Board of Adjustment

Board of Adjustment - Jul 27 2026 Agenda Monday, July 27, 2026 at 7:00 PM Asbury Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting 7 P.M. Asbury City Hall 5290 Grand Meadow Drive Meeting is available virtually via Zoom https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6506402953 and via telephone 1.929.205.6099 Page 1. Meeting Opening A. Call to Order B. Roll Call 2. Public Hearing A. Special Exception for Tristate Christian School 5630 Saratoga Road for Lot 1-1 3 Asbury Mall 3rd Addition for determining setback for fence placement. Special Exception Application TSCS.pdf Site Plan.pdf TRI STATE CHRISTIAN FENCE JULY 2026 NOTICE.pdf al Plat Asbury Mall Third Addition.pdf City Administrator Notes and Recommendation TSCS July 2026.pdf Standards for Granting a Special Exceptions.pdf B. Motion to open public hearing (hear parties for and against) C. Motion to close public hearing D. Board discussion E. Motion 3. Public Hearing A. Special Exception for Board Discussion 2871 Hales Mill Road for setback for 13 proposed garage. Special Exception Application Hohmann 2871 Hales Mill Rd.pdf 2871 Site Plan.pdf Lot Coverage and Zoning.pdf Standards for Granting a Special Exceptions.pdf Historical Documents of Previous Variances.pdf Special Exception Letter Hohmann 2871 Hales Mill.pdf B. Motion to open public hearing (hear parties for and against) C. Motion to close public hearing D. Board discussion E. Motion 4. Regular Meeting Page 1 of 34  A. Minutes from the March 31, 2025 meeting. 33 BOA MINUTES 03312025.pdf B. Any other business or correspondence. 5. Adjournment A. Adjourn Meeting Title VI Statement - The City of Asbury receives federal funding and may not discriminate against anyone on the basis of race, color, or national origin, according to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. For more information or to obtain a Title VI Complaint form, call 563-556-7106. Page 2 of 34  i 6 ' City ofAsbury 5290 Grand Meadow Drive, Suite 1 Asbury, Iowa 52002 Tel. 563.556.7106 CityOfASbury You’re home. Fax 563.556.2001 info@cityofasbury.c0m APPLICATION FORM Planning and Zoning Board of Adjustment CI Preliminary Plat Rezoning Variance I] Final Plat Annexation Conditional Use Permit E Site Plan Simple Amendments (0rd, plans, etc) Special Exception B Site Plan Major Planned Unit Development Appeal Amended Planned Unit Development Please complete the applicable sections below. Please type or print legibly in ink. PropertyOwnerlS): Ti-Qi'q‘l-b Clarita-Hm m) [3:150de Phone=?ln3_23_’l'570l 5&30 $1wa Zd. IA:Zip: 52.002, Property Address: City Aébuiaé State: Mobile Phone: E-Mail: (iflé?he i?g. are Applicant/Agent: M 233.5%. Phone:5ln3’23l-3"IDI Address: 5025 LCI SOWA'I'DM Cityzmsmtal—‘A Emil—007- Mobile Phone: FIS' '1’qu #331221; E—Mail: MIN—é ?es, Q?? Site Location/Address: 51430 Zé" BELLE.LD+ SMA‘HZQA‘ Legal Description: LO“—l—l A’éb?ijé MK“ 3rd m Total Property (lot) area (square feet or acres): )9 S M” Existing Zoning: C; Proposed Zoning: Describe proposal and reason necessary (attach a letter of explanation if necessary). Q Q “04$ 5) Certification: |/we, the undersigned, do hereby certify/acknowledge that: 1. It is the property owner’s responsibility to locate property lines and to review the abstract for easements and restrictive covenants. 2. The information submitted herein is true and correct to the best of my/our knowledge and upon submittal becomes a public record; 3. Fees are not refundable and payment does not guarantee approval; and 4. Alladditional required written and graphic materials are attached. Property Owner(s): Date Applicant/Agent: WU Date FOR OFFICE USE ONLY 71.1] ’LDZLe Fee: Received by: Date Received: Hearing Date: Page 3 of 34 We are requesting a variance to place a safety fence (6’ high black chain link) closer to the property line than the required setback. The ideal placement of the fence is directly on the school’s property line that is shared with the city (Lot A-t). Our property has a unique topography as it consists of 2 levels with a slope connecting them. The lower level is the flattest and the students find it the best place to use for group games and activities during recess. The street side of this section is what we are requesting a variance for. Due to the layout of the property, strict adherence to the regulation setback would bisect our primary lawn and strip away 5,540 square feet of vital recreational space for our students. (This is nearly the size of our gymnasium, which measures 6,300 square feet.) The requested variance serves as a necessary measure to‘meetour unique needs as a school of ensuring student safety without greatly reducing the playable area. Losing that much play area negatively affects the space as it is used for school events, our annual Husky Run fundraiser, and the outdoor recesses enjoyed by our 125 elementary students multiple times each day. The 5,540 square feet of space out out of our play area due to the current requirement would become completely unusable to our students because it would be outside the protection of the fence, posing a physical danger to students due to its close proximity to the street. Moving the fence to the property line still leaves nearly 25 feet of space between the fence and the curb, preserving public walkways and neighborhood aesthetics. We are pleased to share that our neighbor, Norby Distributing, fully supports this project and has granted permission to place the fence on the property line they share with us. Ultimately,this variance we are requesting from the City of Asbury willallow us to maximize student safety and the play area without negatively impacting the local community. Note: To help protect the privacy of our students since they are so visible to passerbys on the sidewalk and road, we would like our fence to have black privacy slats, which is mentioned on the plans. We did not see slats mentioned in code. Page 4 of 34 Page 5 of 34  Sidewalk ‘4‘,“ Reguired Information 302. 