Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-09-28 Bd Comm minutes '"..,..-- "'11I"". ---- ~ '1 --" i \\\ !"\l~ ~ \, ' '; I " I I, , " "'- ...--;~- -~ ......---.....---- ~ ... --...-- -1-- , ",'. ',' " I,' '- -' ttl f-t ,", , ' , ,', ' " , . "",t,l:"t,', :~,'.,','" ,":.', r~, ..'_' ,. J '~'.. , . ," . / /'\ , J ;, " - .-----~ MINUTES IOWA CITY HOUSING COMMISSION AUGUST 10, 1993 ROBERT A LEE COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER - ROOM A MEMBERS PRESENT: JAMES L HARRIS, ROBIN PAETZOLD-DURUMERIC (Left at 10:25 AM), PAUL EGLI, CHARLES EASTHAM MEMBERS ABSENT: BENJAMIN J MOORE, ROGER J REILLY, JACK MCMAHON STAFF PRESENT: DOUG BOOTHROY, MARIANNE MILKMAN, MARCIE LINDSAY, RON HENDERSON, SECRETARY VIRGINIA STROUD RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None MEETING TO ORDER: Both Chairperson Moore and Vice-Chairperson Reilly were absent. Harris wae elected temporary Chairperson and meeting was called to order at e:35 AM. MINUTES: The date of the meeting was corrected and a etatement wae added on Page 3 at the, end of Charles Eastham Letter section stating "Staff agreed to provide the requested review." Motion to approve the minutes of July 13, 1993, was made by Paetzold-Durumeric, seconded by Elgi, carried 4-0. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous: Harris, paetzold-Durumeric, Egli, Eastham. CCN REPORT - EGLI No regular meetinge ware echeduled for July and August. A epecial meeting was held August 4, 1993, to allow approximatsly $40,000 carryover income from CDBG funds to pay for flood relief to low-income families (80\ of median income) that FEMA doesn't pay for. This will be prssentsd to City Council at the August 17, 1993, mssting. CCN membsrs visitsd the Emergency Shelter. City closed on 8 lots at Whispering Meadows. CD HOUSING UPDATE - MILKMAN - Draft COMMUNITY PROFILE and FIVE-YEAR STRATEGY Lindsey reviewed the two sections of the CRAS and the tables. Milkman stated no recommendation from Housing Commission was needed at this time, but staff wants comments to make sure the proposed CRAS is the right way to go. Eastham stated he felt this was an outstanding draft and an improvement over last year's. He also stated he agreed with the priorities eetablished. Staff will present the revised Draft CRAS to the Housing Commission at the september meeting. The Draft CRAS will be available for Public review around the first of October and a Public Hearing will be held in October. Housing Commission msmbers requested material be sent to them earlier than with the regular Agenda packets in order to allow them sufficient time to review lengthy material. ...... _~'", ..: ,~,,',~',,;~'l. j..,,,~,;,, ,,_.,_"__" ;:~ i L .....Ll po - ~. ~"'.""----- \ ---" .-.... Iq~7 i .."".. "" i I' Ii: ,I II " Ii I: _ " " " \ II i j: :i i , , Ii I ;,,- j. f: " ",' ..'"i'i ".r Ii ;! j <} ,I' i ""', iI j' ; , ~JIIIIII.' - ...., , ' "'f/f"- - ~"1~-, --......... ~ -..-.',....... ------ --- I \ ~ , (; , 'J', ',';'.:h~ "',",,t'..," , "" , ' , ::. ' (I:' f(' t;j ,18, ' ' " ,.,". ,; ~ 1..__ '_c_'_;-, ;, . ' ~l".'" , '. , / / /,', /' , -l -- ------ -" PAGE 2 MINUTES IOWA CITY HOUSING COMMISSION AUGUST 10, 1993 HOUSING AUTHORITY REPORT - HENDERSON - update - Section e and Public Housing Henderson reviewsd statistics and statsd for section e and Public Housing this is the highest turnover period of the year. The Acquisition Project has only one unit left to buy and HUD ie looking at a unit on Arizona today. Paetzold-Durumerio would like to 'have vacant unit addreseee lieted and length of time vacant. Hendereon etated the number of landlorde on the liet at anyone time fluctuate. - Report on PSS Program Committee Henderson etated the PSS Committee met early laet week and begun working on the changee needed. The Public Houeing Action Plan needs to 'be ready in November and the Administrative plan for section 8 neede to be ready at the eame time. .- Report of Activity on PMR Reduction Proposale to do a FMR etudy for Johneon County are due Auguet 20, 1993. A contract needs to be in place by Auguet 31, 1993. The Proposal allows three weeks to do the study, with resulte available in four weeks. Funding for the etudy will be from current income and the reserve funde. - Report of Public Hearinge on Applicatione Hendereon etated there were no commente at the Public Hearinge. - Diecuesion of Utility Allowances Hendereon etated HUD reviewsd FMR limits annually and suggeete Houeing Authoritiee review Utility Allowancee annually. The proposed changee to the utility Allowencee were etarted laet year end ware baeed on current and upcoming utility increasee. The last Utility Allowance change wae effective in 1987. Henderson stated the changee will not affect renewale but new starts only. It will limit the number of unite available for tenante to select in order to meet the FMR limit eet by HUD. Eastham requested data on current tenante ehowing the relationship of Contract Rent and Utility Allowances to Groee Rent for certificate FMR, and also requested etaff to provide information on how the doUar amounte for new Utility Allowances were arrivad at. In addition Eastham euggested guidelines be established to implement the change over a period of yeare instead of all at one time. No action or recommondation was by the Housing Commiseion at this time. ,;.c,..,...,....-.-.....-... '''- ,'J -.-.-., .'..~ 19t{l " ,~ ;" , I II I:i Ii! ,I I ,[ , I I ; II '!: ij, [ " f:: " I.: ::1 Iii " d ,'i! :1 I, j " I ,I I", ( ':/; "<:i".'" '\," " d, i " ',> , . \': , II i 'I I, , 'j' , I, \\; " "'IIf"'- - ,J" - ~: -~""'4. -'........--- '" 0," -- ~. .,- ---- ~ff . ......,-- . " 'L"':'l" '1'1 ,',t-, "f1"7I'" " ,'. " I ,~' '~ _ . I. . .:,> ~' " . t... _ . ,_~. ". , " , : / IV) ....,,, .t' '''... ~- ------'. ......'---...--. PAGE 3 MINUTES IOWA CITY HOUSING COMMISSION AUGUST 10, 1993 - Discussion of Youth Sports Grant/Neighborhood Center Henderson stated HUD issued a NOFA for Youth Sports Grant with application deadline of August 20, 1993. Ths maximum grant amount is $125,00 with a 50' local match. Henderson stated Joan Vandenburg of the Neighborhocd Center was working on the information to submit an application to HUD. If the application ie completed it will be placed on the Council agenda. - Discussion of Ssction 5(h) Plan and TOP Hsnderson stated the draft Homsownership Plan, under Ssction 5(h) was submittsd to HUD for informal rsvisw. Ths Tenant to Owner Program was revissd but is basically ths sams as last ysar. A rsquirsment of the 5(h) Plan is to havs a replacemsnt plan in place. Our plan will be new construction. A Public Hearing on the Tenant to Owner Program (TOP) will he hold August 31, 1993. Further information will be available at the September Housing Commission meeting. - Discussion of Public Hcusing Admission Policy Itsm not discussed. 'Will be discussed at next meeting in Ssptsmbs~. DISCUSSION I , Handout of Burns letter not discussed. meeting in septsmber. ADJOURNMENT. Motion to adjourn at 10.40 AM was made by Eastham, seconded by Egli, carried 3-0. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous. Eastham, Egli, Harris. Will be discussed at next I i APPROVED BY, BENJAMIN J KOORE, CHAIRPERSON I J: , > . ~ '~'I,";J+;~_"~';';'~':"'';''''1..!"",:.-,~..,..._,, .....,_,.. ,__' ,__ . '--__'h '~"_"".,.., _", r _.~ I \ --.-.. --'-, j [, " \'1 Ii :1 II " I' " " ') : 'I ! I l. I, 1 t ; C Ii ,Ii"" , :, /9 'f7 :( \.-, ! I "" i i :~ , , ; ~ ! II" '.fJ~) ~ " I i , I , i I . I,' :' 't''':l'' "I I' . " t-" :i ,(' ,', . "'" ,: , i .", ',~ .,... "', U' '. ," '.. . " \: . L _' ,:'. " _' ~! ~ . , , " / /~ ' , :(. - --"'---. MINUTES RIVERFRONT AND NATURAL AREAS COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1993 ' 5:30 P.M. SENIOR CENTER CLASSROOM ~.,~ ~'I~ ~." :' .', '~.' ~~. . .'~'" .;- . -:~ . "1> ,;: y :~' ,;, , . MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Hoppin, Jan Hubel, Deb Liddell, Karen Mumford, Don Otto, Jim Pugh, Nancy Seiberling, Larry Wilson (arrived late) MEMBERS ABSENT: Barb Hinkel, t!Jdy Pfohl' : STAFF PRESENT: Denney, Krippner, Laufenberg GUEST PRESENT: ,Stan Bench CALL TO ORDER. INTRODUCTIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS: Vice-cheirperson Mumford called the meeting to order at 5:34 p.m. Mumford introduced Matt Laufenberg, an intern with the Planning Department. Pugh introduced Stan Bench, a candidate for City Council. Mumford commented on several upcoming meetings. Mumford explained that Joe Bolkcom has organized meetings for any interested persons to discuss water-quality and land use issues. The "Sub-committee on Water Supply and Weste Water" of this new ad hoc group is meeting Monday, September 20 at 1 :30 p.m, at the Johnson County Administration Building. All are invited. The Department of Natural Resources is holding an Open House at the County Fairgrounds on September 16 at 7 p.m. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 18, 1993. MEETING: Liddell moved and Seiberling seconded to approve the minutes of the August 18, 1993 meeting. The motion carried 7.0; STANLEY PLAN UPDATE: Liddell noted thet a trail standards section, which includes a discussion of lighting, was added to the plan. She stated there was positive feedback from the Parks and Recreation Commission. Mumford said the report was readable and well-done, especielly the historical information and trail standards. Denney stated he was pleased with the response of the Parks 'and Recreation Commission. Liddell explained that the Parks & Recreation Commission supported using the Parks and Recreation Foundation to receive donations for trails. Pugh asked why Pleasant Harris Park (Mesquekie Park) was not considered a priority. He argued thet people often walk end bike along Highway 6 which is not lighted. Denney and Liddell clarified the Plan's priorities focus on building new trail and that lighting is only recommended in the urbanized parts of the trail. Denney stated that Marie Ware, Coralville Recreation Director, asked that the proposal for lighting along the trail segments in Coralville be elimlneted. She felt Coralville would not support lighting the trail, and that there was an egreement not to light the Coralville Connection when it was constructed. Seiberling explained the reason was financial. 19~~ .~,_. ';'" ,:.'. .....", .;..., ,. -" ," ,'," ---' i' I ~ L I' . ! , : i t; I, I: I , I I I ,j , I I I , ; I, 'I' " " \ , , 'i I , " h:' I.: '. ,,(, !j r r '1' lj ,1/ ,!' " , il , , , ~ \ . ----'.... ..-r~..-- -- ....~....--~- ~""f"'" ...~..._~ r~~ J \ !": "f.-I'" ',; I' , "t~/" ".,-Z~, " '" ,:,::' ,,' :,' . " '" I " ' , ",.. . " . .'~ '~, \' ,- ~ , ,/1 i, "\ , 1 , .{. -'-...~ ---,...- --- Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission September 15, 1993 Page 2 Pugh moved and Otto seconded to approve the Iowa River Corridor Study Update. The motion carried 7-0, Liddell aCknowledged Denney and all the Planning Staff for their assistance on the plan. Seiberling said she was very excited about the plan. Liddell commented she felt a lot of energy coming from the various groups interested in the plan. Mumford said she especially liked the 'Call to Action" and thanked Liddell for her efforts. SYCAMORE FARMS UPDATE: Hoppin attended the September 9, 1993 Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting on Sycamore Farms with Mumford and Wilson. He noted there is another Special Meeting on' September 23, 1993. Hoppin summarized the meeting's main points: (1) no agreement on either a conservation easement or dedication of the land to the City, although many people feel the land is best protected by dedication; (2) wetlands are still not defined; (3) all parties agree there should be a buffer zone; (4) there are special concerns for protection during construction; (5) the developer does not agree with the City's opinion that farming should cease on the land to allow wetland restoretion; (6) most everyone favored public access but only for passive recreational use: and (7) the wetland should be into grated as part of a corridor of parks and recreation areas. Mumford commented that Tom Scott, Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission, presented a reasonable compromise plan that might suit all parties. This option will be discussed at the next special meeting. I III ,i " if t,i )\; ~ II 'j !I: There was additional discussion about the designation of wetlands and other methods of solving this problem. " ;. " ", (, I; TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE UPDATE: I ~, I !, ,.. , " I /,j ! ' i I I I i Seiberling stated she met with Denney, Rockwell and Hinkel on Tuesday, September 14, 1993. She said it is interesting to observe the formation of the ordinance. Seiberling listed some of the details to consider include the trees' size, condition, and location within the "public viewshed." Denney added the process is complicated since many trees are in the ' public right-of-way and within individuals' front yards. He said they are considering a "tree preservation corridor" and methods of protecting trees in developing neighborhoods as well es those in undeveloped arees. Seiberling stressed the value of learning an "environmental tradition." She noted how this idea ties in with the work of the Heritage Tree group. , ,>~ ' Hoppin expressed concern about the future of trees in Lower City Park. He stated trees that can withstand flOOding should be planted. Liddell stated that Terry Robinson estimated the loss of 100 trees in City Park, due to the flooding. Seiberling left at 6:31 p.m. ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS INVENTORY: Denney reported that the City has hired RUST Consultants from Waterloo to conduct the ' inventory. Mumford asked if the Commission, especially the Waterways Committee, wanted ,; , :i , , : ~ 1""H'".:,,~:,u,.~,..,_,_,, '...,' /9'18 ;-- .L.. I (:..\ " r I i i " '! " I': " ..- '"' -" ~.....~- ': , \ ~:'. " ~~l:" ,/ I:' ,(" ,\ ,:i, ,'," ',' '..., " . f '., r, [-., .' \ U' ' ., ' . . ; -.,'. ,-'" -~\ ,., . / /,\ ~. . '. " '.,- '."'-~---..~-- " , --'- .- Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission September 15, 1993 Page 3 to become involved in any activities surrounding Flood Plain Development issues. Mumford explained the City has a Floodplain Overlay zone that requires buildings to be setback 30 feet from theriverbenk and be raised one foot above the 100 year flood level. She emphasized that the 100 year flood requirements were established by collecting data and establishing probabilities. These estimations are affected by surrounding built-up areas and may need to be re-examined. Mumford also suggested studying the impact of the recent flooding. Laufenberg said he is very interested in this issue. He noted the increased development in Iowa City after the construction of the dam. Denney stated that among other things, Laufenberg will research other communities' flood plein development regulations and responses to this years flooding. I I I , I , ! ! , Wilson arrived at 6:44 p.m, RIVER CORRIDOR TRAIL UPDATE: , II ! ! I.; 1;' 1 i ~ II II I! II Hill: ii Ii , I~ i, :' I:, I': :i t;: I,; I;; ,f' 'I' J I ,I 1,1, ! , ',1,-,:' ',I Due to the flood, there was still no progress to report. DEVELOPMENT ITEMS: There were no recent development items of environmental interest. COMMITTEE REPORTS: The only committee report was from the Waterways Committee. Mumford reported on a recent DNR proposal to restrict stream-straightening. Mumford said the DNR wants to limit or he It "channelization" on protected streams due to the severe environmental effects. After some discussion, the Commission recommended Mumford write a letter of support to the DNR on their behalf. COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS: Earlier In the meeting, Pugh noted the potential for the City to capitalize on Its current road resurfacing project by using the tailings (old road surface materials) for surfacing trails, He noted there was discussion of building a protective levee near the two flooded mobile home parks in south Iowa City. Pugh suggested placing the trail on the levee. , Liddell stated that the Parks and Recreetion Commission is losing two of its most environmen- tal members. She asked that everyone encourage their environmentally'sensitive friends to apply for the positions. Mumford expressed a special debt of gratitude to Deb Liddell for all her work on the Commission. Liddell left at 6:57 p.m. i," ,', /9'1/ " Ii , ;, ! [, .....,......'''.-.".-.,'..''"'..,..,,',..''"',..-.. '-.,..", , -- , .,.- r::IK '.... "~'fII/II("'''----- ~-'" ----, --~.... ...~ r .....~~~-...-....- -- .-. ....-._--~~ .... ) . , , . ' , ' , ',' -" t-' /' [' . , ',' l.,;,~ ',.., , I : ' ,/ U ' ',' I-=-~, , '~ '. - -",': ' / '//'1.., " {, <:.'-: ': ~~-: """-----.- , -....- , , _.~..-..., Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission September 15, 1993 Page 4 Wilson said some of the trees on the University campus have Dutch Elm disease. Wilson distributed a brochure about tree preservation from the tree consultant hired to look at the University's diseased trees. Wilson and Mumford proposed examination of the responsibilities of the Chair and Vice Chair positions, Hubel recommended sharing the paperwork. Pugh suggested "co'chairs" that rotate responsibilities. Wilson stated he felt the Commission still needed a visible and public figurehead. Hubelleft at 7:01 p.m. Mumford stated she wanted group input. Wilson said he felt the positions should have responsibility and importance. He noted that other Commissieners will take his place therefore there is a need to organize responsibilities for future leaders. Denney said it is ,important to record the Commission's activities end methods for the "next generetion," The Commission agreed that Wilson and Mumford should return to the group with a "new" definition of their positions. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was edjourned at 7:09 p.m. Lacking a quorum, there was no motion. Minutes submitted by Kerstin Krippner. \rnle9-l!5 , . , I , "'i i , I I I /?l/~_, "'1' ,':,' .' ,I ~' -: 'J-".:.t.{""'r._;~'IJ,.:.....,, "',."",,'., ;h~''-'' .. ,'~'_ .__. . .', '''' '.. . '. .. , ~ ..- ,-'," .. ' 'II,: , ,J -~ . IOIt. , 1 I I :1' l' l'j II' I II it II ., ~ 1. " !I .. Ii: iI 'I I, I \ 1-' , , I I , , , , - -- ~-"-'---'--- --...,~... .... -1--. (, " _: . 1 t-' 1- . ',' " " ' " ',t 1,,/, , ....; " ".,' " .. , . I ":""U ' , . OJ, . ..: . -. . ' '.~ ,,... . - ,. .' ,,' " i , 1:J\)~ 1 I I I MINUTES PNtiJ~}~~~~~V I ' IOWA CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION I SEPTEMBER 9, 1993 . 7:30 P.M. SPECIAL MEETING Subject to Approval ! CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann BovbJerg, Sally Dierks, Dick Gibson, Tom Scott, George Starr MEMBERS ABSENT: Pete Cooper STAFF PRESENT: Bormann, MlkJo, Schreiber CALL TO ORDER: Scott called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. : , l: PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: i., 11' I, There was none. jli I , I I! , ZONING ITEMS: : W - ,) .., ! Il- l, ANN93.0003. REZ93.0015, Public discussion of an application submitted by Sycamore Farms I' Ii , , Company to annex an approximately 420 acre tract of land located south of Highway 6 and the ill Ii southern corporate limits, and to rezone the parcel from County RS Suburban Residential, to RS. 'I! ' h' 8, Medium Density Single-Family Residential; RM.12, Low Density Multl.Famlly Residential; II (; RFBH, Factory Built Housing Resldenllal; CC-2, Community Commercial and CN.l, Neighborhood " I .1 Commercial, (45-day IImltallon period: waived to September 9, 1993.) " ,i 'I Scott listed the Issues he would like to discuss at the meeting, noting his list may be extremely I optimistic. He said the Commission should discuss outright dedication versus a conservation I easement; If a conservation easement Is preferred by the Commission, the difference In the language between the develope~s and the City's drafts of the proposed conservation easement I, ,I should be discussed. He said If the language differences can be resolved, he would recommend ,~ that either the Commission adopt the conservation easement as revised or give staff clear, concise language on the modifications to the conservation easement. He said If that Issue can be resolved, he would like to take up the Issue of annexation and whether the Commission Is disposed to approve the annexation subject to a conditional zoning agreement or to deny the annexation. He said he would also like to discuss the conditional zoning agreement and the setting of densllles. He noted the Commission has dealt with this application over a long period of time and he feels the Commission should be close to makJng some definitive decisions. MlkJo said the conservallon easement Is being proposed as an alternative to outright dedication of the area known as the Snyder Creek Bottoms to the public In the form of a City park or some other form 01 City ownership. He said the actual proposal to dedicate this area came about In response to the various meetings that occurred last fall and winter where the CommiSSion, developers, and staff all learned of both Jurisdictional and non.Jurisdlctlonal wetlands and other senslllve features, such as hydric solis and potenllal native prairie grasses, In the Snyder Creek Bottoms area, He said II was clear after those discussions that II was the Commission's position not to annex land that contained unusual conditions /I the City did not have In place ordinances , 'I /qq~ ! i ..---~ , " \; '1:Il,. - ... " -....... "'IIf''' - - -- """IE'1 -------..- ~--~..-,.......----~ ....~... -....- -...,~ ... ...........- r-.... '. -' , "'. . '. . (" ,-' -, " , , '-,. ~.l' "~I I, f f ' ' /....; . ,::' ", ',";, , ' :",'~ .,.' ~. ,;;...~,. . .f ,:,' Planning & Zoning Commission September 9, 1993 Page 2 to address those conditions; a statement to that effect was adopted Into the Comprehensive Plan policy regarding annexation. He said to address that policy, staff proposed that the Snyder Creek Bottoms area, Including Jurisdictional wetlands and other areas which may not actually Include wetlands but are within the area of hydric soils and are below the 670 toot elevation mark that forms a rim on the north potion of Snyder Creek Bottoms, be dedicated to the public as a means to address concems about development In environmentally sensitive areas. He said as a public area, there would little or no development of the area; development would probably be Ilmited to nature trails and Interpretative centers. Mlklo said, as an alternative, the developer proposed the possibility of a conservation easement which would hopefully have the same effect of treating the Snyder Creek Bottoms area as a no. build area. He said the developer presented an Initial draft of a conservation easement to staff who then devised their own draft, which staff feels better addresses the concerns regarding preservation of the Snyder Creek Bottoms. He said the decision before the C~mmlsslon Is whether some version of the conservation easement addresses the main policy concerns of protecting the Snyder Creek Bottoms. He said If the City and developer cannot, come to an agreement on a conservation easement, staff recommends dedication of the area and that the annexation be subject to that dedication. Bormann distributed copies of a table outlining the differences between the developer's and staff's drafts of a proposed conservation easement, adding she had also Included a category of proposed compromise In which she Indicated whether there Is a potential for compromise on the differences. She noted some of the differences have already been discussed with the developer and are Included In the revised draft Included In the Commissioner's packets. Bormann said the first topic Is the parties: staff's version anticipates that It will be the City who Is the grantee of the easement and will enter Into the agreement with Sycamore Farms Company; the developer's version leaves the grantee open to an unspecified third party, She added the City would need to be a party to the agreement because of the burdens the developer's version seeks to Impose on the City; In order for those burdens to be Imposed, the City must agree to those burdens, She said In the developer's Initial draft, the City did not have the right of enforcement of the easement; under the revised version, a new section was added regarding compliance with state and federal regulations and allowing the grantee the right to raise the Iss~e of non.compllance with those regulations. Bormann said staff feels the City should be a party to the agreement; If It Is granted to a third party, only that party has the right to enforce the easement. She added staff does not necessarily object to a third party, such as the Natural Heritage Foundation, who work to restore wetlands and establish wetlands parks, Joining Into the agreement but the City should retain the right to monitor the easement. Bormann said the second topic Is Jurisdictional versus non.Jurisdlctlonal wetlands and Is the major difference between the two proposals. She said the question Is whether the City Is going to make a distinction between the Jurisdictional and non-Jurisdictional wetlands located I~ the proposed conservation easement area. She said staff's draft treats the entire conservation easement as a whole and the restrictions apply to the entire property, She noted jurisdictional wetlands are those wetlands that receive protection by the federal and state statutes; non.Jurisdlctlonal wetlands are not currently govemed by any ordinances or statutes. She said the developer's version contains two classes 01 property: the Jurisdictional wetlands and the remainder of the 1 Ii I , , " I " , I, ;i ,I)' '" I I; I t " ,I " , I I: I' , 1'1 1 'I II I' II II II 'I 'I " /9~1 - ,. - :,: ~,,- ...... - "1-----....--: -~....~ ;'.......- ..... v"... --- ~~~ , , , , (.' - ' - '~l ,','", ",',' Ll "/' :tl;.' :i,t',." "" :', " ~ : ' . I~.l" .' " ' f,:' f h." : '-, '0- t. : I' ..., Planning & Zoning Commission September 9, 1993 Page 3 property, which receives lossor restrictions. She noted the staff may be wUUng to recommend somo uses of the non-Jurisdictional wetiands; after discussions with the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), there has been some Indication that It may be possible to allow stormwater detention on the non'jurlsdlctional wetlands and possibility some recreational activities. She saki lithe CIty were fa agree to those activities, staff would want to see expUclt protections put Into the easement agreement, Including City review, approval by the IDNR, the Army Corps of Engineers, or any other necessary agencies, and a mitigation plan, Bormann said the third topic Is the particular description of the conservation easement found on page 1 of both drafts. She said staff's version Includes a section, which Is currently parenthetical, that states that the values of the property that the easement Is designed to protect will need to be particularly described, She said It will be difficult and tlme.consumlng to Identify the particular values of the property; staff feels It Is Important because In the future It will be the conservation easement document that will be referred to for explanations as to what Is being protected. Bormann noted the developer's draft does not contain that section bu~ she believes the developer Is not opposed to Including such a section. Bormann said the fourth topic Is the farming Issue; staffs draft permits continuation of current farming activities for 10 years, but disallows expansion of the farming activities, She said the developer's draft permits continuation of current farming activities for 20 years or until the land to the west develops, She said staff does not object to the 20 year period; onco the farming operations have ceased, the wetiands could be restored to their natural state. Bormann said the fifth topic Is reference to Iowa Code, Section 457 A; whUe that reference Is not contained In the developer's version, she believes the developers have no objection to Its Inclusion If the City were made party to the easement. She said this section needs to be Included because It Is the enabling ordinance that allows the City to enter Into the conservation easement. Bormann said the sixth topic deals with the rights of the granteEl;ln staff's draft, #4 would grant the City the right, after the farming ceased, to restore any portion of the property to Its natural state, Including but not IImltacf to, restoration of the weliands. She said under the developer's version, because they are making the distinction between the Jurisdictional and non-Jurisdictional wetiands, the right to restore Is limited to the Jurisdictional wetiands because the developer would anticipate using the non-Jurisdictional wetlands for other purposes. She added under the developer's version, the grantee \IIould have to submit to the developer a restoration plan for their approval before restoration could begin. She reiterated staff may be willing to permit some uses of the non-jurisdictional wetiands; If the Commission wishes to allow some uses, staff would not object to limiting the restoration to those portions of the property not used but would object to Umlting the restoration to only the Jurisdictional wetlands. She said If the Commission chooses to allow no uses of the non-Jurisdictional wetlands, staff prefers to retain the rlgn! of restoration for all of the property. . Bormann said staff has not discussed the dev~loper's proposal to require City submission of a restoration plan; she said this proposal may be reasonable, given the faclthe developer would retain ownership of the land. /9 f9. 1II .11II. -~- ; . : I , " ! I I I' ,i " i; lr ~ : ii' n I: 1\ I' ,: ,.' , I I I 1'. f; ! I I ( I " I i' " II !I I, , , i "........."I/f('". ----- -- "'1 -----...- i i , , I I -- ~ -" ..... ....- --- ~--\.& .;'..... "If"'''- -...~ r -." ,r .... , . , , (, '.""':' ",,,<,,\'~~i: "..:." ", . '"..,,' ,',,' :< 'tl if 11 ,ILl " '" I.:" ,. ,-' ,', (.'If,. ,,~:, ,,',' ",,, I' .~' "- ," _.,,'~' . \ Planning & Zoning Commission September 9, 1993 Page 4 Bormann said there Is a second substantial difference between the two drafts under the grantee section; staffs version grants the City two additional rights not found In the developer's version. She said one right Is the right of the City to use the a portion of the wetlands for filtration of the effluent from the City's wastewater treatment plant. She said the actual area that would be used for filtration would be located south of this property; this particular provision would protect rhe City in the event that part of the water would flow onto this property for any period of time, She stressed the Inclusion of that right does not mean the City plans to use the area to the south for filtration or that the effluent would flow onto the subject property; Inclusion of this right Is simply meant to protect the City, She said the developer has characterized this right as flooding of Ihe property, and stressed that Is not what the City's anticipates. Bormann noted If the City were to use a portion of the wetlands for filtration, the City would have to seek approval from the appropriate federal and state agencies; that language should be added to this provision. Bormann said the second additional right that the City Is seeking Is the right to Install utility lines across the property If necessary; she noted the City would have to obtain approval from the appropriate state and federal agencies and would have an obilgation to restore any port/on of the property that may be damaged by the Installation. She said the developer's version does not grant the City this right but reserves to the developer the right to Install utility i1nes; staff feels the City should also have that rl~hl Bormann said the seventh topic Is prohibited uses; staffs version permits only the uses required by current farming operations or any other expressly permitted activity on the entire easement area. She noted staffs draft Is fairly Inclusive; it limits construction, any structures, biliboards and signs, filling and excavation, removal of any trees or plants, disturbing or changlng the habitat In any manner, dumping of garbage or other materials that would affect the appearance, and prohibits the manipulation or alteration of any natural water courses. She said the developer's version uses the same prohibitions contained In staffs draft for the jurisdictional wetlands; the developer characterizes the property that Is not Jurisdictional wetlands as different and eases the restrictions by not prohibiting filling, excavating, or dredging and the removal of plants or trees or disturbing the habitat. She said this would allow the developer to do whatever Is necessary If they were allowed certain activities In the non.Jurlsdlctlonal wetland areas. Bormann reiterated staff may be willing to agree to some limited use of the non.jurlsdlctlonal wetlands. She said Mlklo spoke with the IDNR regarding whether stormwater detention basins would be a permissible use of the non.Jurlsdlctional wetlands; the IDNR Indicated that use may be allowed but would require approval by the City and the IDNA. She said if the Commission Is amenable to ailowlng limited uses of the non.jurlsdlctlonal wetlands, the two uses envisioned would be stormwaler detention facilities and active recreation, She said staff would want both of those uses to be subject 10 City approval, approval by the appropriate state and federal agencies, and a mitigation plan. She said In the version Included In the Commissioners' packets, Mr. Bright attempted to draft language which Included the flrst two conditions and she does not beileve the developer Is opposed to the mitigation plan requirement. Bormann said staff would prefer the language be expanded to Include the City's rights with regard to approving or disapproving the stormwater detention facilities. Bormann noted the IDNR was less optimistic that active open space would be an appropriate use for this area; If the conservation easement permits this use only with approval by the City, approval by the appropriate state and federal agencies, and subject to a mitigation plan, there would be a number of steps the developer would have to /9f9 --- -- - ..,. - 1 , I II 11 I: I I; 1.1 :1 I i I II ~ Ii i~ 11; I- p " !' ~ 1 " I II /I Ii li , ,I ....,. ~,- ......~-~~- ~-- ~w. ..