Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-04-22 Bd Comm minutesr - MINUTES IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION MARCH 12, 1986 MEMBERS PRESENT: Ashby, Tiffany, Sokol, Lewis ABSENT: Knowling STAFF PRESENT: Zehr, Brown GUESTS PRESENT: J. Sautel, H. Bogart, E. Moses, E. Jones, H. Jones, M. Jones, D. Houston Tiffany called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Minutes of the February 12, 1986, Airport Commission meeting were approved as read. Moved by Sokol, seconded by Ashby, to retain Tiffany as Chairperson and Lewis as Vice -Chairperson of the Iowa City Airport Commission for the following year. Motion carried. Zehr presented the bills for the month. The Airport Commission approved the bills for payment as presented. COMPLIANCE PROJECT REPORT: Zehr explained that a meeting with the ap- pra sers and City Attorney was held to reformulate the price of the prop- erty and appraisals should be started within the next 30 days. Tiffany declared the public hearing on the plans and specifications for runway 6-24 extension project open. Moses explained the project will remove 200 feet of existing runway, extend runway 6-24, and relocate a drainage ditch. Zehr stated cost estimate for the project was $540,000 a year ago. E.K. Jones asked about future consequences if the airport lawsuit decision was reversed and raised concerns about the future reloca- tion of the ditch. Zehr said there is not a commitment to the construc- tion on of as currentlyeplan edthwould is snot nt abe practical nd further eXdue s�to the ttopograhe phy thenE.K. Jones inquired about the obtainment of easements. Zehr stated the airport is buying aerial easements and will buy fee simple when ground is needed. Tiffany noted that the City Council has scheduled an executive session March 24, 1986, with the Airport Commission to discuss pending litigation. Tiffany declared the public hearing closed. Brown stated the bid date has been set for April 10, 1986, sealed bids are due April 10, 1986, at 4:30 p.m. at the Iowa City City Clerk's office, and bids will be opened during the scheduled Airport Commission meeting on April 10 at 7:00 p.m. Zehr said a pre-bid meeting is scheduled to allow contractors to meet with the contract engineers. Moved by Sokol, seconded by Ashby to approve plans, specifications, form of contract and estimation of costs for construction of runway 6-24 extension project and to set the bid date for runway 6-24 extension project. Motion carried. Brown said the bid proposal contains a provision stating that the awarded contract will be awarded within 30 days of the date of the receipt of bids, April 10, 1986, therefore awarding the contract on May 10. Brown explained that quali- ed in fied 30vi requestthecommissioncould dbidderagreesto waivethe then have 60 days to award the contract. PUBLIC HEARING ON CORPORATE HANGAR NO. 31: Zehr reported Commission rephenewalptio s,nd rentis$28 Seeers5per uemo the lease c ntainsfour one yearrnth. RM t7 r Iowa City Airport Commission March 12, 1986 Page 2 Tiffany declared the public hearing open on the proposed corporate hangar lease N31. There was no input from the public, Tiffany declared the public hearing closed. Moved by Ashby, seconded by Sokol, to authorize the Chairperson to execute and the Secretary to attest to the corporate hangar lease between the Iowa City Airport Commission and Interwest Equi- ties for corporate hangar N31. The motion passed. DYKSTRA NURSERIES/IOWA CITY LANDSCAPE LEASE: Zehr explained Iowa City Landscape ease one-quarter acre ot landone year ago, has adequately maintained the property, and now proposes another one-year lease for a total of one-half acres of land. Zehr stated rent is $125 per month and the land will be used to store shrubs, bushes and other landscaping items. Brown noted the date of execution on the lease should read 1986. Moved by Sokol, seconded by Ashby, to authorize the Chairman to sign and the Secre- tary to attest a one-year lease with Dykstra Nurseries, Corporation, d/b/a Iowa City Landscaping for one-half acre of land on the airport. Motion carried. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT: Tiffany stated the Airport Commission is meeting with the Iowa City Coun- cil in executive session on March 24, 1986. Tiffany stated Zehr and I met with the City Manager search consulting firms to review responsibilities of the Airport Comnission. Tiffany stated the FAA has responded in writing that they don't think there is a problem with banner towing. E.K. Jones said the FAA is chicken and doesn't have any guts. Tim Sawtelle, political science student, distributed a questionnaire to obtain a brief profile on Airport Commission members to be used to write a paper. PUBLIC INPUT: Tiffany noted the Airport Commission will tour the new corporate hangar after tonight's meeting. E.K. Jones stated that the future of general aviation doesn't look good. E.K. Jones state that expansion of runway 6-24 is a downgrade of the airport and is in violation of the Iowa City Flying Service lease with the Iowa City Airport. E.K. Jones said the Iowa City Flying Service opposes the project. Commission members discussed the listing of times on the agenda and di- rected Zehr to designate the meeting's starting time on the agenda. E.K. Jones reported that the House Bill submitted by the IDOT to the Legislature to eliminate the gas tax refund was not passed. Meeting adjourned at 7:55. 