54' . Tri-State Christian W4“ 3m Proposed 6' fence w/ [ \ kW? Fall Safety Zone (red) School Association Mulch (existing) privacy slats (orange) —% ——> Monkey Bars and Swings 8' High (new) — 5630 Saratoga Road : Playground (existing) ———— r - See attached specification sheets —\ /: 25' 0" - Retaining Wall/Bench (existing) 9 Mulch (new) Asbury, Iowa 52002 Setbacks (green) Contact: Amy Rush LLI Lot—Arceis ”’5“ :pyL, ro ert ine ‘b‘ue ’ Phone: (563) 231-3701 Z —. 0: D 35 E ___ _/\ .'I I 299.98' M .???ifé‘eiiig‘éiylnpé‘vacy“a“W” :: Entrance/Exit Gate (typical) . Proposed expanSion of play ground and < Tri State ' .. U i . . - NORBYS addition of new p lay —v I Christian School structures. | A — l | . '" “Area Proposed new privacy I 1'5““ fence for children's l . I safety and security. Site Plan 1 1"=50'-0" l \1 No. Description Date Tri-State Christian School Site (11x17) DESIGN Fence Plan Project number Date Drawn by Project Number Issue Date Author C102 Scale 1" = 50'-0" Checked by Checker Page 6 of 34  PUBLIC NOTICE OFFICIAL NOTICE OF THE CITY OF ASBURY, IOWA Pursuant to the directive of the Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Asbury, Iowa, notice is hereby given to the parties interested and citizens of said City that on the 27th day of July 2026 at 7:00 P.M., a public hearing will be held at the Asbury City Hall, 5290 Grand Meadow Drive, Asbury, IA on the following Special Exception request: Request for Special Exception Tri-State Christian School 5630 Saratoga Road on Lot 1-1 Asbury Mall 3rd Edition for determining setbacks for fence placement. At said time and place all interested parties will be given an opportunity to be heard for and against the request. Dated at Asbury, IA this 11th day of July, 2026. Steve Ready, Chairperson Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 7 of 34 Page 8 of 34 Plan Review for Special Excep on Applica on Tri-State Chris an School Fencing in playground area July 9, 2026 Applica on for Special Excep on for set backs for proposed fence around playground structure. Chapter 165.03.03 Fences Walls and Hedges Chapter 165.03.03D General Provisions: 1. Right of Way – Proposed fence is placed out of the right of way. 2. Permits – If Special Excep on is granted, then Special Excep on Applica on will serve as the Fence Permit Applica on. 3. Fence Material – applicant states the fence will be chain link which is an acceptable material. 4. Maintenance. Applicant is required to maintain both sides of the fence. 5. Damage. No damage can occur to abu ng property during installa on. 6. Survey. Since the intent of the applicant is to install the fence on the property line – The City may require the applicant to survey the property to insure proper placement of the fence. 7. Retaining Wall. Not applicable. 8. Wetland. Not applicable. 9. Fence height. The proposed fence is 6 foot tall. This meets the maximum height requirement. Chapter 165.03.03 E Specific Standards: 1. Corner lot. Not applicable. 2. Setback from property line. 5 foot set back from the property line. May be waived a er a fence agreement is obtained from abu ng property owner. a. The applicant has obtained a fence agreement from the adjoining property owner (Norby Distribu ng). b. Applicant should also have a fence agreement with the city since it abuts city property. 3. Front Yard Setback. No fence shall be permi ed in any front yard setback. a. This is a vacant lot with no primary use structure. To consider this a rear yard, applicant should replat the property to combine the two lots into a single lot. 4. Rear and Side Yard Setback. No fence or wall which exceeds 6 feet in height is not permi ed. Meets requirement. 5. Street Side Yard Setback. Not applicable. 6. Setback from Access and U lity Easement or Right of Way. No fence, wall or hedge shall be place closer than 2 feet from an access or u lity easement or right of way. a. There is an exis ng 10 Stormwater Easement plus an exis ng public u lity easement for a total of 20 feet on the south property line. Page 9 of 34  b. There is an exis ng 5 foot public u lity easement along both Lot 1-1 and Lot 1-2-2-2 for a total of 10 feet. Board Informa on: This applica on is coming before the Board of Adjustment for a decision on the Special Excep on Applica on to: 1. Recommend approval to the City Council for a fence agreement with Tri-State Chris an for the installa on of a fence on the property line. If placed on the property line, then survey is required to insure correct fence placement. OR Have the fence be placed in accordance with the required 5 feet from the property line. 2. Determine if the lots should be combined to establish a true “rear yard” for the property. This is not an op on because Tri-State Chris an School is not the deed holder of the property OR Approve the site plan as submi ed with the fence constructed with the understanding Lot 1-2-2-2 is where the primary structure is located and Lot 1-1 is the “rear yard” to Lot 1-2-2-2. Notes: A. Tri-State Chris an School is not the deed holder of Lot 1-1. The deed is held by Tom Kane. The parcels would not be abled to be combined un l the land contract is fulfilled. B. A declara on should be recorded to formally document