-'....... --~-- i,' ,-' " -,' ID' '" .' """.,:'..' : . ~ I' ,):1:'" 't '.lJ . ' ,:',' '," , ' '. :f: "I",. _. '1"" . . ,_., 1 Planning & Zoning Commission September 9, 1993 Page 5 complete before any active recreational uses would be allowed and may provide adequate protection of the non-Jurisdictional areas. Bormann said the eight topic Is reserved rights, which have already been discussed. She said under staffs draft, the reserved rights for the grantor are the right to Install utility lines and farming for 10 years; the developer has expanded the farming right to 20 years, reserved the right to Install utility lines, and retained the right to use non-Jurisdictional wetland areas for stormwater detention and active recreation. I ! , , , l II Bormann said the ninth topic Is burdens on the City as an Interested party; staffs version does not contain the section regarding burdens on the City. She said the reason this section In necessary In the developers version Is because the City Is not the grantor, so It Is necessary to specifically burden the City with the proposed burdens. She said there are 5 burdens that the grantor Identifies; the first burden Is notto operate It's adjacent property to Injure the conservation values of the subject property. She said staff agrees with this burden. She said staff objects to the second burden as It Is presently drafted but not to the concept behind the burden, She said the second burden Is that the City will evaluate development that Is not part of the conservation easement on It's own merits and not deny development solely because the conservation easement exists. Bormann said staff does object to the last three burdens, She said the third burden Is to accept dedication of the property; she noted future Councils cannot be bound to accept a future dedication. She said the fourth burden Is that the taxes on the property be abated; staff opposes this burden. Bormann said the fifth burden Is to allow transfer of density; staff feels the conservation easement Is not the appropriate document to address this Iss~e and advocates addressing this Issue In the conditional zoning agreement. She added staff feels the transfer of density should be done through the means of an OPDH that would encompass part of the conservation easement area. She said If the land Is not dedicated to the public and zoned P, staff recommends rezoning the land to RR.1; the part of the conservation easement In the OPDH could be characterized as open space for the OPDH plan and the density allowed by RR,1 would bay on the developable portion of this tract, Bormann said the final topic Is compliance with federal and state standards; neither of the original drafts Included this section but staff feels this section should be Included. She said staff has not closely scrutinized the exact language proposed In the developer's revised draft and would want the opportunity to do so. Starr asked If the developer and staff had reached agreement on the borders of the easement area; MlkJo said there Is general agreement regarding the area, which Is basically the 670 foot elevation line to the north and the western boundary will encompass the 1 OO-year flood plain and Identified wetlands. He said following staff proposing this boundary, the IDNR suggested that the boundary may be extended to the west to Include additional possible Jurisdictional wetlands and suggested using the Southwest Sewer Interceptor line as the western boundary. He said staff Is requesting direction from the Commission as to the appropriate location for the western boundary. He added the IDNR would also be consulted to ensure the boundary complies with the City's contractual obligations regarding the Southwest Interceptor line. In response to a question from Starr, MlkJo said the Corps has suggested the applicant hire an environmental consultanllo define the JurlsdlcUonal wetlands. I . . I, Ii .I Ii j) I it I i\ I: , " j', : ~ I:i Ii II II :~ '! 19f9. _tom - 81, ~,,- - - 1"',0,,""" ...", , ~ --'.'-----.......--...---,......- - - '1-~- ~--~~-,-'.."-- -~~... ....~ -r -.~~'.--, , , r ,. f-l ,:", . 'i f'" f~t",', , ::,..' : : r" .1..) ~ . " \ . ~'" ,. '. :.:. ' , t, 'v" ; ,.--' : . " , / " Planning & Zoning Commission September 9, 1993 Page 6 In response to a question from Scott, Miklo said there Is a 50 foot easement over the Southwest Sewer Interceptor line. In response to a question from BovbJerg, Miklo said the sewer Interceptor line runs through a draw in the northern portion of the property, TIm Thompson said the line runs along the base of the ridge, above the we,tlands. Bright demonslraled'the path of the sewer Interceptor line on an overhead map, Bormann said the developers and the City may have different Interpretations of what active recreation Includes and staff feels It Is very Important that the City's approval rights and the steps Involved be made very specific. Starr asked about a map provided by Richard Rhodes, which Indicates a known jurisdictional wetiand to the west of the proposed no-build area, Bright said that area has not been delineated as wetiands to his knowledge, but added the agreement with the City Is that any areas that are delineated as wetlands In the future will not be developed. He stressed the developers Intend to seek 10NR approval for all development. He said the developer's proposed conservation easement tries to set up a procedure for a living document rather than a static one. In response to a question from Scott regarding the restoration plan, Bormann explained the City would retain the right, once farming ceases on the non-jurisdictional wetlands, to undertake activities necessary to restore the area to Its natural state. She said staffs versIon gives the City the right to restore wetlands without any conditions; the developer's version gives the City the right to restore'only jUriSdictional wetlands and provides that whoever does the restoration would have to submit a restoration plan to the developer. She said II the City agrees to the requirement to submit a restoration plan, the requirements of the restoration plan would need to bil clearly defined, I , II I',' " j, I 1'1 II i I I l 'I II 11 " H. 'Ii' , r~ !': Public discussion opened at 8:17 p.m. Stephen Brlaht, aoollcant, thanked the CommissIon for setting the special meeting and said he appreciates all the efforts by staff and the Commission. Bright said the developer has no problem with the City having enforcement rights under the conservation easement. He said the fundamental policy Issue the Commission must decide Is the uses and restrfctlons on the land. He noted the developer has distinguished between Jurisdictional wetlands and the other property located in the proposed no-build zone and has attempted In their version of the conservation easement to retain rights over the non.Jurlsdictlonal wetlands, He said the developer would like to provide for the potential use of the non, jurisdictional wetlands for stormwater detention and active recreation. He emphasized the reserved rights language In the developer's proposal, adding the developer would like to reserve the right to farm for the earlier of 20 years or unlllthe proposed 10 zone to the west Is developed. He said the developer has also reserved the right to Install utility lines and does not object to the City also retaining that right. Bright said In the developer's version, the developer has also reserved the right to build stormwater retention basins and other facilities required as a part of the development plan for Sycamore Farms, subject to approval from the City, approval of the 10NR, and the applicable federal agency, II any, He said the developer Is not tryfng to trap anyone, but rather Is trying to produce a document that will allow the developer to develop this area over 20 years. He said the developer has also reserved the right of active recreation Ii . I I i I ; Ii t /9~9 i " ---<1 ' \ ,\ , , , \ \ " \', , I ,~, ',' ':''-'t' . .,' ',:' ".. ;, ' , t I ,"/ I ' ,'/ I .I, , , ' . ',,' . '. 't'. . , , ' . ' . I " , ',I.,' "j"_ .., ' , ' , . Planning & Zoning Commission September 9, 1993 Page 7 facilities, which they define as building trails, ball fields, and other active recreation facilities, sUbJect to the three approval processes also required for stormwater detention facilities. Scott asked if Bright Interpreted 'build stormwater retention basins and other facilities required as part of the development plan for Sycamore Farms' as the same as building water retention basins and other facilities as required as part of l/1e mitigation plan; Bright replied aff/rmallvely. Bright said he does not feel the developer's proposed language avoids the mitigation plan and stressed all development Is subJect to the mitigation process. Scott asked If it would be the same as the location of stormwater detention structures only as part of the developer's mitigation plan or does the developer envision It to be other than possible stormwater detention facilities for greater than the mitigation plan to protect the bottom lands. Bright asked If Scott meant as an enhancement or restoration. Scott said the developer will probably have to utilize part of the non, Jurisdictional wetlands to protect the bottomlandsln the mitigation plan; he asked If the developer views the need for building stormwater retention basins to handle the water that Is not necessarily from the uplands to protect the bottomlands, but possibly from the west or from the land Itself within the no-build zone. Bright said the right the developer Is seeking would be to facilitate the development to the north and to the wesl Gibson asked the function of a stormwater detention basin under these circumstances; he said his understanding was that stormwater detention facilllles were Intended to avoid flooding and he has difficulty with the notion of a stormwater detention basin In a flood plain. MlkJo said the Intention would be to ensure that the stormwater from the upland area does not harm adjacent properties or the Jurisdictional wetlandS. Gibson asked how flood water could harm a flood plain and wetlands. MikJo said the rate of Inflow and the depth the stormwater Is ailowed to reach may have some harm on the wetiands. Gibson said construction of stormwater detention facilities may be more detrimental, to the wetlands than letting the water run free over and through the area He said the City's stormwater detention ordinance may not be appilcable for this particular situation. Bormann said the stormwater detention facility plans would have to be approved by the IDNA and the Corps; If the Corps determines that It would be more harmful than good, they would not be approved. Bormann said facilities would then need to be buill outside the no-build area or If It Is determined that It would be more beneflclal not to build stormwater detention facilllles, the developer may need to request exemption from the stormwater detention ordinance. Bormann said once a specific plan lias been developed for grading, building, or construction, some federal agency Is obligated to make a determination as to whether It will affect Ute Jurisdictional wetlands, MikJo said the developer will need to hire a consullantto prepare Ute mitigation plan, which will then be submitted to the City; If the City engineering staff cannot determine whether It Is harmful to or enhances the wetlands, staff anticipates hiring a third party to review the proposal, He said a stormwater facility that may occur In the Snyder Creek Bottoms would not necessarily be to the standards used In other SUbdiviSions; It may not be a structure and staff prefers the right to review stormwater management requests on case'by.case basis. Starr said the decision regarding conselVation easements versus dedication has not been resolved. , He asked about stormwater facilities " the area were dedicated to the City; MlkJo replied, If It were dedicated to the City, stormwater management could only occur with the City's consent and'the developer has much less of a right to have stormwater management occur on the land. Scott said the developer would be required to negotiate wllh the City for properly that he/she previously owned to allow the developer to do either the mitigation plan If It Involves any i, ( i, , II 11 I' i\ " jl. 'I- I I. P I, !' , , I , " i'. I . 1'1 , , I I I I , I ,I Ii !! t; i /9,/f' ~,,- -7 ~ \' \\ \' \ "" -----..... - --~---...--~ ..- , ..... - ( '",~: ',',.' ,.-" ," . ',," r.". ""'.': , t I ' I I' 'I I d. . , '. ,., , . ' ,',- ' I, ",,: '" ... , : ' \; ': _,' \",,', '.' . .,...0.':\ . ..,' " Planning & Zoning Commission September 9, 1993 Page 8 utilization of non'jurlsdlctlonal wetlands or If the City determines a need for control of water runoff within the area, Miklo said this Is not unprecedented, citing the Park West Subdivision, In which the KIwanis parkland was dedicated to the City and the City Is now looking at alternative designs ' for providing some stormwater management on the actual Clty.owned park for the subdivision; he said this was agreed to when the subdivision was approved, Scott noted the Commission wanted to encroach on parkland for stormwater management west of Willow Creek Park but was told City property cannot be used for private use. Mlklo said, In that particular case, federal funds were used by the City to buy that parkland and the federal grants contained silpulatlons that the parkland could not be used for that purpose, Starr said the Commission should first dei;lde between dedication versus a conservation' easement before attempting to determine the exact language of the conservation easement. Scott said If the language differences between the two versions of the conservation easement can be resolved, he feels a conservation easement may be preferable, Bormann said the overriding Issue to resolve Is whether to permit activity In the area at all; If the Commission decides to disallow any activity, they have basicaliy decided on dedication of the land. Bright said the Intent with reserving the rights for stormwater detention facilities and active recreation is to make a living document that Is subJect to the City's approval In the future. He said he finds It ironic that the developer may be the only one' who cannot put water on this ground; the City wants the right to flood the land and the Snyder Creek Development water can flood the land. He said he feels the developer's request for allowing stormwater detention facilities Is reasonable, He said, regarding active recreation, the developer wishes to make a ' development that has a neighborhood that works rather than forcing kids to go six blocks to play. He reiterated the active recreation proposals would be subject to approval by the City and the appropriate state and federal agencies. Bright said the developer does not object to the process of defining conservation values, He said regarding the farming Issue, he wished to emphasize to the Commission that the developer Is proposing that farming activity would cease whenever development of the 10 area begins. Bright said regarding the rights of the grantee, the Issue he would like to focus on Is the right to restore the non-Jurisdictional wetlands. He said If the Commission allows the developer to have some reserved rights for slormwater detention and active recreation, there may be a conflict as restoration may occur before the developer has determined whether a particular site Is appropriate for either of these activities. He suggested the right to restore non-Jurisdictional wetlands not be triggered until all development Is completed. Bright said two rights are retained by the City In staff's version of the conservation easement. , He said, regarding the right to flood, no one has ever said they were going to flood this property or that the City would use It for sewage treatmant and he sees no reason for the developer to agree to that. He said the City Is asking the developer to give the City the right to flood areas In which the developer may bulid stormwater detention or active recreation facilities. He said he feels It Is inappropriate for the City to cease that right In the annexation process; the City has the right of condemnation If the land Is needed by the City. Bright said the prohibited uses have already been discussed; the Commission needs to make a policy decision regarding uses of non.jurisdlctlonal wetlands, 1?~9. '. .Lb..L , I ~ II I' 1\ I ;1 , ,,, , ( I I': " II I; I: , " i I f; I I I ;, ! " 'I \1 I, f: .1 I \ - '" -~----~ ...-'.......- ...... ... --- ...,~... .. ..,...- ,.._......--~.~---.....-----.--.