City of Waterloo - Zoning Board of Appeals met Jan. 12.
Here is the minutes as provided by the Board:
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Ken Hartman at 7:35 PM.
Roll call was taken: Present: Hagenow, Boothman, Loerch, Gibbs and Hartman.
Absent: Mueller and Kaempfe
Chairman Hartman asked if there were any additions or corrections to the minutes of the
November 17, 2016 meeting. A motion was made by Gibbs and seconded by Hagenow to
approve the minutes of the November 17, 2016 meeting as presented. Motion carried.
The Chairman asked if there were any citizens to address the Zoning Board of Appeals. There
were none.
The Chairman also asked if there were any corrections or deletions to the agenda. There were
none.
OLD BUSINESS:
The Chairman asked if there was any old business. There was none.
PETITIONS:
Z-17-01-01 Review and Comment on Possible Zoning Text Amendment to Section 40-3-
2(B) regarding Commercial Accessory Building Roofing Materials.
The Zoning Administrator commented that the public notice for this petition was published in the
Waterloo Republic Times on November 28, 2016. Mr. Jack Strellis, representative for Mystic
Oak Golf Course, was present to speak on behalf of this petition. Mystic Oak Golf Course is
building a pavilion to replace the log cabin that was destroyed by a fire. Under the current
ordinance, the accessory building is required to match the building materials of the primary
building. In this case, their accessory building (pavilion) would need to have an asphalt shingled
roof. Due to the layout of the land, Mystic Oak believes that an asphalt roof would not be
aesthetically pleasing, and they would like to install a green standing metal seam roof. In order
to use a standing metal seam roof, a zoning text change would need to be made. The City
Council met with Mystic Oak Golf Course and agreed to approve a change in the Zoning Text to
allow standing metal seam roofs within golf courses and within the parks district due to the
natural and open environment of these areas. The Zoning Administrator commented that the
zoning text concerning commercial accessory building roofing materials will probably be looked
at in more detail as the City is receiving requests from downtown businesses regarding the
requirement that accessory buildings match the building materials of the primary building.
Motion was made by Gibbs and seconded by Loerch to recommend approval for the
Proposed Zoning Text Amendment to Section 40-3-2(B) regarding Commercial Accessory
Building Roofing Materials with the addition that the final non-matching roofing material
complement the existing structures.
Members voted as follows: YES – Hagenow, Boothman, Loerch, Gibbs and Hartman.
Motion carried.
Z-17-01-02 Review and Comment on Possible Zoning Text Amendment to Section 40-2-
3(B) regarding the addition of Gym/Training/Fitness Center to B-2 General Business
District, Special Use Permits Required.
The Zoning Administrator commented that the public notice for this petition was published in the
Waterloo Republic Times on November 28, 2016. Mr. Tony Smallmon, representative for both
landlord and tenant for the building at 1301 Jamie Lane, was present to speak on behalf of this
petition. During the process of applying for a sign permit, it was discovered that gym, training
and/or fitness centers were not allowed in a B-2 Business District. The site of the proposed Fast
Fitness Boot Camp is located within a B-2 zoned area. The fitness center is a group training
environment where people exercise without trend mills, machines or heavy weights. The
exercise program is body weight driven with some kick boxing. The program will aid in keeping
people motivated and offers assistance in nutrition and weight loss. The Zoning Administrator
mentioned that the Planning Commission gave this petition a favorable recommendation, and
also added to their motion that Gym/Training/Fitness Center be listed as a permitted use in a B-3,
Central Business District.
Motion was made by Gibbs and seconded by Boothman to recommend approval for the
Zoning Text Amendment to Section 40-2-3(B) regarding the addition of
“Gym/Training/Fitness Center” to B-2 General Business District, Special Use Permits
Required. In addition, the Board of Appeals recommends that the term
Gym/Training/Fitness Center be listed as a permitted use in a B-3, Central Business
District.
Members voted as follows: YES – Hagenow, Boothman, Loerch, Gibbs and Hartman.
Motion carried.
Z-17-01-03 Review and Comment on Possible Special Use Permit to allow for a Fitness
Center to be located in a B-2 Zoning District at 1301 Jamie Lane as permitted by Section
40-2-3(B).
The Zoning Administrator commented that the public notice for this petition was published in the
Waterloo Republic Times on November 28, 2016. Mr. Tony Smallmon, representative for both
landlord and tenant for the building at 1301 Jamie Lane, was present to speak on behalf of this
petition. Mr. Smallmon presented the postal notification receipts to the Zoning Administrator.
Mr. Smallmon didn’t have anything more to mention than what he already presented to the
Board under Petition Z-17-01-02.
Motion was made by Gibbs and seconded by Hagenow to recommend approval for the
Special Use Permit to allow for a Fitness Center to be located in a B-2 Zoning District at
1301 Jamie Lane as permitted by Section 40-2-3(B).
Members voted as follows: YES – Hagenow, Boothman, Loerch, Gibbs and Hartman.
Motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS:
The Zoning Administrator distributed a map of “The Ridge” subdivision with specific attention
to Lot 007. Mr. Allen Brand is thinking about purchasing Lot 007 with the intent of building a
duplex style condominium on the lot. The area is already zoned R-6, Condominium. The lot is
slightly unusual in shape, and a duplex style condominium does not sit well on the property.
Mr. Brand is having problems fitting the building on the property and still meeting the set back
requirements. He exceeds the setback requirements either front to back and side to side. Mr.
Brand is inquiring into what the Board of Appeals may or may not approve for a variance in
order to erect a condominium on the property. The Board thought the front set back should be
met with the understanding that the rear set back would then need a variance. They also thought
the west side set back should be met with the understanding that the east side setback would then
need a variance.
COMMENTS:
The Chairman asked if there were any new additional comments. There was none.
Motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:00 PM was made by Loerch and seconded by
Boothman.
Motion carried.
Alerts Sign-up