the ac on taken by the Board of Adjustment on the property that declares Lot 1-1 as the rear yard to Lot 1-2-2-2; requires Tri-State Chris an School to formally request the county to combine the two parcels into one tax parcel upon contract fulfillment; And vehicular ingress or egress onto Parcel 1-1 to parcel from Heacock Road is prohibited. Page 10 of 34 Asbury Zoning Ordinance Update Page 179 SECTION165.07 ZONING BOARDOF ADJUSTMENT 3. Additional Information. The Zoning Board of Adjustment may require the applicant to supply any further information beyond that contained in the application where it reasonably considers such information necessary to make the determinations required by this Ordinance. B. Standards for Granting a Special Exception. The Zoning Board of Adjustment has the power to authorize in specific cases such special exception from the terms of the Zoning Ordinance as will not be contrary to the public interest, where owing to special conditions a literal enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance will result in practical difficulty, and so that the spirit of the Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done in accordance with the following standards for approval. (Iowa Code Sec. 414.12) No such special exceptionshall be granted unless the Zoning Board of Adjustment determines on the basis of specific information presented at the public meeting or contained in the application that all of the following Standards for Approval have been satisfied: 1. Strict compliance with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance would unreasonably prevent the landowner from using the property for a permitted use or would render conformity necessarily burdensome. a. Ifthere is a way to accomplish the same purpose without a special exception, such as a design change, even if it will be more inconvenient or more expensive forthe applicant, a special exception should not be granted. b. A special exception may be granted for circumstances unique to the property (e.g., odd shape), not those unique to the property owner (e.g., large family). 2. The particular request, or a lesser relaxation of the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, would provide substantial justice to the landowner and neighbors. a. When the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance treat an applicant unfairly in relation to unique aspects of the land they should be relaxed. b. If a lesser special exception than requested would provide substantial justice to the property owner, the lesser special exception should be considered. 3. The plight is due to unique circumstances of property and is not shared by neighboring properties in the same zoning district. a. If the circumstances for which a special exception is warranted are shared among numerous properties in the same zOning district, then the special exception request should be denied. b. It may be better to consider amending the Zoning Ordinance. Adopted 05-14-2024 Page 11 of 34 Asbury Zoning Ordinance Update Page 180 SECTION165.07 ZONING BOARDOF ADJUSTMENT 4. The problem is not self-created. Being ”self-created” includes actions of the current property owner and actions of all previous owners. a. The key is whether a property owner — present or past, took some affirmative action that created the need for the special exception, such as making an unusual land division (i.e., odd shape), filling the entire buildable area so that a porch must necessarily extend into the setback area or exceed maximum lot coverage, altering the property in violation of the controlling Zoning Ordinance, etc. b. Purchasing property with the knowledge of current Zoning Ordinance limitations does not prevent an application for (and granting of) a special exception. 5. In granting a special exception, the Zoning Board of Adjustment shall not consider prospective financial loss or gain to the applicant. 6. Under no circumstances shall the Zoning Board of Adjustment grant a special exception to allow a use not permissible under the terms of these regulations in the district involved, or any use expressly or by implication prohibited by the terms of these regulations in said district. 7. No non—conforming use of neighboring lands, structures, or buildings in the same district and no permitted or non—conforminguse of lands, structures, or buildings in other districts shall be considered grounds for the granting of a special exception. C. Conditions and Restrictions on a Special Exception. 1. Imposition of Conditions and Restrictions. In granting a special exception, the Zoning Board of Adjustment may impose any conditions or restrictions in conformance with these regulations it reasonably considers necessary to ensure full compliance with the standards of Subsection 165.07.06.C. Standards for Granting a Special Exception above to reduce or eliminate any detrimental effect of the proposed special exception upon the neighborhood or the district, or to carry out the general purposes and intent of this Ordinance. 2. Modification of Conditions and Restrictions. Any subsequent change or modification of a condition or restriction imposed by the Zoning Board of Adjustment in granting a special exception must be approved in the same manner and with the same requirements as the original application for a special exception. 