------- \ " , " . . I, f~l" / "I I,' ,:t' ,,", , ,:', ,', :, " ,.t., I. , "~ ,'.' ~. " '. . .. '~.' ;~, ' . . " ., Planning & Zoning Commission September 9, 1993 Page 9 Bright said, regarding burdens on the City, he would find It Ironic If the developer was to grant a conservation right to the City and then the City would object to development of adjacent areas because of the conservation easement. He said the developer Is requesting the right to future dedication to the City if they are In compliance with the conservation easement. Bright said he feels it Is reasonable to, abate the taxes for this property If the developer gives up their development rights; he quoted the CHAS report, which states the City may make tax adjustments to encourage affordable housing. He said In discussions at an eariler meellng, it was Indicated that the Commission wished to define the transfer of density now; the developer does not object to obtaining that right through an acceptable OPDH. Bright said the section regarding compliance with state and federal standards was added because both the City and the developer are bound to comply with the IDNR agreement and federal rules. Bright said the overriding policy Issue for the Commission to decide Is whether they will differentiate Jurisdictional wetlands from the remainder of the property In the proposed no-build area and, If so, on what basis. He said he feels the remainder of the differences between the two drafts are less substanllalln nature. Bright said If there are jurisdictional wetiands to the west of the proposed border 01 the no-build area, the boundary would be moved; he noted the no-build area has already Increased from 60 acres to 150 acres. He said the developer wishes to comply with the City's agreement with the IDNR and will Incorporate the necessary process to delineate wetlands Into the conservallon easement. ' Susan Horowitz. 1129 Kirkwood Avenue. said she feels the Issue of whether farming operations can conllnue for 10 or 20 years Is a red herring, She said upon agreement by both parties, one would hope that the mitigation ofwetiands would begin Immediately. She suggested there should be a locational priority 01 non.junsdlctlonal wetiands so that when the farming operations can be ceased In what should be a jurlsdlcllonal wetland, they are ceased and restoration begins. She said she would like to see a locallonal priority established to provide for sequential restoration. Horowitz said it Is her understanding that If a Jurisdlcllonal wetland Is proposed for development, it must be subsllluled with a non.jurisdlctlonal wetiand. Bormann said the Corps performs an analysis to determine If the wetiand can be developed upon and they determine whether it has to be substituted with a non.jurisdl~onal wetland. MlkJo said the draft before the Commission would basically remove the option of applying to the Corps to alter jurisdictional wetlands. Horowitz said If the developer would need to develop a portion 01 Jurisdictional wetlands for legitimate reasons, she feels the conservation easement should contain reference to a locatlonal priority rating 01 the non-jurisdictional wetlands to be used as a substitute. Scoll said the contract language would prohibit utilization of any Jurisdictional wetlands. In response to a question from Gibson, Bormann said the developer's draft of the conservation easement restricts the developer from any actlvll/es In the jurisdictional wellands upon signing the agreement. Bright said the draft document gives the developer the right to present land use for the earlier of 20 years or development of ID zone, adding there are currently no farming actlvll/es on Jurisdictional wetlands. Horowitz asked If there are any farms on the tract that would be Jurisdictional wetlands If they were not tiled; Bormann said that Is possible: Horowitz asked If it would be possible to develop a prioritization of the farms so that farming operations cease sooner for the most fragile areas to be restored. /991. ....' - , I, ~ !, I I 1\ II, " " 'I r I" " ", (~ \" i n I' '" .. , 'I I, I i: I I) , I I I Ii ,I ; il "If''' - ..... --~--,~ ~-- \.& ,-'...... --....~ ........----...-- r-~.... .... --- _.' --...- ~~ 1 r -.. -1"""""'-- . ,... ~ \ , . '. I t~l " '," 'I I ,'Ll" ' " ' " "',' ,', ' : ~', . f' ~I , '''.,~ ' ' , .", .D. ,.' . " .' '. - . Planning & Zoning Commission September 9, 1993 Page 10 Tim Thompson. 3048 Rohret Road, said farming operations can Include row cropping, IivestockJng and grazing; grazing Is currently occurring on both jurlsdlctlonaI and non'jUrlsdictlonaI wetlands, MlkJo said It was his understanding that the references to farming operations In the conservation easement were meant to address the non-jurisdictional wetland areas; farming operations on any jurlsdlctlonaI wetlands would cease once the boundaries were determined. Bormann said that Is not how the conservation easement Is currently drafted. In response to a question from Gibson, Thompson said determination of farmed wetlands or prior converted wetlands Is b~ed on whether the tiles or drainage ditches are adequate to completely drain the soli; If the soli Is not adequately drained, they would be determined to be jurisdictional wetlands, Horowitz asked If It would be possible to develop a glossary of terms In conjunction with the conservation easement for use by future Councils. Scott asked If Soli Conservation, Services uses the same parameters stated by Thompson to determine whether an area Is a jurisdIctional wetland; Thompson relied affirmatively. He added even areas that are adequately drained can sometimes be restored to a wetlands, clllng over 800 basins that were adequately drained to meet the non-wetland criteria that have been restored from cropland to wetlands In Iowa. Scott said the CommissIon determined a long time ago they would deal with jurisdictional wetlands; the Corps has agreed with SCS's determination of the Jurisdictional wetlands In the vast majority of the area south of the 670 foot elevation line and east of the Southwest Sower Interceptor. He said there are some prior converted wetlands and probably some wetlands being farmed; prior converted wetlands Is not the same as jurisdictional wetiands and the Commission agreed they would deal with jurisdictional wetlands, which would be off limits to all development Thompson said the Corps reviewed SCS's maps and saId they agreed with what the SCS had catled wetlands; for areas the SCS had Indicated as possible wetlands, In most cases, the Corps said they did not have adequate Information to support or dispute whethet they were wetiands. In response to a comment by Thompson, Bormann said It IYas her understanding that farming operations referred only to row cropping, Bright said the developer wishes tc continue current farming operations to make some money off the land prior to Its development. He added the developer Intends to restore ail of the property In the no.bulid zone not used for other activities once development has been completed In 20 to 30 years. He noted any glossary would need to be capable of being changed; he reported the Corps and EPA recently Issued a final regulation ensuring that approximately 53 million acres of prior converted cropland, which no longer exhibits wetland characteristics, will not be subject to wetland regulations. Bright displayed on a map the location of the current farming activities. Scott reiterated that the Commission decided long ago to deal only with jurisdictional wetlands and accepted that term; he said he does not wish to deviate from that agreement because the remainder of the areas are debatable. Bormann said staffs Interpretation of farming was limited to row cropping; she was unaware the developer's deflnlllon of farming differed from staffs understanding. She said she agrees a glossary would be very useful. Bormann said, prior to signing the agreement, an Inventory of the current uses would be completed so there would be no question as to whether the developer Is expanding those uses. ' , , , , , I II, \ I II I': ,11 , 'I I' ' I \,' " I! .t, If I' I;: , I I, , 'I ' 'I : " I,: II j'. 11'1 ': II ' i Iii I I Ii 'j ~ I ,\ I /000 \\ 7'1' ---- .... - ....~ - '~ "'tIf'" ------ - ~-............~ ..........'~..-'........-----' ......"'........--- --~T~ ... '9' .... ...---.-- -,~ - ,- -. ~'---...-- , , ' ,..1" ' r' :.:." :,' /- , ',' , , . '~l" ,/ I," ,'f I ~:,." " ' ,: . ; :,..f~ ,," " :\'. I ~~~. .: \ ' .,'. ,', " , Planning & Zoning Commission September 9, 1993 Page 11 Thompson said he feels hay cropping should also be included In the deflnlllon of farming because hay would be a legitimate rotation, as opposed to pasture. He also noted the Issue of fencing and who Is responsible for maintenance may need to be discussed. He noted the IDNR does not allow wetlands to be mitigated through another wetland; It has to be on a non-wetland area that mitigation will occur. He also noted that overhead utility lines can pose great danger to wetland birds. Thompson said, In order to restore wetlands to a usable state for wildlife, the City and state and federal agencies should attempt to remain flexible on the Idea of creation, restoration, and enhancement of the wetlands In this area and should realize the process often might Involve dredging and/or filling In a wetland. Bormann said the City Is willing to allow grading, dredging, and filling In the course of restoration. Thompson also urged the Commission to consider the Issue of how to handle the wildilfe nuisance complaints that will occur with wetlands so close to development. Richard Rhodes II. 2014 Rochester Avenue, noted a leller he had sent to the Commission regarding this application and the drafts of the conservation easement. In response to questions raised regarding the known exlent of wetlands In Snyder Creek Bottoms and Sycamore Farms portion of the Snyder Creak Bottoms, he displayed a map showing the known, probable, and possible wetlands In the area, according to Information provided by the SCS. He noted the Corps fully agreed with that designation In a letter dated December 1992. Rhodes pointed out the known wetlands Include an area to the west of the proposed boundary for the no-build area He said the areas on the maps designated as possible wetlands may Include farm fields that have not been adequately tiled and stili have wetland properties or may be adequately tiled and be prior converted, He said this points out the need for a detailed Inventory and assessment of this area before or shortly after any agreement Is signed by the City. Rhodes noted In dry years, many of the areas that are known Jurisdictional wetlands can be row cropped and said It behooves the City to specify exactly what Is meant by current farming practices. Rhodes also noted the area to the west of the proposed no-build area Is 100 percent fully hydric solis. Rhodes said he has heard no mention of who would be the third party grantee mentioned In the developer's draft of the conservation easement; he said he feels this needs to be specified. Rhodes said In the portion of his IGtter discussing the Impact of farming operations on wetlands, he accidently omitted Including that fact that fertlilzers also run off to the wet areas, which can put excess nutrients Into the wetlands and cause the wetlands to degrade substantially, He said the sooner farming activities are ceased on not only the Jurisdictional wetlands but also the surrounding areas, the better off the wetlands will be. He said if farming Is allowed, which he feels Is reasonable from the developer's perspective, It should be for no more than 5 years and should require a buffer zone around the margins of the wetlands to catch the polluting runoff. Rhodes said he feels the request for tax abalementls Inappropriate because the amount of the taxes Is generally determined by the use of the land; If a conservation easement Is In place, the taxes should be minimal. He said since the land would remain In private hands, he strongly feels the owners should pay property taxes, In regard to the City burden of Involuntary acceptance of dedication at the developer's discretion, Rhodes noted other publiC agencies, such as the IDNR, /?'I9, _, ..Ml. , ' , 1 ( II: Ii ,. I, ij Ii I;: ,I I I; I I: 1:1- i: I, 'I' " il I': I, " I i :i f: . ,i """""Iff" - ....... - ~, "," ,0" '" _, '." . _ '... "'~ ~---~ ~-l.....- ....~ ........ - -- ~ff ,. ~ p '... :'.' ,t-l""; / ,:'1 f"bu,,' ',"',,:::, ;,:> , "r',..", " ,~: ~,", I, . " : ',- " -~-'_." --. Planning & Zoning Commission September 9, 1993 Page 12 could accept dedication of the land and It probably Is not necessary that the City be speclfied as an accepting party. Rhodes said In addition to row cropping and hay cropping, pasturing Is also very damaging to wetlands. He said the solis are soft and, often saturated; callIe and horses trompIng around In them fundamentally ruins the natural surface of the ground and destroys plants. He said haying can often be done In wetland areas when It Is dry; this Is also damaging because it lake off plants at the ground level that should be producing seed and can have a detrimental Impact on wetland areas. In response to a question from Scott, Rhodes said If annual plants are hayed for several years In a row, the seed bank Is severely decreas&d; he noted less Impact on plants with permanent root systems but added It can alter the balance of the plant bank In the wetlands and favor those plants that bloom and set seeds earlier In the year. Slarr asked If the damage Is permanent In areas that have been farmed for several years; Rhodes replied the damage will need to be assessed for each Individual tract because it depends on the seed source nearby, Tom Hoff, 7 Under Vallev Circle, said he Is a member of Wetlands for Iowa and about 11/2 years ago, he was approached by Bob Lenz about buying the property designated on Rhodes' map as a probable wetiand; he concurred the area Is definitely a wetiand, He said he sits on the State Board of Wetlands for Iowa and can assure the Commission they would not be Interested In being a party to the conservation easement. He said he feels although the easement Is being portrayed as a open-ended agreement and document of negotiation, the developer Is being critical of the City's point of view but In return wish to rela!n the same rights for opposite purposes. Hoff said It appears to him that by proposing a cloudy easement, the developer Is attempting to give away some rights to get developmental rights but also wants to relaln the right to 'call the shots'. He said he feels some of the conditions proposed by the developer are out of line and urged the Commission to work to revise the agreement to protect the Interests of the citizens of Iowa City. Hoff said developing right up to the Jurisdictional wetlands would defeat part of the purpose of the easement; the reason for the easement Is to protect those areas. He said If tile negotiated agreement allows development so close to the Jurisdictional wetlands, the City Is giving away some of what they bargained for. He said he also agrees the request for tax abatement Is Inappropriate. Hoff said he personally leans towards dedication of the land; he said the given the flood of 1993, perhaps It Is time for the Commission to consider not only what Is good for the citizens of Iowa City but also what Is good for the people living downstream. He said he feels dedication would provide the City with more control over the uses of the land In this area, Steve Hendrix, 738 Dearborn Street. said In response to a question regarding the damage from haying, the longer haying Is done, the greater the effect on the wetlands, He agreed the damage would need to be evaluated on an Individual basis. Hendrix said he supports public dedication of the area. He noted there Is no provision for public access In either version of the conservation easement: he feels It Is Important for the clUzens to have the opportunity to experience such a unique ecosystem. He said he does not feel public 19'9 i : , t \ I V I, Ii I" " 'I ,j I, 1! ~ ", I II, I 1\ , i( I. ~ i'; I Ii \1 ! 'I I , I , , I I !I , 'I j ,i ..-'.......- _ ~..... '-....- ...,~... ...-\-- ,... -.. '''- ...., 'I I, ',.' t-l" " 'I'."" I -t' '.' ":",.',;" . './,,'1' :1 : '..' I.:, ) '~. . ':', 'l ."; "I".... I '.',', :', ' : '.' " / " ,I. Planning & Zoning Commission September 9, 1993 Page 13 dedication Is necessarily at odds with conservation goals; It is typically amateurs and professionals who bring to the attention of City staff problems with given areas. Hendrix said he feels any continued farming operations would have the opposite effect of the Commission's goal of protecting the wetiands. He said farming operations should cease Immediately; If farming Is to be allowed, a buffer zone should be Included In the conservation easement. He said he also disagrees with staffs analysis that an OPDH zone Is stili possible; he feels this may endanger the wetiands dramatically, Mlklo explained an OPDH zone would be subject to City approval and would remove the development rights of one unit per acre from the conservation easemenlarea to another area of Sycamore Farms outside the conservation easement. Larry Wilson, Chairperson.. Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission, said the Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission Is committed to preserving wetiands and other natural areas and feels the Snyder Creek Bottoms wetlands Is a slgntncant community resource and should be protected from development, should be protectea during development, and should be protected and maintained for future generations. He said the City should have JUrisdiction over the area In a way that will allow public access and use. He said the RNAC feels these Issues should be part of the annexation conditions. Wilson said disallowing public access Is contradictory to what the RNAC Is promoting. Wilson noted the right of the grantor to transfer the property and obligations to a Homeowner's Assoclation In the Sycamore Farms development; he said the members of a Homeowner's Association would have a self-Interest and would be less likely to be Interested In allowing the general public to use the land. Carol Thomoson, 1116 Muscatine Avenue, said she agrees public access Is very Important and should be allowed. She said other wetiand areas In urban settings are generally heavily used as an alternative park type. She said she also supports public dedication of the area only because of the proposed uses of the non-Jurisdictional wetlands. She said If the developer Is allowed to completely develop the area with the plan of restoring the areas that are left, there will likely be no restoration outside the Jurisdictional wetiands. Thompson agreed the articulation of values and the Identiflcation of potential uses will be difficult but are absolutely necessary and should be done up front. Thompson sald, primarily because of the manner of the restoration process, many of the ephemeral areas are being lost; she noted these areas also support unique vegetation and animal populations. She said this Is an opportunity to restore something unique. She sald she feels farming operations should cease Immediately to stop the negative effects on the wetiands, Karen Mumford, Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission membor. reiterated the RNAC's support for public dedication and said the RNAC also supports and encourages the Idea of approaching this area In a holistic manner. PUblic discussion closed at 9:45 p.m. , , , 1'~9 i: i I' ;, :1 I I - I , I : ' II' ~!' 'I! Ii , 'j " I. !' 1\ " , l' f' i' ' " i i ! I I I " (, . I I' ,/ II Ii i: , Ii "'11('''- ...... ~ ""-~- --~..... , '..' , I' "-, " ", I 'f"7t' :,..,", , " .,' ~ I : ,.1' ."1 , ~. " ' ::, ' , .', ,:' 'I~. \'" ""', ~~' " . - ,'" " Planning & Zoning Commission September 9, 1993 Page 14 Scott requested the Commission members to make comments on the public debate, dedication versus a conservation easement, and language proposed In the conservation easement. The Commission agreed to schedule a special formal meeting for September 23, 1993 at 7:30 p.m. In the Civic Center Council Chambers to continue discussion 01 this application. In response to a question from Dierks, Bright said a third party cannot be approached until the City has agreed to the conditions of the conservation easement. He said there are many possible third parties the developer Is considering, Gibson said both the developer and staff seem to accept that It Is the responsibility of the City to restore the wetlands; he asked why It Is assumed It Is the City's responsibility. He said also has questions about the stormwater Issue and how It relates to development adjacent to the bottomlands and lands that are routinely flooded. lie said density transfer Is a concept that Is put In place to deal with theoretical future Issues and said he Is not sure It Is appropriate In this situation. Gibson said once the developable sites are determined, the Commission could determine the appropriate density for those areas Irrespective of any land that Is not being developed and he Is not sure he would favor any density transfer for this area. He noted the developer Is interested In continuing to farm because of the uncertainty about when development of this area will occur. He asked, If development will not occur for 20 to 30 years, why the Commission should rezone the land to higher densities at this point; why not rezone the land at the lowest possible density and deal with the Issue of rezoning the area to higher densities at a time more near development. Gibson said he feels the time range for aliowlng farming operations to continue should be zero to 20 years and he feels the Commission heard very convincing arguments on thaI Issue. Gibson said the conservation easement Is a horribly complex Issue and he Is unsure It Is manageable; there are sllll a number of Issues that have not been addressed and dedication would probably be a less complex and straightforward resolution of this Issue. Gibson said another option would be to require the developer to submit a development proposal and mitigation plan for the Commission's consideration rather than dealing with the Issues In a theoretical manner; he said such an approach may result In a better resolution of the Issues for the developer and for the City, BovbJerg agreed the wetlands must be protected before, during, and after development; she said the final solution must provide for no.lmpact on the jurisdictional wetlands from construction and runoff north of the Snyder Creek Bottoms. She said It Is unwise to bulid conventionally and clean up later; the development and mitigation plan should protect the area from the beginning. BovbJerg said she agrees public access should be available in the form of walkJng trails only. She said, regarding tax abatement, she woulct like to see what kJnd of benefits would come to the City In eXChange for abetlng taxes; perhaps this would make It possible to enlarge and speed up restoration of the entire area, Dierks agreed wllh Bovbjerg's comments and said she finds It frustrating that each time this Issue Is discussed, more questions are raised. She said she appreciates the developer attempting to annex and rezone the entire area rather than deallrig with portions sequentially. j i I" ;' I: i ,I, ! I ! :! , if Ii! Ii' II,' I, I I! /1' i'. I I i I; I i I ! I ,I i I '1 I I, , ,\ 19~f . -.r,,- ---- - .'.---."-..,.,... '" _, '9\ , I" ': -' ,"" 1 ," "/ij- ' ,',,", ' " :', "~ , ' L I," ';.i I ",:' , '< ,,', '" :"",,', ':', ,": . ,r: _" " _" I ;', '., I'" I', " _ " Planning & Zoning Commission September 9, 1993 Page 15 Starr agreed It would probably be easier and cleaner to require public dedication of the area but said he would prefer to attempt to work out a conservallon easement. He said an easement will be extremely complex, citing stormwater management, public access, filtration, and active recreation as Issues requiring resolution. Starr said he feels the Commission and the developer are not all that far apart and correct language simply needs to be constructed to satisfy both parties. He said he does not wish to lose sight of the affordable housing Issue; he believes this development provides an excellent opportunity to create some affordable housing In the community. Scott said he supports a conservation easement as opposed to public dedication but agrees dedication would'be easler, cleaner, and probably would occur faster. He said a dedication forces a developer to negotiate with the City on property that he/she owned previously to accomplish some of the things that will need to be accomplished" this area Is going to develop, Scott said Jurisdictional wetiands, as they are presently defined, are off limits for any type of development, which means at the time the agreement Is signed, any use of the jurisdictional wetiands ceases. He said this Includes the surrounding buffer area, which was discussed at previous meetings; staff's survey of other communities showed most buffer zones to be between 50 and 100 feeL He said he will support a buffer zone around the Jurisdictional wetiands as also being off-lImlls. Scott said, In regards to treatment of the property; he wliuld not support active recreational uses In the proposed no-bulld zone. Scott said he also feels that agricultural uses In the non- Jurisdictional wetlands need to be limited to row cropping, haying, and pasturing an~ would support a zero to 5-year time frame for ceasing all farming operations In the non-Jurisdictional wetland areas, He said he does not object to either the City or the developer reserving the right to Install utility lines In the non'jurisdlctlonal wetiand areas. Scott said Gibson's questions regarding the purpose of stormwater detention facilities In a flood plain have merit. He said If stormwater detention structures are built In the no-build area, It should only be as part of the mitigation plan to protect the wetiands from the runoff from the north and west areas of development; he said it does not seem to him that stormwater detention structures should be ne,eded to control that runoff. Scott requested staff to prepare various Changes to the wording In the reserved rights section to renect the consensus of the Commission regarding those Issues. Scott said he agrees public access should not be restricted to this area; he said he views the passive utilization of the non-Jurisdictional areas as very similar to the Commission's actions with previous Village Green Subdivisions. He said one of the reasons he supports the developer retaining ownership of the land Is because that area should become an amenity to the overall area; he fears dedication would result In IItl1e or no restoration because the City lacks adequate funds, Scott said he would not support transfer of the property to a Homeowner's Association because he does not feel a Homeowner's Association would have the wherewithal to develop and to malntaln the area once It was developed, ! ! ; , " , i' I I,' , Ii! ri Ii ,: ' Ii 'I I!, I 11' Ii , '1':" ,: " I! 1'; I ! I " I I 11 Iii ,\ 19'/ - - .II ~, ~ ...",.". , ','1 I i . I ,:' ~ i \'" 'I"~ ,--- - -- .......' .......... - .... - ..... ~"'1-~-.. ~...... ~ ';.' ..... -...,~.... V' _\__ . ------... .-----........---...- r -- \. . . , I' ' , . ~-:-l' '.I 'I ,: '/ ,', ',';-t" , ' ,." " .- ' "; , , '. ' I"".. , '., ,.,' ,'.,,' ~ '~ . / /~j, ....."", '~ .....--:----....~- Planning & Zoning Commission September 9, 1993 Page 16 Scott said he does not object to binding the City to future dedlcaUon but does oppose a tax abatement. He said he does not support under any circumstances, a transfer of density rights, even under an OPDH. He said he Is comfortable with staffs recommendation for rezoning densities. Scott said he feels a conservation easement that Is agreeable to the Commission Is possible, but he cannot be sure the develcper will also be agreeable. Gibson said he did not mean to Imply that a dedication should be selected because It would be easier; he said If a conservation easement Is the right thing to do, the Commission should continue to struggle with II although he Is unsure all the Issues can be satisfactorily resolved. DIerks moved 10 defer pUblic discussion 01 emendments 10 the ZonIng OrdInance, Section 36-58. Off-Slreel Parking Requlrementsj Seellon 36-60, SIgn Regulellonsj and 36-9, RFBH, Factory Built Housing ResIdentIal Zone. 10 allow conslderallon 01 certain commercial uses 88 provIsIonal uses In Ihe RFBH Zone, 10 Ihe Seplember 23, 1993 SpecIal formal meallng. Gibson seconded. The mollon carried on a 5-0 vote. Bovb/erg moved 10 deler ANN93-0003, REZ93-0015 10 Ihe special lormel meellng 01 Seplember 23, 1993, sub/eel 10 a waiver by Ihe developer. DIerks seconded. The mollon cerrled on a 5-0 vole. , Scott noled the developer gave verbal agreement to waive the 45-day limitation period to September 23, 1993. Bovb/erg moved 10 ad/oum a110:19 p.m. Stsrr seconded. The mollon carried on a 5-0 vole. - Ann Bovbjerg, Secretary Minutes submitted by Nancy Schreiber ppdadmlnlmlns\P&Z9.9.m1n i I" -. '~~M'~""., ""."~'''''_''_,_,_ .., /91/9 ""....,.,.,.""..", , " .--'-" .-- - i' . ' I, , , : I I' I I I I I I, I I I I I , i , i I , ' . ' ~ i ! ! i:: '" ~I : , Ii " ;j " " " " " " " 'i; . , I I n , ,'1'1 'I, I I' ': , , I :1 , ' 'I " I I , j , , , '\,! __---.:J_~ .."., - , , I I I ..... .,- '1 .....~-- ,,, ",-1" I" "',,-r, ,,',t' "',',,",, "" I. . . " .,f ,I~,: " ,', . . .,1 , I '. I _ " ~ , -.. ' . - . - / /j ...... :~' -~ . -- ......-.--- ~" Sp,;,I"L Poj-'l.. R:eg,t1~l meeflf\l~ S{.,08+ q I /7 q~ ~ 7.Jlv 1'.... ~i€.a.5e Si9~ 11\1: I. Ma.mt: 'S'(~"'~L,.l-- (" I X <I:h1_M~ J. 3. Ti 1"1 IAA "'f~/ '" 4. ~O-~Jl ~ ~, ,f!! J' 'i~ ~':P 7.1;. ~~ : K~~- 'I 10. . II. Ij, 13. ''1. ~~"-._~.........~.."".,.~._.,~-.-,---,.,- ,....,.,',..".."." B cic\ Sle.S5: 3 'l.\ <., vY\ 'I. 1- I / /V1,;i;.-tc.w~ tiq ( 34t{ U /?rJJ,,.d ((~. "-{r~~ 7L~ t~~! '1~ T}u<~. ~, . ..lli1\0 -1l.1 (n Musachr:.t , nrv~ t ;,...'",.,--."....,0'.. ".' "'''''',- --~..._-, -' "kIC, 191/' I .,,,, ..--. ",'._,..,,., "'-'.-"," ''''''''1 -' I , I , I , ! ! , i I i , , II I, Iii , , II ' ' ': !. !i 'Il- l! t. ii" i I '::.. :'1', , 'I ~ ; II - ,;,,; , t'" , " , : , " , , I _,:\_ I I; " . j ," , I: I , ,/ ' r ,\, Ii. -- ~ -- ...........--......- -.....- ..... -.--"" ~-, ~-- ~ ';'..... , n~ ~ ~ , , , , , r.. 't-:-l"'" :' /, ":d.' ,,;:r' ',' ',:' ", ' ' , "j , , . , " '~', . " ' .. ~.' '" ,- ,.., / / /" j,. , - ...... ~'-...... MINUTES IOWA CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 16, 1993 - 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS [)[)~~ r,r.~mHH)llf f'. U~."'UUiU"i~~'"u\\ V SII1Jjoct ~s RPPTDilaJ MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Bovbjerg, Pete Cooper, Sally Dierks, Tom Scott, George Starr MEMBERS ABSENT: Dick Gibson STAFF PRESENT: Bormann, Miklo, Moen, Schreiber CALL TO ORDER: Scott called the meeting to order at 7:46 p.m. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: 1. Recommend approval, by a 5-0 vote, of REZ93.0008, a request to rezone an approximate 1,2 acre tract of land located at 605 and 617 Kirkwood Avenue from RS, 5, Low Density Single.Family Residential and CC-2, Community Commercial, to CO.l, Commercial Office, conditioned upon: 1) the existing curb cut at 617 Kirkwood Avenue being closed at the applicant's expense; and 2) an access easement be established across 605 Kirkwood Avenue to provide access to 617 Kirkwood Avenue. 2. Recommend approval, by a 5.0 vote, of REZ93.Q011, a request to rezone a 0.139 acre portion of a 6.435 acre parcel located immediately south of Breese's Auto Parts and west of Keokuk Street from ID-RM to RS.12. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON tHE AGENDA: There was none, DEVELOPMENT ITEM: 1. SUB93.0011. Public discussion of an application submitted by Dean Oakes for preliminary plat approval of Scott's Fourth Addition, a seven lot, 13.4 acre resubdivision of Lot 4 of Scott's Second Addition located in Fringe Area 8 west of Naples Avenue in the southeast quadrant of the Highwayl/Highway 218 interchange. (45.day limitation period: September 16, 1993.) Miklo said staff has reviewed the revised plat submitted by the applicent, which removes access for the proposed street onto Highway 1 but still contains access to Highway 1 for Lot 6. He said stefl views this es a better situation than the previous design; however, staff still has concerns regarding access to Lot 6 via the unpaved frontage road, particulerly because of concerns ebout sight distance in this eree. Miklo said the City Traffic Engineer hes reviewed the letter from the Iowa Department of Transportetion regarding concerns about access and concurred with those concerns. He noted outstanding deficiencies with the plat: preliminary storm water calculations and designs should be submiited and the Public Works Department has requested e detail of the proposed cul.de.sac, illustrating that it can accommodate truck traffic. Miklo said the Johnson County Heelth Department has reviewed the propose I but has not granted final epprovel; they are conSidering eppro,val subject to the legal papers .... -. n,.~", , I ,9q, i \ " \\ , -,- -.,. -- .-...~.. _4_"" .,.".... ",~~..~..., ~".._ " .; ", \' " - , i' , ill I Ii i i! I' " r i \ ~ , !! i I , r~ , H- ", !,,\ V !: ,ii '/il III :'1 '/i"" \ :J :1 i :,.; , " ..,.,,- - - ..,-~-:, ...........~ .-'.....---- - , , ' , , , ' '.:.. ," "-I -t' ',,, ,0 , :" ,',;,." -,: ''":-' '~~, " ", ','" '::, ': ' "f1 ': II...; "_" " , .. -. , / , ,:> \J -...._u__~__, ---..., '.'., Planning & Zoning Commission Septembe 16, 1993 Page 2 containing a provision requiring the notification of the Health Department whenever a commercial land use changes, if the plat is approved. He said staff recommends deferral until these issues have been resolved. Scott noted staff had made available the CPl and CP2 Planned Commercial Districts regulations from the County Zoning Ordinance. ' Public discussion opened at 7:50 p.m. Larrv Schnittier. MMS Consultants. said an enlarged detail of the cui-de-sac had been submitted to the Public Works Department the previous afternoon. Schnittjer egreed to grant a waiver of the 45.day limitation period. In response to a question from Cooper, Schnittjer said the only changes on the plat from the version the Commission reviewed at their September 13 informal meeting are the identification of the radiuses of the proposed street onto Naples Avenue and the additional street cross section illustrating the Naples Avenue improvements. He said as the tract now exists, it is one large lot with access onto both Naples Avenue and the frontage road and could be developed as such; changing it to result in significantly smaller parcels of land having access onto the frontage road is a considerable improvement over the current situation. Scott said, at the informal meeting on September 13, the developer had requested direction from the Commission. He said the Commission indicated the plat should be redesigned so that Lot 6 does not have access onto the frontage road, which is en 18 foot wide substandard crushed rock road with no curbs or drainage ditches. He said there are concerns that commercial traffic on that road would ceuse significant problems in both the ebility to maintain the road for residential uses that are serviced there as well as the site distance where the road connects with Highway 1, Schnittjer said he did not disagree but noted the frontage road had previously been paved but was converted to rock at the time the Highway Commission made the changes that resulted in the frontage road, despite the developer's request that the road remain paved. He seid the original plat was redesigned with a limited street system because of difficulty in meeting the centerline curve requirements of the Public Works Department; a longer street system designed to serve Lot 6 would result in curves for which the Public Works Department requires rather significent radiuses and in small unusable parcels. He said the street system shown on the revised plat is needed to provide access to existing lots. In response to a question from Dierks, Schnittjer explained access must also be provided to the lotto the west of the subject tract. Scott said left turning traffic off Highway 1 onto the frontage road is going to be a significant safety factor; the CO,mmission also has concerns regarding the condition of the unimproved eccesss roed. In response to a question from Dierks, Schniltjer said Miller Monuments is currently on e portion of Lot 1 and has private access and Lots 2 and 3 (Ira vacant. Public discussion closed at 7:59 p.m. Bovbjerg moved to defer SU893.0011 to October 7,1993. Cooper seconded. IM motion carried on a vote of 5.0, .