Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/23/2007 A ^ MINUTES OF THE WATERLOO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 23, 2007, IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL Acting Chairperson Anfinson called the regular monthly meeting of the Waterloo Board of Adjustment to order on Tuesday,October 23, 2007, at 4:00 p.m. Board members in attendance were: Goldsberry, Mixdorf, Mohr and Anfinson. Member absent was Holdiman. Staff in attendance was Noel Anderson, Aric Schroeder and Shane Graham. There were approximately 7 people from the public in attendance. I. Approval of the Agenda fnr October 2'\ 2007 It was moved by Mixdorf, seconded by Mohr, to approve the agenda as amended.Motion carried unanimously. II. Approval nf the Minutes nf the PPdular Meeting nn SPptemher 7.. 7(1)7 It was moved by Mixdorf, seconded by Mohr, to approve the minutes as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. III. nerisinn ItPmc 1. Request by A-Line EDS, Inc. at ROR nvarhnrn A77P for a special permit to allow for the expansion of the existing recycling yard,including a 13,488 SF building for warehousing and dismantling of distribution transformers, and for a variance to the requirement that a solid fence completely surround the yard to allow no fencing along a portion of the south side of the yard. Schroeder gave the staff report,noting that the applicants have been growing for a number of years, as is evidenced by the recent expansions requests in 2003 and current request. The recent request invoices the need for a 13,488 sq. ft. building for expansion,warehousing, and dismantling of distribution transformers. A Line EDS is growing their ability to service the utility industry through the decommissioning of transformers. As a result of this, they are working to add additional employees, and need further building space for proper environmental methods to accommodate the decommissioning work. The decommissioning will follow all applicable local, state, and federal regulations for such work. The 13,488 sq. ft. building will be located immediately south of the existing main structure at 808 Dearborn Avenue. The entrance to the building will be via the existing entrance off of Dearborn Avenue and will be on existing vehicular use areas. The expansion will not involve additional areas for outside storage of materials, as any such storage needs will be accommodate within the existing fenced area. The previous approval on the site noted a 3-year timeframe for fencing expansion, but with the change in focus for this southerly part of the site away from the outside storage of scrap metal, fencing would not be required, as no outside storage would be utilized in the areas adjacent to where they are requesting to not have fencing. Schroeder indicated that the location of the building would be outside of the current fenced area. The Zoning Ordinance requires that"all work performed shall be carried on within the fenced area or within an enclosed building or structure approved as a part of the salvage operation." The construction of the 13,488 sq. ft. building outside of the fenced area, to perform salvage work within an enclosed building, would therefore be in conformance with the Zoning Ordinance upon issuance of the special permit. However, the Zoning Ordinance requires that "the yard shall be completely surrounded with a fence or wall that is at least eight(8) feet in uniform height and color". Schroeder noted that staff would ask the Board of Adjustment to • BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT October 23,2007 Minutes accessory structure on a vacant lot, subject to the applicant signing and recording a restrictive covenant tying the lots together.Motion carried unanimously. VARIANCE REQUEST APPROVED. 3. Request by Legacy Remodeling, LLC at 11 h Fnr .ct A-r,P for a variance to the 5' maximum deck addition into the required front yard setback to allow for the construction of an 8' deck, extending 3' past the maximum allowed. Schroeder gave the staff report,noting that the request would not appear to have a negative impact on the neighborhood, as the deck would be an unenclosed structure that would not obstruct the view of adjoining properties. The property to the west is across an alley and is addressed off of Kimball Ave, which its rear yard facing the lot in question. The Zoning Ordinance provides for a deck or unenclosed porch to be built into the front yard, including being built past the average setback, but only up to 5' or 1/4 the distance into the front yard. The property in question and the property to the east are approximately in line with a 20' front yard setback, and 1/4 of 20' is 5'. Schroeder noted that this provision was added to the Zoning Ordinance back in 1999 to try to allow and encourage unenclosed porches and decks in the front yard, which provides for a more traditional and friendly neighborhood atmosphere, and given that such structures are unenclosed and therefore despite extending past the average setback, do not obstruct the line of sight of adjoining properties,which is the primary purpose of the requirement prohibiting structures to extend past the average front yard setback. Staff is currently reviewing the entire Zoning Ordinance with the Planning and Zoning Commission for multiple changes and updates, and as part of that, staff is recommending that the provision allowing for the 5' minimum deck or unenclosed porch be increased to 8'. Staff feels that a minimum 8' deck or unenclosed porch would not have a negative impact, and if the minimum needed to create a usable space. The current 5' minimum essentially provides for an adequate entry landing,but does not provide sufficient space for chairs or other patio furniture, which should be encouraged to promote neighborhoods. Schroeder indicated that staff recommends approval of the request, as the deck would extend 3' past the maximum allowed,but would not obstruct the view of adjoining properties, and the request would not appear to have a negative impact on the neighborhood, but would instead have a positive impact by creating a usable deck that encourages a more traditional and friendly neighborhood atmosphere. It was moved by Mixdorf, seconded by Goldsberry, to approve the variance request to allow for an 8'deck, as the request would not have a negative impact on the neighborhood. Motion carried unanimously. VARIANCE REQUEST APPROVED. 