Dubuque County Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes of January 7, 2014

Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes – January 7, 2014

Dubuque County Zoning Board of Adjustment

Minutes of January 7, 2014

Chairperson Pat Hickson called the meeting to order at 7 p.m.

A. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Ron Koppes, Darlene Burds, Connie Nolan & Pat Hickson. Tom Kuhle was absent. Staff Present: Anna O’Shea & Donell Hefel
B. Election of Chairperson & Vice-Chairperson. A motion was made by Mr. Koppes, seconded by Ms. Nolan and passed unanimously to move elections to the end of the meeting. Vote: 4-0
C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A motion was made by Mr. Koppes, seconded by Ms. Nolan and passed unanimously to approve the Minutes of the December 3, 2013 meeting. Vote: 4-0
D. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. BA#01-01-14 LIME ROCK SPRINGS COMPANY – MICHAEL GANTZ –

VARIANCE
The applicant is requesting a 25’ left side yard variance to the 30’ required to build a 105’ x 44’ addition onto an existing structure at 5’ from the left side yard property line in the M-1, Industrial district. The property located adjacent to the city of Sageville and .15 miles north of the city of Dubuque is legally described as Lot 2 of Lime Rock Place and Lot 1-2-2-1-1-1-1 of Northome Place Section 11 (T89N, R2E) Dubuque Township, Dubuque County, Iowa.
Ms. O’Shea said the property has an existing building on the lot that is only 5’ from the left side yard property line. The new addition will be attached and follow the same side yard setback. Three letters were sent, two were delivered and the cities of Sageville and Dubuque were notified. There were no comments received for this case.
Speaking to the Board was Jim Kaune, IIW Engineers, 4155 Pennsylvania Ave. Dubuque, IA. Mr. Hickson administered the following oath asking the participant to raise his right hand. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth? He responded yes. Mr. Kaune said he is representing the owners of Lime Rock Springs Company. The building is a facility for the Verena Street Coffee Company. They process coffee distributed to the grocery stores. They would like to add on to the existing building. They are requesting a variance of 5’ to the left side property line. That property line in effect is an interior property line, because Lime Rock Springs owns the property to the north (left). Their property is comprised of approximately 14 separate parcels. Therefore, the actual distance to the next owner’s property line on that side is over 300’. On the other side the setback meets the 30’ setback.
Ms. Burds asked what was Lime Rock Springs Company. Mr. Kaune stated that Lime Rock Springs bottles Pepsi Cola products. This new warehouse is for Verena Street Coffee, they process coffee beans.
Mr. Koppes asked Ms. O’Shea if this property line is adjoining their own property why is a variance needed? Ms. O’Shea said that if they had built over the property line it would have joined the lots together. Because they did not, it is a separate lot and could be sold, a variance was required.
Mr. Koppes asked if they were expanding the business? Mr. Kaune indicated that they were. Ms. Nolan asked if they were the only occupants of the building? Mr. Kaune said they were the only occupants.
Ms. O’Shea asked about a well and septic on the site plan. Mr. Kaune said they get their water from the Pepsi facility. The Pepsi facility also handles the waste. Ms. O’Shea asked if they had talked to the Health Department about the expansion? Mr. Kaune indicated that they had not; they are not planning to add any additional bathrooms.
Ms. O’Shea asked if there were going to be additional employees? Mr. Kaune said he did not think so, it was more of a warehouse.
Mr. Hickson asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against the case. No one spoke.
A motion was made by Ms. Burds, seconded by Mr. Koppes and passed unanimously to approve the variance. Vote: 4-0
2. BA#11-43-13 KIPPER, KENNETH & DEBRA – SPECIAL USE PERMIT

TABLED FROM THE NOVEMBER 5, 2013 MEETING

The applicants are requesting a Special Use Permit to allow a 35’ x 30’ addition to an existing accessory building as a non-conforming use in the C-1, Conservancy district. The property located along Mud Lake Road approximately 2.75 miles north of the city of Sageville is legally described as, Lot 2-1 of the N1/2 of the SW1/4 Section 15, (T90N, R2E) Peru Township, Dubuque County, Iowa.