-'-_..-._',..."."..~"'".', '. ,i,.."" _".,...~__, /9qq - r,.-- , , 1 , i ; I Ji: ~ I Ii Ii ji 'I Ii' , ,I II' i , , , i ;: i " Ii I ; , " , ~ :1 ,,~ V " ,: II ",' Ii I,: ). " , I, ! I,.! i , .... , '" . , .' I ';'t-l ,:/ ~l' Lt" ' ',,:,' '" ' ' .1, 'L:" 'r -, ' . . ' . I, " ~ ' " ' , '" :., ", "~' . '" , . , /' .// '\, , ...... . ~-- ---..,., --- Planning & Zoning Commission Septembe 16, 1993 Page 3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM: 1. Public hearing on discussion of an amendment of the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use map designation of property located east of Harlocke Street from 16,24 dwelling units per acre to 2.8 dwelling units per acre. Miklo said the Commission looked at this area for a change in the Comprehensive Plan due to concerns about the lack of adequate access for traffic in and out of the Harlocke.Weeber area. He said this particular site, which is now designated in the Comprehensive Plan multi-family for medium density residential development, relies on access on a local street through a low density residential neighborhood; this is the rationale stated by the Commission for wanting to consider a change to the Comprehensive Plan. Miklo noted, although on paper this change does not result in a gradual transition in land uses as the City usually tries to achieve, in reality, it may actually result in a gradual transition because of the topography and the wooded nature of the perimeter of the site, which provides a natural buffer between the subject property and the adjacent multi.family development. Public hearing opened at 8:02 p.m. Robert Jansen. reoresentino CFO Partnershio, said his clients own the undeveloped 4 acre tract on the east side of, Harlocke Street. He said CFO Partnership does not currently have any development proposals regarding this tract pending before the City nor do they intend to submit any in the immediate future. He said when the Commission considered this issue in 1983, because of opposition from area residents end access concerns, the development proposal before the City at that time for e large- scale development was withdrawn. He noted nothing has changed since 1983 with regards to his clients' tract of land. Jansen noted that in 1983, the Harlocke-Weeber Street residents filed an application to initiate a downzoning of the area including the 4 acre tract owned by his clients to RS-5, but the Commission refused to recommend the downzoning to City Council on the basis it was too drastic of a reduction in density at that time. Jansen said his clients recognize that the current RM.44 zoning designation is inappropriate; this tract is ObViOUSly not suitable for development of that density because of the tremendous traffic it would generate. He noted the Comprehensive Plan land use map has never reflected the present zoning. He said the current City- initiated application started as a proposal to rezone his clients'tract to RM.20 to bring the tract into conformance with the land use map but has now been changed to e proposal to rezone the tract to RS-5. He said his clients have no quarrel with rezoning the tract to RM-20; while it limits development it is appropriate because of the traffic concerns. Jansen said his clients are willing to enter into discussions with City planning and legal staff to reach' an egreement with appropriate covenants to determine an appropriate density to address traffic concerns while protecting his clients' right to reasonable development of the property. He seid if the Commission will permit RM-20 zoning for the tract, his clients are willing to agree to restrict the , number of units for all time so as to achieve roughly the same traffic flow as would result from RS-5 zoning. Jansen said his clients feel RS'5 zoning would destroy the economic value of the property, 'Scott asked Jensen to explain thet belief. Jensen replied the subject tract .......'..- '-..._"-,~--_.~._-.,",.._-- 19'9,. , ' " ! , , ' \ \; " III II II II. " II 'I, ( .. , I /'1 l"'i , .' :'; ~ i I;' I: I, !: I I , ~j i i , i' I , if " I 'I " .' ' , ~ " . (' f'-';l I' .;-'1' ','I':]-i, ': '..... '" , ",_ , ' ,,~ ' I ,,' . 'I, , . ~ .:' , ',~, ".' - , .~~: I . , ,', / " I .' Planning & Zoning Commission Septembe 16, 1993 Page 4 is currently an enclave surrounded on three sides by medium and high density multi- family residential development; if the tract to the south is rezoned to AM'12 as has been proposed, it would result in the client's tract of land being an island of RS-5 zoning. He said his clients do not believe there is a market for single.family homes on that tract, in which case, there are no appropriate uses for the property. He added the topography of the tract does not lend itself to single family development because of steep ravines on the southeast and northeast edges, Scott said there may still be some development potential with AS-5 under the OPDH regulations. William Knabe. 1101 Weeber Circle, said, in regard to Mr. Jansen's claim that there is no plan to develop this area, at the informal meeting on August 31. one of the developers announced a plan for development of this tract. He said Mr. Jansen also claimed the Commission rejected the idea to rezone this property to RS'5 in 1983; he said he does not need to remind the Commission that they recommended the City Council rezone the property to RS-8, RM-12, and RM.20. Knabe said it should be clear to the Commission that the residents of the Harlocke- Weeber neighborhood are strongly committed to the preservation of the quality of life in their neighborhood and have told the Commission of its scenic beauty, the longevity among its constituents, and the continued service and support that the residents give to the community. He said while the residents remain deeply concerned about all of the property specified in REZ93.0007, he planned to focus tonight solely on the reasons why the Commission must vote in favor of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. He said the residents realize the very difficult position the Commission is in; they must feel as if they are in the middle between the developers and the neighbors and the residents empathize with that feeling but wish to show the Commission why they must vote with the side of the neighborhood by examining just the simple facts. He said the neighborhood recognizes the subject property will eventually be developed; that fact has never been denied. He said the residents have said to the Commission in the past and remind them now of the fact that they are not talking about a piece of property that is adjacent to the neighborhood, but rather about property that is in the neighborhood. He said the residents feel they have a great deal at stake in this decision., He said the neighborhood is deeply concerned about the impact of additional multi-family development on their neighborhood; the residents have repeatedly told the Commission that their primary concern~ are safety and traffic conditions of their neighborhood. Knabe presented the results of a survey of the apartment dwellers in the Harlocke- Weeber neighborhood, noting they are highly mobile, mostly single college students who have no children. He said the average daily number of car trips for the apartment dwellers in the neighborhood is 128. Knabe said the apartment dwellers in their neighborhood do I'Iot seem to match the City standards: they seem to heve more cars, more transient people, more single people. and more COllege students. He added, because of limited parking spaces available behind the apartment buildings in the area, many of the apartment dwellers park their vehicles on Harlocke Street, which is of substandard width and allows parking only on one side. Knabe presented e mep showing where the children in the neighborhood live, saying it was made for some of ' the Commissioners who may have difficulty follOWing the idea that there ere meny children liVing in this neighborhood. He seid there are 38 children living In the neighborhood, noting this is because the area is an old and established single.family neighborhood that is only a few blocks away from a school. He said the residents of .-..-.......,--,., '" .,'"":,,,~' "~-','.... .-'" _.-. /q~9 ---...., .--. , , , i i ii ~ I II: I' t II \ :1 II. I' :! Ii' r Ii " I: Y' , 'i' 1'1 !i I: " I " I , ! ,I !i i .. ii , , fr. - - "'1----.0 , ... - . , .:, J r , '" cl '. ,; '/, ,1_"d' f~:- : , ",,' ' , .,..:..1., ':'_~ ,:." ':~~-:~"'I..~~' .' .' ""', / / , ' , " '[ I .' " Planning & Zoning Commission Septembe 16, 1993 Page 5 the neighborhood live by the policy that if you want to have children and raise them in a neighborhood in Iowa City, you ought to live near a school so that the children can walk to school; he noted almost all of the children in the neighborhood, except those who attend high school, do walk to school. He said when you count the number of children who live along Harlocke Street, you see why the residents are so greatly concerned about the traffic issue. Knabe seid Herlocke Street is the only evailable access for the undeveloped land in this neighborhood and development of additional multi-family dwellings would result in a major traffic increase in the neighborhood. He said this same argument. was advanced 10 years ago; at that time, many of the residents were invited to sit down with the developers to try to work out reasonable plans but after 9 months of working together, this one outstanding issue could not be resolved. He said there is no way to put multi- family housing in this area without sending the traffic up Harlocke and Weeber Streets to Benton Street; as a consequence, the residents feel the Commission's only option is to downzone the area to the lowest possible density. Knabe said the residents also believe additional multi-family units in the area would decrease the property values of the existing single-family homes; while the residents have accepted the existing multi'family units, they do not wish to see a further erosion of their property values. He said the residents are fully cognizant that past attempts to look at traffic control and problems associated with that has caused the City itself to downzone some property because of increased traffic; that has been evidenced on Benton Street already. Knabe said the Harlocke,Weeber residents take a great deal of pride in the upkeep of their property and already experience problems with trash from the apartment dwellers because there is no incentive for them to take pride in the neighborhood. Knabe said the area residents are truly concerned about the destruction of their neighborhood and that is the only issue the residents see as relevant in this case. Knabe noted staff had spent a considerable amount of time studying the issue and had concurred with the recommendation to amend the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use map designation to 2.8 dwelling units per acre for this area, He said the residents feels that RS.5 rezoning recommendation is very sound because it is supported by the Planning staff. (Editor's Note: Staff has not made a recommendation regarding the proposed RS.5 zoning in this area.! Knabe said it is a fact, even though Mr. Jansen would disagree, that the developers have made no effort to communicate with the neighborhood. He said at the July 26, 1993 informal meeting, it was suggested by the Chair that the developers might want to get together with the neighbors to discuss a mutually acceptable plan; the residents wish to inform the Commission that to date neither the developers nor their legal counsel have made any effort whatsoever to contact the residents. Knabe said the residents realize this is a difficult decision for the Commission but the residents look only at the facts; if they are viewed in a very Socratic manner, the facts ' are quite cleer: there is a piece of property thet someone wents to develop but thet piece of property can only be accessed by one street, and the eccessing of thet property through the Harlocke.Weeber neighborhood could greatly disturb and eventually destroy, the neighborhood. He said the residents see no reason to delay this ~ "-"-.~.,.., "^,,,,,..'..,,.,:... '- ,.'..-.,~. -., /9i/? ... - ~ I! II 'I _; I' L. l " " , , 'ii. I I;' 1: tt 'i " , I I !I I, 'j I" " :i " ! , '-' ", ' , I ,~t' ,:;"t" ""~ ',', ' " , I '/,:1 . ' , '. :': ,t,l' ";',',I",,~..."", " '.' ' . , . , / , ", !. '--, -'- , Planning & Zoning Commission Septembe 16, 1993 Page 6 action further and urge the Commission to vote in favor of the amending the Comprehensive Plan. He said voting in favor of the proposed amendment would be voting for the preservation of the neighborhood; voting against the proposed amendment would be voting for the eventual destruction of the neighborhood. He said the choice is obviously the Commissions' to make. Jeffrev Gathier, 11 08 Weeber Circle. said it is time to resolve this issue and reiterated that the developers have made nc attempt to contact the residents. He said he would also like to note there was a point of merit regarding the potential for an island surrounded by mUlti-family developed as discussed by Mr. Jansen; he said he feels that point has been made several times by the residents of the area, who have recommended that the entire area be considered as a whole rather than in a piecemeal fashion. He said, with regard to the comments made by Mr. Jansen, the profitability of the land is relative to the purchase price; if the property has gotten to the point where it really does not have much value, the residents would welcome the opportunity to negotiate with the developers and perhaps purchase the land and turn it into a park. He reiterated the land in question is a part of their neighborhood and the residents are very concerned about having some sort of transition between their single' family dwellings and mega'apartments. He said that transition does not exist. perhaps by bad design, and it needs to be corrected. He said most of the residents in the area have every intent to remain in the neighborhood and be good citizens and would like to be eble to development their neighborhood along the lines that the language in the Comprehensive Plan suggests; he said they are at the meeting tonight to gain the Commission's help in doing that. Gathier said a traffic count was began by the City Traffic Engineer on Monday and said some changes are needed. He said the corner of Harlocke and Weeber Streets is an uncontrolled intersection and the residents are going to work hard to build a case that, some type of control is needed at that corner. He said increased traffic volume will only exacerbate the situation. Gathier added, due to the constraints on parking in the community during home football games, the neighborhood now has football parking on their streets, which has created many problems. Gathier said the residents feel the case is very strong to downzone the area and work with the neighborhood to preserve the peace and tranquility that they enjoy. Charlie RUDoert. 1906 North Dubuaue Road, said, as one of the developers of the southern tract included in the City.initiated application to rezone this area, they have no intention of connecting to Harlocke Street when they develop their land, Public hearing closed at 8:39 p.m. 2. Public discussion of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use map designation of property located east of Harlocke Street from 16.24 dwellings units per acre to 2.8 dwelling units per acre. Public discussion opened at 8:40 p.m, There was none. Public discussion closed at 8:41 p.m. ..,.. .-.."~-,~....~."...._._.- /9'19 -.,...." .- ~ " i i i I , I I , , , Ii Ii I i! i, " , , I' ,i Iii I , i ii; i: I: ", 'I: I, I I , J i , " \ ;\ i '} \\: , ~- - _.~ ---------- - rli ... - r~"" _.. ~ ' ..... .' -..... ...- -~- "'~- .. ...,.... r - r , "-,, , .' " ,,' ,- ' :,' ':""",',', "., , " ' ' " ,It I. ' ,/ I ',jd :.fH ) ,', :" " ' ,: .' '--. ',~ ~- "'~I . / .:> \., .!.' -'--~-..