Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-11-27 Bd Comm minutes m: Approved MINUTES Youth Advisory Commission October 22, 2007 Lobby Conference Room, City Hall Members Present: Members Absent: Others Present: Bleam, Green, Keranen, Nelson, Weeks Segar City Clerk Karr, VI journalism student Call to Order: Meeting was called to order at 7:00PM Introductions: All present introduced themselves to a VI journalism student observing the meeting. Approve Minutes: Motioned by Bleam, seconded by Nelson. Approved 5-0. Report from Website Subcommittee: Nelson requested that members update their biographies for the website. Nelson noted that the calendar had received its first event submission for the calendar. Report from Grant Pro!!rammin!! Subcommittee: Nelson reported that he posted advertisements on Facebook for the Youth Empowerment Grant. Keranen and Green reported that they had problems posting ads. No applications had been received for the Youth Empowerment Grants. Karr suggested that members target specific community groups focused on service and projects. Examples discussed include VA Y, classes that require service learning hours, and boy scouts working on their Eagle badge. Announcements/Invitations: Keranen presented an invitation from Mayor Wilburn. The PAR Group requested that a commissioner attend an input session for the City Manager search. The meeting will gather input on th~ background desired and the issues that the city manager would need to address. Nelson will attend the meeting on November 8 at 9:15AM. Vacancies: Two positions for ages 18 through 21 and one position for ages 15 through 17 are currently accepting applications. One of the 18 through 21 positions is effective immediately, while two begin on January 1,2008. The announcements will be mailed to high school principals. Karr noted that applicants must be Iowa City residents. Fundin!! Reauest for Fiscal Year 2009: The fiscal year 2009 budget was discussed. The following funds were tentatively selected: . Summer of the Arts Global Village: $500 Youth Advisory Commission October 22, 2007 Page 2 . Web site and Advertising: . Youth Empowerment Grant: $500 $2000 Since the website has been built and no major additions were foreseen, the web site expenses were predicted to be much lower. However, the commission decided that advertising would become more important in informing the public of the programs, website, and events. The Youth Empowerment Grant budget was set at $2000, enabling the funding of four projects. This is based on the growth predicted as the project matures. Meetinl! Schedule: The next meeting was set on November 6 at 5:30PM. Another meeting was set on December 3 at 7:00PM. Adiournment: Adjourned at 7:52PM. Motioned by Keranen, seconded by Bleam. Approved 5-0. Minutes prepared by Nelson. YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2007 (Meeting Date) 10/22 9/24 8/22 7/25 7/18 5/30 4/25 3/21 2/21 X 1/17 X TERM EXP. - 12/31/07 NAME X X o X X X X X Audrey Keranen Sarah X X X X OlE X X 12/31/07 Ziegenhorn Un Weeks X X X X OlE X OlE X X X 12/31/08 OlE X X X X X X OlE X X 12/31/08 David Segar X o X o X OlE OlE X OlE X 12/31/07 Maison Bleam Jacqueline Stubbers OlE OlE X OlE OlE X X 12/31/07 X X X X X X X OlE X X X X 12/31/08 12/31/09 Michael Nelson Hannah Green X = Present o = Absent OlE = Absent/Excused KEY: NM = No meeting = Not a Member MINUTES PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 2007 MEETING ROOM A, ROBERT A. LEE RECREATION CENTER APPROVED Members Present: Emily Martin, Mark Seabold, DaLayne Williamson, Patrick Carney, Terry Trueblood, Rick Fosse Members Absent: Emily Carter-Walsh Staff Present: Marcia Klingaman, Jeff Davidson CALL TO ORDER Seabold called the meeting to order at 3:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 2.2007 MEETING MOTION: Seabold moved to approve the minutes with minor corrections; Martin seconded. The motion passed 6:0. UPDATE OF MURAL PROPOSAL BY TOM AWAD AND TONY CARTER Jeff Davidson confirmed that St. Patrick's is now actively marketing that site. The mural would probably only be guaranteed a maximum of 2-3 years at that location. Marcia noted that when she last spoke to Tom Awad and Tony Carter that they are still interested in the project. They had dropped their price down to $28,000. The Committee would still like to see them get matching funds. The Committee would also like to see both Tom and Tony present at the next meeting. PRESENTATION OF A COMMUNITY INITIATED PUBLIC ART PROJECT BY MATTHEW MUNSTERMANN Marcia has been in communication with Matt. He is still very enthusiastic about doing the project. His school schedule conflicts with the time for the Public Art Meeting. He'd like to do the lighting project this fall. He is ready to present his proposal to the Committee when his schedule allows. REVIEW OF LETTERS REGARDING CALL FOR PROPOSALS FOR POOL WALL PROJECT Marcia indicated that rather than develop a more formal Call to Artists, she decided that a standardized letter would be sent to the artists. Seabold would like the artists to provide specific details regarding attachment of their piece to the pool wall. Martin also thought it would be useful to have the artists address potential problems with projectiles hitting the art from kids playing in the pool area. The Committee also agreed that the rn: Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes September 6, 2007 Page 2 letter should specify that unless the artwork is a mural, it should not go down to the ground. The Committee would like the artist to address how they plan to handle ADA issues. Marcia will have the legal department look at the letters before they are sent out next week. Emily Martin noted that she will be out of town for the November 1 meeting but will be accessible by email. The Committee decided that installation should be completed on or before April 30th rather than the proposed March 31st. Installation will not interfere with summer swim lessons. DISCUSSION REGARDING IOWA SCULPTOR'S SHOWCASE AND PENINSULA PARK SCULPTOR'S SHOWCASE Marcia updated that Gene Anderson has removed his art piece from the Pedestrian Mall Sculptor's Showcase as it had been tampered with. The site is now vacant. Brandy is working on updating the artist database for future calls to be sent to Iowa artists. The Peninsula Showcase is specific to Iowa Art students. Mark NeuCollins "Blade" is currently in place; however, his contract is up October 1st. Marciaquestioned whether or not she should contact student artists for the next call. Martin suggested that she should include Lee Running, an art professor at Grinnell College. She may have contacts for sculptors in her department. The Committee suggested that a long-term solution may be to install a permanent sculpture as it is time consuming to market and send out the calls. However, changing the pieces does keep the artwork fresh. Trueblood questioned whether or not "Blade" should be purchased and if more than one piece should be placed out there. Marcia noted that would depend on the pool project and the final budget. The Committee decided to send out a final call before considering purchasing "Blade." If the call does not go well, the process may need to be re-evaluated. COMMITTEE TIME/UPDATES Marcia noted that Emily Martin did a fine job presenting the Recognition of Public Art in Non-Public Spaces at the City Council meeting on August 21 st. The recipients seemed genuinely thrilled about the recognition and it was obvious that the program was very appreciated by both the recipients and the artist. None. ADJOURNMENT Fosse moved to adjourn; Williamson seconded. Meeting adjourned at 3:40 pm. Next meeting October 4. Minutes submitted by Brandy Howe Public Art Advisory Committee Attendance Record 2007 Term Name Expires 2/1 4/5 . 5/3 6/28 8/2 9/6 Emilv Carter Walsh 01/01/08 X OlE X X X 0 DaLayne Williamson 01/01/09 X X OlE X X X Emily Martin 01/01/08 OlE X X X X X Mark Seabold 01/01/10 X OlE X X X X Patrick Carney 01/01/09 -- -- -- -- X X X X Rick Fosse OlE X OlE X O\E X Terry Trueblood X X X OlE * X X Key: X = Present o = Absent OlE = Absent/Excused Mike Moran represented Terry Trueblood * MINUTES PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION October 10, 2007 FINAL r: I MEMBERS PRESENT: David Bourgeois, Craig Gustaveson, Ryan O'Leary, Matt Pacha, Phil Reisetter, John Watson, John Westefeld MEMBERS ABSENT: Margie Loomer, Jerry Raaz STAFF PRESENT: Mike Moran, Terry Robinson, Terry Trueblood GUESTS PRESENT: Henrietta Miller; Del Holland; Diana Harris; Jean Walker RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Moved by Gustaveson. seconded by Bourl!:eois. to name the parkland located alonl!: Lower West Branch Road Frauenholtz-Miller Park as reQuested bv the Miller Family. Unanimous. OTHER FORMAL ACTION TAKEN Moved bv Westefeld. seconded bv Boureeois. to approve the September 12. 2007 meetine minutes as written. Unanimous. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: No public discussion. PROPROSAL TO NAME PARK "MILLER SQUARE" Trueblood. referred Commission to the letters enclosed in their packet regarding this item. In summary, the Miller's have donated approximately 1 12 acres ofland that will make up the new park in the Northeast District Plan (Lindeman Hills Neighborhood development plan). The other 50% of land was donated by the developer. The Miller's wish to name the new park Frauenholtz- Miller Park in honor of their family. Trueblood noted that this was discussed at the Joint Staff meeting on August 28. It is the recommendation of this group to name the park "Miller Square," with the thought that simpler might be better and that the park does meet the definition of a "square." Ms. Miller responded with a letter representing her family's agreement to the name "Miller Square," while stating that it is not their first choice but it does allow them to accomplish their goal of using the family name for the park. Miller was present at the meeting to further discuss. After discussion, it was determined that while Miller is in agreement with the "Miller Square" name, she would rather it be named her family's original recommendation of "Frauenholtz-Miller Park." Moved bv Gustaveson. seconded bv Boureeois. to name the parkland located alone Lower West Branch Road Frauenholtz-Miller Park as reQuested by the Miller Family. Unanimous. Parks and Recreation Commission October 10, 2007 Page 2 of 5 PROPOSAL TO NAME SMALL DOG AREA AT THE DOG PARK "LINDER TIRE SERVICE SMALL DOG YARD." This is the only portion of the dog park that remains unnamed. DogP AC is recommending the name "Linder Tire Service Small Dog Yard" at the request of John Linder who has donated $10,000 to the dog park. Diana Harris, on behalf of John Linder, expressed his pleasure in making this donation in support of the dog park. Moved bv Gustaveson. seconded bv O'Leary. to accept the proposal of Doe:PAC and John Linder to name the small doe: area at Thornberry Off-Leash Doe: Park "Linder Tire Service Small Doe: Yard". Unanimous. DISCUSSION OF DOGPAC'S PREFERENCES FOR SMALLER DOG PARK LOCATIONS: Diana Harris and Jean Walker from DogPAC were present at this meeting to ask the Commission to consider several areas for smaller dog parks. The locations are as follows: Willow Creek, Sturgis Ferry, Hunters Run, Pheasant Hill, Court Hill, Sand Lake Scott Park, Wetherby Park. Pros and cons of each area were discussed. Some of the following comments were made, Sturgis Ferry: May be a good location as it is an entry-way to the city; however, this may be a con as well. Hunters Run: As this park was designed by the neighborhood, it is felt that they may not be in agreement. Pheasant Hill: May not be large enough and as it is surrounded by mostly back yards, neighbors may not approve. Court Hill: Presents a similar situation as Pheasant Hill with many back yards bordering the park. On the other hand, it does provide more space and therefore, could provide a section for a dog park while still leaving space for regular park use. Scott Park: This park would provide a good location for a dog park as it would accommodate the eastern portion of the City. This park would offer enough land for a small dog park and still provide a large area for regular park use. However, Moran noted that the area in question would make it necessary to move the flag football program. Wetherby Park: This park also provides enough land to accommodate a small dog park while still having enough land for regular park use, however, parking may be an issue. Walker noted that a number of these parks may present parking issues, however, she also mentioned that the idea is to provide small "neighborhood" dog parks. Parks and Recreation Commission October 10, 2007 Page 3 of 5 Another location that was mentioned was the area near the animal shelter. Walker noted that this area really needs to be left as is, for shelter use only. Del Holland, who was present from the public, noted that there is certainly a need for a dog park located near downtown, especially as more condominiums etc. are being built. ' Trueblood noted that such an area would need to provide at last three acres of land for a dog park. Therefore, it will be necessary to choose a large enough area that can accommodate this space while still leaving a large area of trees, grounds, etc. for park use. Gustaveson noted his concern of changing the use of a park to accommodate something else, such as would be necessary at Scott Park. Westefeld asked Trueblood if Commission was being asked to consider multiple locations or just one at this time. Trueblood stated just one at this time. Gustaveson felt that since there has already been a donation and request for Willow Creek that Commission should look at and discuss this location first. Pacha stated that for the sake of process, he would like staff to narrow down the list and return with their proposal at a later meeting. Commission was in agreement and will defer this item for now. MASTER PLAN UPDATE Trueblood announced that the consultants were in town during September meeting with the focus groups. The focus groups consisted of approximately 15 participants each. The consultants reported very good input from these groups. Trueblood stated his disappointment in the youth group participation, however, consultants from GreenPlay stated that this is not unusual. At the end of the week GreenPlay held a community forum at which approximately 20 people participated. O'Leary stated that while this was helpful it seemed that most of the people attending the community forum, while passionate about one particular issue, were not so much concerned about parks, recreation and trails as a whole. Pacha felt that there was very good representation at the focus groups and that the comments were all very positive regarding current programs offered etc. Pacha also stated that he feels a large portion of this process will be based on the survey outcome. The draft survey was sent to Trueblood and other staff for their review. Trueblood will forward to the Commission for their comments as well. Trueblood went over the next steps in the process. The surveys will be gathered and GreenPlay and Leisure Vision will compile the information from both the focus groups and the surveys and report back to staff. COMMISSION TIME Westefeld thanked staff for the park tour in September, stating that he looks forward to these each year as each tour presents new information. CHAIR'S REPORT None Parks and Recreation Commission October 10, 2007 Page 4 of 5 DIRECTOR'S REPORT Napoleon Park under construction. Mercer Park Field #3 under construction. Court Hill Trail near the bidding process. Trueblood noted that he is scheduled to meet with the Elks Club regarding the proposed trail. ADJOURNMENT Moved bv Gustaveson. seconded bv Westefeld. to adiourn the meetine: at 5:55 p.m. Unanimous. Parks and Recreation Commission October 10,2007 Page 5 of 5 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2007 TERM NAME EXPIRES 1/10 2/7 3/14 4/10 5/9 6/13 7/11 8/8 9/12 10/10 11/14 12/12 David Boure;eois 1/1/11 X OlE OlE X X OlE X OlE X X Craig Gustaveson 1/1/11 X OlE OlE OlE X X X X X X Margaret Loomer 1/1/08 X X OlE OlE X X X X X OlE Ryan O'Leary 1/1/10 X X X X X X X X X X Matt Pacha 1/1/09 X X X X X X X X X X Jerry Raaz 1/1/08 X X X X OlE X X X X OlE Phil Reisetter 1/1/09 OlE X X X X X X OlE OlE X John Watson 1/1/11 X OlE OlE X X OlE X X X X John Westefeld 1/1/10 X X X OlE X X X X X X KEY: X= 0= OlE = NM= LQ= Present Absent AbsentlExcused No meeting No meeting due to lack of quorum Not a Member I ~b(;L MINUTES PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING November 7,2007 FINAL MEMBERS PRESENT: David Bourgeois, Craig Gustaveson, Margie Loomer, Ryan O'Leary, Matt Pacha, Phil Reisetter, John Watson, John Westefeld MEMBERS ABSENT: Jerry Raaz STAFF PRESENT: Mike Moran, Terry Robinson, Terry Trueblood GUESTS PRESENT: Mary Bennett, Helen Burford, Carl Klaus, Shaner Magalhaes, Ken Slonneger, Marybeth Slonneger, Christopher Voci, Sarah Walz DISCUSSION OF PROPOSAL TO RELOCATE THE ISAAC WETHERBY HOUSE TO A MUNICIPAL PARK: This special meeting was called to order to discuss the possibility of moving the Isaac Wetherby House, located at 935 Market Street, to a municipal