HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-10-07 I01C_02 Receipt-File_Board of Adjustment Minutes 09262024 AGENDA ITEM:
CITY OF WAUKEE, IOWA
CITY COUNCIL MEETING COMMUNICATION
MEETING DATE: October 7, 2024
AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of receipt and file of Board of Adjustment Minutes of September
26, 2024, meeting
FORMAT: Consent Agenda
SYNOPSIS INCLUDING PRO & CON: Attached is a copy of the Board of Adjustment Minutes from
their meeting held on September 26, 2024, for the City Council to receive and
file of record.
FISCAL IMPACT INCLUDING COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS:
COMMISSION/BOARD/COMMITTEE COMMENT:
STAFF REVIEW AND COMMENT:
RECOMMENDATION:
ATTACHMENTS: I. 09/26/2024 Board of Adjustment Minutes
PREPARED BY: Melissa DeBoer, Planning Coordinator
REVIEWED BY:
PUBLIC NOTICE INFORMATION –
NAME OF PUBLICATION:
DATE OF PUBLICATION:
I1C2
The meeting was called to order at 5:30 PM by Chairperson Juan Garcia.
Item 1: Roll Call: The following members were present:
Cole Bisgard
Dan McAlpine
Juan Garcia
Dellan Llewellyn
Members not present: Bryce Johnson
City Staff Present: Andy Kass, Community Development Director, Melissa DeBoer, Planning Coordinator, and Dawn
Young, Community Development Specialist
Item 2: Agenda Approval: The agenda for the September 26, 2024, meeting agenda was approved on a motion by Dan
McAlpine, seconded by Juan Garcia. On voice vote, all ayes.
Item 3: Approval of July 17, 2024, Meeting Minutes
The minutes of the July 17, 2024, meeting were approved on a motion by Juan Garcia, seconded by Dellan Llewellyn. On
voice vote, all ayes.
Item 4: Application for 450 NW Red Oak Court (Lot 14 of Ashley Acres Plat 3) Variance from §169.08 of the Waukee
Municipal Code to allow a covered deck to be constructed within the required rear yard setback
Melissa DeBoer, Planning Coordinator, introduced the request for a covered deck to be constructed within the required
rear yard setback.
The subject property is located at the west end of the cul-de-sac on NW Red Oak Court. The property is a vacant,
undeveloped, single-family lot. The applicant is preparing to build a house on the lot, which includes a covered deck that
is proposed to be located within the required 30-foot rear yard setback. The property owner submitted a building permit
application for the home and was denied due to the structure being located within the required setback.
The owner requests a variance to allow a portion of the covered deck that will be attached to the future home, to be
placed approximately 7.5’ into the required rear yard setback.
Variances are designed to grant relief from the Ordinance, which if strictly imposed, would deny a property owner
reasonable use of the land and create undue hardship. An applicant is required to prove that a hardship exists. The
applicant has noted that with a west facing back yard, it will get the most sun in the afternoon and evening and they feel
it is important to have a covered deck to utilize the deck at those times of the day. The applicant must also indicate
proof of special conditions and circumstances which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved which are
not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings. The applicant has noted that with the open space behind the lot
and with the pie shape lot, the covered deck will not obstruct the view of others surrounding the property. The applicant
has noted that granting the variance will not have any adverse effects to the public interest or overall neighborhood
Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes
September 26, 2024
integrity. They also note that granting the variance will not devalue nearby properties, as most homes have a covered
deck. Additionally, the have noted they don’t believe their roofline will be a hazard to other people or properties.
Generally, staff would always be in a position of recommending against variance requests, due to the request not
meeting the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, which staff is obligated to support. Because of that, staff will not
make a recommendation on the requested variance and will leave the decision to the Board of Adjustment based upon
the merits and criteria of the request. In lieu of making a recommendation, the following is a list of items that staff feels
are pertinent to the request and will aid the Board in making their decision:
• The property is currently vacant; the building permit has not been issued, and the home has not yet been built
• The applicant is proposing 7.5 feet of a covered deck to be built within the required 30-foot rear yard setback,
which equates to a variance of 25% of the required 30-foot setback
• The area of the lot in question is 14,129 square feet; the minimum required lot area in the R-2 district is 8,000
square feet – the lot exceeds the minimum size requirements of the R-2 zoning district by 6,129 square feet
• The lot in question meets or exceeds all other bulk regulations of the R-2 district including lot depth and lot
width
• All homes with covered decks within the Ashley Acres neighborhood, as well as across the rest of the City of
Waukee, are held to the same requirements that is the basis of this request
Discussion as follows:
• General discussion of the green space behind the lot
• Andy Kass provided information this space is city owned and zoned for greenspace preservation, possible trails,
was originally zoned R-2 as part of Ashley Acres development, and is not intended to be developed for housing
• General discussion of uncovered decks vs covered deck in setback areas; uncovered decks are allowed in the
setback
• Additional discussion of greenspace potential uses; Andy Kass shared information that nothing has been
designed yet, considerations include greenway, trails, perhaps acquire additional property to the west to develop
a wider greenway, possible pocket parks like Glynn Village but no parking lots or shelter structures
• Builder representative of Luna Homes, Ethan Freeman, addressed the Board and spoke about covenant and
developer requirements specific to end of cul-de-sac homes which often are required to be higher square
footage; he also addressed the irregular shape of this lot, providing a handout illustrating approximately half of
the deck being covered
• General discussion of foundation location, builder confirmed the foundation stops prior to the setback
• Homeowner Tanya Patrick addressed the Board, requesting approval of the variance and spoke of their current
living situation with no covered deck, which she states influenced the decisions they made on their future home;
they are very happy with this location and would like to start building
• Discussion of precedents that may guide this decision; Andy Kass described a similar request on Bowman Drive
for a front yard setback several years ago, in which the Board approved a 1.5-foot variance on a new home
construction project
• Clarification that the deck was elevated
Motion from Cole Bisgard to approve the variance from §169.08 of the Waukee Municipal Code related to 450 NW Red
Oak Court (Lot 14 of Ashley Acres Plat 3) to allow a covered deck to be constructed within the required rear yard setback,
seconded by Dan McAlpine. On voice vote, all ayes. On roll call vote, motion was approved:
Roll Call:
Bisgard: Y
McAlpine: Y
Garcia: Y
Llewellyn: Y
Item 5: Property Owners Request to Reconsider an application for 2515 SE Florence Drive (Lot 18 of Kettlestone Ridge
Plat 1) – Variance from §165.15(1) of the Waukee Municipal Code to allow a 5-foot-tall fence to remain within the
required 15-foot front yard setback
Andy Kass, Community Development Director, introduced the request to reconsider an application for a 5-foot-tall fence
to remain within a 15-foot front yard setback. At the Board of Adjustment meeting on July 17, 2024, the Board vote was
(2) two votes to approve and (2) two votes to deny. A minimum of (3) three votes in the affirmative are required to
approve a request, therefore, the motion failed to pass.