4 e6 MINUTES COMMITTEE ON COMMUNITY NEEDS MARCH 18, 1986 - 3:30 P.M. IOWA CITY RECREATION CENTER ME14BERS PRESENT: Cooper, Kubby, Parden, Becker, Kuhn, Leshtz, Watts MEMBERS ABSENT: Williams, Lauria, Patrick, McCoy GUESTS PRESENT: Bill Morrison STAFF PRESENT: Nugent, Milkman, Dittmer CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Kubby at 3:36 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Becker said the minutes should be amended to include, on page 3, her assign- ments to Goodwill Industries and Systems Unlimited Group Homes, under 1986 CDBG project assignments. She said, under Quarterly Reports for 1985 Pro- jects, at the bottom of page 3, that she did report on Human Services Funding and that she is responsible for the insert on human services funding in this he minutes of amended.packet. Kuhn Cooper secondedved thetMotion. The motion carriedebruary unanimou S,y 1986 as Leshtz reported he had attended an Iowa Planners Network sponsored event. He said Norman Krumholtz, Director of the Center for Neighborhood Development, in Cleveland, Ohio, spoke. Leshtz said that the essence of Krumholtz' speech was that if citizens care about the long term health of their city, then they should be encouraging as much self-determination and neighborhood power as possible. He said the Millard/Orchard Park group would be an example. Leshtz added that Krumholtz further said that if citizens care about democracy, then low income groups must be assisted so there will be a balance of influence in society. Kuhn said Katherine Johnson has brought the issue of junk cars on the south side of Iowa City before the former City Manager, Neal Berlin, and Councilman McDonald. Milkman said the City is trying to take care of the issue and there have been other complaints. Nugent said the Community Development Plan Subcommittee will be sponsoring a public meeting on April 10 at 7:00 p.m. at the Public Library. She said the purpose of the meetingis to receive citizen comments on the proposed Commu- nity Development Plan. She said the Committee is urged to attend or list some ideas for the subcommittee. Kubby said the Committee has a new member, James McCoy, who will attend the next meeting. 4$7 Committee on Community Needs March 18, 1986 Page 2 DISCUSSION OF CCN RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL: Kubby said the CCN recommendation to Council was a request for clarification regarding the funding with CDBG monies of the Shared Housing Coordinator and the Human Services Coordinator's salaries. She said Council confirmed that funding for these staff positions was not a change in policy but an exception to theCit olic not to use CDBG funds for staff positions. A letter to mem ers o rom the liayor pro tem regarding this item was distributed. DISCUSSION OF FUNDING FOR BENTON STREET CULVERT REPLACEMENT: Milkman referred to her memo detailing costs of the Benton Street culvert replacement and the 1986 CDBG budget. She said there is $28,000 in the contingency fund and recommended that the Committee not let the fund go below that amount. She said, if the Committee feels the Benton Street Culvert Project is important and should be a high priority for funding in the future, then a statement could be made, as such, in the minutes as a way of going on record. Parden said she didn't feel the Benton Street Culvert Project should be the highest priority for the Committee. She added that if money were to become scarce there were likely to be projects with a higher priority for the City's needs. Kubby said the purchase of the property at 228 (lest Benton would most directly help the residents of the neighborhood, since it's the initial step that must be accomplished before any repairs are started. Kubby said the Committee may want to write a letter to the Miller/Orchard Neighborhood stating that their concerns are not being slighted and explain- ing the financial situation of the Committee. Consensus of the Committee was to write a letter. QUARTERLY REPORTS FOR MARCH: Iowa Youth Corps - Napoleon Park Project: Leshtz said the Iowa Youth Corps has met with the Parks and Recreation De- partment and has developed a time line regarding the Napoleon Park Project. He said a supervisor for the teenage workers will be hired soon. Leshtz said the Parks and Recreation Department is working on materials acquisition and the actual location of the restrooms will be determined in April. He said the Public Works Department will extend the water line to the north end of Napoleon Park in April and that then Parks and Recreation will be responsible for carrying the line to the actual site location. The completion date for the project will be July 4. Community Support Services and Day Treatment Program: Nugent reported for Williams. She said the Program will be .on the Council agenda on March 25, 1986, for approval of a contract between the City and the Community Mental Health Center to acquire a property on Van Buren Street. Milkman said one problem has arisen regarding a large discrepancy in the appraisals done on the property. 