3. Violation of Conditions and Restrictions. Violation of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms under which the special exception is granted, shall be deemed a violation of this Ordinance and punishable under Subsection 1653.06.09. Enforcement. Adopted 05-14—2024 Page 12 of 34  ' } 0 5290 Grand Meadow City of Asbury Drive, Suite 1 Asbury, Iowa 52002 Tel. 563.556.7106 CltyOfAYgrebhgwa ° F 563.556.2001 info@ca:i: yofasbury.com APPLICATION FORM Planning and Zoning Board of Adjustment D Preliminary Plat Rezoning Variance D Final Plat Annexation Conditional Use Permit B Site Plan Simple Amendments (0rd, plans, etc) Special Exception B Site Plan Major Planned Unit Development Appeal Amended Planned Unit Development Please com lete the a licable sections below. Please t e or rint le ibl in ink. Property J W phthmmhn 0wner(s): ,3 a' %I 125‘ Phone:‘ ‘ Property Address: 93"\ HOA€S Rd Citym AAA“ State:\P\ Zip. 652009 Mobile Phone:525 9f; 8’W?E§\ Mail: E— WWW Phone:_?;_ Applicant/Agent WM _?;'_%I 19:5 CJU Address: 2%H EIILES L2&\\\Rd City2WStatez? 2mm? Mobile Phone: m' LEA- 1'33 \ E-Mail: WWI I.COIVI I Halls AM”Rd Site Location/Addresszg?’I W IA CQQOQ' Legal Description: ID%1 LLQQI Total Property(lot)area (square feet or acres):\/U+ 9‘ 0" \mg ' 5' 606%6; Existing Zoning: Proposed Zoning: an: tac<h explanatiozif I reason nece sar (a a tter of necessary). «Dee?riti?rac?al Certification: l/we, the undersigned, do hereby certify/acknowledge that: 1. It is the property owner’s responsibility to locate property lines and to review the abstract for easements and restrictive covenants. 2. The information submitted herein is true and correct to the best of my/our knowledge and upon submittal becomes a public record; 3. Fees are not refundable and payment does not guarantee approval; and 4. Alladditional required written and graphic materials are attached. Property 0wner(s): Date 2,9 IAID IQI Applicant/Agent:_ 0%!“ Date (1‘30 I342 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ee:2§\c‘)0Received by: Hb Date ReceivedWaring Date: Page 13 of 34 . 3 3 . .-.. .. "T" 3 3 Page 14 of 34 Page 15 of 34  Exhibit of: ~ LOT 2—2 of th SE1/4 SW1/4, Section 17, T89N, R2E in the City of Asbury, Iowa I , Address: 2871 Holes Mills Rd I AREAS: I EXISTING DWELLING=I980.8 SF PROPOSED ADDITION = 442.2 SE TOTAL BUILDING AREA =2423.3 SE ROW) = LOT AREA (EXCLUDING 9888.4 SE 920 TOTAL BUILDING COVERAGE = 24.5% '3. LINE CHART \ I I \ LINE # DISTANCE BEARING \ \ \ 14.90 (14.90') 553- 28' 55"5 I \ \ 6/4 ? 1?<0» 50&3 <9 /p/S /O4/ . ® O LEGEND FOUND 1" IRON PIPE (UNLESSOTHERWISENOTED) PLACE CUT "x" PLACED 5/8" ROD MARKED KOELKER #15487 w/ORANGE CAP SURVEYED BOUNDARY LINE —— PROPERTY LINE WWW PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT IMWWW EXISTING BUILDINGFOOTPRINT _ _R0L _ RIGHT OF WAY (Row) LINE ( ) RECORD DIMENSION SF SQUARE PEET TA TOTAL AREA , NA NET AREA ’1_ 3 4 RIGHT OF WAY AREA 662 <<\ w I T7 I ‘96, I / 00 up. T _ \ Y7,\\ 000\ .?J\ \ \ LOT 2—1—2 OI- IH- S-I/4 SWI/4 \ OF SECTION I7, T89N, R2E \ 5UESING ASSOCIATES INC. ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS 1212 LOCUST ST. DUBUOUE, IA DRAW BY: JJL CHECKED BY: TLK 10' 20' 40' SURVEY DATE: 4/12/2026 PLOT DATE: 07/01/2025 DWG. NO. 26071—01 SCALE: 1" = 20'Page 16 of 34 SHEET 1 OF I Page 17 of 34 Page 18 of 34 Asbury Zoning Ordinance Update Page 179 SECTION165.07 ZONING BOARDOF ADJUSTMENT 3. Additional Information. The Zoning Board of Adjustment may require the applicant to supply any further information beyond that contained in the application where it reasonably considers such information necessary to make the determinations required by this Ordinance. B. Standards for Granting a Special Exception. The Zoning Board of Adjustment has the power to authorize in specific cases such special exception from the terms of the Zoning Ordinance as will not be contrary to the public interest, where owing to special conditions a literal enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance will result in practical difficulty, and so that the spirit of the Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done in accordance with the following standards for approval. (Iowa Code Sec. 414.12) No such special exceptionshall be granted unless the Zoning Board of Adjustment determines on the basis of specific information presented at the public meeting or contained in the application that all of the following Standards for Approval have been satisfied: 1. Strict compliance with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance would unreasonably prevent the landowner from using the property for a permitted use or would render conformity necessarily burdensome. a. Ifthere is a way to accomplish the same purpose without a special exception, such as a design change, even if it will be more inconvenient or more expensive forthe applicant, a special exception should not be granted. b. A special exception may be granted for circumstances unique to the property (e.g., odd shape), not those unique to the property owner (e.g., large family). 2. The particular request, or a lesser relaxation of the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, would provide substantial justice to the landowner and neighbors. a. When the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance treat an applicant unfairly in relation to unique aspects of the land they should be relaxed. b. If a lesser special exception than requested would provide substantial justice to the property owner, the lesser special exception should be considered. 