- Planning & Zoning Commission Septembe 16, 1993 Page 7 Cooper moved to approve the amendment to the Comprehen~ive Plan to change the land use designation of property located east of Harlocke Street from 16.24 dwelling units per acre to 2-8 dwelling units per acre. Starr seconded. Scott said he realizes this is an emotional issue for the residents and he rarely comments on public discussion because he knows it is very tough to always right all the wrongs when people ere involved in an emotional argument. He said there are some facts that he does feel are extremely important for the residents who are at tonight's meeting bu~ have not attended some of the other meetings to be aware of. He said it is not unusual for the Commission to be caught between developers and residents of a neighborhood and the Commission must be willing to make hard choices and recommendations to Council. He also noted that Mr, Jansen's comment thet no development plans are presently before the City is true; at the informal meeting on' August 31, Kal Knight reported what was planned for the tract of land east of Harlocke Street but did not indicate that a proposal was ready to present to the City. Scott said he indicated at that meeting thet he had spoken to the potential developers of the Ruppert iract and asked them to meet with the neighbors but he did not speak to Kel Knight or Mr. Jansen. Scott said he was upset with the tone of some of the comments made that implied an insensitivity to this neighborhood by the Commission. He said that is just not true; nine years ago, the Commission recommended that Harlocke Street be cul-de-saced, specifically to prevent traffic from going through the Harlocke-Weeber Street neighborhood. He said there was also a recommendation to continue the RS-a zoning south of Harlocke Street. He noted that the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that the Commission is now considering was initiated by the Commission and supported by staff, not the other way around. Scott said while he understands this is an emotional issue, he would prefer to discuss the issue based on facts rather than on emotion, Bormann said, given the comments made at the public hearing, it may be good idea to proceed cautiously and recommended deferral to allow time for staff to initiate discussions with Mr. Jansen regarding his proposal for the 4 acre tract east of Harlocke Street. . Cooper and Starr agreed to withdraw their motion and second. Cooper moved to defer the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use map designation for property located east of Harlocke Street from 16.24 dwelling units per acre to 2-8 dwelling units per acre to October 7, 1993, Starr seconded. lli motion carried on a 4-0.1 vote. with Clerks ebstelnlng, ZONING ITEMS: 1, REZ93-0002. Public discussion of an applicetlon submitted by Southgate Development Company to rezone an approximately 1.a acre tract of land located ,south of West Benton Street, south of Roosevelt School, from RS-a, Medium density Single-Family , Residential, to PDH-a, Planned development Housing. (45-day limitation' period: waived indefinitely.) Scott indiceted, at the developer's' request, this item would be deferred indefinitely. ,y- i ---"'"' .~- r i I . ; , I. ! " Iii Ii I 'I I f,. , l' I' I; )i , I. i ", ,,' , f. I i' ~ , j " I ,II ./1 \ i', ii . ..,. ,.-..~-,....,..~.,,' ""'-"".".~'''-'''' ,... _.... /?~9, - .'/ I I, ), '~, ! " - - .., ------... - - ,",,"'- ~ ~- r ........ , " . " I, t':"/' ,/,,"":'1'" 1:1 ,:.' , ',"" ,',' , . " 1- ""', , ., .1 ". , ".' '.' "'" " ~ '.6,... ' / /~ , '- .~' ":~~._= -~:,:.:.-...: -,.----........._" Planning & Zoning Commission Septembe 16, 1993 Page 8 Public discussion opened at 8:49 p.m. There was none. Public discussion closed at 8:S0 p.m. Dierks moved to defer REZ93.0002 Indefinitely, Bovbjerg seconded. The motion carried on a S.O vote, 2. REZ93-0007. Public discussion of a City.initiated applicetion to rezone an approximate 17.08 acre tract of land loceted generally on the east and west sides of Harlocke Street and north 0 Highway 1 West from RM-44, High Density Multi-Family Residential, to RS-S, Low Density Single-Family Residential (approximately S.S acres) and RM-12, Low Density Multi-Family Residenti~1 (approximately 11,S8 acres), Miklo said staff had no new information regarding this item. Public discussion opened at 8:S1 p,m, There was none. Public discussion closed at B:S1 p.m. Bovbjerg moved to defer RF.Z93.0007 to October 7, 1993., Starr seconded. The motion carried on a 4-0.1 vote. with Dierks abstaining. Recessed at 8:S2 p,m.; reconvened at 9:00 p.m, , ! ! 3. REZ93.0008. Public discussion of an application submitted by Michael and Vicki Lensing to rezone an approximate 1.2 acre tract of land located at 60S and 617 Kirkwood Avenue from RS-S, Low density Single-Family Residential and CC'2, Community Commercial, to CO-l, Commercial Office. (4S.day limitation period: September 16, 1993.) Miklo seid this application had been amended to include 617 and 60S Kirkwood Avenue and the requested rezoning had been changed to CO-l from the previous request for CC.2. Miklo said staff still has concerns that approval of this applicetion could result in further requests for commercial rezoning along Kirkwood Avenue. He said staff recommends denial, but if the Commission is inclined to approve the application, staff recommends that epproval be subject to closure of the existing curb cut at 617 Kirkwood Avenue and an eccess easement being granted across 605 Kirkwood Avenue to provide access to 617 Kirkwood Avenue. He also noted a special exemption would need to be granted by the Board of Adjustment in order for the existing funeral home business to expand onto 617 Kirkwood Avenue. Public discussion opened at 9:02 p.m. There wes none. Public discussion closed at 9:02 p.m, . ---"~._"~~''''~'''''''''''.''''_''.V__'''''' /9'1 ? -.-..-.--"'~._" """"'''" '.'....-..........".,.. ---.., -- ~ I ! I I I I I I I I , , I I , i. ! Iii It II - ,I !, ' F I' rj , . (- , '::1' '1 1- ." I k :1, I:: i I:' J I',' I J , ,,' ,.. ii , " \ , " . '01 , !,'" ."'t7""I' ' 'I ' "9 ' f:-t'" ': ""::,, ':,. . "-" "', '. ~ . I' _. '" ~. i .... '_,' '-" / ,''1 , , '" , -~_hu, m ~ Planning & Zoning Commission Septemba 16, 1993 Page 9 Starr moved to approve REZ93-0008, subject to: 1) closure of the existing curb cut at 617 Kirkwood Avenue at the applicant's expense; and 2) an access easement be established across 605 Kirkwood Avenue to provide access to 617 Kirkwood Avenue. Cooper seconded. ' Bovbjerg said this has been a difficult request because it highlights continuing concerns about the junction of commercial and residential uses. She said she appreciated the change in the request from CC.2 to CO-l, which she feels is more appropriete for a commercial use adjacent to a residential area. She said she also appreciates staff investigating the details of a special exemption necessary for any subsequent use of the property. Bovbjerg said, in this instance, the applicants and the neighborhood have worked together. and she would vote in favor of the request. Diarks seid she also found this request difficult because of concerns regarding the constant erosion of Single-family residential neighborhoods but because there were no objections from the neighborhood and the requested rezoning was changed to CO-I, she would also vote in favor of the request. Starr concurred with the remarks made by Bovbjerg and Dierks, adding he found it interesting that the neighborhood supported this change to CO-I. He said he also appreciated the change in the requested rezoning to a less intense commercial use, which he feels will provide a good buffer between the commercial and residential uses in the area. He said he would also support the requested rezoning. Cooper agreed, adding he would vote in favor of the request since the curb cut issue had been resolved. In response to a'question from Dierks, Scott said both the curb cut and the apron at 615 Kirkwood Avenue would be removed. The motion carried on a 5.0 vote. 4. REZ93,OOl O. Public discussion of an application submitted by First Muscatine Properties, Inc, to rezone a 7.86 parcel located north of Muscatine Avenue and east of First Avenue from RFBH, Factory Built Housing Residential, to CC-2, Community Commercial. (45.day limitation period: September 17, 1993.) Miklo said this proposal would allow the redevelopment of the subject tract as well as adjecent properties to the west that have frontage onto First Avenue, He said the Comprehensive Plan would lend some support to the proposed rezoning in that it contains a policy that supports expansion of commercial development in existing cores; the First Avanue/Muscatine Avenuerrowncrest area is identified as an eXisting commercial core in the Comprehensive Plan. He said this must also be reconciled with other policies of the Comprehensive Plan, including the housing policies; if the proposed rezoning and later development are approved, the City would be losing en area that is currently zoned for manufactured hOUSing and such areas generally contain affordable housing. Miklo said the other policy aree in which the Comprehensive Plan would provide guidance is transportation: In this perticular case, the Comprehensive Pian encourages commercial development at the intersection of two arterial streets. He noted both Muscetine Avenue end First Avenue are designated as arterial streets; however, this must be reconciled with the arterial street plan, which is also part of the Comprehensive Plan, and identifies an existing need to improve this intersection in -"-_OM""", _, _""'.,.".."~.._..._,,..,.,",. ,~.__.,' /9i/9 " ; i I' 1 I) I ,f Ii I i' I" ,I 1\' " , Il r:, (~ , , '. I I , II I ' ! :' / ~ \ ii , I' ': , ' '\.! T,,-. - - ~~--:--~---~ ..-,,-,.....- ~....~-~- -6'f~""" , I, ..,. '. ,~ cl' ,/ /' "71 ," -l' :,' \ ,," , , " I,: . I, 1~. ',', '--;. ' \ '.." , " ,", / / ,'\ , 1 '{,' ~-""-'- Planning & Zoning Commission Septembe 16, 1993 Page 10 terms of lengthening the turn lanes and adding an additional lane at the intersection to allow a freer flow of traffic in this area. Miklo said there are also site'specific concerns regarding the number of curb cuts on the subject tract- and the adjacent properties. Miklo said to address these concerns, it may be possible for the City and the applicant to work together in the spirit of a partnership, given the nature of the transportation and housing issues identified, He said in terms of the housing issue, staff has identified several strategies which might be used to address both the short-term concerns about the removal of the existing housing units and more long-term concerns about increasing the City's supply of affordable housing. He said these strategies might include: contracting with Life Skills for counseling for the current tenants of the mobile home court; providing funds to be used for the initial costs of securing alternative housing; providing e suitable time period to allow tenants to find alternative housing: and assisting in the disposal or relocation of individual mobile home units. He said strategies that address the larger issue would include: the City could apply for HOME or other Federal and State funds for the establishment of new manufactured housing; the City could initiate rezoning of suitable locations for manufactured housing; and the City could purchase suitable lend for manufactured housing developments. Miklo said, in term of the transportation and traffic issues, it might again be possible for the City to work with the developer to address these concerns, He said some of the short-term concerns could be addressed through controls of curb cuts and the granting of access easements to adjacent properties, so that the number of curb cuts associated with this perticular development and adjacent sites could be minimized. He noted the staff report outlines the possible curb cut controls in detail. Miklo said, in terms of the traffic improvements to the intersection, the City has listed this improvement in the Capital Improvements Program; however, it has been given a rather low priority. He said if the City wants to support this proposed redevelopment, it may behoove the City to increase the priority of this particular capital improvement. Miklo said staff also has concerns regarding providing a buffer between the commercial development and existing residential development to the north and east and also to the cemetery to the east, He said staff believes that buffer can be achieved with increased setbacks, especially on the north where there is a water detention basin, and through landscaping, fencing, end other provisions to provide a buffer. Miklo said staff recommends that the proposed rezoning only be approved if the City and developer can reconcile the concerns regarding the intersection improvements and curb cut controls, as well as address the housing issues. Scott said at the September 13 informal meeting, the Commission requested that Treffic Planner Jeff Davidson determine an estimate of the costs of improving the intersection and a breakdown of the impact of the proposed development so that It can be determined if the costs of the additional impact can be assessed to the developer. He added the Commission also requested legal steff to provide a written legel opinion on the possibilities of requiring the developer to contribute to the "housing problem", He added the developer will be required at some point to provide a detailed response to staffs~ and the Commission's concerns, requests and requirements; he not~d the applicant has indicated a willingness to provide that response. -'<....~."'"",'."'."-,..,,..'..,,. ,.,............-' , /9~9 ... 1a , , i : i 11 li 1" )11 I! II II: J I;' .:1 II' , !\ " , ;i \ , . I' , i-: " i: , I I 1" I :,r I I !i J I' I ! ! I I, ' , \ , , :i "~I '.. ~,.. - - "'-~-: "'W\,.... ~ ~-'..." ------- --. ... -....- - ""ff ... ....~-r~..... , " ,: l-l " ,;,,:' ",'" " ',,:t'" :", ::-.- ' '.',' ., ~ ".t~_1 " " . ' ,- _ ,;...-';....', ' , '.'."" / , \1 /,.' Planning & Zoning Commission Septembe 16, 1993 Page 11 Public discussion opened at 9:16 p.m, Phillio Leff, reoresentinQ the aoolicant, said the appiicant has agreed to waive the 45- day limitation period. He said the developers heve reviewed the staff report and are willing to cooperate and to study each of the issues that have been raised. He said it doe not appear to the developer that there are any serious impediments to those things over which the developer has some control, noting some of the issues are beyond the developer's scope and will require some commitment from the City. Leff said the dev~loper is willing to dedicate an additional widening strip on each of the two streets involved and are also willing to participate, to some extent, monetarily in the costs of widening the intersection once they have had a' chance to review the costs projections and the traffic study for the impact the proposed development will have on the intersection. He said, in regards to the proposed informal partnership with the City, the developer is willing to consider those things that are within its capabilities. He said once the applicant has further details regarding staffs' and the Commission's requests, they can be prepared to state with which they agree in a relatively short period of time. Leff said the applicant has illustrated elevations from other stores of this applicant; those elevations would not differ significantly from the proposed store to be place on the subject tract. He said to prepare a detailed engineering plan and to present it at the early stages before it is determined whether agreement can reached would be very expensive and the applicant hopes that staff will accept the elevation studies of other stores as applicable to this particular proposal. Jav Honahan. 2503 Friendshio Street. said he supports the proposal, adding any proposal that removes the existing trailer court from the neighborhood and cleans up Jack Lee's property has got to be good. He said these are problems the neighborhood has been faced with for the last thirty years. He said his one concern is that there is residential development to the west of the north end of the proposed development and it also abuts residential property directly to the north; the letter he sent the Commission stated that some conditions should be placed on the rezoning to protect those residential areas. Honahan said the City may also need to consider some type of traffic control for the intersection of Friendship Street and First Avenue if this development is approved, noting there are already traffic problems at that intersection. He reiterated that he supports the proposal as an overall improvement to the neighborhood. Ed Murohv. 2312 Muscatine Avenue. 1113C, identified himself as a resident of the Towncrest Mobile Home Park. He said some of his concerns have been addressed by the previous discussion and the presentation made by staff. He said, for many of the mobile homes currently located at the Towncrest Mobile Home Park, there are no alternative locations: many mobile home parks will not eccept units of the size of the trailers currently located at Towncrest. He said the proposal will displace many residents of the community; whi,le proposals for relocation assistance are being discussed, the future for the current residents is very unsettled at this time. He noted winter is not an ideal time for relocation of e mobile home. '--_._^~''',.,-''-"-,,..,.,'',...