Coralville Board of Adjustment

City of Coralville Board of Adjustment Meeting June 16, 2014 Staff: Jim Kessler, Building & Zoning Official and Dee Marshek, Administrative Assistant Item 1: Meeting called to order 6:02 PM Item 2: Member present: Rice, Nicola, Wells and Szczech. Absent: Boucher Others present: Tim Hawkins with HMR Investments, LLC. Item 3: Approval of March 17, 2014 Minutes. Nicola: Motion to approve. Wells: Motion Seconded. Motion carried: 4-0 Item 4: Public Hearing request by HMR Investments, LLC is for a Variance to Section 165.25 (6) (B) rear yard setback. This property is located at 971 Boston Way # 1- 4. Public Hearing open: Tim Hawkins with HMR Investments, LLC explains the reason for this Variance request, being that this building (971 Boston Way) burned in a fire 3-4 years ago. The original slab /foundation of the burned building remains and he would like to reconstruct upon this existing foundation. The setback in the rear of the building is at 24 ft. and we now need 30 ft. This building will be rebuilt like 969 Boston Way, the same as the units/building to the left. The building will consist of four units at 786 sq. ft. per unit. Rice: Questions the setback requirements, whether the building can be rebuilt on the existing slab, and if there was a previous variance grant for this building? Kessler: Explains that this is two buildings on one lot. The Zoning Code states if a building is non-conforming and is destroy to 60% it must then be rebuild to current codes and setbacks, unless granted a Variance. Members discuss parking, setback requirements, and the site plan of this property. Boucher arrives at the meeting. Kessler: Mr. Hawkins is tight on parking, that’s why each unit is under 800ft., to meet the necessary parking requirements. He has plenty of distance between buildings structures. Notifications letters were also sent out to the property owner and we hadn’t heard any opposition from any neighboring properties. Public Hearing closed: Nicola: Questions granting this Variance as setting a bad precedence for future requests. Kessler: Not necessarily this is why the Board was created. Requests are granted on a case by case basis. In this case I feel the case is legitimate. Boucher: Would we be considering this if it were new construction? Kessler: No, new construction would have more options. Boucher: I guess this would be the hardship, not of his doing. The fire is the determining factor for requesting this Variance. Kessler will have the City Attorney write a letter to confirm the Board of Adjustments decision and allowing Mr. Hawkins proceed with this reconstruction project. a) Consider approval of the Variance. Wells: Motion to approve. Szczech: Motion Seconded. Motion Carried: 5– 0 Item 5: Adjourn Meeting Szczech: Motion to Adjourn @ 6:20pm. Rice: Motion Seconded. Motion Carried: 5-0 Respectfully submitted, Dee Marshek