411 _A r Committee on Community Needs March 18, 1986 Page 3 Shared Housing Program: Nugent reported for Patrick. She said the new contract for Shared Housing will go into effect July 1, 1986. She said 20 matches are still intact. She added Diana Miller is doing a lot of publicity for the program. Housing Modifications for Low/Moderate Income Frail Elderly: Nugent reported for Patrick. She said the City will be entering into a contract with Elderly Services Agency around May 1. She said $8,000 was approved by CCN and the Council for the project. Mark Twain School Playground Revitalization: Kuhn said the Committee had met and that playground equipment had been or- dered. She said there is some fear regarding the equipment in that accidents may occur and the school could get sued. She said a proper surface needs to be put on the ground under the playground equipment. She said sand would be a good surface. Nugent urged the Committee, regarding quarterly reports, to visit their new sites in the next couple of months. Leshtz asked for an explanation of the table from the Human Services Report regarding Planning Division Reports. He asked what the asterisk, giving special consideration to these agencies, meant. Nugent said she would ask Marge Penney. ADJOURNMENT: Becker moved to adjourn. Kuhn seconded the motion adjourned at 4:08 p.m. Minutes submitted by Kim Dittmer. The meeting was 417 Wi MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, MARCH 12, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Jones, Wagner, Horowitz MEMBERS ABSENT: Champion, Hayes, Nowysz, VanderWoude STAFF PRESENT: Moen, Dittmer GUESTS PRESENT: See attached list. CALL TO ORDER: Vice Chairperson Wagner called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. She stated that since there was no quorum for the meeting, the minutes of February 12, 1986 would be approved at the next meeting. Wagner welcomed Sue Horowitz as the new representative from the Planning and Zoning Commission. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None. PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSAL TO DESIGNATE THE NORTH SIDE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBOR- HOOD A LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT: Wagner read letters written from residents of the proposed North Side Resi- dential Historic District. A letter from David and Liz Pepper of 613 N. Van Buren Street stated approval of the proposal. Another letter, from Nancy Barcelo of 715 N. Gilbert, also stated approval of the proposal. A third letter, from Sally Smith of 208 Fairchild, stated she was in favor of the idea of designating the North Side a local historic district. Public Hearing: Bob Saunders, who owns property at 230 Fairchild, asked the Commission to provide some background information on the proposal. He asked what the Historic Preservation Commission is and who authorized it. Moen stated the Commission is an advisory body to the Iowa City City Council. She said the Commission is a seven -member group appointed by the City Council. She said the representatives on the Commission are all volunteers. Moen said the Commission was established in April, 1982, and authorized in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Ordinance. She said the purpose of the Commission is to pursue preservation of local historic structures and to advise the City Council on preservation related issues. Moen said, to date, the Commission has designated two areas local historic districts, the Woodlawn area and the Summit Street area. She said both areas are also on the National Register of Historic Places. She said National Register designation doesn't afford the same protection to a neighborhood or to the structures within the neighbor- hood as local historic designation does. Moen said the Commission would have the opportunity, when a building permit or regulatory permit is issued in a C 6 6 _A� I Historic Preservation Commission March 12, 1986 Page 2 local historic designated area, to review the proposed plans to ensure the alterations for the exterior portions of a building are in harmony with the character of the building and, in the case of new construction, that the construction is consistent in design with existing units. She said new construction does not have to duplicate the structures in the area but should be sensitive to design concepts established by existing architecture. She said the proposed designation is being sought because the north side repre- sents the original town of Iowa City and because residents of the neighbor- hood have come forth seeking designation as a way of protecting the area from additional alterations which are not consistent or harmonious with the exist- ing architecture of the area. Saunders asked if the proposed designation would take the form of an ordi- nance superseding the Planning and Zoning Commission. Moen said the pro- posal, if it were adopted, would take the form of an ordinance but that the Planning and Zoning Commission would have an opportunity to review the pro- posal. She said the State Office of Historic Preservation would also review the proposal. Moen said, after the Planning and Zoning Commission has re- viewed the proposal, both the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Historic Preservation Commission would forward their recommendations to the City Council. Saunders asked what he would be allowed and not be allowed to do with his property. He asked if he would have to ask the Historic Preservation Commis- sion for permission to reroof his house. Moen replied that only alterations