HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/20/2007 MINUTES OF THE WATERLOO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING HELD ON
DECEMBER 20, 2007, IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL
Chairperson Holdiman called the regular monthly meeting of the Waterloo Board of
Adjustment to order on Thursday, December 20, 2007, at 4:00 p.m. Board members in
attendance were: Holdiman,Goldsberry and Mohr. Board members not in attendance were:
Mixdorf 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 A gander for necember 20, 7007
It was moved by Goldsberry, seconded by Mohr, to approve the agenda as submitted. Motion
carried unanimously.
II. Ar nrnval of the Minutes of the Regular I� eeHng nn Nnvamber 77, 7007.
It was moved by Mohr, seconded by Goldsberry, to approve the minutes as submitted.Motion
carried unanimously, with Holdiman abstaining.
III. llerisinn Ttamc
1. Request by Signs & Designs on behalf of the City of Waterloo (Center for the Arts) at 225
Commercial St for a variance to the 80 SF maximum size limit for freestanding signs in the
C-3 Commercial District, to allow for the construction of a 112 SF monument sign and a 15
SF monument sign, in addition to a 36 SF monument sign, for a total of 163 SF of signage, 83
SF more than the maximum allowed.
Schroeder gave the staff report, noting that the Waterloo Center for the Arts is currently
undergoing major renovation, including the addition of the Phelps Youth Pavilion. As part of
the project, the applicant is proposing to redo the signage of the site, including new wall
signage and three monument type freestanding signs. The applicant has already obtained the
necessary building permits for the wall signage, and for one of the freestanding signs that will
be located adjacent to the building near the main entrance, and is 36 SF in area. Of the other
two signs proposed, one would be located along W 1St Street near the location of an existing
sign that will be removed, and will be 112 SF and include an electronic message center. The
second would be located along Commercial Street near the main access to the facility, and
would be 15 SF. Schroeder noted that the Ordinance limits total freestanding signs on a
property in the "C-3" District to 80 SF, which is significantly less than the 300 SF that is allowed
in the "C-2" or "M-1" Districts. The "C-3" District is more restricted because it was the intent to
encourage wall signs in the Central Business District. Although the site is within the "C-3"
Central Business District designation, it is located on the fringe and is developed significantly
different than the majority of the Central Business District,which typically has smaller lots and
allows zero lot line development and no parking lots. The site in question is on a very large lot
at well over a city block, and the building is setback off the property lines with a parking lot
located in the front. The site is developed more like a "C-2" or "M-1" zoned property would be
developed. The property is surrounded by Highway 63 to the west, with Young Arena (also
owned by the City of Waterloo) west of that. The Cedar River is located to the north, Us Bank is
located to the east, and other commercial development is located to the south across
Commercial Street, including the Waterloo Community Playhouse. The proposed signs would
not appear to have a negative impact on the surrounding properties or on traffic conditions in
the area. Schroeder indicated that staff recommends approval of the request, as the request
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Dec?mber 20,2007 Minutes
Graham gave the staff report,noting that the applicant is proposing to purchase the property in
order to move their animal hospital and veterinary clinic from their current site on W 4th Street
to this location, as it better suits their needs. The use is listed as a principal permitted use in the
"C-2" Commercial District, however there is a provision that states that"an exercising runway
shall be at least 200 feet from any "R" District and 100 feet from any "C-1" District Boundary".
The applicant is proposing to have an exercise runway for the animals, which would be located
behind the building, with the fence running along the east and north property lines. Adjacent
to the east is property owned by the City of Waterloo that is zoned "C-1" Commercial District,
however that land is full of trees and is being utilized as part of the flood levy along Black
Hawk Creek. There is a house located to the east of the City owned land along Norton St also
zoned "C-1" Commercial District, which would appear to be approximately 86' from the rear
property line to the property in question. There are many trees separating the two properties, so
the exercise runway would be screened from any residential properties. Graham noted that the
distance requirement was put in place so that the area where the animals would be out in the
open would not interfere, whether it be by noise, smell, or sight, with any other commercial
uses nearby. This property would appear to be unique in that the adjacent property is a heavily
treed area owned by the City of Waterloo,with little chance of future development. Graham
indicated that staff recommends approval of the request, as the request would not appear to
have a negative impact on the area, as the runway would be located behind the building and
would be screened from other properties by trees on City owned land, and without the
variance, the exercise runway would have to be much smaller in area in order to meet the
setback requirements, which could result in a hardship.
Fred Miehe, real estate broker representing the applicants, noted that he feels that it is a good
use considering the surrounding property is all owned by the City for use of the flood control
levee. Miehe noted that the surrounding trees would provide a good buffer from the property.
It was moved by Mohr, seconded by Goldsberry, to approve the variance request to allow for the
animal run to be a distance of 0'from the closest"C-1"Commercial District. Motion carried
unanimously.
VARIANCE REQUEST APPROVED.
4. Request by Michael Crow at 2864 Burton Ave for a variance to the hard surface vehicular
use requirement to allow for a gravel vehicular use area around a recent building
expansion.
Anderson noted that this request was on last month's agenda, and that a major issue was not
the variance being requested, but a related issue regarding hard surface parking for employees.
Anderson noted that he spoke with Mr. Crow, and that they have 10 hard surface parking stalls,
with 17 employees on the maximum shift. Mr. Crow had asked that a variance be granted for
the vehicles that employees don't park on a hard surface, and that most of the cars parked on
the grass was from construction employees temporarily on the site. Holdiman expressed
concern that they turned down a similar request at a nearby property, and Schroeder noted that
this request is unique in that the property currently has gravel parking, where the other request
was on an undeveloped parcel.
It was moved by Goldsberry, seconded by Mohr, to table the request for one month so that the
applicant can be present. Motion carried unanimously.
VARIANCE REQUEST TABLED.
3