park. The house is slated for demolition by its current owner. The following information was reported: A special meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission took place on Thursday November 1, 2007 where Friends of Historic Preservation, local historians and community members met to determine what options might be available for preserving this house. At this meeting, Mike McLaughlin, owner of the Wetherby House, said that he is willing to donate the house to Friends of Historic Preservation if they can have it moved within 15 days, therefore delaying demolition to Thursday, November 15, 2007. He also stated that given evidence of progress on relocating the house and with a definite timetable given, he does have some flexibility beyond the above date. Pacha expressed his appreciation to everyone present for attending on such short notice. Pacha asked for a member of the audience to address the Commission with an overview of the project and their desired plans for the Wetherby House. Marybeth Slonneger, on behalf of the Committee to Save the Wetherby Cottage; addressed the Commission. Based on emails, letters, and her presentation, information is as follows. She thanked the Commission for arranging time for this special session. She explained that she is very interested in the Wetherby House because of research she has done resulting in a book she wrote called "Wetherby's Gallery." This has lead to her desire to preserve the house. She has been working in close association with Mary Bennett with the State Historical Society and together they have formed the Committee to Save the Wetherby Cottage. The owner has indicated a willingness to donate the house to the Friends of Historic Preservation. She went on to explain that Friends of Historic Preservation have done extensive research into the integrity of the house and have compiled a budget report. M. Slonneger explained that two possible sites being considered at this time are Reno Street Park and Hickory Hill Park. She presented to the Commission, distributed earlier in writing, cost Parks and Recreation Commission September 12, 2007 Page 2 of 6 estimates for moving the house to both sites. She mentioned several options to moving the house, which has three separate pieces so cannot be moved as a single unit. Cost estimates for the either location are within a few thousand dollars of each other. The project will be divided into two parts taking up to 24 months for completion. The first step is the move itself and setting the building on a firm foundation. The second part includes restoration of the cottage under the direction of Friends of Historic Preservation, who would like to do a series of educational preservation workshops that would be open to the public. A third stage of the project includes long term care and maintenance plans. The group is exploring several options for maintenance including the possibility of a caretaker that would live on site. M. Slonneger explained that a fund-raising campaign will begin soon and will be headed by Jean Lloyd-Jones and Mike Wright. There will be newspaper coverage via a letter that will be published in the Friday, November 9, 2007 edition of the Iowa City Press Citizen in hopes of gaining more financial support, Further articles are planned for upcoming editions of Press Citizen. She also mentioned that there would be a photo op with the Press Citizen on Thursday, November 8 at 12:30 and that all are invited to attend. It is their desire to involve the Gazette as well. She noted there has been $7000 in donations collected previous to this Parks & Recreation Commission meeting. Other donations have included $5000 from the Scanlon Foundation as well as the State Historical Society's HDRP grant that could match funds up to a maximum of $15,000. The Committee is in the process of creating a relationship with the Johnson County Historical Society who would oversee the house in the future. The plan is to create an endowment for future expenses. M. Slonneger again reiterated her wish to save this house and spoke of its unique ornamental value to the City of Iowa City. She then asked the rest of the Committee to introduce themselves to the Commission. Carl Klaus introduced himself to the Commission. He talked of his great admiration for the passion that has gone into this effort to save this house. He feels the house is of great symbolic and historical value to the City of Iowa City and it a great gift to the City. Sarah Walz was present in her capacity as a member of the board of Friends of Hickory Hill Park. She noted that the board supports saving this house, but also notes that the question is whether it belongs on public land. She emphasized that they are not necessarily supporting the Hickory Hill location for the house; they realize this is a decision that rests with the Parks & Recreation Commission and the City Council. However, since she and her fellow board members were aware of the request to possibly locate the house in Hickory Hill Park, they felt it was appropriate for there board to provide input. They presented a list of conditions which, if met, would make the Hickory Hill location acceptable to them, again indicating they realize this is not their decision. These conditions are as follows: 1. House to be placed along Cedar Street at the western edge of the park where there are already houses abutting the park with the cemetery just to the rear (northwest) of the property. In this location it would be less susceptible to vandalism since it would be surrounded by residential properties and would not seem to intrude upon the park. Parks and Recreation Commission September 12, 2007 Page 3 of 6 2. Abutting property owners must not opject to the placement of the house in this location. 3. The exterior of the house must be restored within 18-24 months. 4. Friends of Hickory Hill Park will bear no financial or other responsibility for the restoration or long-term maintenance of the house. A plan must be spelled out for who will be responsible for maintenance. 5. Historic landscaping of the house (namely, apple trees) will be confined to the immediate yard of the house and will not extend into the park. 6. The house must serve a public educational function and should be made available to Friends 'of Hickory Hill Park and/or the Parks and Recreation Department for public education and meeting purposes. Klaus again spoke to the Commission expressing his desire to relocate the house to Reno Street Park as an alternative to Hickory Hill Park. In particular, he would like to see the house located in the area on the south side of the park that was added at a later time from its original coronation. He also would like the house to be renovated as quickly as possible and for its use to be for educational purposes and likes the idea of a person being present on the property. He also mentioned his desire to see the house set back from the street so that it does not block access into the park. Westefeld asked for confirmation from Walz that Friends of Hickory Hill Park do support the placement of this house in the park as long as the six criteria mentioned are met. Walz answered that if the Parks and Recreation Commission decides it is feasible and appropriate to place this house in Hickory Hill Park, and if the six criteria are met, that the Friends of Hickory Hill Park Board would be supportive this decision. Pacha asked if the importance of this house was realized at the time that McLaughlin purchased the property. Bennett stated that the City was aware of its historic value. M. Slonneger mentioned that she had approached the previous owner with her desire to purchase the property but at that time there was interest from another developer to purchase the property. Ken Slonneger stated that it would be a shame to lose this important part of Iowa City History. Shaner Maghailas, Executive Director of the Johnson County Historical Society, stated that they have been tracking this development since they first became aware of this situation. He stated that the JCHS is tentatively agreeable to having a long term commitment to the care of the house. He mentioned other properties that the Historical Society maintains now such as the old school house in Coralville, Plum Grove and the poor farm. He made clear that while they do not have the financial wherewithal to take care of the restoration, they would be working to find grants to do so. He feels it is a very worthwhile effort and is excited about the opportunity. At this point Pacha asked that, with the exception of questions to the Committee, discussion be limited to the Commission. Parks and Recreation Commission September 12, 2007 Page 4 of 6 Reisetter asked if the house is structurally sound enough to withstand moving. M. Slonneger stated that it has been ~nspected by the mover and is deemed structurally sound. Reisetter further asked if there is a definite commitment from someone to maintain care of the property. M. Slonneger again mentioned the creation of an endowment fund for this purpose. Gustaveson asked staff if this is the first time we had addressed this type of request. Trueblood stated that the Commission was approached a number of years ago regarding the possibility of moving the Bluffwood House, which was slated for demolition, into Hickory Hill Park. Pacha noted it was at that time that the Hickory Hill Park Guidelines (1994) were adopted by the Commission, and that just prior to this time the Commission was considering a request for the historic Chimney Swift Tower to be located in the park. Trueblood discussed the history behind these two requests. The request for placement of the Chimney Swift Tower was supported by the Commission with the thought that this type of structure would fit well within this natural park. A short time later the request came to place the Bluffwood House in this park as well. Upon hearing this, the Chimney Swift proponents came back to the Commission and withdrew their request. It became a concern of this group that putting the Chimney Swift Tower in the park would open the "proverbial can of worms" for more structures to be placed in the park, and they didn'twant to see this happen. O'Leary asked if there are other sites being considered besides those previous mentioned, such as vacant lots etc. M. Slonneger said that there is one lot available on North Prairie Du Chien however it would be tucked in with ranch style homes and this group feels the house would not be appropriate for this area. She also stated that they have been in touch with real estate companies and the City's Planning Department, particularly Bob Miklo, and they have been unable to locate any possibilities on privately owned land. In answer to questions posed by Commissioners, Trueblood stated that staff's main concern is the long term care and maintenance of the house and the surrounding property. The department does not want the responsibility or expense of maintaining or renovating this building. He indicated that he is not certain this house would comply with the Commission adopted guidelines for Hickory Hill Park. He also expressed concern with Reno Street Park, indicating it is a very small park and the addition to the park that Mr. Klaus had previously mentioned had included an old house that was demolished in order to add green space to the park. He is concerned that the neighborhood might not like the idea of having tom down one old house to replace it with another. Trueblood indicated his understanding for the desire to save the Wetherby House, and also understands the desire to place it on public property. He also mentioned that Wetherby Park might be the most appropriate location for the house since it bears the name of Isaac Wetherby. The downside, however, is the fact that it would be a long move, being on other side of town, and the park incurs a higher degree of vandalism than most parks. Pacha stated that while he respects and understands the groups efforts, when considering Hickory Hill Park, he feels it is necessary to look at the guidelines that were put in place which specifically states, "The decision to install any permanent structures in Hickory Hill Park should Parks and Recreation Commission September 12,2007 Page 5 of 6 be considered judiciously." He reminded the Commission that members who were present in 1994 expressed the hope that future Commissions would keep these guidelines in place. Reisetter asked if there has been any discussion of a temporary setting for the house, allowing more time for discussion and a final decision, as he feels there is insufficient time to deliberate sufficiently. Bennett responded that there is no temporary location available. Gustaveson stated that as stewards of Iowa City Parks, he has a concern that while there has been much suggestion that the property will be maintained by outside sources long term, this may not be the case in reality. Loomer stated that while she likes the idea of saving this historical building, she does not feel that a park is the right location for such a structure. Bourgeois stated that he is struggling with this request. He does not like the idea of losing what he feels is a very important historical piece of property for Iowa City and would like the Commission to make an exception. He would favor Reno Street Park as the location. Magalhaes addressed the concerns of the Commission regarding continued maintenance for the property. He stated that the Johnson County Historical Society has a very good record of getting grants etc. to help finance these types of projects and assured the Commission that they would do the same for this project. After discussion it was confirmed that the consensus of the Commission is that Reno Street Park would be the better location than Hickory Hill Park. Westefeld also expressed concern regarding the time compression and the difficulty that this presents when making such an important decision. Reisetter stated that while the group present has introduced many positive aspects to this project, he would like to hear from the opposition if there is any. Bennett again mentioned that the owner has expressed his willingness to be flexible in the demolition date, but only in the case of tangible progress. It is his desire to build a duplex in the place of this house. Gustaeveson stated that he wants to hear input from the neighborhood before making a decision. Moved bv Reisetter. seconded bv Boure:eois. to resolve that it is appropriate to place a historical structure in an Iowa City Park. Aves: None. Navs: Reisetter. Gustaveson. Abstentions: Westefeld. Boureeois. O'Leary. Loomer. Pacha and Watson. The Commission expressed their desire to invite residents from the Reno Street Park neighborhood to the next Parks & Recreation Commission meeting scheduled for Wednesday, November 14, 2007. More discussion ensued about what mechanism to use to get the word out. Parks and Recreation Commission September 12, 2007 Page 6 of 6 Bennett said she would work with Marcia Klingaman, Neighborhood Services Coordinator, to draft a letter to the residents. The group will work at mailing out letters as well distributing door to door. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 6: I 0 p.m. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2007 NAME TERM Q I' ..... Q ..... Q l"l .... M M I' ~ ~ .... ~ .... .... EXPIRES .... ..... .... .... .... .... .... ..... ..... ..... ..... M ;;:s ..... l{l ..... ..... QCI ..... Q .... .... .... ..... ~ I' 0'1 M .... .... .... .... David Bour!!eois 1/1/11 X DIE DIE X X DIE X DIE X X X Craig Gustaveson 1/1/11 X DIE DIE DIE X X X X X X X Margaret Loomer 1/1/08 X X DIE DIE X X X X X DIE X Ryan O'Leary 1/1/10 X X X X X X X X X X X Matt Pacha 1/1/09 X X X X X X X X X X X Jerry Raaz 1/1/08 X X X X DIE X X X X DIE DIE Phil Reisetter 1/1/09 DIE X X X X X X DIE DIE X X John Watson 1/1/11 X DIE DIE X X DIE X X X X X John Westefeld 1/1/1 0 X X X DIE X X X X X X X KEY: x= 0= DIE = NM= LQ= Present Absent AbsentlEIcused No meeting No meeting due to lack of quorum Not a Member C[ APPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OCTOBER 18, 2007 - 7:30 PM EMMA J. HARVAT HALL - CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Wally Plahutnik, Terry Smith, Beth Koppes, Ann Freerks, Charlie Eastham, Bob Brooks, Dean Shannon STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Karen, Howard, Sunil Terdalkar, Sarah Holecek, Jeff Davidson OTHERS PRESENT: Kevin Hochstetler, Duane Musser, Mike Pugh, Jay LeaVesseur, Charlotte Bailey, Nancy LeaVesseur, Tom Gelmen, Randy Bruce, Karl Madsen, David Dowell, Charlotte Walker RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, of SUB07-00009 an application from The Crossing Development for a final plat of Cardinal Pointe South Part One and Part Two, a 39-lot, 45.04 acre residential subdivision located east of Camp Cardinal Boulevard, south of Kennedy Parkway. Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-1 (Eastham voting no), of REZ07-00015/SUB07-00007/SUB07- 00008 an application from Dav-Ed Limited & Prime Ventures for a rezoning to amend a Sensitive Areas Development Plan and a preliminary and final plat of Galway Hills Part 4, a 26-lot, 10.41-acre residential subdivision located west of Donegal Place on Galway Drive. Recommended denial, by a vote of 4-3 (Eastham, Shannon and Smith voting no), of REZ07-00014 an application submitted by Big Ten Rentals for a rezoning from Central Business Support (CB-5) zone to Central Business (CB-10) zone for approximately .48-acres of property located at the northwest corner of Linn Street and Court Street Call to Order: Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:34 pm. Public Discussion of Anv Item Not on the Aaenda Jeff Davidson introduced himself to the commission and stated that he had recently taken over the duties of Director of Planning and Community Development. He stated that he looked forward to working with the Commission and expressed admiration of the work done by the Commission. He expressed his confidence in the Planning staff and noted that if the Commission would like to have work performed by the department, he is open to scheduling those tasks. Develooment Item SUB07-00009: Discussion of an application from The Crossing Development for a final plat of Cardinal Pointe South Part One and Part Two, a 39-lot, 45.04 acre residential subdivision located east of Camp Cardinal Boulevard, south of Kennedy Parkway. Miklo stated that staff recommends approval subject to staff approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to City Council consideration. Miklo said that there are no deficiencies in the plat at this time. He pointed out that a minor lot line adjustment had been made to allow a three attached units on lots 22, 23 and 24. The previous plan had shown two attached units and on detached unit on these three lots. Staff felt that he proposed change to attach the third unit was not a significant change from the preliminary plan, Motion: Plahutnik made a motion to recommend approval of item SUB07-00009. Smith seconded. The motion to approve passed on a vote of 7-0. Planning and Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 2 REl07-00015/SUB07-00007/SUB07-00008: Discussion of an application from Dav-Ed Limited & Prime Ventures for a rezoning to amend a Sensitive Areas Development Plan and a preliminary and final plat of Galway Hills Part 4, a 26-lot, 10.41-acre residential subdivision located west of Donegal Place on Galway Drive. (45-day limitation period 10/29/07) Terdalkar stated that approval should be based on compliance with the six items in the staff report to ensure stabilization of soils on sloping sites and improvements to woodland areas. He also noted that the applicant submitted information on neighborhood meetings that were held. Terdalkar confirmed that there have been no changes to the application since Oct 4. A question came up regarding the pink areas on the map that was submitted by the applicant. Terdalkar verified that yellow is for changes being sought, red is for the new construction limit line, and pink is where soil has been pulled back. Public discussion was opened. Kevin Hochstedler, of Prime Ventures construction, emphasized that he is with Prime Ventures, not the previous developer Dav-Ed. He stated that neighbors have been confused by this. Hochstedler showed photos of a berm and landscape screening that had recently been constructed on lot 8. . Hochstedler said that Prime Ventures will implement four construction practices to mitigate for the increase in the construction area limits including installation of a construction limit fence and signage, meeting with subcontractors to ensure limits are not exceeded, and planting native vegetation. As an example of what they have done so far to improve the site, he showed a picture of a berm, swale, and trees that had been planted on lots 8 and 9. He stated that these were mature trees that had been planted. They are roughly 20 to 25 feet tall and have made neighbors happy. He said that grasses have also been planted and that the trees were planted in a double row with one row of deciduous trees and one with fir trees that will provide a good screen from Highway 218. Hochstedler stated that there has been confusion on the part of neighbors as to the purpose of this application. Some neighbors thought that this application was to rezone to allow multifamily dwellings, but he said that this is not the case. He stated that Prime Ventures has experience building close to wooded areas in the past, and cited examples of this including The Stables Subdivision. He also said that Prime Ventures provides interesting architecture, citing the Arlington Heights Subdivision as an example. Hochstedler provided specific numbers regarding how the changes will affect the area's sensitive areas. He said that disturbance to critical slopes, steep slopes and woodland disturbance would increase by between 1 %, 4% and 4% each, Hochstedler stated that Prime Ventures wants to build quality homes. Duane Musser, of MMS Consultants, stated that lot 20 had been left unchanged. The line in this area had just been straightened out. He emphasized that no trees have been removed. Eastham asked about the size of the proposed homes. He said that the information in the Oct 4 meeting packet stated that plans called for homes of 2600 to 3600 square feet and that Prime Ventures is now showing a lower figure. Musser said that the discrepancy was due to some figures using a building footprint while others used total dwelling square footage. He said the reason for moving the line was to accommodate the size of the homes and more specifically, the decks that are to be at the rear of the homes. A question was asked about whether foundations that are currently in place can be built on the lots without having to move the line on those lots. The applicant responded that it is possible. Mike Puqh, counsel for Prime Ventures, stated that he wanted to clarify an item regarding the landscape buffer. He said the landscape buffer is from the original plat and was a requirement made by the City. This amendment is to change the final plat. The sensitive areas development plan is a Level II review that requires a rezoning because the original applicant asked for a modification to allow for a longer cul-de-sac than otherwise allowed. He said sensitive areas on outlots A and B were being protected. Pugh said that the Planning and Zoning Commission October 1S, 2007 Page 3 reason for this application is because the original Sensitive Areas Development Plan was approved through a Level II Review, which requires a rezoning. So even though the changes being requested with the current application are fairly minor, this also requires a Level II Review. He stated that sensitive areas approval guidelines number 1,4,7,S, and 9 are the only ones applicable in this case. He stated that City staff has indicated that this application meets these standards. Pugh indicated that the construction area limit line will be moved approximately 20 to 25 feet further back on lots 21 and 22. Jay LeaVesseur, 742 Tipperary Rd, said that lots 21 and 22 used to have vegetation in the past, but that Dav- Ed had bulldozed it. He said that as a result, the neighbors are worried about more vegetation being taken away. He asked that the developers respect the neighbors and that violations have already occurred. LeaVesseur stated that the homeowners association is active and desires good communication. He said that Prime Ventures has made a good faith effort recently to meet or discuss with neighbors. He stated that there is an orange snow fence in the area of lot 17 near the Iowa City sign, and that vegetation in that area appears to be thinner now than in the past. Charlotte Bailey, 6 Kearney Ct, said she wanted to discuss changes that have happened since the last meeting. She stated that input from the neighbors had been solicited, but a meeting never occurred. She said that a decision had already been made regarding the amount of the allowed disturbance of the sensitive areas on this property years ago. She said that the lots are buildable with the construction area limit lines that were set originally, or else the plan would not have been approved. She stated that a change of construction limit line placement will result in a change in impact. She said the lots look okay to build on as previously approved. She asked that an assumption not be made that one necessary fix to move the line to address work that was already done on tow of the lots does not require the movement of the construction limit line on several lots. She said that the existing lines are where they are for a reason and that not all changes may be necessary. Hochstedler stated that Prime Ventures has tried to set up a meeting but due to various circumstances, things have not worked out. He stated that they are willing to meet with neighbors. Nancy LeaVesseur, 742 Tipperary Rd, stated that she is requested that there continue to be a good relationship between Prime Ventures and the homeowners association. Public discussion was closed. Smith made a motion to approve item REZ07-00015/SUB07-00007/SUB07-0000S. Plahutnik seconded. Eastham expressed concern that the changes are not necessary because there already appears to be enough space on the lot to build good sized houses. Smith expressed a similar concern but felt that the revised plan met the requirements of the code. Smith asked about the violation on lots 19 and 20 where the construction limit line had already been crossed. Terdalkar said that the applicant is working on this and has corrected the violations. They had removed the stocked piled soil and added erosion control measures as directed by the inspection department. Plahutnik stated that violations were not a P&Z issue as the Commission is not an enforcement entity. He said that with the improvements the woodlands and the planting of native vegetation as recommended by the Soil Conservation Service the concerns about soil erosion would be addressed. Bob Brooks stated that this is a case in point where if the developer would follow the "good neighbor policy" early on in the process there would not be confusion and misunderstandings and it would save time during the approval process. Freerks also agreed that it is important to have open communication with existing neighbors and hoped the progress that had been made on this front would continue. Freerks asked if the orange construction fence is temporary. Terdalkar responded that it is temporary and will remain in place through construction. The motion to approve the item passed on a 6-1 vote (Eastham). Planning and Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 4 Rezonina Item REZ07-00014: Discussion of an application submitted by Big Ten Rentals for a rezoning from Central Business Support (CB-5) zone to Central Business (CB-10) zone for approximately A8-acres of property located at the northwest corner of Linn Street and Court Street. (45-day limitation period: 10/29/2007) Howard stated that project would include a 12-story building with one floor of commercial and eleven floors of residential. It would have 82 parking spaces and would pay parking impact fees to cover the rest. The applicant has revised the mix of apartments since the last meeting. They are now proposing 36 studio, 24 two-bedroom, 24 three-bedroom, and 64 four-bedroom apartments totaling 148 apartments with 412 bedrooms. 88 of the 148 total apartments now contain 3 bedrooms or more which is 60% of the total. Howard compared the bedrooms per acre for this application to that of existing local projects. The Big Ten Rentals project would have 858 bedrooms per acre which is nearly 2.5 times the number of residents per acre than for the densest project built in the CB-5 and CB-10 to date. City staff remains concerned about the proposed density and apartment mix and find that the proposed density is achieved by concentrating floor space in bedrooms, while minimizing living, dining, and shared common areas within the building. Staff believes that the dorm-like living environment proposed for this project will appeal only to short-term residents. Since there is already a concentration of this type of residential living in the downtown area, and one of the reasons that the Near Southside Plan was amended to allow for the possibility of CB-1 0 Zone was to provide opportunities for apartments and condominiums designed for and including amenities suited to residents other than just short term renters and that a better mix of residential opportunities in the downtown area would help to support a healthy variety of commercial development and retail in the downtown core that was envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan. Since the proposed development does not appear to meet these goals there does not appear to be a compelling reason to rezone this property to CB-10. Howard said that the application falls short of the goals for CB-10 zoning. She said the plans concentrate too much space in bedrooms, which results in over 80b residents per acre. Staff is concerned that the density of residents on the site will be very difficult to manage and may cause problems for residents of the building and for neighboring properties. Howard stated that staff recommends REZ07-00014 be denied. Smith asked if the Comp Plan, district plan, or zoning code say anything about maximum residential density in the CB-1 0 Zone. Howard stated that the residential density is only limited by the height and FAR limits for buildings in the CB-1 0 Zone, Eastham inquired about CB-5 versus CB-10 zoning. Howard said that the site development standards are the same for both with regard to the commercial storefront design, articulation and fenestration of the building, etc., but that parking standards differ between the two zones. She said that with this request for a rezoning, the City can place additional reasonable conditions on the development beyond the zoning requirements. The developers currently have the right to build apartments in the CB-5 Zone and can achieve considerable density with that zoning. Miklo stated that in the CB-5 zone, bonus points are often sought to achieve a higher FAR, which then leads to greater scrutiny of the design. Howard discussed the definition of FAR. Eastham asked if other CB-5-zoned properties have been through design review. Miklo stated that they have been. Miklo mentioned that the public works department had noted that sewer capacity in the area should be checked to see if this density of development could be accommodated with existing facilities. Howard said that staff had asked the developer for estimates of water usage at other similar projects that they built in Madison, Wisconsin, but that the planning department has not received these estimates yet. Public discussion was opened. Tom Gelman, attorney for the developer, stated that two events led to this application. First was the destruction of St. Patrick's Church in the tornado. Second was a modification of the Near Southside Plan to allow for CB-10 zoning in the area between Burlington and Court Streets. Planning and Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 5 Gelman discussed the amendment to the Comp Plan. He said the CB-10 zone was equally appropriate as a CB-5 zone and that two criteria should be used to determine this: 1) Is it an appropriate extension of the downtown area? 2) Are the services adequate for the density? He questioned why the focus was on the residential density and whether that was appropriate in this case. He questioned why staff was insisting that there be a diversity of residents within each building rather than focusing on a diversity of residents in the whole of downtown. Gelman talked about two services that seem relevant to the case, parking and sewer capacity. He stated that the strategy for parking was to use public parking facilities to supplement the on-site parking. He noted that the developer had agreed to pay a substantial parking impact fee even though the CB-10 zone does nor require parking. He stated that the Hieronymus Square project has set a good standard in terms of adhering to the CB-5 parking standards even thought it is zoned CB-10. He also mentioned that the area's plan showed a potential parking ramp across the street from this property. He stated that the issue of sewer capacity did not seem to be a problem - the engineers just wanted to confirm that the lines in the area had sufficient capacity. He stated that about 24,000 University of Iowa students live off-campus. This has resulted in horizontal sprawl of students into existing single-family neighborhoods. He said that this project would be less dense than what is allowed and that the developers had removed all five-bedroom units from the plans. He discussed that vertical density is different than horizontal density. He said that a taller building would obviously have greater density. He said the last five horizontal projects in Iowa City have had a density average of 3.8 bedrooms per unit while this plan has 2.78 bedrooms per unit. Gelman stated that diverse options should include student housing and that this project will add to the downtown housing mix. He stated it might also benefit affordable housing in Iowa City. He cited a story he heard about Washington County. He heard that this County had determined that widows' homes were where the affordable housing