requiring a building permit or which are visible from the right-of-way would be subject to Historic Preservation Commission review and approval. Saunders asked who determined the area which is being proposed as an historic district. Moen said a study from the early 1980's recommended boundaries for the proposed historic district. She said the Historic Preservation Commis- sion reviewed the boundaries and made additions to the area. Saunders asked who conducted the study. Moen replied the study was conducted by an intern working with the Iowa City Department of Planning and Program Development, and who is now employed as the National Historic Register Coordinator for the State of Iowa. Jones explained to the audience the steps a proposed ordinance must go through before it is adopted. He then read from the Iowa City Historic Preservation Ordinance regarding changes a homeowner can make to his/her property under the ordinance. He explained the steps a homeowner would have to go through if a building permit were issued. Saunders asked if he would have to seek the approval of the Historic Preser- vation Commission to rebuild his house if it were totally destroyed by a fire or a tornado. Jones said he would have to request a building permit and then his plans would be referred to the Historic Preservation Commission for review. Saunders asked if he would be able to build a 1986 style home as a replace- ment for a destroyed home. Jones replied, if the design were totally and strictly out of conformity, then the Historic Preservation Commission would WA, r Historic Preservation Commission March 12, 1986 Page 3 probably say the design was an intrusion and was unwarranted in the district. Jones continued that there are designs for 1986 structures which have some degree of conformity. Moen said the Commission is required by the Iowa City Historic Preservation Ordinance to follow the Secretary of Interior's guide- lines for rehabilitation. She said these guidelines would direct the Commis- sion in determining the suitability and appropriateness of a particular proposal. She said a contemporary building may be very appropriate if there are considerations given to the design and scale of the structure. Saunders said his concern is with "the visibility from the thoroughfare" and who determines that visibility. He said a lot of the homes in the area are very narrow and as someone walks down the street he/she can see almost every- thing there is of the property. He said this would make the building of an addition difficult, without approval of the Historic Preservation Commission. Moen said visibility is determined by someone being able to view the property from the street or sidewalk. Saunders asked if one of the purposes of the public hearing was to determine if the boundary lines for the district were right or wrong. Jones said that was one purpose and a second purpose was to determine the degree to which the neighborhood itself wanted to be designated as a local historic preservation district. Saunders said he is concerned, as a property owner, about his ability to be able to sell his property if it were in a local historic preservation dis- trict. He said, as Vice Chairperson of the Johnson County Zoning Commission, he is concerned because the ordinance would change the concept of zoning because it would say what could and could not be done with a property after the property was bought. Horowitz said that, although she agreed with him in one respect, she is also very conscious of the changes in zoning that assist a property owner, such as signage, and which benefit a homeowner even after the purchase of a property. She said there are positive and negative sides to making changes after the purchase of a home. Saunders said he was con- cerned about the negative aspects. He said, as long as someone meets the City's zoning requirements, he shouldn't be told the exact shape his house should take. Jones said that the purpose of the meeting was to gain opinions regarding these issues. James Harris, a professor from the University of Iowa Department of Urban and Regional Planning, commented that the Court's view of zoning has changed through time. He said case law has shown that a municipality is free to change its zoning ordinance and that the vested rights of property owners, in the previous zoning, are not recognized except in some very extreme cases. He said to suggest that a municipality doesn't have the right, or that people as citizens don't have the right, to expect there will be zoning changes after someone buys a piece of property isn't consistent with case law. Betty Means, who lives at 120 Fairchild, said she owns the properties located at 515 North Dubuque and 128 Fairchild. She said her home at 120 Fairchild is on the National Register. She said she was also representing the owners of the property located at 114 Fairchild. She said that she and the other -I r Historic Preservation Commission March 12, 1986 Page 4 owners were anxious to see the ordinance adopted and that the area being considered for designation should be expanded. She said they would like the ordinance "to have some teeth in it so that absentee owners who abuse prop- erty would be taken to task to help preserve it." She said the area is increasingly being infringed upon by the University. She said the North Side has changed since she