## Facts

- Shelter House operated a transient homeless shelter in Iowa City for about twenty years, serving up to twenty-nine persons, but often lacked capacity.
- Shelter House applied to build a new two-story transient housing facility at 429 Southgate Avenue in an “intensive commercial” zoning district where transient housing was allowed only by special exception.
- The zoning ordinance required the Board of Adjustment to find both use-specific criteria and general standards, including that the use “will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood.”
- City planning staff recommended approval, and the Board held a public hearing with extensive public participation.
- Evidence supporting approval included testimony that property values near the existing shelter had not decreased, testimony that the existing shelter did not create significant problems or traffic, arrest-rate statistics comparing shelter residents favorably to a nearby mobile-home park, and an urban planner’s research indicating shelters do not necessarily reduce property values.
- Objectors (nearby property owners and businesses) opposed the project based on concerns about crime, safety, traffic, and property values; no expert appraisal evidence addressed property-value impacts at the proposed site.
- The Board granted the special exception and issued written findings concluding ordinance requirements (including property values and parking) were satisfied.

## Issues

1. Whether the Board’s written findings were adequate to permit judicial review.
2. Whether substantial evidence supported the Board’s finding that the use would not substantially diminish or impair neighborhood property values.
3. Whether challenges to the Board’s interpretation and application of parking requirements were preserved for appellate review.

## Decision

- The Iowa Supreme Court held the Board’s written findings were sufficient for judicial review.
- The Court declined to decide the parking-requirements question because error was not preserved in the district court.
- The Court held substantial evidence supported the Board’s property-value finding under the deferential certiorari/substantial-evidence standard.
- The Court reversed the district court and remanded with directions to enter judgment affirming the Board’s approval of the special exception.

## Legal Principles

- On certiorari review of a board of adjustment, illegality includes decisions unsupported by substantial evidence.
- Substantial evidence is evidence a reasonable mind would accept as adequate; it may be less than a preponderance, and reviewing courts view the record in the light most favorable to the board’s decision without reweighing evidence.
- A board must make findings adequate to show the basis of its decision and permit review, but findings need not be elaborate if they connect conclusions to the ordinance criteria.
- Appellate review is limited to issues properly raised and ruled upon below; unpreserved claims (including ordinance-interpretation disputes) will not be decided on appeal.

## Conclusion

The court reinstated the special exception for Shelter House because the Board’s findings were adequate, the challenge to parking compliance was not preserved, and the record contained substantial evidence supporting the Board’s determination that the facility would not substantially diminish or impair neighborhood property values.


Bontrager Auto Serv., Inc. v. Iowa City Bd. of Adjustment, 748 N.W.2d 483 (Iowa 2008)