could be found. In this case, when widows' homes became vacant, families were able to move in. He said the affordable housing in Iowa City could be found in the existing housing stock. This would be more realistic than building it new. He stated that concentrating student housing in a vertical project in the CB-10 zone may free up some of the existing housing stock in older neighborhoods surrounding downtown. This existing older housing stock would then provide for affordable housing opportunities and could transition back to family housing. He stated that a CB-5 zoned project would have less of an affect on housing in the older neighborhoods. Gelman said that on site amenities in a building near downtown don't need to be as great as those farther away, because there are so many amenities within the downtown area. He cited the availability of the planned University recreation center and downtown restaurants, etc. He said the location of this property ~ the amenity in this case. He also noted that this project will be student housing whether it is zoned CB-10 or CB-5. Randv Bruce, architect for the developer, said that planning staff had praised the exterior design of the proposed building. He said the density allowed under the CB-10 zoning allowed more money to be spent on the exterior design and materials for the building. He said that there are now less bedrooms in this plan than in a similar building in Madison, Wisconsin. With CB-10 zoning, it becomes financially feasible to use concrete and steel construction rather than wood construction. Concrete construction would allow a CB-10 project to be reconfigurable because the walls would not be load-bearing. So in the future the building could be converted to apartments with fewer bedrooms if that is what the market supported. He said that a large project would bring students closer in to the downtown. Bruce said that in Madison, a similar building resulted in students moving closer in, leaving older homes available, and that some homes have been converted back into single-family homes. Bruce stated that high quality construction, convertibility, and economic development in downtown are positives. He said that a CB-10 project allows them to spend more on materials and the structure. Planning and Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 6 With regard to the conditions mentioned by staff in their report, Bruce said that they are agreeable to most conditions with the exception being the prohibition of balconies on interior courtyard. He stated that balconies are an amenity for the residents and requested that this condition be eliminated. Karl Madsen, of the development team, asked questions: What are the reasonable conditions? What is an appropriate standard if this is only a density issue? What constitutes diversity of housing? Is diversity in each building or diversity spread out over downtown preferred? He said that the proposed project was a good density for a downtown location and would support retail uses on the ground floor of the building. He said that it would be adding to the diversity of housing and that the high end condos that the community desired where already being provided in Plaza Towers and Hieronymus Square. He noted that those projects received tax breaks which allowed those developers to meet the conditions that the City imposed and that his team was not seeking tax breaks so the same conditions where not appropriate. Eastham inquired about the use of CB-1 0 for a variety of people. He asked if it is possible for students and non-students to be together. Madsen stated that anyone could rent in this building but that non-students tend to not want to live near students. David Dowell, 320 S. Dubuque St, stated that he lives in the Capitol House Apartments which is next to this property. He asked if more student housing is needed in the downtown area. He said that affordable student housing may be needed, but doubted whether this would be affordable. Dowell said that people in the neighborhood are concerned. He believes that this project will not lead to more affordable housing in neighborhoods. Dowell said that the applicants bought the property knowing what the existing zoning was and should not have had the expectation that it would be automatically rezoned to CB-10. He stated that if scattered housing is not used in the case of student housing, but is for other reasons, that this does not make sense. Charlotte Walker, 320 S. Dubuque St, stated that the developer had not spoken to residents of the Capitol House Apartments or other neighbors. She said that some elderly residents can't make it to the meeting to express their concerns. Walker was concerned that the plan calls for a loading area in the alley that is near the first floor windows of the Capitol House where some of the most disabled and elderly residents live. She also expressed concern that in this meeting, the developer had not once mentioned the neighbors surrounding the property. Howard clarified that staff was not insisting that there needed to be a diversity of residents within each building, but rather that the Near Southside Plan was amended to allow opportunities for a wider variety of residents to live downtown, not just students. Staff was concerned that there was already a concentration of student apartments in this area and did not feel that an upzoning to support an even higher density of student apartments met the intent of the recent amendment to the Near Souths ide Plan. For example, a condition of approval for the Hieronymus Square project was that there could be no apartments with more than 3 bedrooms and that not more than 30 percent of the apartments could be 3-bedroom apartments. The proposed project does not meet the bar that was set by Hieronymus Square. She also noted that the intent of the Central Business Zone (CB-10) is to support a healthy commercial core, that the zone is not primarily a residential zone. In addition, there is much more to the Near Southside Plan than just the recent two- sentence amendment and that the entirety of the comprehensive plan for the area needs to be taken into account with this rezoning request. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Plahutnik made a motion to deny REZ07-00014. Koppes seconded. Brooks stated that parking is a key issue for him and that he felt that more needs to be done to address the parking for an apartment building with this number of residents. He said he did like the idea that allowing high rise residential might help historic residential areas and also felt that the building was designed to accommodate commercial development on the first floor. He said, however, there is a need for a diversity of housing types, and a broader mix of people in downtown would be good. Planning and Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 7 Smith stated that this project is a logical extension of the downtown, that the project does meet the cities parking requirements in the Near Southside. Similar parking concessions were made for Hieronymus Square. He said is was confused about the density issue and whether it was appropriate to consider this a problem with this project. Eastham stated that it is his belief that additional parking will be needed. He said a mix of housing within each building in this area is not necessary. Eastham said that providing student housing near downtown may actually increase safety due to a shorter walking distance. He said that it is his observation that the quality of CB-10 projects has been better than that of CB-5 projects. Plahutnik stated that this project would lead to too many people in one area and feels that this project is not a logical extension of downtown. It is such a leap in residential density from anything else in the downtown that he doesn't feel that this is a logical extension of Iowa City's downtown and is concerned about the impacts that this will have on the downtown and surrounding properties. Shannon stated that Iowa City has changed a lot over the years. Reno and Slater residence halls were huge projects but are well managed. He doesn't have a good answer for the density question, but feels that the applicant should take the application to City Council for them to make a final decision. Koppes said that this project does not follow the precedent that was set with the previous CB-1 0 rezonings in the Near Southside area and does not feel that it meets the intent of the amendments that were recently made to the comprehensive plan. Freerks said she agrees that this is not a logical extension of downtown and that a broader mix of people would be good to support a healthy downtown commercial core. She also stated that it is appropriate to discuss the residential density and mix of the proposed project because the CB-10 zone is a commercial zone. Density is a fundamental issue when considering rezoning requests. The motion to deny the rezoning request was approved 4-3 (Smith, Eastham, Shannon voted in the negative). Consideration of Meeting Minutes Motion: Smith made a motion to approve the October 4, 2007 meeting minutes as typed and corrected. Brooks seconded the motion. The motion was approved on a vote of 7-0. Other Item None Adiournment Motion: Smith make a motion to adjourn the meeting 10:29 pm. Brooks seconded. The motion was approved on a vote of 7-0. Minutes submitted by Adam Ralston s/pcdlminslp&zl2007/1 0-18-07 ,doc c:: o 'Iii 1/1 's E o u"e 0'10 c:: U .- Q) go:: NQ)r-- olSgg O'IIllN c::"C ,- c:: c:: Q) c::::: .!!<c 0.. ~ <3 ; ..2 (!) z i= w w :E ..J <C :E 0:: o u.. 1IO ~X X X X X X X .... ~ e x X X X X X X 0 .... 0 N X X X X X X X en CD w .... X X X X X X 0 co N X W X X X X X co 0 en X X X w X X .... X 0 t:: N W W .... 0 X X X 0 X X t:: .... w w W N 0 X 0 XX X 0 CQ I'- W ~ X X X X 0 X X I'- .... X X X X X X X - 10 M e X X X X X X X 10 en .... X X X X X X X ~ 10 W 0 0 X X X X X X ~ 10 W .... X X X X X X 0 M .... e X X X X X XX M 10 W W .... X XX -. 0 OX (;l 0 .... 0 X X X X X XX (;l 1IO X XX :!:: X X X X .... 1/1 E ~ 0 ..- 00 N 0 00 ..- ..- ..- 0 ..- ..- 52 ..- Qj.~ - - - - i:O - It) It) It) It) It) It) I-UJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ E :s c 1Il 1Il 0 11 ca t!: QI ::::I C .c Q. c .c 0 ... QI .c ... 1Il Q. ca ca 'E Q) 2 ca 12 ~ n:: .c E In W LL tI)tI) co ai 0 <i. u.i ;t 0"': z .... UJ UJ 0 >< >< >< >< >< - (5 (5 0 .... .... UJ UJ M >< >< >< >< (5 >< (5 - r-- U) >< >< >< UJ UJ >< .... >< (5 (5 - r-- e >< >< >< UJ UJ >< UJ r-- (5 (5 (5 co UJ .... >< >< (5 >< >< >< >< - U) 0 ~ >< >< >< >< >< >< >< U) UJ .... >< (5 >< >< >< >< >< - 'It U) UJ N >< >< >< (5 >< >< >< - N en UJ N >< >< >< >< >< (5 >< - .... 1/1 E ~ 0 ..- 00 N 0 00 ..- ..- ..- 0 ..- ..- 0 ..- ~'A. - - - - - - - ~>< It) It) It) It) It) It) It) UJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E ~ c:: ~ ~ 1/1 c:: 0 III g ... c:: 0 .c .. ::l c:: .c ... Q) .c ... Q) e 1/1 e III III 's III ~ .c E a:I W u.. a: f/) f/) ro ai 0 <. u.i ~ d ~ z (!) z i= w w :E ..J <C :E 0:: o u.. ~ "0 Q) 1/1 :J () >< UJ -_::. c:: c: c: Q) Q) Q) If) If) If) ~.o.o 0..<(<( .. II II II >. UJ Q) - ::.:::><00 FINAL HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 18,2007 PHEASANT RIDGE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER Hightshoe noted that since the Chair, Anthony, was not present, nor the Vice Chair, Richman, they would need to appoint someone as temporary Chair in order to call the meeting to order. MOTION: Drum moved to appoint Shaw as Temporary Chair; seconded by Hart. Motion carried 5-0. Call to Order: Shaw called the meeting to order at 6:47 P.M. Members Present: Steve Crane, Marcy DeFrance, Charles Drum, Holly Jane Hart, Michael Shaw, Members Absent: Jerry Anthony, Andy Douglas, Rebecca McMurray, Brian Richman Staff Present: Tracy Hightshoe, Steve Long Others Present: Andy Johnson RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL (become effective only after separate Council action): None APPROVAL OF THE SEPTEMBER 20, 2007 MINUTES Shaw asked if there were any changes, additions to the minutes. MOTION: Crane moved to accept the minutes as submitted; seconded by Hart. Motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NO ON THE AGENDA None. c:: Housing and Community Development Commission October 18, 2007 Page 2 STAFF/COMMISSION COMMENT Hightshoe began her comments by stating that she had received an em ail from Shaw regarding affordable housing and the Big Ten property downtown that has been proposed for student housing. Hightshoe stated that she checked with the legal department and the commission is not able to discuss or make a motion to approve a statement as the commission/staff did not give the customary 24-hour notice that this would be on tonight's agenda. Shaw provided a brief update, stating that Planning and Zoning had originally denied this, but that they were now reconsidering it. Shaw will speak with Anthony to discuss if they should put it on the November agenda. HOUSING TRUST FUNDS - Presentation by Andy Johnson, Executive Director of the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County Andy Johnson spoke to the members about housing trust funds, stating that they have been around for about 30 years, and are becoming very popular. Iowa has 17 trust funds, according to Johnson. These trust funds are used to address local housing needs. Johnson said that the goal of the Housing Trust Fund is to fill in the gaps after other agencies have helped to the best of their ability. He said that with the decreased level in federal funding for housing, housing trust funds have seen a surge in the needs. In comparing Johnson County's needs with Van Buren County's needs, Johnson stated that Van Buren's needs are a bit different than Johnson County's in terms of need for transitional, rental and owner-occupied housing and/or housing rehabilitation. The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County is about three years old, as far as having funding and staff. Their mission statement is to promote and support affordable housing in Johnson County, and their vision statement is decent, safe, affordable housing for all in Johnson County. The primary source of funding is the State Housing Trust Fund. Johnson also explained they receive additional funds from various sources. They were recently awarded assistance for rental assistance for the elderly and persons with disabilities. Johnson noted that the fund is a revolving loan fund. Funds returned are allocated to new affordable housing projects. Johnson shared with members some of the Housing Trust Fund's achievements over the past three years, and some of their partnerships with area affordable housing providers such as Habitat for Humanity. Johnson spoke about the housing summit they sponsored that took place last November, at which over 100 business leaders were in attendance to advocate and raise awareness for affordable housing. Johnson continued his presentation, discussing where the Housing Trust Fund stands currently with funding and what they would like to achieve. He stated that there has been a campaign for a national housing trust fund, but it has not been approved by both houses yet. He said the goal would be to funnel national funds through a dedicated revenue source such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to state and local governments. Crane asked Johnson for more details on the various state trust funds. Johnson explained various counties within the state have set up trust funds to address local housing issues and to make them eligible to receive state and/or national funds should legislation pass that , Housing and Community Development Commission October 18, 2007 Page 3 secures a dedicated revenue source. He stated the state housing trust fund advocacy's network hired a lobbyist to help them with their advocacy goals. NEW BUSINESS - Annual Review of the 2006-2010 Consolidated Plan (a.k.a. CITY STEPS) Hightshoe explained that each year the city conducts public meetings to gather feedback on needs and priorities for low-to-moderate income persons. The commission and staff compare the comments received to the existing needs and priorities identified in CITY STEPS. Three meetings were held, one at Pheasant Ridge Neighborhood Center, one at Forest View Mobile Home Park and one at Lakeside Apartments. The feedback from the first two meetings were included in the HCOC packets. (The last meeting was held right before the HCOC meeting.) Hightshoe asked if after reviewing the comments received if any needs or priorities must be changed in CITY STEPS. Long stated that they have had good turnouts at each meeting. A translator was present for the meetings at Forest View and Pheasant Ridge as a large percentage of the population did not speak English. Long also spoke about the meeting at Lakeside, and some of the issues they have been addressing there. He further stated that they just found out that Lakeside has been sold. He stated that they are looking forward to working with the new owners to get some issues resolved, with safety being a major issue. Hightshoe noted that due to some procedural changes, HUO has changed their reporting requirements. She briefly explained some ofthe issues, explaining that the format will be somewhat different. They