home would not be a detriment to the neighborhood. Anna
Shower questioned what the City would do if the home doesn't go well. Orozco commented that if
the request is approved, that a resident of the neighborhood should be on the board of directors.
Harris noted that he is not trying to threaten the neighborhood, and noted that the home would be
a good fit for the neighborhood. Mike Shower noted that the property values would go down, and
that the only person that would benefit from this would be the landlord. Robert Tromanhauser, 403
Williston Ave, indicated concern about the property values going down in the neighborhood.
Graham asked Holdiman if the property values would be affected by this group home, and
Holdiman indicated that it could limit the marketability if it is known to be a problem.
3
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
April 28,2009 Minutes
which in this case is 5'. The addition would therefore be 1 1/2' into the required setback, thus
requiring the variance. Graham noted that the property adjacent to the south, as well as the
property across the street, both have 3-stall attached garages, both of which would be larger
than the total size of the proposed addition on the property in question. Therefore, the request
to add a third stall to an existing attached garage would not look out of character for the area.
Also, the applicant has submitted a petition of support, which includes both properties on each
side of them, as well as the properties behind them. Graham indicated that staff recommends
approval of the request, as there already exists a concrete pad for a vehicle, and the request is to
add a stall over that existing pad, there are similar sized garages in the area, so the addition
would not be out of character for the area, and the applicants have submitted a petition of
support from all surrounding property owners.
Keith Rogers indicated that his neighbors were happy to sign the petition in support of his
request, and that they need the extra room in their garage.
It was moved by Mixdorf, seconded by Goldsberry, to approve the variance to allow a side
yard setback of 3 1/2'. Motion carried unanimously.
VARIANCE REQUEST APPROVED.
5. Request by the Cedar Bend Humane Society at 11 i6 W Airline Hwy for a variance to the 25
required parking stalls for a commercial kennel, to allow for the construction of a new
building on the property, which would provide 14 parking spaces, 11 spaces short of the
minimum required.
Graham gave the staff report, noting that the applicant is proposing to construct a new kennel
building of approximately 6,140 SF building just to the west of its existing kennel building at
1166 West Airline Highway. Based on the parking provisions within the Zoning Ordinance for
a kennel, one parking stall is required for every 250 SF of gross floor area; therefore, the site
would require 25 parking stalls. The applicants are proposing a parking lot with 14 parking
stalls, and have noted that their current facility has 24 existing parking stalls, as well as noting
that the principal use of the new building will strictly be as a kennel,which would effectively
reduce the amount of useable floor space for office personnel. Between the two sites, a total of
38 parking stalls are provided, and the applicant has noted that rarely all of the parking stalls at
their existing facility are full at any given time. Andera noted that the applicant does not have
enough space to expand the proposed parking area further towards the east, as the existing
building currently utilizes a 27'x 47' Bio-retention Basin for the facilities existing uses. Due to
the close proximity of the bio-retention basin, as well as the narrow nature of the lot, the
applicant is limited in the amount of parking they are able to provide, as well as areas they can
place the proposed parking. Andera indicated that staff recommends approval of the request, as
it would appear to be unique, as there wouldn't appear to be the need for the additional parking
stalls, and the request would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
Mohr questioned if the existing building would stay there, and Larry Buchholz with Ament
Engineering noted that it would. Buchholz indicated that they are trying to keep the trees and
bio-retention area between the two buildings, so additional parking may be hard to provide.
It was moved by Goldsberry, seconded by Holdiman, to approve the variance to allow a total
of 14 parking spaces. Motion carried unanimously.
VARIANCE REQUEST APPROVED.
6. Request by First Equity Acquisitions, LLC on behalf of the City of Waterloo at the NW enrvpr
5