3. The plight is due to unique circumstances of property and is not shared by neighboring properties in the same zoning district. a. If the circumstances for which a special exception is warranted are shared among numerous properties in the same zOning district, then the special exception request should be denied. b. It may be better to consider amending the Zoning Ordinance. Adopted 05-14-2024 Page 19 of 34 Asbury Zoning Ordinance Update Page 180 SECTION165.07 ZONING BOARDOF ADJUSTMENT 4. The problem is not self-created. Being ”self-created” includes actions of the current property owner and actions of all previous owners. a. The key is whether a property owner — present or past, took some affirmative action that created the need for the special exception, such as making an unusual land division (i.e., odd shape), filling the entire buildable area so that a porch must necessarily extend into the setback area or exceed maximum lot coverage, altering the property in violation of the controlling Zoning Ordinance, etc. b. Purchasing property with the knowledge of current Zoning Ordinance limitations does not prevent an application for (and granting of) a special exception. 5. In granting a special exception, the Zoning Board of Adjustment shall not consider prospective financial loss or gain to the applicant. 6. Under no circumstances shall the Zoning Board of Adjustment grant a special exception to allow a use not permissible under the terms of these regulations in the district involved, or any use expressly or by implication prohibited by the terms of these regulations in said district. 7. No non—conforming use of neighboring lands, structures, or buildings in the same district and no permitted or non—conforminguse of lands, structures, or buildings in other districts shall be considered grounds for the granting of a special exception. C. Conditions and Restrictions on a Special Exception. 1. Imposition of Conditions and Restrictions. In granting a special exception, the Zoning Board of Adjustment may impose any conditions or restrictions in conformance with these regulations it reasonably considers necessary to ensure full compliance with the standards of Subsection 165.07.06.C. Standards for Granting a Special Exception above to reduce or eliminate any detrimental effect of the proposed special exception upon the neighborhood or the district, or to carry out the general purposes and intent of this Ordinance. 2. Modification of Conditions and Restrictions. Any subsequent change or modification of a condition or restriction imposed by the Zoning Board of Adjustment in granting a special exception must be approved in the same manner and with the same requirements as the original application for a special exception. 3. Violation of Conditions and Restrictions. Violation of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms under which the special exception is granted, shall be deemed a violation of this Ordinance and punishable under Subsection 1653.06.09. Enforcement. Adopted 05-14—2024 Page 20 of 34  CITY OF ASBURI, IOWA No. CERTIFICATE OF ZONING COMPLIANCE Joseph & Becky Hohmann Name of Contractor or Owner: a es Mill Road Address of Property: Applicable Zoning District R2 —_—__—__——_—-————-——_———— Proposed use conforms: yes .——————-——-._—____-—————— no Cite Terms for non—conformance AppIIcaBIe HeguIations for conforming uses: Int area required sq. ft. , Number off-street par g spaces require Yard requirements: Front Side Other I Rear _———-—— Advertising Sign Restrictions Comment: . _________________________________________ _____________———————— ________________________.___________ Date of Issuance Certificate of OFFICER ADMINISTRATIVE FDr Board of Adjustment Action; This Certificate of Zoning Compliance is issued by action of the Asbury, Iowa Zoning Board of Adjustment. Description of Certificate Use: ——_____—__——————-——— —_——_—_.—_—.—_———_—————_——'———— U58 Where8131336851858 OI Spec1aI P6111115 DESCI'ILPEIOD _._——— —_—__—_—————————__——-—-———_ Description of Variance (where applicable): Jim Steil moved to grant a 6 1/2 3t. rear setback variance for Lot 2—2 SE%SW% Sect.l7T89Nr3E of 5P.M. City of Asbury to W LllOW construction of a garage as per the sketch submitted by the property owners. Seconded )y George Waddell. DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: 3/23/92 Racord of Board Vote:Steil—aye; Waddell—aye; Elenz—aye. Secretary Page 21 of 34  _| .W MINER OF LOT ,?NCRETE WW9amt/0M5 COHS+QUQ+)‘©Y\ £643A ngr?? Jcouo gave 0 aq‘bbr. (b?b?fb‘ “900$ 'QOOTg??/wLSQ‘ 1% , LOT20F10F2 sc1/4i-sw1/4 sacnoun TBONf-RZE SOUR-“ESTCORNEROF LOT 04 REBAR"TH ID CAP MARKED“IOWA- 9961' LEGALDESCRIPTION FOR: [JOSEPH N. AND BECKYu. mum Lot 2 of the Southeast Quarter of the ; Quarter of Section Seventeen (17), 32371 HALESMILLROAD ADDRESS: iASBURY: Page 22 of 34 '0“ 89 Northi?RonquZEast of the Fifth  FM:3- ../Z [gard of Adjustment Proceedings: of the Asbury Board of Adjustment was called to order at , public hearing Mark Elenz. Answering roll call were George Waddell, [‘30 P.M. by Chairman Steil and Mark Elenz. Absent were Delores Kloser and Ray Kluck. Jim Jim Steil moved to suspend with the reading of the last minutes. Seconded by George Waddell. Motion carried (all ayes). ' hearing was to consider a variance request of The purpose of the public SE 1/4 SW 1/4 of Joseph N. and Becky M. Hohmann for Lot 2 of Lot 2 of the of Asbury, IA. (2871 Hales Section 17 T 89N R3E of the 5 P.M. in the City Mill Rd). notice of this meeting was published in the It noted that the public was Telegraph Herald on 3/5/92. from the Hohmanns and the Mark Elenz read the 2/24/92 letter of request Luthern Church giving approval to construct 2/24/92 letter from Lord oerife 1 1/2 feet of their (Hohmanns) northerly property line. a garage within the setback requirements for the R2 district and the The Board reviewed Lord of Life Church gave to the City on property