Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/22/2008 MINUTES OF THE WATERLOO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING HELD ON APRIL 22, 2008, IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL Chairperson Holdiman called the regular monthly meeting of the Waterloo Board of Adjustment to order on Tuesday, March 25, 2008, at 4:00 p.m. Board members in attendance were: Holdiman, Anfinson, Mixdorf,Goldsberry and Mohr. Staff in attendance was Aric Schroeder and Shane Graham. There were 6 people from the public in attendance. I. Approval of the Aunt-la for April 77, 7nn8 It was moved by Anfinson, seconded by Goldsberry, to approve the agenda as submitted.Motion carried unanimously. II. Annrnval of the Minptae of+ho RPanlar eeHr. �M h r� 8 �rar� �. It was moved by Mixdorf, seconded by Goldsberry, to approve the minutes as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. III. fPcision Items 1. Request by Waterloo Auto Parts at 1491 David St for a special permit to allow for an auto salvage recycling yard for the purpose of expanding the existing auto salvage recycling yard by adding an additional 6.8 acres of fenced yard, and a variance to the 25' setback requirement for a salvage yard fence, to allow the fence to be 15' from David Street, 10' less than the minimum required. Graham gave the staff report, noting that the applicant is requesting the special permit in order to expand the existing salvage yard to the east, on land currently owned by Alter Trading. Alter Trading received a special permit in 2001 to utilize an approximate 3.5-acre portion of the property for use as a secondary yard to their existing yard located at 1500 W Airline Highway. The site in question, although approved yearly for a salvage yard license by the City Council, is used very little. Waterloo Auto Parts, Inc,which owns the existing auto salvage business adjacent to the west, is proposing to purchase the land in question in order to expand their business. As part of the purchase,they are asking for a special permit in order to expand the approved salvage yard area to cover the entire 10.5-acre parcel, which is approximately 6.8 acres of additional land that has not yet been approved for such use. The existing approved area has the proper fencing around it, and the expansion to include the rest of the property would have to be fenced with 8' tall solid fencing as well, per the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for a salvage yard. Graham indicated that the request for expansion would not appear to have a negative impact on the area, as a portion of the property has already been approved for such a use, and much of the surrounding area is comprised of industrial uses, including a similar use just to the north and west. Graham indicated that the Zoning Ordinance requires that for new yards established after adoption of the provisions regulating recycling yards, the required fence must be no closer to any street lot line than the minimum front yard required in the District, with 2 inch caliper understory trees planted every 100 feet or part thereof within this setback area. The existing fenced area to the north appears to be setback approximately 25' at its farthest point, and approximately 15' at its closest point from David Street. The M-2 Heavy Industrial District requires a minimum front yard setback of 25', therefore portions of the existing fence would appear to be located closer than allowed by the Ordinance. Graham noted that the applicant is BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT April 22,2008 Minutes appear to be a negative impact on the area. However, the garage was not constructed properly, being constructed 72 SF larger than approved and 15' further to the south than approved, causing the structure to "stick out" into the line of site of adjoining homes along May Street. Our office has received a call from Robert Ehr, an adjoining property owner at 739 May St,who expressed concern that the garage is located too far south. Mr. Ehr spoke in opposition to the request at the April 1, 2008 Planning and Zoning Commission, indicating that the entire structure should be moved further to the north, and expressing concerns that the church has added gravel at the end of May Street that causes water to back up onto the street. Schroeder indicated that the property is located within the Sunnyside Watershed,which crosses Highway 63 eventually draining into Black Hawk Creek. There is a 16' wide public drainage easement that extends off of the dead end of May Street that crosses the property in question. The existing garage is located approximately 10' into the public drainage easement. The easement was originally designed to take storm water runoff from Gloria Drive and May Street to the east then outlet onto the property in question and then surface flow across the property to a point that it would then flow under Highway 63. However, the applicants have since constructed a 24" private storm sewer line that connects into the public storm sewer line at the end of May Street, and diverts the public storm water runoff, as well as water runoff from the property in question, across the property into the private detention pond located west of the church building. The private detention pond then outlets into the ditch of Highway 63. Schroeder noted that the Engineering Department has indicated that it is not typical for public storm water to outlet into a private storm sewer pipe, but would be ok if a public easement is dedicated over the private line to ensure that the public storm water can continue to outlet. If such a utility easement were established over the private storm sewer, then the drainage easement would no longer be needed, and could be vacated. However, no such easement exists over the private storm sewer, and the applicants had previously indicated that they were not interested in establishing such an easement. Schroeder