Ms. O’Shea said that the property is in the flood plain, but received a LOMA (a letter of map amendment) just for the home in 2002, because the home is one foot above the 100-year flood elevation. The home was built in 1993 and received a Special Use Permit and Variance from the Board of Adjustment to build in the C-1 Conservancy district. The previous owner also received a Special Use Permit and Variance for the 30’ x 50’ garage, which was stipulated for personal use only in 1996.
Ms. O’Shea said that it appears that the Special Use and Variance may not have been recorded. There was no recording stamp on the decision by the recorder.
Conservation reviewed the application in 1993 and in 1996 for the home and garage. They approved the home and later the garage. No formal Conservation Easement was executed. They looked at it and gave their blessing, but there was no formal Conservation Easement that is required in the C-1 district. A Conservation Easement was part of the Conservation Board’s motion for the 24’ x 26’ addition to the home in 2001. That letter stated that “no further development should be allowed to take place on the property unless a permanent Conservation Easement as provided in Chapter 457A of the Code of Iowa is granted to a conservation organization to protect the remainder of the forest and wetland natural resources found on the property.”
Ms. O’Shea said the Board looked at this case in November 2013 and it was tabled because the County Conservation Board had not reviewed the application. The Conservation Board has now reviewed the case and has no objections to the request. A Conservation Easement was not required by that Board.
This property is currently in violation for building without a permit. The Kippers are waiting for this Board’s decision and they will need a Flood Plain Permit before they can finish the structure.
Mr. Koppes asked why they were in violation. Ms. O’Shea said they did not receive a permit to build, they were issued a warning to stop construction. Eight letters were sent and six were delivered.
There was one comment received from Dennis Kring, 21481 Mud Lake Road, Dubuque, IA. He indicated that he is in favor of the application. He said that it does not affect him and the building is back away from the road.
Speaking to the Board were Kenneth & Debra Kipper, 21402 Mud Lake Rd., Dubuque, IA. Mr. Hickson administered the following oath asking the participants to raise their right hand. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth? They both responded yes.
Mr. Koppes had a question about one of the pictures that showed a Warning sign posted on the structure. Ms. O’Shea responded when they go out and do an investigation and there is a structure that has been started without proper permitting, they do a Stop Work Order and that is what the sign is for. We take a picture of it for the files to show that it was posted.
Mr. Kipper said they are asking for an addition to the accessory building. It is for personal use. They have a boat, jet ski and an ATV. They have had to rent storage for their personal items in the past and would like to get their items on their own property.
Mr. Koppes asked why there was not a permit issued? Mr. Kipper said it was a miscommunication between himself and his contractor. He thought the contractor was going to get the permit and the contractor thought Mr. Kipper was going to get the permit. He had no idea that neither one had gotten the permit until Mr. Bodnar stopped out at their house.
Ms. Nolan asked if either one had checked back with the other one to see if there was a permit taken out? Mr. Kipper said no they had not. He said he had talked to his contractor in April and he was not able to start the building until October. Mr. Hickson asked who the contractor was. Mr. Kipper said it was Craig Friedman.
Ms. Nolan asked if the contractor was not aware he needed the permit? Mr. Kipper said apparently he did not. Mr. Koppes said there is no excuse for a contractor not knowing that they need a permit. Ms. O’Shea indicated that when the contractor stopped in the day after they received the Stop Work Order, the Zoning Office gave him the letters regarding permitting requirements. She said she was not sure if he received those letters previously or not. He does have them now. Mr. Koppes said that is the typical cop-out that they thought the other person got the permit.
Ms. Burds asked how the Zoning Office became aware that the Kippers did not have a permit? Ms. O’Shea said they received a complaint call.
Mr. Hickson asked about the Conservation Board’s decision. Ms. O’Shea said they had no opposition to the request. In the past, we have required people to get their Conservation Easement and the Conservation Board has always acquiesced. It is required by Code.
Mr. Koppes asked what would happen if the Board approves it and the Code says we have to require it. Ms. O’Shea said it is the County Ordinance that requires it. She said it is a State Code that regulates the Conservation Easement, but it is required by our County Ordinance in the C-1 district.
Mr. Hickson asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against the case. No one spoke.
Mr. Koppes started a motion and discussion ensued on how to go about wording the motion to address the issues with this property and the Conservation Easement.
It was noted that this property has bluff on both sides and it is right along the road. The home sits back by the bluff and there are cornfields on top of the bluff. They are right down in the valley. There are not a lot of trees on the property.
A motion was made by Mr. Koppes, seconded by Ms. Burds and passed unanimously to approve the Special Use Permit with the condition that it follow all the requirements excluding the requirement for the Conservation Easement. Vote: 4-0
3. BA#11-44-13 KIPPER, KENNETH & DEBRA – VARIANCE