adjacent perpetual easement Mrs. Hohmann advised the Board that the 8 foot to the Hohmann property. residence and the proposed garage is necessary open open area between their space for well maintenance purposes. a 6 1/2 foot rear setback variance for Lot 2 of Jim Steil moved to grant 17 T 89 N R3E of the 5 P.M., City of 2 of the SE 1/4 SW 1/4 of Section of a garage as per the Asbury, IA. (2871 Hales Mill Rd) to allow construction sketch submitted by the property owners. Seconded by George Waddell. Roll Call Vote: Steil—aye; Waddell-aye; Elenz—aye. the meeting at 8:25 P.M. Seconded by George Waddell moved to adjourn Jim Steil. Motion carried (all ayes). Respectfully submitted, George Waddell Secretary Page 23 of 34  2871 Hales Mill Road Dubuque, IA 52002 August 30, 1995 rio" Asbury Zoning Board of Adjustment City of Asbury, IA 4985 Asbury Road Dubuque, IA 52002 Dear Board Members: Would you please consider my application for a variance for the following construction on my property at 2871 Hales Mill Roadn My lot is described as: Lot 2 of 2 of the SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 17, T 89 N, R2E of the 5th P.Mu, City of Asburyn la A 10 ft x 52 ft cement slab with a wooded deck over a portion of the slabu As you will note on the drawing the slab is proposed to be constructed to within 6 fta of the back lot line” 2a A 12 ft x 12 ft cement slab on which I intend to construct a 8 ft x 12 ft storage shed“ The remaining 4 ft x 12 ft area will be used for a dog kennel“ As you will note on the drawing, the slab is proposed to be 2 ft from the side lot line and 4 ft from the back property linen Thank youa Sincerely, 'i 1‘‘5 ,v :("_,n Joseph No Hohmann enclosures Page 24 of 34 October 2, 1995 ,,/ Board of Adjustment Proceedings: 'C?cla ll) The hearing the Asbury of Zoning Board of Adjustment was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Chairperson Mark Elenz. Present were: Tom Foster, Jim Steil, Mark Elenz, Ray Kluck and George Waddell. Jim Steil moved to suspend with the reading of the last minutes. Seconded by Ray Kluck. Motion carried (all ayes). Public Hearing: The purpose of the hearing was to consider a variance request of Joseph N. Hohmann for Lot 2 of 2 of the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4, Section 17, City of Asbury. Mr. Hohmann’s request is for a variance so that he can build a 10’ x 52’ concrete slab and a wooden deck to his residence as well as construct a concrete slab for storage shed and dog kennel. Mr. Hohmann was not present. The Board reviewed & discussed: The request included a 8' x 12’ storage shed. The shed meets with zoning ordinance requirements, Reviewed the R2 district zoning ordinance setback requirement of 8' on size & back yards. The request is to put the concrete slab/shed/dog kennel 2 feet from the side yard line (adjacent to Ronald Wagner) and 4' from the back yard line (Lord of Life Lutheran Church) and the 10' x 52' concrete slab 6' from the back yard line. The Board expressed concern that no one was present to respond to their questions. Mr. Hohmann addresses a wooded deck in his letter; however, no deck is shown on the drawing. Tom Foster moved to recess the public hearing portion of the meeting at 8:22 P.M. until such time as the Board and property owner can meet to consider the request further. Seconded by George Waddell. Motion carried (all ayes). Board concurred that if possible meeting would be scheduled for 10/9/95. Meeting: A Zoning Administrator asked for guidance regarding Zoning Permit #744 for 2461 Springreen Dr. City staff are unable to determine if the front porch could have been built within the setback area due to the following: Unable to locate property pins for this property; at the southerly property line, Ridgewood II begins creating a wider street right—of—way than in Ridgewood I. Street doesn't job as shown on the plat; was constructed even with curb line in Ridgewood I; staff found property pins in lots across street, measured off of them & find that porch could be within building area on lot. Would cost an undetermined amount to have property surveyed. Board concurred that the house should be considered as built within the building area & not within the set back. Ray Kluck moved to adjourn the meeting portion of the meeting at 8:50 P.M. Seconded by Tom Foster. Motion carried (all ayes). George Waddell Secretary Page 25 of 34  ,. NOR’EJHWEST . CORNEROF LOT 'X' WT IN 'CCNCRETE SIDEWALK . I _ ' E ' {493: A 2‘ oa. v E r -- § 19943 094131;skeet,Wooden deck, 3 9gm'Ahi Cqmnae SLAB£3quva E; x9: (5"?(3‘0‘2um; As we“ emanate Qig‘fbghb s'l-csmgq DR. Skcd um As éE “of tcml deg“: LOT26F10F2 _ sev/4L5w1/4 sacnoun 50U1HKEST V recur-32: CORNEROF LOT [4 REBAR“TH ID CAP HARKED'IOVIA - 9961' rm" LEGALDESCRIPTION LOCATI HOUSE 5: ON K Lot 2 of the Southeast Quarter of FOR: {JOSEPHM. ANDBECKY the €287! muss MILLROAD mm H. : Quarterof Section Seventeen 89 North, Range 02 East of (17), ADDRESS: :Aseuav.uom the Fifth l in the City of Asbury, Page 26 of 34 Dubuque REQUESTEDBY: Plan Review for Special Exception Application Joesph & Becky Hohmann-2871 Hales Mill Rd Proposed Garage Addition July 10, 2026 Application for Special Exception for setbacks for proposed garage addition. Background and History Previous Board of Adjustment Hearings March 23, 1992 The Hohmann’s requested a variance for rear setback to build a 22’ X 24’ garage. Jim Steil moved to grant a 6.5’ rear setback to allow construction of a garage per the sketch plan submitted by the property owner. In October 1995 the Hohmann’s requested a variance to build a 10’ X 52’ cement