-,. /9'/9 ---'-" .-- , : I, I, Iii I I ! 'I :i I, Ii I" " ,I,' :, Ii fi - Ii I': 'I r 1;1 , i I " , ,i I I .. I" 11/ I .'! I , - I , , , \; VI'- ......... - '" -, ~--~;.'....... .' ',1 r , 't-f"'" /' .-, .-t " , " I. ' ," , .~ , . ::-f' ' ,.c..V ' r, . . :.: ~'..-.. . . , _,' ,,4,.-.~' ',"'",",,' / .',''1 !, Planning & Zoning Commission Septembe 16, 1993 Page 12 Murphy said he is not objecting to the development, which he feels would be good for the neighborhood. He said he is concerned as to what wiil happen to the current residents at Towncrest, noting the value of most of the trailers has significantly decreased or they have no value. He said he is glad to know there is concern on behalf of the City for the tenants. In response to a question from Dierks, Leff said, given the details to be worked out with the City, he believes the applicant's plen is to begin the development next spring and does not anticipate having to request the mobile homes to be moved in the winter. Dan Dakin, 71 0 First Avenue South. said he owns the property directly to the north of the proposed development. He said he is not opposed to the development but has concerns regarding increasing traffic: he agreed a turning lane wiil need to be installed to accommodate traffic turning into the development. He also noted Ralston Creek rose to bank level several times this past summer and expressed concerns that the placement of a storm water retention pond does not affect the residents to the north. Dakin also requested that as much of the current timber area between the area to the 'north and the development as possible remain untouched to control the erosion of Ralston Creek and to provide e buffer for the residential properties, He said he would like to see something more attractive than a row of arbor vitae be used for screening. Terrv Camoie. owner of Memorv Gardens, said his business is adjacent to the proposed development. He said he supports the proposal but expressed concerns regarding a' buffer zone between the burial gardens on his property and the development because of concerns about privacy during burial services. He said he would also like to see some sort of fencing between the cemetery and the development; he said there are currently problems with children coming onto his property after hours and would like to not enhance that problem by having an open area next to the cemetery. He said he is also concerned with noise during construction while burial services are in progress. He also expressed concerns about runoff onto the cemetery. In response to e question from Scott, Miklo said the screening requirement between the development and the residential areas is for pyramidal arbor vitae but there may be more attractive elternatives that could be used along the northern and eastern boundaries. He said staff also recommends some sort of fence between the cemetery and the development. Scott asked if a landscaping plan would need to be submitted: Miklo replied, in terms of the zoning ordinance, the app,licant would need only show the proposed screening on a site plan. He said staff is proposing that a concept plan, to be approved by the Director of Planning, be required prior to the submittal of a building permit as a conditional of the rezoning. Public discussion closed at 9:36 p.m. Dierks moved to defer REZ93.Q010 to October 21,1993, Bovb)erg seconded, Bovbjerg said she appreciated staff's thorough discussion of the issues involved in this request, including traffic and housing concerns end Mr. Murphy attending the meeting to discussion concerns from the tenants' perspective. The motion carried on 0 5-0 vote. 191/q ~".~ ; I i i , , I, ~ I;: II " " I, Ii. il ( ,! " I " I \ , . n " I j " I :: f: '1 I I I , " I , , I II " I: ' II ,! I' , I I: " !I , ' , , ,I " -------'.!. "'If"'" - - ""~-'-~.....~ .,-......... , ,,' 'r\' " , I " ' t~l" ,.; I' ,~I U ,: ' , , '" "'.': I,':, ,~. '. '3 .;-.;], ".,' ',:, ::' / " \ " 1 ~. . , " '-...-- Planning & Zoning Commission Septembe 16, 1993 Page 13 5. REZ93-0011. Public discussion of an application submitted bv Braverman Development, In, to rezone a 0.139 acre portion of a 6.435 acre parcel located immediately south of Breese's Auto Parts and west of Keokuk Street from ID-RM to RM-12. 145-day limitation period: October 4,1993.) Miklo said this proposal would result in a slight addition to an existing RM-12 zone; staff feels the request is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, which designates the area as appropriate for 8,16 dwelling units per acre. He said staff recommends approval but noted there are issues regarding sewer capacity in this area that will need to be resolved prior to the issuance of a building permit, Public discussion opened at 9:40 p.m. Glenn Siders, Southoate DeveloDment Comoanv, said he was available to respond to any citizen input or to answer any questions. Public discussion closed at 9:42 p,m, Starr moved to approve REZ93.0011 to rezone a 0.139 acre portion of a 6.435 acre parcel located Immediately south of 8reese's Auto Parts and west of Keokuk Street from ID-RM to RS-12. Cooper seconded. Scott explained that while the Commission normally allows two opportunities for public discussions with rezonings, it was decided at the September 13 informal meeting that if there were no public objections to the rezoning, the Commission would teke action on this application in an attempt to facilitate the agenda being open and not requiring people to attend more than one public meeting. Dierks said she hod concerns about limiting the opportunity for public discussion to only one meeting: she said quite often schedules are busy and people who may wish to address a particular issue may not be able to attend a meeting. She said she feels since the Commission has set a policy of two opportunities for public comment for rezonings, they should comply with that policy in this instance. Miklo said, in terms of publication and posting, only the first meeting is listed; unless interested parties attend the first meeting, they are normally unaware of the second public meeting. Dierks said it has been the Commission's policy to have two public hearings for rezonings for the ten years that she has been on the Commission. Scott said, under normal circumstances he would agree with Dierks, but if the interested parties are in attendance and their questions have been answered, he is willing to waive the Commission's policy for this request. He said it is not a policy that the Commission waives lightly and there is normally good justification for the waiver. He noted the Commission has had some rather long meetings and are faced with some additional long, meetings; had there been any opposition expressed, he would have supported a second opportunity for public discussion on this request. Miklo noted there will also be a public heering before the City Council and potentially three reedir,gs , of the rezoning ordinance. Dierks said that would be the case regardless of whether the Commission held one or two public hearings. The motion carried on a 5,0 vote. /9f? ",_"",~,_,',.,J"",,,,,,,,',,J. ..'.....,..".."... - ..::II!I....- " li I Iii II il " iI, " :1 j. !j " II , , " ': , ,I l' :1 !; I' , . " h , (' j I I I I , ; ! i, I: I , :i " 'I'IJ , " i I, I, .1; ~ , \ " r' . -' " -::'-. .' , ' , ~ 'I ' ' . 1 I' ,;, I ,L,:" ':,.,'. L_.~ ,.\'~, . :.y' ,~~" ,- > : , / 1/, " '1 ,I. '\ , '-., ,~~--, ~-_.._---- ',- ---" --, Planning & Zoning Commission Septembe 16, 1993 Page 14 CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 2, 1993. MEETING: Starr moved to approve the minutes of the September 2, 1993, meeting, as cl,rculated, Cooper seconded. The motion carried on a 5.0 vote. I' I i PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION INFORMATION: Moen reported the that the joint meeting between the City Council and the Johnson County Board of Supervisors, scheduled for September 20, had been cancelled, She noted that was the meeting at which the proposed, amendment to the Fringe Area Agreement was going to be presented. She said the meeting has not been rescheduled and there is some enticipation that it may not be rescheduled until after the first of the year in order to include new Council members. She said she would be contacting the members of the Fringe Area Subcommittee to determine what strategy they wish to follow; they can either make separete presentations to the Council and the Board of Supervisors or, if the subcommittee (eels that the atmosphere may be more conducive to approval, the presentation can be postponed until the joint meeting has been rescheduled. i , ~ i. ii ~ " II II II I' I' iI, ,I I, ! " ,) :! " " :; " 'Ii : I,tr :l ,,' il ,!'i " , l .'1, ,; 1! ,;1 I if ' I ,) I Moen reminded the Commission of the special meeting scheduled for September 23 at 7:30 p.m. to discuss the Sycamore Farms application. Dierks noted thB City's maps denote both West High and City High incorrectly and requested, those corrections be made b'efore the maps are reprinted. Bormann reported she would be out of town from October 7 to October 10 and said Ann Burnside will be attending the Commission meetings in her absence. Bovbjerg noted that she had received photographs of the Harlocke-Weeber neighborhood; the Commission had requested that the photos be made from slides presented at a previous meeting. ADJOURNMENT: BovbJerg moved to edJourn at 9:54 p.m. Dierks seconded. The motion carried on a 5.0 vote. , /" Ann Bovbjerg, Secretary : / .. ~J ' Minutes submitted by Nancy Schreiber " ppd.dmlnlmlns\p&z9.1 e,mln , I , ;! _.._---.._.....,,_.._~.-._... .'''-.' /9f? i I' , , , l: ..-.,.,.",.., '.~,~., " ....' ,_ h - ------------~- L .. .' i f i , ., , . , " I. 'x, " ; , (11 \"\ !' . :...:' ' . - I " ' " " .." ,J / ' ',1/: :~l' ~~: ... '.',', ;" " L... : .' . ~r, .-~ , ., " / {" ,. J. ""'"Y ".. -- -.. -------. , , ff2. ' R.ES u.la.Fl. -CeliNcL l meEt'1 N~ . &q-!c, - '13 '(130 'P. m. '?lta.sE'. Si9~ IN: Ma.me..: ~lJlme;1Z. , , ~'rA 3;, .2. 3. ~ t/~ 4. --- ,UtI" ~,~ I. G-\...l*'1.? ~i:>~ II. 1:1. 13. ''1. I "'_4"~'.'""""",_"_",_""___,_,_,,,,,___,, ..........--..-....- Bcla~e.ss\ l Ii /1 ~, Col t...ES'i.2l( ~\, j!)6 Ld~~{tI..( ;T \ /10/ www Ckat. I I r iJ-'1; ~J(l(P' h ~ &",~ J1Q$ ~L~~~ 'RJ" I'}.;~ ~\ fJ ~ .::L.c. -zn3 ~ ,;1. ~ I eX !II ~(5 C/1' r.t:JJ{; ;fvl/ #/p:" 710 I~ pure. !:. ;:)(,.,() D ~ L c)'t.V;(l. r ~:r:. or-( , --'-" --. I i I \! III I II' - ; Ii '- r. \\- :\. I. ',,' , : i ~ ,l,i " "I' , r', i :: : .,1. '. I "'-'.\ ." I:.' t I I . .,........1...., :",." 11-.,.:, " I I,.l".-.:,j, . c"" ',I ' .\ . '.: I . , , ' :1 19191 ! ! I .. ..-, '.. ....., .-.-.........'.."....,.....,,' - . I " " ""If'''' I I , ,\ ' ......... ~~ ----....-. ~-- ~ 't~....... -- - --- "'QIIJ....--.. -.....- -'r ........\_. . ' . . , ' , I 't-/ /' I "H' :;-t '-' " I ~, " , . I . ' . , . ',-_.' ,..' . . ,.,..' ," .' :: " _.'" _ 1- . " / //\ , 1 4", ~_..._--. ~._'-' _.,~ ,~ ~ ' MINUTES IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION TUESDAY. AUGUST 17. 1993 - 5:30 P.M. IOWA CITY TRANSIT FACILITY MEMBERS PRESENT: 'John Ockenfels, Howard Horan, Pat Foster, Robert Hicks, Richard Blum STAFF PRESENT: Ron O'Neil CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Ockenfels called the meeting to order at 5:41 p.m. A quorum of the Commission was present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the July 20, 1993, Commission meeting were accepted as submitted. Ii II i) !J Ii 11: I: I " ,) ~ i I'~ ,';',. '.! ;; - i'; (': !'I (" Ji~ I \ AUTHORIZATION OF EXPENDITURES: Blum made a motion to pay the bills as presented. Horan seconded the motion and it passed 4 - O. PUBLIC DISCUSSION - ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA: The Sports Car Club requested permission to use the Airport facilities again at some time in the future. Blum stated that the last event was well organized. O'Neil had reservations about closing any part of the Airport for a non-aviation event. The use of Airport property for non-aviation events will be discussed at a later date. , 10 i , , 'J ill, .' , I',:. ,/ ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: a. T-hangars: Ockenfels stated that in discussing the issue with Attorney Burnside, it was decided that the T-hangar leases are to be determined by ICFS. The Commission is responsible for general policy at the Airport, but not the specific lease used for the T- hangars. , ICFS has requested a $10.00 per hangar per month rent increase. Jones, from ICFS, stated that the rent has not been increased for several years and ICFS' s cost of doing business has increased SUbstantiallY in the last few years. Information presented by O'Neil and Jones shows that Iowa city is already at the high range for hangar rent. O'Neil stated it is difficult to compare hangars at different airports because of the variety and size of hangars. Hicks made a motion to grant the rent increase to ICFS. Foster seconded the motion and it passed'4 - 0, with Ockenfels abstaining. I :1 .............,...' /qSlJ i. ','( , i \ \ ~ ' '" ~". - - I I "1-----';"-: -- ~ ... , ' ,,' . '" .' ..' , ':, C/ "II'. "1:"/:[' " ' ,"'".:,.' I, r:". . '. .,' . .', _ _ " " .; .:, ,'- . -', --~." " . . ( / , . " '1 , '. ~;' "- b. AIP project 3-19-0047-03 - Ockenfels stated that the Iowa City Planning Department is conducting an economic impact study to attempt to determine the economic value of the Airport to the community. He said there is still a lot of misinformation being circulated concerning the Feasibility study. As an example, Ockenfels cited a recent editorial in a local newspaper, which was' based on information the paper had retracted from an earlier editorial because it was incorrect. The Commission discussed ways of providing information to the public to correctly identify the issues involved with the feasibility study. Several ideas were'discussed. c. Capital Improvement Projects - O'Neil stated that a current Master Plan includes a capital improvement project list. Because a current Master Plan will not be completed for a while, an independent list for capital improvements should be generated and prioritized. Several capital improvement projects were discussed. O'Neil, stated that a complete list should be generated by October to incorporate the capital improvements into the 1995 budgeting process. d. Fly-in Breakfast - O'Neil stated that everything seemed to be organized and ready to go. Sertoma Club has organized several events. Discussion was held concerning how to commemorate the 75th Anniversary of the Iowa city Municipal Airport. There was discussion concerning parking. If there is additional rain, the grass parking at the Airport can not be used. Alternative parking was discussed. One alternative is to use parking at the Fair Grounds and provide some type of shuttle service. e. Hanqar building - O'Neil said that the city architect is outlining costs for a new hangar building. There has been increased interest from area pilots for more hangar space. There is currently a waiting list for T-hangars at the Airport. The cost of a new building would be approximately $ 125,000 to $ 170,000. Jones said he thought it would be more beneficial to build a multi- plane hangar. O'Neil said the interest shown has been for T- hangars. This issue will be an agenda item at a future meeting. CHAIRPERSON'S REPORT: Ockenfels commented on the flooding that has occurred at, the Airport this summer. He questioned whether the water retention area at Walmart is working properly. Water continues to flow across the parking lot behind Godfather's Pizza. The water is backing' up on to Airport property. COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORT: No items were presented. jQSo \ II 'I ,.. 'I !' , \ [: : ,I " 1.1 r: I,; 1:1 I I' , I , I i " , ' !, II ~ . . "j :,j I " " '" \:~ 'J, ~". _ _ "I1____-;:u-".-~ ;,_...- ~. ........-...... , :' ;' ' '/'~l' ' J ,," , ' "I ,: () .". .. ., .. '".::,' 1...:.... " ,:' " __, " 1 t. \' '. ", . - ' / l\ . '" .( '~"::-='': :':::':"'~~-------- --'-'--.-. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: O'Neil said the parking policy for home football games will be the same as last year. Runway 12/30 will be closed for aircraft parking. ICFS will shuttle pilots to and from their aircraft before and after the game. No private vehicles or taxicabs will be allowed to go out to the runway. The Central Region AlP Conference is scheduled for October 29, 1993. , i, I I I The reenactment of the Transcontinental Airmail Flight is scheduled to stop in Iowa city on September 2, 1993. The National Guard is storing 40 vehicles at the Airport until their parking lot is usable. This may be for another two months. SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING: The next regular meeting was set for September 21, 1993, at 5:30 p.m. " i I i, l' 1,1 1/ , Ii ,I " 'i - L 'P': :1 I I "jl " , " ~: JI ,r~. ~- .\..- j 'I j '.'..11.. (I... ADJOURNMENT: Blum moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:38 p.m. Foster seconded the motion and the meeting was adjourned. Ii I: " if I! i! i 'i' " 'I ., i \ , ,.' .\ ": "i . "_~"""___'_..,....~.....~._.u.,L"_".__' . . ";".., ,.; '.' . ."-'- -~.. -' 1950 ,_.. ~,... .."_,...___>___~.".....".r.._ ._..~_"., I " :i , i. , .!, I, -"-~.'''''~'''' , " "