The applicants have requested the Board reconsider the previous motion, because they feel they did not provide key
information at the meeting on July 17th. Roberts Rules of Order, which the City of Waukee follows for parliamentary
procedure, permits a motion to be reconsidered at the next scheduled meeting. A Board member who was on the
prevailing side will need to make the motion to reconsider the request. The Board can then vote to approve or deny the
request.
Staff will not take a position on whether the Board should reconsider the request. Information regarding the request had
been included in the packets distributed to Board members, including Request for Reconsideration, Staff Report, and
Variance Application.
Discussion as follows:
• Andy Kass provided an explanation of the process as it relates to Roberts Rules of Order
• Juan Garcia recapped the process of the request for a variance up to this point for benefit of the new Board
members, with input from Andy
• General discussion of the pool permit process and timeline relative to the fence permit; Andy Kass confirmed the
homeowner had an approved fence permit
• General discussion of the required setback and timeline of the required setback being reduced from 20 feet to
15 feet in June 2024
Motion from Cole Bisgard to reconsider an application for 2515 SE Florence Drive, variance from §165.15(1) of the
Waukee Municipal Code to allow a 5-foot-tall fence to remain within the required 15-foot front yard setback, seconded
by Juan Garcia. No vote was needed on the motion to reconsider.
Discussion as follows:
• Homeowner Brandon Fast presented, summarizing the timeline and sequence of events with both their fence
project and the neighbor’s fence to the east, and shared that communication with their fence contractor was
difficult, resulting in the fence being installed incorrectly at the wrong height, and provided photos of the fence,
as well as neighbor’s fence in relation to the street
• General discussion of the photos provided by the homeowner, clarifying neighbor’s fence vs presenting
homeowner’s fence
• Discussion to confirm the variance for the neighbor was granted due to contractor error; homeowner confirmed
that their contractor did not update the fence permit after neighbor requested a change to a 5-foot fence; and
this fence was due to breakdown in communication between homeowner and contractor
• General discussion of next steps if this request for variance is again denied; Andy Kass commented that this is a
“one time only” reconsideration that can be presented only at the next meeting after the denial; homeowner
cannot request again and the city would pursue code compliance
Amended Motion from Cole Bisgard to approve the request for 2515 SE Florence Drive (Lot 18 of Kettlestone Ridge Plat
1) to reconsider variance from 165.15(1) of the Waukee Municipal code to allow a 5-foot-tall fence to remain within the
required 15-foot front yard setback, seconded by Juan Garcia.
Amended Motion from Dan McAlpine to add “ornamental steel” to the fence description, seconded by Juan Garcia.
Amended Motion from Cole Bisgard to approve the request to reconsider a request for 2515 SE Florence Drive (Lot 18 of
Kettlestone Ridge Plat 1) variance from 165.15(1) of the Waukee Municipal code to allow a 5-foot-tall ornamental steel
fence to remain within the required 15-foot front yard setback, seconded by Juan Garcia.
On roll call vote, motion was approved:
Roll Call:
Bisgard: N
McAlpine: Y
Garcia: Y
Llewellyn: Y
Additional Discussion after Roll Call:
• Andy Kass instructed the homeowner to submit a new fence permit which staff will approve in combination with
getting the pool permit completed now that the fence issue is resolved
• Cole Bisgard asked for more clarification on fences regarding fence materials; Andy Kass commented that this has
been previously considered by City Council who indicated there is no interest in regulating fence materials at this
time
Item 6: New Business
Andy Kass spoke on the following topics:
• Andy announced new members Dan McAlpine and Dellan Llewellyn, who each spoke briefly to introduce
themselves
• No new applications for the Board as of today’s date
• Our new planner has started, going forward she will be the primary contact for Board of Adjustment items
Item 8: Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned on a motion by Cole Bisgard, seconded by Juan Garcia.
The meeting adjourned at 6:33 PM.
________________________________
Juan Garcia, Chairperson
Attest:
________________________________
Andy Kass, Community Development Director