slab and a wooden deck as well as construct a concrete slab for a storage shed and dog kennel. Decision: Jim Steil moved that in reference to the request for a 10’ X 52’ cement slab with wooded deck over a portion of the slab that a variance be granted for a 10’ X 52’ slab at ground level and for a deck above so long as they maintain a 1.5 foot distance from the property line to the edge of the deck; with no storage shed on the 10’ X 52’ slab if it does not meet required setback. Special Exception Request for Setback Regulations Chapter 165.02.12 R-1 Single-Family Residential District Chapter 165.02.12F Bulk Regulations 1. Setbacks a. Front Yard Setback requirement is 25 feet. Applicant is asking for a special exception to decrease the front yard setback to 17 feet. Hales Mill Road is an arterial street in the City of Asbury. Reducing the front yard setback would have a negative impact by reducing the site visibility for the egress from the driveway. b. Rear Yard Setback requirement is 20 feet. Applicant is asking for a special exception with a 1.34-foot setback. Asbury Zoning Regulations were updated May 14, 2024. The rear yard set back increased from 8 feet to 20 feet. 1 Page 27 of 34  The applicant previously submitted variance requests in 1992 for the garage and in 1995 for a rear set back to allow for a setback of 1.5 feet from the property line for a concrete slab. In 1992 the Board of Adjustment granted a variance to build the garage 6.5 feet from the property line. The City required the homeowner to submit a survey of the property with the existing structures. Per the survey, the garage as-built is within 1.34 feet of the property line and is not built in conformance with the direction of the March 1992 Board of Adjustment ruling requiring a 6.5 foot setback. The 1995 Board of Adjustment granted a variance for a 10’ X 52’ cement slab with wooded deck over a portion of the slab that a variance be granted for a 10’ X 52’ slab at ground level and for a deck above so long as they maintain a 1.5 foot distance from the property line to the edge of the deck; with no storage shed on the 10’ X 52’ slab if it does not meet required setback. Per the survey the garage is built 1.34 feet from the property line. Given this information if the slab is placed adjacent to the garage, then a portion 10’ X 52’ slab is constructed over the property line by approximately 8.66 feet at the maximum. Board information: This application is coming before the Board of Adjustment for a decision on the Special Exception Application to: 1. Recommend approval of the front yard setback be adjusted from 25 feet to 17 feet for the proposed garage addition OR Recommend to deny the request and the garage is required to meet the 25 foot front setback. 2. Recommend to approve the rear yard setback of 1.34 feet for the garage instead of the required 20 feet OR Recommend to deny request for the rear yard setback and the garage is required to meet the rear setback. 2 Page 28 of 34 Recommendation: Deny. The property does not meet the Standards for Granting a Special Exception In addition, The property owner did not follow the variance rulings with prior variance and setback requests. General Comment: A special exception to the setback, sets a precedent for future Special Exception hearings. More recent Board of Adjustment rulings have not approved variances or special exceptions for setback. 3 Page 29 of 34 165.07.06 B Standards for Granting a Special Exception. The Zoning Board of Adjustment has the power to authorize in specific cases such special exception from the terms of the Zoning Ordinance as will not be contrary to the public interest, where owing to special conditions a literal enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance will result in practical difficulty, and so that the spirit of the Ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done in accordance with the following standards for approval. (Iowa Code Sec. 414.12) No such special exception shall be granted unless the Zoning Board of Adjustment determines on the basis of specific information presented at the public meeting or contained in the application that all of the following Standards for Approval have been satisfied: 1. Strict compliance with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance would unreasonably prevent the landowner from using the property for a permitted use or would render conformity necessarily burdensome. a. If there is a way to accomplish the same purpose without a special exception, such as a design change, even if it will be more inconvenient or more expensive for the applicant, a special exception should not be granted. b. A special exception may be granted for circumstances unique to the property (e.g., odd shape), not those unique to the property owner (e.g., large family). 2. The particular request, or a lesser relaxation of the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, would provide substantial justice to the landowner and neighbors. a. When the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance treat an applicant unfairly in relation to unique aspects of the land they should be relaxed. b. If a lesser special exception than requested would provide substantial justice to the property owner, the lesser special exception should be considered. 3. The plight is due to unique circumstances of property and is not shared by neighboring properties in the same zoning district. a. If the circumstances for which a special exception is warranted are shared among numerous properties in the same zoning district, then the special exception request should be denied. 