moved there. She said it used to be a single family neighborhood with trees and children around. She said now there are rooming. houses and apartments and deterioration all around the area. George McCormick, who lives at 230 Fairchild Street, said he was a member of the preservation task force which wrote the Historic Preservation Ordinance. He said he could clarify a few points regarding what the ordinance could and could not do. He said the ordinance would protect the private homeowner, as well as the landlord, who has converted some buildings into multi -family use. McCormick said the ordinance would protect the homeowner from a constant battle with the City and the constant worry that tomorrow the home next door may be torn down and a sixplex built in its place with parking in the back- yard. He said many of the homes on the North Side are too large for single family use and should be multi -family dwellings. He said there are problems on the North Side and that some homes may need to be torn down and no one expects them to be replaced with Victorian designs and gingerbread. He gave two examples of the situation. He said the apartment complexes built by Farkas Construction, which can be seen all around town, have fit in well with the existing character of the area. He said the Mansard Roof developments are another story. McCormick gave one example in which a Mansard Roof builder was persuaded to change the design of the building at Court and Gilbert Streets. He said the resulting design of a building. He said this was an example of a design being altered a bit yet made to fit in well. McCormick gave an example of how the proposed ordinance would be advantageous to land- lords. He said, if a structure on a lot of less than 6,000 square feet had been converted into multi -family use and burned down today, the present Planning and Zoning ordinance would only allow single family homes to be built on a lot of less than 6,000 square feet. He said, however, if the lot were in a local historic preservation district, a new structure could be built for multi -family use as long as it was built on the original founda- tion. McCormick said another advantage was, if a demolition permit was issued to destroy a structure, a 30 -day waiting period would be required before the structure could be torn down, which would allow other interested parties, who may want to preserve the building, a chance to bid on it. He said this would provide staging time. If an interested party could not be identified, the demolition permit would be issued. Mark Rettig, a member of the Corporation Board of Sigma Chi Fraternity, said his concern was the placement of the boundary lines for the historic dis- trict. He said his fraternity, located at 703 North Dubuque, was at the western corner of the proposed historic district in the area identified as OL33 and a portion of OL32. He said the area north of this contains addi- tional fraternity houses, as part of fraternity row, and these houses are not in the proposed historic district. He said the area immediately to the west of OL32, which includes a portion of the University of Iowa President's mansion, also isn't included. He asked why the map was drawn in such a way r Historic Preservation Commission March 12, 1986 Page 5 as to include some fraternities and exclude others. McCormick responded that the University of Iowa property was left out because state property, as part of the Iowa Code, couldn't be included. Rettig said according to Section 303.34 of the Iowa Code, as long as the property is located within city limits, a city can include the property within the city's ordinance. He said the Code provides that an historic district cannot include an area greater than 160 acres. He said the exclu- sion of Sigma Chi Fraternity would cause no significant harm to the historic district and would make it more representative of the goals of the district and the Historic Preservation Commission. He asked why Sigma Chi Fraternity was included and what criteria was used to include it. Moen said original boundary maps didn't include the fraternity but, in order to include some significant adjacent or contiguous structures, the boundary lines were en- larged. Rettig said he didn't understand what criteria was used to include structures. He said the fraternity has future intentions to rebuild its present building and is concerned about the impact of the proposed historic district. He asked that the fraternity be deleted from the proposed historic preservation district. Moen asked Rettig if he would feel differently if the other fraternities were included rather than to exclude Sigma Chi Fraternity. Rettig said he would prefer to have all fraternities excluded, particularly since some are located in other areas of Iowa City. Rettig asked if the present boundary lines are final or if there will be further review. Moen responded that two years ago the boundaries were re- viewed and endorsed by the State Office of Historic Preservation. She said, before the proposal is submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission, it will be resubmitted to the State Office of Historic Preservation for their review. Rettig asked if the Commission had investigated the proposed district area to make some determinations, as it is required to do under Section 303.2.1 of the Iowa Code. He said