4. Request by Gene Dettmer at 824-R26 Columbia St for a variance to the Non-Conforming Structure section to allow for the expansion of a legal non-conforming building for the construction of a 9'8"x32' (310 SF) roofed addition to the existing 3,476 SF building, and for a variance to the 20' rear yard setback requirement in the "R-3" Multiple Residence District to allow for the construction of a 20'x24' (480 SF) attached garage addition within 11' of the rear property line, 9' less than the minimum required. Schroeder gave the staff report,noting that the applicant is proposing the 9'8"x32' (310 SF) roofed addition to the legal non-conforming structure at 824 Columbia St and the20'x24' (480SF) attached garage addition to the house that will rebuilt at 826 Columbia St. The legal non- conforming structure is an existing 3,476 SF building constructed in 1914. A review of past City 3 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT October 23,2007 Minutes junk or any other items or equipment pertaining to the non-conforming business, and there shall be no storage of junk within the unenclosed addition. Detliuer noted that there are some things on the property that are borderline junk, but that has been an ongoing issue that would be taken care of with the new construction. Anfinson questioned what the building was being used for, and Dettmer noted that he has been there since 1984 and that he used to run RPM Motors, but now it is a small machine shop. Dettmer noted that he has not received any complaints from any neighbors regarding the business. Dettmer noted that he intends to put a new roof on the building and clean the property up. Anfinson questioned if Mr. Dettmer lived at 826 Columbia St, and Deltiner noted that he does not live there now, as it is currently under construction, but lived there in the past and would live there once the construction is complete. It was moved by Mixdorf, seconded by Mohr, to approve the variance to expand the legal non- conforming use and the variance to the 20'rear yard setback requirement, as the request would not have a negative impact on the neighborhood.Motion carried unanimously. VARIANCE REQUESTS APPROVED. 5. Request by Ranchero Western Wear and Saddle Shop at 4192 Logan AvP for a variance to the "A-1" Agricultural District sign regulations to allow for the construction of a 5'x8' (40 SF) monument sign, advertising a legal non-conforming retail business. Graham gave the staff report,noting that the applicant is proposing to construct an 8'x5' (40 SF) monument sign on the property, which would advertise their western wear and saddle shop business, which is a legal non-conforming business established prior to adoption of the Zoning Ordinance. Currently, there is a temporary sign located on the property,which has been there for quite some time. The applicants would like to get rid of that sign, as it is not very visually appealing, and construct the new monument sign in its place. The "A-1" Agricultural District sign regulations do not allow monument signs advertising a commercial business, as the district only allows bulletin boards and signs pertaining to the lease,hire, or sale of a building or premises. It would appear, however, that the business has been on the property for some time, and would appear to be a legal non-conforming use. Given that there has been an existing sign on the property for some time, the request to upgrade the sign would not appear to have a negative impact on the surrounding area. The area is on the outskirts of the city where not many homes are located, and there are several commercial properties just to the south at the intersection of E Big Rock Rd and Logan Ave. Graham indicated that staff recommends approval of the request, as it would not have a negative impact on the neighborhood or traffic conditions, and a sign already exists on the property, and this request is only to replace the existing sign to better advertise the legal non-conforming business. It was moved by Mohr, seconded by Mixdorf, to approve the variance to the "A-1"Sign Regulations, as it would not have a negative impact on the neighborhood or traffic conditions. Motion carried unanimously. 6. Request by Frank Hanson at 05 W qrh .fit for a variance to the Accessory Structure size limit, the 35% maximum lot coverage requirement and the 30% rear yard lot coverage requirement for an accessory structure, to allow for the construction of an approximate 990 SF structure to be used as a grape arbor,with a total accessory structure size of 1,190 SF,340 SF more than the 850 SF maximum allowed, a total lot coverage of 2,246 SF (57.3%), 874 SF more than the 1,372 SF maximum lot coverage allowed, and a total rear yard coverage of 5 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT October 23,2007 Minutes meeting, which leaves 3 members remaining, so all 3 members would have to vote in favor of the request for it to pass. It was moved by Mixdorf, seconded by Mohr, to deny all variance requests, based on the request having no uniqueness and it could set a precedent.Motion carried unanimously. VARIANCE REQUESTS DENIED. IV. Tlicrnccinn TtPms V. Adjnurnment It was moved by Mixdorf, seconded by Mohr, to adjourn the meeting at 4:56 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, / ' Shane M. Graham, Associate Planner 7