4 Page 30 of 34  b. It may be better to consider amending the Zoning Ordinance. 4. The problem is not self-created. Being “self-created” includes actions of the current property owner and actions of all previous owners. a. The key is whether a property owner — present or past, took some affirmative action that created the need for the special exception, such as making an unusual land division (i.e., odd shape), filling the entire buildable area so that a porch must necessarily extend into the setback area or exceed maximum lot coverage, altering the property in violation of the controlling Zoning Ordinance, etc. b. Purchasing property with the knowledge of current Zoning Ordinance limitations does not prevent an application for (and granting of) a special exception. 5. In granting a special exception, the Zoning Board of Adjustment shall not consider prospective financial loss or gain to the applicant. 6. Under no circumstances shall the Zoning Board of Adjustment grant a special exception to allow a use not permissible under the terms of these regulations in the district involved, or any use expressly or by implication prohibited by the terms of these regulations in said district. 7. No non-conforming use of neighboring lands, structures, or buildings in the same district and no permitted or non-conforming use of lands, structures, or buildings in other districts shall be considered grounds for the granting of a special exception. C. Conditions and Restrictions on a Special Exception. 1. Imposition of Conditions and Restrictions. In granting a special exception, the Zoning Board of Adjustment may impose any conditions or restrictions in conformance with these regulations it reasonably considers necessary to ensure full compliance with the standards of Subsection 165.07.06.C. Standards for Granting a Special Exception above to reduce or eliminate any detrimental effect of the proposed special exception upon the neighborhood or the district, or to carry out the general purposes and intent of this Ordinance. 2. Modification of Conditions and Restrictions. Any subsequent change or modification of a condition or restriction imposed by the Zoning Board of Adjustment in granting a special exception must be approved in the same manner and with the same requirements as the original application for a special exception. 5 Page 31 of 34 3. Violation of Conditions and Restrictions. Violation of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms under which the special exception is granted, shall be deemed a violation of this Ordinance and punishable under Subsection 165.06.09. Enforcement. 6 Page 32 of 34 Asbury Zoning Board of Adjustment Proceedings: March 31, 2025 The administrative hearing of the Asbury Zoning Board of Adjustment was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Chair Steve Ready. The Board of Adjustment meeting was available to attend in person or via Zoom. Answering roll call: Larry Nagle, Kim Parcher, Ben Rousch and Steve Ready. Absent: Jared Fluhr. Special Exception 6301 Asbury Road – Accessory Use Structure Dan Ernzen, current homeowner, submitted an application for a special exception to build within the 20 ft set back with a proposed garage 16 feet from the side setback. The proposed garage also exceeds the total building coverage by 44 feet; and the Accessory Structure exceeds the 1000 square feet maximum. Rousch moved to close the public hearing at 5:50 p.m. Seconded by Parcher. Motion carried. (all ayes) Ready moved to approve the Special Exception for 6301 Asbury Road to allow for a side setback to be 16 feet vs 20 feet by code and for the proposed garage to meet the building coverage requirement and the use of the proposed garage is only for storage. Seconded by Rousch. Roll Call Vote: Rousch–aye; Nagle–aye; Ready–aye; and Parcher-aye. Motion carried. (all ayes) Rousch moved to approve the minutes from the December 10, 2024 meeting. Seconded by Parcher. Motion carried. (all ayes) Rousch moved to adjourn at 5:58 p.m. Seconded by Parcher. Motion carried. (all ayes) Elizabeth Bonz City Administrator Page 33 of 34 Board of Adjustment Hearing Summary Date: March 31, 2025 Location: 6301 Asbury Road Applicant: Daniel Ernzen Property Address: 6301 Asbury Road Hearing Overview The Board of Adjustment convened to review and consider a special exception request regarding the property located at 6301 Asbury Road. The applicant sought approval for a reduced setback and confirmation of building compliance within the allowable coverage limits. Findings and Decision 1. Setback Allowance: o The Board approved a setback reduction to 16 feet, deviating from the standard 20 foot set back requirement. 2. Building Coverage Compliance: o The proposed structure must adhere to all building coverage limitations as outlined in zoning regulations. No exceptions to maximum coverage limits were granted. 3. Proposed Use: o The approved use of the structure is strictly for storage purposes. Any deviation from this intended use will require further review and approval by the Board. Conditions of Approval  The applicant must obtain all necessary permits prior to construction.  The structure must remain in compliance with all zoning and building code requirements.  No occupancy or use other than storage is permitted.  Any modifications to the approved plans must be resubmitted for Board review. The Board of Adjustment's decision was made in accordance with the applicable zoning ordinances and in consideration of neighborhood impact and property compliance. Hearing Adjourned. Page 34 of 34