will have to show goals and accomplishments, with more detailed required. Hightshoe stated that the commission has another month to decide if they are going to recommend any changes in CITY STEPS. Members briefly discussed some of the various key issues of concern. Hightshoe stated that any change in CITY STEPS requires a 30-day public comment period and must be approved by council. Long explained to members how they have been targeting specific neighborhoods this year, in order to get the communication flowing. They have also been combining meetings with regularly scheduled tenant/resident meetings in order to take advantage of a larger crowd being present. Each meeting had 25-35 residents. NEW BUSINESS - Update on FY08 Projects - CDBGIHOME projects that have not entered a formal agreement with the City of Iowa City Hightshoe stated that there is an existing policy that requires COBO and HOME projects to enter into an agreement with the City within 90 days from the date funds are available. She gave the members a quick run down ofthe various recipients who have not entered a COBO agreement with the City. First noted was Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County (NCJC). Hightshoe noted that NCJC can't enter an agreement until consent is given from the deed holder of the property at Pheasant Ridge. NCJC has a land lease with the current owner for the neighborhood center. Staff is working on getting the owner's consent. HACAP and The Housing Fellowhip (rental project) have not entered Housing and Community Development Commission October 18, 2007 Page 4 agreements as a site is not known yet. A site specific environmental review must be completed before the City can enter an agreement with the recipient. Blooming Garden has not entered an agreement yet as they are trying to determine which property is most accessible due to the accessibility regulations for City-assisted housing projects. Bums and Burns (Blooming Garden) hopes to have construction complete by the fall of2008. Members asked questions of Hight shoe regarding some of the various aspects ofCDBG funding. ' MONITORING REPORTS - Builders of Hope - Transitional Housing (Crane) Crane reported that he spoke to the director of this program. There are currently six people living at the house. There are 5 HOME assisted single room occupancy units and one private unit ("manager's" unit). He further noted that one of the residents is the "manager" who helps the others get hooked up with available services. Long stated they had an open house and it is an attractive, well maintained home. MONITORING REPORTS - Shelter House - Outreach Coordinator (McMurray) Hightshoe stated that McMurray emailed her about this. Her report stated that Shelter House served 154 people during the past fiscal year. Of those, 100% were low income, 45 to 50% were women and children, 15% were veterans, and 40% had self-reported disabilities. Currently, 80 to 90 individuals are being served by the Star program. MONITORING REPORTS - Shelter House - FY04 Land Acquisition (McMurray) As for the land acquisition, the balance ofthe funds is approximately $30,000, and the Supreme Court decision has yet to be made on this project. MONITORING REPORTS - Aid to Agencies - ESI, MECCA, UA Y (Hart) Hart asked that she be put on the agenda for next month's meeting with these. She stated that she put in a call to Elder Services, and will be meeting with them next week. ADJOURNMENT DeFrance moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:45 P.M., seconded by Hart. Motion carried 5-0. Commission Housmg & Community Development Attendance Record 2007 Term Name Expires 01118 2/21 2/22 3/8 3/22 4/19 7/19 9/20 1 0/18 Jerry Anthony 09/01108 OlE X X X X X X X OlE Steve Crane 09/01109 X X X X X X X X X Marcy De France 09/01109 X X X X X OlE OlE OlE X Andv Dou21as 09/01108 X OlE OlE X X X X X OlE Charlie Drum 09/01110 X X X X X X X OlE X Hollv Jane Hart 09/01107 X X X X X X X X X Rebecca McMurray 09/01108 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X OlE Thomas Niblock 09/01/08 X OlE OlE OlE X X -- -- -- -- -- -- Brian Richman 09/01107 X OlE X X X X X X OlE Michael Shaw 09/01109 OlE OlE OlE OlE OlE OlE X X X Charlotte Walker 09/01107 -- -- X X X X X X -- -- -- -- Key: X = Present o = Absent OlE = Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting Not a Member MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION THURSDAY, OCTOBER 11, 2007 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL r:: APPROVED MEMBERS PRESENT: Esther Baker, Michael Brennan, William Downing, Pam Michaud, Jim Ponto, Tim Toomey, Alicia Trimble, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: Ginalie Swaim STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Sunil Terdalkar OTHERS PRESENT: Helen Burford, Barbara Buss, Norm Cate, Austin Chamberlain, Ron Herman, Mark McCallum, David Ozolins CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Weitzel called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. Weitzel welcomed William Downing, representing the Summit Street Historic District, as the newest member of the Commission. Weitzel said that the City received a national preservation honor award at a ceremony he and Regenia Bailey and Mike Haverkamp attended in Minneapolis to accept the award. Weitzel added that there will be a formal presentation to City Council. ITEMS OF CONSIDERATION: Certificate of Appropriateness: Terdalkar stated that two of the applications were fairly straightforward and met the requirements in the guidelines and could be done as consent items. He stated that for 811 East College Street, the application is to install a pergola in the front of an outbuilding that sits in the back of the landmark building. Terdalkar said the applicant will use stained wood materials. Terdalkar said that the application for 411 South Summit Street is to replace windows that are not historically accurate in that they are vinyl clad windows. He said the applicant intends to install four new double hung windows in the kitchen. Terdalkar said the sill level of the windows will be a little bit higher than other windows, but that is natural for kitchen windows. Weitzel said that consent items are generally approved by the Commission, but if anyone has a reservation and wants to discuss one of the items, that can be called out, and the item will become a regular agenda item. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve certificates of appropriateness for the applications for 811 East College Street and 411 South Summit Street. Baker seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. with Downina abstainina from the vote. 821 Dearborn Street. Terdalkar said that this application concerns a contributing structure in the Dearborn Street Conservation District. He said the application is for the demolition of an existing garage, at the back of the house, that has fallen into a state of disrepair. Terdalkar stated that the applicant would like to construct a new two-car garage with a footprint of 24 by 24 feet and would like to match the roof pitch of the garage to that of the house. He said the applicant is considering using stucco for the garage and simple, panel carriage style garage doors. Terdalkar said the applicant plans to use metal clad wood windows and doors for the garage openings. Terdalkar said the only unusual thing on the application would be the installation of two skylights. He said, however, that they are on the alley side of the garage and would not be very noticeable. Historic Preservation Commission October 11, 2007 Page 2 Chamberlain, the contractor for the project, said that the owner would like to make the garage as similar to the house as possible, with the same style roof and sort of a saltbox structure. He said that if he can't use the stucco, he would like to do a Tudor style with panels, if the stucco becomes too costly. Chamberlain said it was recommended to him not to use stucco in this type of climate. Weitzel asked, for the dividing board with the panels, what the panels would be like in between the half- timbers. Chamberlain said that he would probably use cedar or redwood sheets and would paint them. He said he would use cedar board or some weather resistant material painted to tie in with the home. Weitzel said the applicant is asking for two options: one would be stucco, and the other would be the simulated half-timbering. Chamberlain said a third option would be to have painted cedar siding, but he believes the owner would like to use the wood panels. Chamberlain said that the stucco that is on the house right now is cracked in quite a few places. Toomey said that modern stucco is basically a very thick latex with sand and does work in this climate. Chamberlain said there were also cost considerations with the stucco. He said that the paneling with a nice sand roll for texture would look like the house. Weitzel said that stucco is a difficult product to use. Toomey commented that the newer stucco is somewhat easier to install. Michaud said that the high belt course seems prairieish in style. Weitzel stated that there are some definite prairie features about the house, and there is a belt course on the house at the second story. Chamberlain said he is trying to find a way to match that nicely. Weitzel responded that even though the Commission likes to see the style of a garage match that of the house, because that's an easy way to make it fit in, there are other ways the garage could by sympathetic to the house without absolutely having the same features. He said there doesn't have to be a one for one match to the house. Weitzel said he likes the design but doesn't like the arched lights on the doors. Chamberlain said that the owner, Ron Cohen, is an artist and would like a simple garage but would like to have some light from the north so that he could potentially use the garage as studio space in the future. He said that Cohen would like to have the extra lighting features added in. Ponto said that the French doors seem unusual on a garage. Chamberlain said that would be the back side of the garage opening onto the yard. He said that because Cohen may be working in the garage, the doors would open for ventilation and light when he is working. Weitzel asked if the owner was committed to the placement of the door to the right. Chamberlain said it depends on where on the property the garage can be built. He said that the City informed him that if part of the wall of the current garage is kept, he could built the new garage basically there, saving as much of the back yard as possible, including an oak tree, which is what the owner would like to do. Weitzel said that he. was unaware of the setback requirements in this case. Terdalkar said that an alley loaded garage can be up to five feet from the property line. Toomey said that if the garage is a new building, it would not be grandfathered in. Chamberlain said that if he used the existing walls, the new building could be grandfathered in. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for the application for 821 Dearborn Street as submitted, with the option, instead of stucco, of using half- timbering and with the stipulation that the garage doors not have an arched design and following staffs recommendation regarding the roof pitch. Chamberlain said the garage doors will probably be made of vinyl wrapped in a cedar wood to match and be painted. Ponto said the doors should either be solid or with square or rectangular lights, but not an arch pattern. Toomey seconded the motion. Historic Preservation Commission October 11, 2007 Page 3 Ponto said this is an interesting design that will look nice here. Weitzel asked if Commission members had an opinion about the windows. Michaud said that the windows are somewhat uncharacteristic and unrelated to the house. She said that a double hung vertical sash would be more appropriate. Downing said that garages typically have barn sash windows, not double hung. Michaud said that the five windows give the garage more of a prairie style. Chamberlain said that basically the windows in the diagram are supposed to match. He said that he could use four windows along the top to bring in light and also have the skylights to bring in more north light. Michaud said that having the windows elevated makes the garage a different style. Ponto said that in some ways it makes sense that the windows are above the horizontal banding, instead of cutting through the horizontal banding. He said if the owner uses the half timbering, then that issue goes away, and the windows could be lower. Michaud said the higher windows would not provide much light, because they are right up under the eaves. Toomey said it is on the north side, so it's all indirect light anyway. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. 718 South Summit Street. Buss, one of the owners of the house, said that she would like to make some changes to an old two-car garage that has been added onto before. She said that she would like to make it a study. Buss said she does not plan to add plumbing, but the garage currently has electrical service, and she would like to add heat, air, and insulation. Buss said that she would like to add three windows on the south and would like to match the barn sash windows, but she would like windows that open. Buss said that the dimensions on the barn sash conform more to casement windows. She said they are about % of an inch wide, and the casement windows are about 7/8 of an inch wide. Buss said that the double hung is about two inches for the horizontal. Buss said they would like to have three windows on the east side, two above the existing windows and one directly in the middle, the same width, but just a little bit higher. She said Terdalkar suggested putting one on the east side, so they would also like to do that. Buss said that the garage is surrounded by other garages. She said they would also like to have a pedestrian door that would be entered from the east. Weitzel said that the illustration shows tall windows on the upper story and shorter windows on the lower story. Terdalkar said that is his illustration. He said that one could either get a double hung or a barn sash window there. Terdalkar said that a double hung could have a two over two divided light, and the mullion in the middle would be the meeting rails of the windows. Michaud said that the two over two windows look more in keeping with the simplicity of the garage/barn. Toomey said that casement windows will look out of place there. Buss asked if the Commission would mind that the other windows wouldn't conform, that the upper windows would have a wider horizontal separator. Weitzel said the dividing horizontal line wouldn't be a mullion, it would be an actual window frame on a double hung. Buss said that she would be okay with that. She added that she would trade the kind of window for the third window. MOTION: Michaud moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for changes to a garage at 718 South Summit Street, as submitted, with two or three sash or double hung windows on the second floor of the garage, with a door on the east side, a fourth window on the east side, and three windows on the south side, with the windows to all be double hung windows. Ponto, Baker, and Toomey all said that they would prefer double hung windows. Toomey seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. Historic Preservation Commission October 11, 2007 Page 4 302 East Jefferson. Terdalkar stated that this is a landmark structure and is the rectory for Saint Mary's Church. He said that the applicant wants to replace the roof over the front porch with some rubberized roofing and also cover the gutters so that the external gutters on the front porch can be used. Terdalkar said the applicant was also requesting permission to use Azek material instead of wood moldings on the eave, which the Commission has not approved as a substitute material. He said the applicant then revised the application to use wood moldings. Terdalkar said that the revised application would meet the guidelines as long as the roof slope is not changed while covering the gutters and the wood moldings are used to match the existing. Terdalkar stated that the existing roof covering is a seamless, flat metal roof. He said that it does have concealed gutters. Terdalkar said that the gutters could be repaired, but the owner's preference would be to cover over the gutters but not remove them and to install external gutters. Weitzel said the applicant suggested there is a problem with the roof pitch, in that the water sheets off and misses the gutter entirely, coming out onto the stairs. He said the applicant then built the structure up on top to catch that, and that is part of the dissatisfaction with the current roof configuration. Downing asked if the owner would then be adding thickness to the profile to direct the water. Weitzel said he believes the idea would be to put a flat covering over the roof and add gutters all around. He said that he doesn't like the idea of hanging gutters over the trim, but if the building has this problem, and obviously it does, because the applicant put a pretty big thing over the stairway, not allowing the owner to hang gutters may just perpetuate the problem. MOTION: Toomey moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for 302 East Jefferson Street, as proposed, with the changes as suggested by staff in that wood material will be used instead of the Azek material. Michaud seconded the motion. Ponto said this is a reasonable approach, because if, in the future, the owner wants to go back to internal gutters, that would be possible, because they are just being covered. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. Minutes for September 17. 2007. MOTION: Baker moved to approve the minutes of the Commission's September 17, 2007 meeting, as written. Baker seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. OTHER: Terdalkar referred to the handout discussing the proposed telecommunications tower at Hawk Ridge Road. He said the City receives notice from telecommunications companies whenever they propose any towers and whether they affect any of the surrounding National Register or National Register eligible properties. Terdalkar said that is a requirement to receive federal permits, and therefore GSS Inc. has submitted a brief report. He said the City has also received a copy of a visual effects report prepared by Historian Patricia Eckhardt. Terdalkar said that the landmark property at 747 Benton Street and the Melrose National Register Historic District are within a fairly close distance to the location. He said that he did not see anything that would visually affect the historic district, however. Terdalkar said the tower itself would be a stealth tower in that it would be a light pole with downcast light. He said that this report is for the Commission's information, although if the Commission has serious concerns, he could put it on the Commission's agenda for a formal opinion by the Commission. Terdalkar said that the pole would be on the site, not on the street. He said there is a parking lot at the site that will need some lighting. Michaud said she was concerned about light pollution. Terdalkar Historic Preservation Commission October 11, 2007 Page 5 commented that the site plan shows the tower very close to the highway where there are no residences. Weitzel said that the site cannot be seen from the historic properties. Brennan said these are not local historic districts, so the Commission could not do anything if it wanted to. Terdalkar said the Commission has been invited to provide comments to be forwarded to the State Historical Society, which has something to say about the permits. Weitzel said that the State Historic Preservation Office is actually asking the CLG for comments so that the authority to approve or deny is actually asking for input from the Commission. Brennan stated that seems then like something that should be on the agenda. Weitzel said he agreed. He said that this is part of a Section 106, which is part of the 36 CFR Part 800 legislation, which comes into play when there is federal money and when permits are required. Terdalkar referred to a free one-day workshop in Coon Rapids, Iowa providing training opportunities. He asked anyone who may be interested to let him know. Terdalkar said there will be an overview of the Secretary of the Interior Standards, and there will also be a session on financial incentives. PUBLIC HEARING ON DRAFT PRESERVATION PLAN: Weitzel said that the Historic Preservation Commission of Iowa City was enacted because of a certified local government with the State of Iowa and through ordinances that were approved by City Council. He said that the Commission is an independent, volunteer board of citizens - residents who are not part of the City administration. Weitzel said that the Commission is appointed by City Council, and its functions are part legislative and part judicial. He said that the Commission's mission statement is to identify, protect and preserve the community's historic resources in order to enhance the quality of life and economic well-being of current and future generations. Weitzel stated that this public hearing was convened to consider the Preservation Plan update. He said that once the public hearing is opened, citizen participation can greatly aid the process of deliberating whether or not to approve the Preservation Plan update. Weitzel said that in order to arrive at a complete and well-reasoned conclusion, the Commission welcomes all testimony. He said the Commission will base its decision on facts and evidence presented in the open meeting as well as other correspondence transmitted to staff during the Preservation Plan open houses. Terdalkar presented an overview of the draft Preservation Plan. He said that the first plan was adopted in 1992, and it was done through a CLG and an HRDP grant. Terdalkar said that another grant allowed for this draft update of the plan. He said that outside consultants, historians, and preservation planning experts were hired, and Svendsen Tyler and Clarion and Associates collaborated to complete the job, conducting neighborhood meetings and individual interviews with citizens and other interested parties. T erdalkar said that the draft provides a progress report of work done in the past 15 years. He said it tells what has been achieved in terms of the goals of the Preservation Plan and what to strive for in the next ten to 15 years. Terdalkar said the public input process began in January of last year, and solicitation of public input was accomplished in neighborhood meetings held over a three to four-month period, as well as through individual interviews. Terdalkar said that the updates are based on the received input as well as future visions colleCted from the input. He said that the Preservation Plan also provides an adoption policy and implementation policy for implementing objectives. Terdalkar said that in the past 15 years, surveys and evaluations were done for many of the historic districts and historic areas in the City. He said that there are now seven historic districts in the City that are locally designated, five conservation districts, and 56 local and National Register properties. Terdalkar said that recently three national historic districts were added to the City. Terdalkar stated that the 25th annual award program will be held in October. He said all of these efforts have led to neighborhood improvement, stabilization of many of the residential areas, and have provided investment opportunities in the older neighborhoods as well as in downtown and commercial areas. Historic Preservation Commission October 11, 2007 Page 6 Terdalkar said that some of the recommendations in the draft refer to streamlining the Commission's review process in reviewing projects based on exterior changes and alterations. He said, however, the main focus is on providing more technical and financial assistance and incentives to encourage more historic preservation activities, increased efforts to provide education and interpretation, and bringing in outside visitors and creating opportunity for economic development in terms of heritage tourism. Terdalkar said it provides economic potential, and focusing and capitalizing on those resources is one of the recommendations in the draft. Terdalkar said the Commission is seeking pUblic opinion on the draft. He said that after that point, the Commission will discuss the plan and any possible changes and will then recommend this Comprehensive Plan amendment to the Planning and Zoning Commission and eventually to the City Council. Terdalkar said the public hearings for that will be announced, and citizens can also continue to send comments and concerns via e-mail or telephone. Public hearing: Weitzel said that citizens are asked to limit comments to five minutes. He said that the Commission is not here for debate but is present to listen to and discuss public comments. Weitzel said that the Commission will discuss what it hears after the meeting, summarize comments, and eventually make a recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. Helen Burford. 528 East ColleQe Street, said that Friends of Historic Preservation and its board members spent quite a bit of time working with the Commission through this process. She said that what is refreshing about this draft plan is its focus on the economic impact of historic preservation on the community. Burford said the best example of this would be the recovery efforts on Iowa Avenue and in other areas that were affected by the Tornado. She said it is paramount to recognize that this recovery effort created jobs, put dollars back into the community, improved the streetscape, encouraged people in other areas of the community to make investments in their properties, and encouraged those who normally would not want to consider historic preservation as a governmental tool for stabilizing or bettering a neighborhood to take a second view of the situation. Burford said that in stimulating other areas where there is a lot of change about to happen, there has certainly been a positive impact on the community. She said that for the future, it is something that also attracts new people to the community, so that new businesses and new thinking will be supported. Burford stated that the second important thing that the plan addresses is that it encourages neighborhood stabilization. She said that the Plan addresses in detail certain things that the community has heard over and over again. Burford stated that most of the historic areas are already developed properties, so people are concerned with the preservation of certain unique features of the community. For example, she said that this Plan addresses brick streets in a way that the other plan did not. Burford said that the Plan brings forward a rational way of addressing something that is important to some parts of the community. In terms of neighborhood stabilization, Burford said this Plan discusses the older communities and allows one to think of them in a very contemporary way, as with the resurgence of walkable communities and things that have an impact on the environment. She stated that this Plan gives a good framework for talking about these things. Burford said that by encouraging historic preservation, the potential for heritage tourism is created. Burford stated that one other thing that is extremely important about the Plan is the streamlining of the process. She said the Pian really emphasizes better communication both within the City and externally, with the University, community groups, and neighborhoods. Burford said that the Plan reaches and gives a nice framework for encouraging positive actions on the part of the community and also overcomes the hurdle of any sort of negative feelings about dealing with regulations first, because they really do benefit the community. David Ozolins. 1131 East Burlinaton Street, said that he has lived at his house for 15 years and has worked on the house and slowly been remodeling it since he has lived there. He said that the entire house has Andersen windows. Ozolins said that he put a two-story addition on four years ago and is now Historic Preservation Commission October 11, 2007 Page 7 in the process of putting on a single-story addition. He said that he had ordered a bunch of Andersen windows for the addition and was going to use the French doors from the current house on the new addition but has since been informed that he cannot use vinyl windows. Ozolins said he would be forced to lose $5,000 to $6,000 worth of windows. Ozolins said that he is trying to find a way to appeal this to either the City Councilor Board of Adjustment, because he doesn't feel that is proper. He said his main point is that there has to be more ways of appealing the decision of the Commission. Ozolins said that of all the building codes and ways to build, there are a number of different venues in which to work out a disagreement of variance. He said that with historic preservation, he is trying to figure out how to meet the Code and the spirit of the law and yet be able to use the vinyl windows. Ozolins stated that when the standards were written 20 years ago, vinyl windows were not very good. He said that now, one can step back ten to 15 feet and can't tell the difference between a metal clad window and a vinyl clad window. Ozolins said he has heard comments that one cannot paint a vinyl clad window, but that is the reason he bought them. He said that he is trying to get back to what is close and reasonable for his house but wants to figure out a way to get there with the vinyl windows. Ozolins said he would like to see the Commission codify allowing high quality vinyl windows or separate routes of appeal for that kind of process. Weitzel said that in a conservation district, the normal route of appeal would be to the Board of Adjustment. Ozolins stated that that requires a $375 fee. Ron Herman said that he is Ozolins' contractor for the second part of the addition to his house. Regarding an appeal to the Board of Adjustment, Herman said that is really a meaningless appeal. He said the Board of Adjustment can only say that you follow the guidelines or not. Herman said it is obvious that because the guidelines say that something is not allowed, that that is an appeal that in a conservation district costs $375 to file, whereas in a historic district it is free. Herman said that if it were a building code issue and not a zoning issue, which an overlay district is, he could go to the Board of Appeals and get a variance for that, but he can't get a variance for something that is in the historic preservation code. He said that for whatever reason, it exists outside the normal appeal procedure. Herman said all one can do is go to the Board of Adjustment, which will look at the guidelines. He said that guidelines to him is really a soft and fuzzy word, when it is actually a proscription. Herman said that there is no due process in that under the current regime and the way the overlay districts work, there is no appeal past the Board of Adjustment, which can only look at the guidelines. He said there has to be some way to modify things as we go forward. Herman said that by the time Andersen vinyl clad windows are installed and trimmed, they look exactly identical inside and out. He said they are both quality products. Herman agreed that when the statutes were written 25 years ago, vinyl windows were cheap but said that is no longer the case. He said he is not asking that there be a blanket allowance but thinks that there are cases where an exception should be made. Miklo said that there is a section of the draft plan that discusses the guidelines in conservation districts, and windows is one of the things the Plan suggests be looked at. He said the appeal process is pretty standard for this sort of code, but the Plan does actually support looking at the window issue. Miklo said it might be that when there are already vinyl windows on a building, that might be a time when an exception could be made. Norm Cate. 322 Mullin Avenue, said he took on a project about one and one half years ago, an arts and crafts cottage in disrepair. He said that he now lives there, and he took this on to save a really great old house. Cate said that everything he has done on the house is period appropriate except that he had to take out the wooden casement windows that were original to the house, because they were in such bad shape, and he replaced them with metal clad windows. He said the windows look exactly like the wooden windows that were in there. Historic Preservation Commission October 11, 2007 Page 8 Cate said it concerns him that if this property were in a historic district and he came up with a vinyl product that was as good if not better but for a more reasonable price, he wouldn't have been able to put them in that structure. He said that the guidelines, like any other form of proscriptive code, does need to have some form of appeal, that he should be able to come to a board to present a product that he feels satisfies the intent of the guidelines. Cate said that the way it is currently set is that if it doesn't meet the guidelines, it doesn't meet the guidelines. Cate said this is something the Commission should consider as it continues to grapple with what's being written. He said it is something that will have to be looked at in the coming years for neighborhoods that will be considered as historic districts. Cate thanked the Commission for the work it does. Weitzel said the Commission has a way to review unapproved products that have not been looked at before but does not have a way at this point to overturn things that are specifically disallowed in the guidelines. He agreed that the Commission may want to look at that. Weitzel said that the guidelines are approved by the City Council, so the Commission does not have the authority to overturn them, although the guidelines may be revised from time to time with City Council approval. Public hearing closed. Weitzel said the Commission would discuss public comments regarding the plan. He said the Commission could vote on the draft Plan or direct staff to investigate particular items further. Ponto asked what written comments had come in regarding the draft Plan. Terdalkar said that Friends of Historic Preservation