noted that the applicants are now indicating that they would agree to remove the lean-to structure,vacate the drainage easement, and dedicate a utility easement. The garage with lean-to that was moved onto the property extends approximately 2' over the private storm sewer and approximately 10' into the public drainage easement. If the lean-to structure were removed, the private storm sewer would be located approximately 4' from the remainder of the garage. The remainder of the garage would still be located apprnximately 4' into the public drainage easement,however the Engineering Department has indicated that if the drainage easement were vacated, and a utility easement dedicated over the private storm sewer, that the easement,which would likely need to be 16' wide, could be offset with only 4' on the north side of the private storm sewer. Therefore if the lean-to were removed, the drainage easement vacated, and a utility easement dedicated, the remaining portion of the garage would be located approximately right up to the new easement. Schroeder noted that the applicants were originally requesting the Special Permit approval for a revised site plan to allow the garage with its current size and in its current location, which would have also required a request for a vacate or an encroachment agreement into the public drainage easement. However, the applicants are now agreeing to remove the lean-to and are requesting the Special Permit approval for a revised site plan to allow the garage to be located approximately 9' further to the south than what was approved, 3' south of the westerly extension of the northerly right-of-way of May Street, and 4' into a public drainage easement. If the altered request were approved, the applicants would also have to request to vacate the public drainage easement, and then dedicate a public utility easement over the private storm sewer. 3 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Apri122,2008 Minutes neighborhood by eliminating a majority of the building that"sticks out" into the line of site of adjoining homes along May Street, making the structure more compatible with the neighborhood, and the request is in conformance with the Future Land Use Map and the Comprehensive Plan, and subject to the condition that property owner apply for, and receive approval on a request to vacate the 16' drainage easement and dedicate to the City of Waterloo a utility easement of sufficient width as determined by the City of Waterloo over the private storm sewer. Dan Bigler, chairman of the church board, spoke on the request,noting that they did everything that they thought they had to, including getting all approvals and building permits. Anfinson questioned the applicant if they had plans in place for the paving around the two garages, and Bigler noted that they are currently in the process of receiving bids to do the paving work. Robert Ehr, 739 May St, noted that he would like the applicants to move the garage all the way to the previously approved location, which is 15' to the north. Anfinson questioned if the paving would help the drainage, and Ehr noted that it could if it was sloped and maintained correctly. Schroeder indicated that Engineering would review and approve of the paving and drainage plan. Anfinson questioned if a licensed contractor was required, and Schroeder indicated that a licensed contractor isn't required, since the work would be occurring on private property. There was a discussion as to vacating the drainage easement and dedicating a new easement over the private storm sewer. Ehr questioned if the drive would be barricaded, since people currently turn around in his driveway, and Schroeder indicated that there is no requirement that the drive be barricaded, but noted that people would most likely drive onto the church property before turning around. Ehr commented that mud gets onto the street that comes from the church property, and wondered if anything would be done to stop that, and Schroeder noted that the church has until June to pave the area, which would help eliminate the mud. Bigler noted that the city required them to place gravel on the property, even though they didn't have plans to. Mixdorf commented that he would like to have a civil engineer review the paving plan to make sure the property drains properly, and Schroeder indicated that that could be a condition of approval if the Board felt necessary. It was moved by Mohr, seconded by Mixdorf, to approve the special permit approving the revised site plan showing the 20'x24'garage (with no lean-to) located approximately 6'further south than originally approved, subject to the condition that the applicant obtain a licensed civil engineer to prepare a drainage plan, and subject to the condition that the property owner apply for, and receive approval on a request to vacate the 16'drainage easement and dedicate to the City of Waterloo a utility easement of sufficient width as determined by the City of Waterloo over the private storm sewer.Motion carried unanimously. SPECIAL PERMIT REQUEST APPROVED. 3. Request by Rooff Development, LLC at 639 Mobile St for a variance to the 5' side yard setback requirement in the "R-2" One and Two Family Residence District, to allow for the construction of a new single-family home, with a side yard setback of 2', 3' less than the minimum required. Graham gave the staff report, noting that the applicant is proposing to purchase 2 adjoining lots from the City of Waterloo, and would combine the parcels to construct a new single-family home on the site. The lot is 60' wide, and the house would face and be addressed off of Mobile Street. Since it is located on a corner lot, the setback requirement off of Douglas Street would be 10', and the side yard setback requirement from the south property line would be 5'. The proposed house is 48' wide, and by meeting the setback requirement of 10' off of Douglas Street, 5