TABLED FROM THE NOVEMBER 5, 2013 MEETING

The applicants are requesting a 45’ front yard variance to the 80’ required to build a 35’ x 30’ addition to an accessory structure at 35’ from the front yard property line in the C-1, Conservancy district. The property located along Mud Lake Road approximately 2.75 miles north of the city of Sageville is legally described as, Lot 2-1 of the N1/2 of the SW1/4 Section 15, (T90N, R2E) Peru Township, Dubuque County, Iowa.

Ms. O’Shea said a variance was requested in 1996 for a front yard variance for the garage at 65’ to allow the building to be 15’ from the front yard property line. The new addition will sit even farther away from the road. Eight letters were sent, six were delivered and Mr. Kring had the same comment for this case.
Mr. Hickson reminded the participants they were still under oath.
Mr. Kipper added that the addition is actually farther off of the road than the existing corner of the building.
Mr. Hickson asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against the case. No one spoke.
A motion was made by Ms. Burds, seconded by Ms. Nolan and passed unanimously to approve the variance with the condition it is for personal use only. Vote: 4-0
4. BA#01-02-14 CONNOLLY, JUSTIN J. & ANNETTE M. REVOCABLE TRUST

- VARIANCE
The applicants are requesting a 6’ 3” Height Variance to the 11’ 9” required to build a 45’ x 36’ detached garage 6’ 3” taller than the primary structure in the R-1, Rural Residential district. The property located along Monastery Rd. approximately 5 miles south of the city of Peosta is legally described as Lot 1 of Connolly Acres, in Section 1 (T87N, R1E) Prairie Creek Township, and Section 36 (T88N, R1E) Vernon Township, Dubuque County, Iowa.
Ms. O’Shea said this property was rezoned in October of 2013 to R-1, Rural Residential to make the lot and use conforming. The Connollys also platted the property from three lots into one lot. Now they are ready to build and they will need a height variance before they can get a building permit for the garage. Eight letters were sent, three were delivered, and there were no comments for this case.
Speaking to the Board was Justin Connolly, 15182 Monastery Road, Peosta, IA. Mr. Hickson administered the following oath asking the participant to raise his right hand. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth? He responded yes. Mr. Connolly said he would like to build a detached garage behind the house. He said their house was built in the early 70’s. It has the lower roof and sidewalls. The garage is going to have taller walls and a steeper pitched roof. That is what puts him over the height of the home.
Mr. Koppes asked it is a very big garage, what is it going to be used for? Mr. Connolly said it would be for a pick-up and lawn mowers. Just kind of a workshop.
Mr. Hickson asked if it was for his own personal use, not for a business? Mr. Connolly said no, not for a business.
Mr. Koppes asked if the workshop was for his personal use. Mr. Connolly said he has a business about three miles away and he has a big shop there. He wants to get away from that.
Mr. Hickson asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against the case. No one spoke.
A motion was made by Mr. Koppes, seconded by Ms. Burds and passed unanimously to approve the variance with the condition that the garage is for personal use only. Vote: 4-0
E. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None
F. OLD BUSINESS: Ms. O’Shea commented that the Board of Supervisors will have their public hearing on the 13^th for the Ag Exemption changes.
B. Election of Chairperson & Vice-Chairperson. Mr. Hickson turned the meeting over to Mr. Koppes for nominations for Chairperson.
Ms. Nolan made a nomination for Mr. Hickson as Chairperson, seconded by Ms. Burds. Nominations were closed. Mr. Hickson was elected Chairperson on a vote of 4-0.
Mr. Koppes turned the meeting over to Mr. Hickson for nominations for Vice-Chairperson.
A motion was made by Ms. Burds, for Mr. Koppes as Vice-Chairperson, seconded by Ms. Nolan. Nominations were closed. Mr. Koppes was elected Vice-Chairperson on a vote of 4-0.
G. NEW BUSINESS: None
H. ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made by Ms. Burds, seconded by Ms. Nolan and passed unanimously to adjourn. Vote: 4-0 The meeting adjourned at 7:34 p.m.