provided input to the Plan, and a section regarding the role of Friends of Historic Preservation was added to the plan. Brennan said that when the process began, he had thought this was supposed to be a roughly 15-year plan, similar to the time frame of the previous plan. He said that as he reads through this, it appears to be a ten-year plan that makes periodic, perfunctory references to a 15-year time frame but doesn't really talk about a ten to 15-year zone. Terdalkar said that he did not think one could put a concrete timeline on a vision plan like this, but it is normal to have it for a period of ten to 15 years. Miklo added that the previous plan did not have a specified timeline. He said that it is difficult to plan much further ahead than ten years, and after ten years, staff recognized that the plan staff was working from needed updating, in that the City had changed quite a bit and the number of buildings reaching the eligibility age for historic properties and National Register consideration had changed quite a bit. In terms of planning, Miklo said staff likes to look at a ten-year period, realizing that it might stretch into 15 before a new plan is put in place. Brennan said that the Plan seems to discuss buildings up through 1960, and we are now only two years away from the 50-year threshold for those, so there will be more buildings coming across the threshold during the period of this plan that really are not addressed by it. Brennan suggested the Plan should go up through 1970 or at least 1965. Miklo said that Svendsen did discuss that with the State as to what it wanted to see. He said that a lot of people have a difficult time grasping that buildings constructed in 1960 might be considered historic. Miklo said that is one of the reasons the director from the State Historical Society and the consultant specified up through 1960. Brennan said that the post-war development period runs through the late 1950s and 1960s. He said that back in 1930, no one would have thought that the house he now lives in was remarkable in any way, but we do now. Brennan said the Plan doesn't seem to address the houses coming up to that threshold, where in some ways they are worthy of comment and thought. Terdalkar said that the Plan identifies neighborhoods that are eligible for being historic and stepping up and evaluating and documenting those neighborhoods. He said that if five years from now the Commission feels there is a neighborhood that needs to be surveyed, that can be taken on as a separate project as well. Weitzel said the Plan really doesn't stop the Commission from doing anything, and if the Commission sees a need, it could commission a survey to be done. Historic Preservation Commission October 11, 2007 Page 9 Miklo said this is a legitimate question being raised. He said the Commission might consider adding an objective that discusses this and in seven to ten years the Commission looking at the time frame of the buildings to be studied. Ponto stated that objective nine discusses revising design guidelines to better address key issues in presentation format, and the sub objectives discuss new construction, parking and paving materials, and some other things. He suggested the Commission consider adding a new item under objective nine to say to review and revise as appropriate existing guidelines for windows. Ponto said that would be broad enough to get into the issues regarding materials. Miklo said that objective seven discusses developing clear and specific standards that address frequent design review issues in conservation districts. He said that was put in by Svendsen to specifically address these kinds of things where there has been some controversy. Miklo said that supplementing it in section nine as suggested would go hand in hand with that. Michaud suggested that the Plan entertain consideration of sustainable materials that are either recycled or sustainable and therefore better for the environment. Ponto agreed and said perhaps the Plan should go so far as to address things like solar panels. Weitzel said he would agree as long as they could be incorporated into the design so that it doesn't detract from the building. He agreed that energy conservation will be in the forefront more and more. Weitzel said that may be why the Commission is seeing more and more window replacements and said that the Commission will need to have a general discussion on that topic at some point. Miklo said the Commission could put forth a motion to recommend that this Preservation Plan be adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan, and any amendments could be included as part of the motion. He said the other option would be to consider the information and vote on the Plan at an upcoming meeting. Weitzel suggested the Commission investigate some of these things and perhaps articulate a little better what the Commission is recommending as it moves forward. He said that the comments made at the hearing merit further investigation. MOTION: Trimble moved to defer consideration of the draft Preservation Plan to the Commission's November sth meeting. Baker seconded the motion. Ponto agreed with Weitzel that it is appropriate to defer, in that a better write-up of the amendments would make the Commission more comfortable in endorsing them. The motion carried on a vote of S-O. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:47 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte s/pcdlminslhpcJ2007/1 0-11-07 ,doc Historic Preservation Commission Attendance Record 2007 Term Name Expires 2/08 3/08 4/12 5/17 5/31 6/12 6/28 7/12 8/9 9/17 10/11 Baker 3/29/09 X OlE X X X X X X X X X Brennan 3/29/08 X X X OlE X OlE 0 X X X X Carlson 3/29/07 X X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- -. -- -- -- -. Downing 3/29/10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X Gunn 3/29/07 X OlE -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- McConnally 3/29/08 OlE OlE X OlE OlE OlE OlE OlE OlE -- -- -- -- Michaud 3/29/09 X X OlE X X OlE X X X X X Ponto 3/29/07 X X X X OlE X X X X X X Swaim 3/29/09 X X X OlE X X X X OlE X X Trimble 3/29/10 -- -- -- - X X X X X X X OlE OlE Toomey 3/29/09 X X X X X X X OlE X X X Weitzel 3/29/08 X OlE X X X X X X X X X Key: X = Present o = Absent OlE = AbsentlExcused NM = No Meeting = Not a Member em: MINUTES lOW A CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 10th, 2007-5:00 PM EMMA J HARV AT HALL-IOWA CITY/CITY HALL APPROVED CALL TO ORDER: Carol Alexander called the meeting to order at 5:15 PM. MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Michael Wright, Edgar Thornton MEMBERS ABSENT: Michele Payne, Ned Wood STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Walz, Sarah Holecek OTHERS PRESENT: Shelly McCafferty, Frank Wagner RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL (becomes effective onlv after separate Council action): CONSIDERATION OF THE AUGUST 8. 2007 MINUTES: Alexander asked if there were any editorial changes to the August 8, 2007 minutes. She also noted that she thought the minutes were done very well and were very clear. MOTION: Wright moved to approve the August 8, 2007 minutes as presented. Thornton seconded the motion. The motion was approved 3:0. SPECIAL EXCEPTION: EXC07-00007: An application submitted by Frank and Theresa Wagner for a special exception to reduce the required front and side setbacks to allow construction of an addition and an uncovered deck for property located in the Medium Density, Single-Family (RS-8) zone at 1104 Muscatine Avenue. Walz began with the Staff Report by stating that she has two letters to share with Members, which arrived late, from neighbors of the Wagner's that pertain to this exception. Walz stated that this property is in the RS-8 zone, and that the Board would be considering two special exceptions - the first being a special exception to reduce the required front setback for the house itself, from 15 feet to 11 feet, and from 5 feet to 3 feet for the side setback; and a special exception for the uncovered deck, from the required 10 feet front setback to 4 feet, and the required side setback of 5 feet to 3 feet. Walz stated that this property is surrounded by other RS-8's. Walz then proceeded to show the Members the layout of this property, noting that it is triangular, comer lot. The Board of Adjustment October 10, 2007 Page 2 current zoning states that if a lot fronts on two or more streets - which this property does on Muscatine and Washington - it must have the minimum setback, equal to the required front setback, on all streets. Walz continued, stating that this property is a nonconforming one for several reasons. Minimum lot size is 3,400 square feet, and the standards today say the lot must be 5,000 square feet. She noted the IS-foot setback requirement for the front yard, noting that on this property, the side that fronts Muscatine has a porch that is within this setback and a portion of the northwest corner of the house and the mudroom are already within the rear setback on the Washington Street side. Walz said that the applicants have removed an existing mudroom that measured 9 X 5 feet, and they would like to put in a kitchen extension in its place that measures 14 X 4 feet, which will be within the required IS-foot setback. This new addition would also extend into the side setback, which Walz pointed out to the Board. Walz stated that the applicants are proposing to build an uncovered deck, and the required setback for this accessory structure is 10 feet. Walz then explained the requirements for the setback regulation. The situation must be peculiar to the property - Walz noted that staff finds the situation at 1104 Muscatine as such, as it is a triangular lot and fronts on two streets, it is significantly smaller than current minimum lot sizes, and the topography of the site is quite sloped and making the rear yard difficult to use and access. Walz stated next that there would be difficulty complying with the setback standards. She further noted that the applicants are proposing to construct the uncovered deck along the rear side of the house, in order to create some usable, private backyard space, as the topography is so difficult to work with. Walz stated that the applicants are attempting to create more space on the first floor of the home, in order to get the laundry facilities upstairs, a feature that is becoming more common in houses. Walz stated that granting the Special Exception would not be "contrary to the purpose of the setback regulations." She said that staff does not feel this will be an issue, as they would not go beyond the minimum 3 foot setback on the side. Walz said that the house next door is set back even further off its side lot line - more than the required 5 feet - and that there is access to light and air because of the way the lot is situated on a corner. "To provide opportunity between dwellings" is another reason for the setback regulations, stated Walz, and she said that staff believes that the setback reductions for the house will not diminish privacy for the neighbor. She explained how the deck will have some screening with trees, and that the rear of the adjacent house is set somewhat forward from the deck location, and therefore, the deck won't be in direct view from the neighboring house itself. The requested reduction "reflects the general building scale and placement of structures in the City's neighborhoods" - Walz stated that there are a number of older homes in this area that are in this type of unusual situation - either triangular-shaped or other odd shaped lots or lots that front on two streets - and that it is not unusual to have a portion of the house or accessory structure sitting within the required setback. She said that given the nature in this part of town, staff does not feel this will be out of character with the general placement of buildings. Board of Adjustment October 10, 2007 Page 3 . Walz said there was some concern about the deck, as it will sit up somewhat higher. Staff is recommending that the reduction be to 5 feet, and not 4 feet, to allow adequate space for vegetation to grow, whether bushes or lawn. Walz said there is currently a privacy fence along the top of the retaining wall, which intrudes into the space of the sidewalk. Staff felt that if that privacy fencing were removed, it would giveoffer more of a transition from the sidewalk to the property. "Promote a reasonable physical relationship between buildings and residences" is another staff-agreed exception. Walz stated that for the reasons already given, and the fact that the neighborhood is fully developed, this will not create a difficult situation. Walz then discussed the General Standards - will not be detrimental or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or welfare - Walz stated that reducing the setback for the house itself for the kitchen addition will not have any negative effects; that removal of the fence above the retaining wall, requfring some space for vegetation between the retaining wall and the deck, and then have the underside of the deck be covered will minimize any potential negative effect. She further stated that the specific proposed exception would not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity of 1104 Muscatine, and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. Walz said that this house was not maintained very well over the years, and the applicants are in the process of reinvesting in the home and updating both the home and yard to make it more liveable, which will in turn increase the property value for not only this home, but for the neighborhood in general. Continuing, this proposal will "not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in this zone," "adequate utilities are provided," "adequate measures have been taken to provide ingress or egress" - Walz stated that this has no impact on this proposal. Walz further stated that this proposal meets all other applicable regulations; however, it does still have to go through final site review to get the Building Permit. The proposed use will also be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended, which calls for maintaining and improving the safety and conformity of all housing, and promotes the integrity of exiting single-family housing. Walz stated that in this case they have a somewhat historic house that is being restored in a sensitive manner. In summary, staff recommends Special Exception EXC07-00007 and application for Special Exception to reduce the required principal building setback from 15 feet to 11 feet on the front, and from 5 feet to 3 feet along the side property line, be granted subject to compliance with the site plan submitted. Staff also recommends that a Special Exception to reduce the required setbacks for the accessory structure, the uncovered deck, from 10 feet to 5 feet (front), and from 5 feet to 3 feet on the side, for the same property be approved, subject to removal of the existing 4-foot privacy fence, providing landscape space between the retaining wall and screening the underside of the deck. Alexander asked the Board if they had any questions for Walz. Wright asked if the deck screening would be a part of the site review, to which Walz stated that it could be part of that. Thornton asked Walz to explain her remark about a particular picture where she was explaining the existing fencing. Walz stated that one concern staff has is that Board of Adjustment October 10, 2007 Page 4 currently when you walk along the sidewalk you have a wall effect on one side, almost as if the setback were zero. By granting the special exception, that would give the opportunity to get rid of this wall and open up more space in this area. It would be preferable to what is currently in place, and she stated that staff felt it would improve the area overall. Wright asked Walz how far off the ground the deck will be. Walz stated that she believes when you are standing at this sidewalk, the deck will be at 6 to 8 feet above you. Public Hearing Open Alexander asked if the applicant would like to address the Board. Shelley McCafferty, architect on the proposed project, addressed the Board concerning the exceptions. She asked that the Board approve the staffs recommendations, as explained by Walz, noting that the owner has agreed to comply with the recommendations of the City - increasing the setback from 4 to 5 feet during the landscaping and removal of the wall. McCafferty stated that she would address any questions the board members may have. Wright asked about the deck's height. McCafferty stated that from the sidewalk level, it would be about 8 feet. She further explained the landscaping that is proposed. Thornton asked if there will still be some type of wall, and McCafferty stated that the existing retaining wall would most likely stay in place. She said there would be some buildup of the topography from the sidewalk to the house. Alexander asked if anyone else wanted to speak in favor of the application. Frank Wagner, the owner of the home, spoke to the Board next. He gave the Board further explanation of the topography, and how the area around the home and deck will work. Wagner stated that one noteworthy item is from a neighbor across the street who said they turned their porch swing around to watch the progress on the Wagner's home, after turning the swing the opposite direction about 25 years ago due to the deterioration of the home. He said the neighbors are excited about the plans. Thornton asked Wagner how old the house is, and Wagner stated it was built in 1910. Thornton asked what the home was like in the beginning for the Wagners, and Wagner stated, "I shouldn't have bought it!" He said it was in bad shape and had been unoccupied for about a year, after being a rental property for approximately 35 years. He said once he and his wife are done, almost every inch of the home will be restored, not renovated. They plan to live in the home - he and his wife and four children - once the home is finished. He said all of his neighbors have been very positive about the proposed plan. Alexander asked if anyone else wanted to speak to the application. Thornton asked if they could have an explanation as to why they had one letter against this proposal. He said the complaint was about the sidewalk, and the citizen thought it would interfere with walking down the street. Wagner stated that he briefly read the letter, but that he was surprised by it. He said if they left the wall and vines there as they currently are, that this makes the sidewalk harder to use than if they proceed with the proposed plan. He questioned whether the person was aware of the proposed plan. Public Hearing Closed Board of Adjustment October 10, 2007 Page 5 Alexander closed the Public Hearing, and asked Holecek for clarification on whether these exceptions should be done individually or as one. Holecek stated that they should do their motion from the staff recommendation. Wright asked about the contingency on the fence, asking if the Special Exception would keep a fence from being added later. He stated that he would like to add this to the Exception. MOTION: Wright moved that EXC07-00007 application for Special Exception to reduce the required principal building setback from 15 to 11 feet (front), from 5 feet to 3 feet (side), for property located at 1104 Muscatine Avenue be granted, subject to compliance with the site plan submitted, with the Special Exception be approved subject to the removal of the existing privacy fence and providing landscaped space between the retaining wall and a screened area beneath the deck. Thornton seconded the motion. Walz noted that on the first part of the principal setback there was a typo - it should be 5 feet to 3 feet side along the Washington Street frontage. Thornton stated that the request from the Wagners for a Special Exception to reduce the required front setback for principal building from 15 to 11 feet has gone before staff for recommendation, and is now before the Board. He continued, stating that in looking at the analysis and the situation is peculiar and there is practical difficulty with compliance. Thornton stated that in looking at the general standards, the property is not an endangerment to public health, safety, and welfare. In terms of making general improvements to the property, the applicants have talked about removing some areas that were of concern-the fencing. In looking at the specific issues and how they impact neighbors, once again, Thornton stated that the applicants are making overall improvements to the property. Utilities are not going to be impacted, and it is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan for the City. Thornton stated that he is in favor of this proposal. Wright said that when he looks at the specific standards, he agrees the situation is peculiar to the property given the lot size, peculiar shape, and sharp grade of the lot. He said it also makes it difficult to comply with the setback standards. Wright voiced his concern over the scale of the deck in terms ofthe rest ofthe neighborhood, and stated that he went and looked at the current situation. He does feel that with the clearing of the fence and the landscaping around the deck that it will not "loom" as he had feared. He continued, stating that by requiring removal of the fence, the setback will give more space on the sidewalk. He does not feel the Special Exception will be injurious to surrounding properties. He does feel it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as well, noting that one aspect of the Comprehensive Plan is to make properties more livable. With the inability to provide a fence along the setback in the future, Wright feels this will be a much more friendly approach to this side of the home, and that he is in favor of it. Board of Adjustment October 10, 2007 Page 6 Alexander stated that she too, for all of the reason stated, feels this will be an improvement for the neighborhood, and that she will vote in favor, as well. The motion was approved 3:0. APPEAL: APL07-00002: Discussion of an application submitted by Leighton House for an appeal on a decision not to renew a rental permit for property at 923 East College Street. Holecek explained to the Board that the appellant asked that this be deferred until such time as the maximum number of Board Members could hear their appeal. Holecek stated that one of the Board Members would not be able to sit on this appeal, and the other was ill this evening. They have specifically asked that this be deferred to November 14,2007, which is the next regular Board of Adjustment meeting. MOTION: Wright moved deferment of APL07-00002 to the November 14, 2007 Board of Adjustment meeting. Thornton seconded. The motion was approved 3:0. VARIANCE: V AR07-00003: An application submitted by Corridor State Bank for a variance to allow an animated, freestanding sign in the Central Business Service (CB-2) zone located at 202 North Linn Street. Holecek stated that the same issue is relevant here - a different Board Member will be conflicted on this application, and so again, the maximum number of Members to hear this variance application will be four total, and the applicant has also asked for deferment to enable them to present their case to the maximum number of Board Members. Walz added that she had a brief discussion with the Bank and noted that the November 14 meeting would most likely be when the variance is heard. MOTION: Thornton moved deferment of Variance V AR07-00003 to the November 14,2007 Board of Adjustment meeting. Wright seconded. The motion was approved 3:0. OTHER: Alexander asked that Board Members remember that they need to be present for items which they are not recusing themselves. Walz asked if everyone present is able to make the next meeting, to which Members all stated they could. Holecek asked that Members let staff know as soon as possible if they are unable to attend meetings. Members Board of Adjustment October 10, 2007 Page 7 discussed having a meal at this next meeting, due to the expected length of the upcoming agenda. Walz agreed to provide food for the board. Holecek reminded the Members that once the applicant has made their case to the Board, the Board does not have to render its decision immediately at that meeting, that they can decide to defer their deliberations to a later meeting, especially if there is a lot of information to digest or the meeting runs late. Alexander asked about the Appeal process, asking Holecek for clarification on the decision-making. Holecek stated that the Members step into the decision making role, that this decision being appealed was in error, and the Board can reverse in whole or in part; they can modify the decision; or they can uphold the decision, either in part or in whole. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION: Holecek stated there is nothing new on Shelter House, and that the expected opinions are out on Thursday mornings. ADJOURNMENT: Alexander adjourned the meeting at 5:45 PM. Board of Adjustment Attendance Record 2007 TERM 1/10 3/28 4/11 4/28 5/9 6/13 7/11 8/8 9/12 10/10 11/14 12/12 NAME EXP. Carol Alexander 01/01/08 X X DIE X X NM X X NM X Michael Wright 01/01/09 X X X X X NM X X NM X Ned Wood 01/01/10 X X X X X NM DIE X NM DIE Michelle Payne 01/01/11 X X X X X NM X X NM DIE Edgar Thornton 01/01/12 X X X X X NM DIE X NM X KEY: x = Present o = Absent OlE = Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting --- = Not a Member ~ (#i;:) Iowa City ~Public Library BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes of the Regular Meeting October 25, 2007 FINAL APPROVED Members Present: Linzee McCray (arrived at 5:03 pm), Thomas Dean, Michael Cohen, John Kenyon, William Korf, Thomas Martin, Mary New, Meredith Rich-Chappell Members Absent: Leon Spies Staff Present: Barb Black, Susan Craig, Debb Green (arrived at approximately 5:16 pm), Kara Logsden, Patty McCarthy, Elyse Miller, Hal Penick Guests Present: None. Call Meeting to Order. Dean called the meeting to order at 5:00 pm. Public Discussion. None. Approval of Minutes. The minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 25, 2007 were reviewed. A motion to approve the minutes of the September 25, 2007 meeting was made by Korf, seconded by Martin. Motion carried 7/0. Unfinished Business. None. New Business. Library Board Policy 401 Finance Policy Review. This is a regularly scheduled policy review. Staff recommended changes include updating account numbers and some minor language changes. Dean stated that the word "are" on page 3, 401.3 D 3 should be crossed out. A motion to approve the changes to Library Board Policy 401 was made by Korf, seconded by Cohen. Motion carried 8/0. Staff Reports. Departmental Reports: Children's Services. McCray asked a question about Family Night at the Library with the Title I schools. Craig explained that they have already taken place, and that they are usually scheduled at the beginning of the school year. The Library received a thank you note from Lucas School which Craig shared with Board members. Systems. McCray was both interested and impressed with the Event Manager software. She also thinks the usability study is a good idea. Technical Services. Kenyon looking forward to featured lists on RSS. Black described that there will be a broader topic featured list from which items which fit the criteria for that list will also be included, so the RSS feed will be more powerful and inclusive. For example, signing up for the Music & Movies list would mean getting a weekly list on a specific topic within the category such as "New Operas", "Music with a Latin Beat" or "Films of Martin Scorsese". Kenyon expressed interest and pleasure in the feature that will enable an email or a text message that contains the location, call number, title and author of anything in the catalog be sent to a cell phone. Development Office. McCarthy said that the Book End book sale on Sunday brought in more than $1500 in 3 hours. The Iowa City Downtown Rotary Club adopted this as one of their projects and they were very helpful at the sale. McCarthy shared an article about Mike Ott, one of the Corridor Business Journal's 40 under 40 honorees this year and a Library Foundation Board member. A reminder that Sunday, 11/4 is the Book Gala, an event at Prairie Lights in which a percentage of the evenings receipts are donated to the Library. Book End sales are steady, but McCarthy said that it is sometimes difficult to keep the shelves stocked. New mentioned the City water bill and asked if we ever had an insert and suggested that it would be a good place to ask for books. Craig said it might be time to do this again. Kenyon asked about the possibility of having a book receipt day that would be dedicated to people just dropping off books to the library. ILA Conference Report. Three board members attended the Iowa Library Association (ILA) Annual conference this year and the Library had more staff attend than usual because it was held in Coralville. Craig said that the Wednesday night reception was supported by the Iowa City Libraries Friends Foundation and the Friends of the Coralville Public Libraries at the Johnson County Historical Museum. Craig stated that the ILA attendees were very impressed with the conference and that more than 900 persons registered, the highest attendance ever. The Gates Foundation provided money so that some of the smaller libraries could send staff. New asked how sites for the conference are chosen. Craig explained that historically the ILA met on the east, west, and mid parts of the state but that the size of the conference is growing so much that there are fewer locations that can accommodate it. Reader Report. Miscellaneous. There was a piece in the packet celebrating the 20th anniversary of Community Reading month Book Talks. The November 7 talk, Community Leader Readers will include recognition of Hills Bank, which has supported this program for all 20 years. On another note, progress is being made in the basement construction. President's Report. McCray said hats off to Lauritzen, Clark, and Logsden for all of their hard work at the Iowa Library Association Annual conference. McCray said that the sessions she attended made her appreciate the great relationship this Board has with its Director and staff. McCray related that since the fundraising event at the Izaak Walton League with Lazy Boy and the Recliners, the band got a cease and desist order from the La-Z-Boy Corporation. McCray has written a souvenir book for Old Capitol which was recently published. Announcements from Members. Members are encouraged to see the show on the Writer's Workshop at the Old Capitol curated by Jennifer New. Tom Dean wrote an essay in the just off the presses Spectator. He also edited and contributed to Grace of Grass and Water: Writing in Honor of Paul Gruchow, a collection of essays by Paul Gruchow. Gruchow was an author, editor, and conservationist from Minnesota whose writing focused on place and community. The collection is in honor of Gruchow, who committed suicide in 2004. Committee Reports. None. Communications. An email received from Dan Lechay prompted Craig to follow up with the Library architects and City building inspectors. All have stated that the main staircase meets all coding requirements. The architects reviewed both the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements and suggestions. A visual cue is not included in the ADA. The Board directed Craig to respond to Mr. Lechay that it does not recommend any changes to the stairs. Quarterly Financial Reports. First quarter Receipts. As expected, fines are down because of courtesy notices we now send to patrons. Rent is also down because the first floor tenant is behind in rent. The City Attorney is following up on this. First quarter Expenditures. The largest expense is payroll. Because paychecks are issued every two weeks, there are two months of the year in which there is an "extra" paycheck. This happened in August, so the payroll expense look larger than it typically would. The bottom line in services and supplies is the bellwether for the Library's financial status. Both are at 25%, which is appropriate for the first quarter of a fiscal year. Materials are always reflected at higher percentage rate because we pay for materials at the end of the year from gift funds from the Foundation. Quarterly Use Reports. Three month Output Measures. Hours open are similar to last year and the average number per hour is up 2.5%. Meeting room usage is up 25.4% this year, from 331 to 415, and the variety of meetings in our meeting rooms is amazing. Circulation is up 3.5 %. Bus passes are down, which was expected after the change in bus pass policy. However, parking stamp use is increasing. New noted that there was a huge increase in hits for the home page. Penick explained that search engines promote this. Home page hits are going up along with in-house computer use and use of databases. Disbursements. The Visa expenditures for September 2007 were reviewed. A motion to approve the disbursements for September 2007 was made by Cohen, seconded by New. Motion carried 8/0. Set Agenda Order for November Meeting. Accreditation report. Book Gala. Craig reminded the Board that the November meeting is the third Thursday, November 15,2007, due to the Thanksgiving Holiday. Adjournment. It was moved by Kenyon, seconded by Rich-Chappell to adjourn the meeting. Dean declared the meeting adjourned at 5:55 pm. Respectfully submitted, Elyse Miller Board or Commission: ICPL Board of Trustees ATTENDANCE RECORD CALENDAR YEAR 2007 - L13/22/0714/26/0 - Term 5124/07 6/28/07 123107 I 9127/07110/25/07 I 11/15/07 Exp - - - - - - Michael Cohen 7/01113 Not on Board OlE x OlE x x ~ I - - - - - - - Thomas Dean 7/01/09 x x x x OlE x x x x x - - - - - - - - John Kenyon 7/01113 Not on Board x x x x - - - - - - - - - - Bill Korf 7/01/09 x x x x x x OlE x x x x - - - - - - - - - - Tom Martin 6/30111 x x x x x OlE OlE x x x OlE - - - - - - - - - - Linzee McCray 7/01/09 x x x x OlE x x x x x x - - - - - - - - - - Mary New 7/01/07 OlE x x x x x x x x x x - - - - - - - - - - Meredith 6/30/11 Rich-Chappel x x x x x x x x x x x - - - - - Pat Schnack 7/01/07 x OlE OlE OlE OlE x - - - - Leon Spies 6/30111 x x x 0 OlE x - - - - David 7/01/07 OlE VanDusseldorQ x x x x x KEY: X = Present o = Absent OlE = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting Res = Resigned