that section of the Code could be used to determine if the proposed historic preservation district, or any portion of it, qualifies as an area of historical significance. Rettig explained the process an aggrieved landowner would have if he/she did not agree with a decision of the Historic Preservation Commission. Moen said the steps mentioned were in the Historic Preservatioin ordinance. Pearl Ritter, who lives at 1110 East Bloomington Street, said her home has not been included in the proposed historic district. She said she was also curious why Bloomington Street wasn't included in the boundary lines. She said there are many historic structures in the area and that her home was owned by the first brewer in Iowa City. She said she app reciates being done for the North Side area. Cecelia Ridgeway, who lives at 409 Brown Street, said she was in favor of the proposed district. She said before she bought her home she was hesitant and concerned because so many of the beautiful homes in the area were deteriorat- ing and an increasing number of apartments and duplexes were being built. She said her real estate agent was cautious to show her homes in the North Side area because the agent was unsure "what was happening to the area." into atthought North eseanidcoming etheymust Sidewaonofthe ncestareasan,ifrealestae agents feel RM Wi r- Historic Preservation Commission March 12, 1986 Page 6 advise a potential buyer about the security of his or her investment, then something must be done to protect the area. She said some of the homes on the North Side are simply doomed without protection. She said there are people who would be willing to buy many of the more deteriorated houses in the area, and reconstruct them, if there was some assurance their investment would have some value and not be lost by a large property going up nearby. She said she wanted to respond to Sigma Chi Fraternity's concern about main- taining the value of its property. She said the fraternity, like all other people who live in the area, are members of the community and have the same community obligations as anyone else. David Pepper, who lives at 613 North Van Buren, said he is in favor of the proposal. He said this is his first home and that he and his wife are having their first child there. He said he likes the area and that it has a lot of history and beautiful homes. He described examples of how some developers have come into the area, built "abominations" or moved in houses with little regard for the character of the neighborhood, and have not kept up their properties. He said he supported the proposal and thinks it should be ex- panded. (Applause.) Dennis Bielfeldt, who owns properties located at 325 North Gilbert, 328 and 330 North Linn and 422 North Clinton, said he was also representing Lutheran Campus Ministry. He said he truly likes Victorian houses but doesn't feel the area along North Clinton is of historical significance. He said the homes are student rentals and are old. He said his property at 422 North Clinton is over 100 years old and wasn't in good condition when he bought it. He said he plans to tear it down and build a sixplex. He said his concern is the increased cost he might have to pay if he has to meet certain codes regarding roof lines, etc. He said this could make a project financially infeasible. Bielfeldt said Lutheran Campus Ministry owns the property located at OL32. He said the University wants this property. He asked if the University could get the property if it were protected, as part of an historical district. He asked if the University could tear down the structure for green space. Moen said an applicant would have to obtain a demolition permit and that the applicant may or may not obtain endorsement from the Commission, depending on the historical significance, quality and condition of the structure. Bielfeldt respectfully submitted to the Commission to not include the proper- ties, located directly across from the Clinton Street dormitories, in the proposed historic district. Pete Vanderhoff, who represented the Corporation Board of Sigma Chi Frater- nity, said his Board would like to replace the Sigma Chi Fraternity building at some point in the future. He said Sigma Chi Fraternity also owns the building to the south of the fraternity. He said the present fraternity building, which is a brick structure on a wood frame, looks nice but has all the problems of a 50 year old building that has been severely beat on every year. He said his Board is concerned about the requirements the proposed histor'c district ordinance would have regarding the type of replacement building which could be built. RM r -I r- Historic Preservation Commission March 12, 1986 Page 7 Horowitz asked Vanderhoff what recourse the neighborhood would have if the fraternity were excluded from the proposed district and then sold, consider- ing the fraternity is one of the entrances to the City. Vanderhoff said when Sigma Chi Fraternity bought the property next door, they had to beat out other developers with intentions to build a big apartment building. He said his Board already has plans made which would duplicate the existing structure but the problem is the inner structure is wood. He said they would like a sturdier building. Horowitz asked what recourse the neighborhood would have if Sigma Chi were sold. Vanderhoff said Sigma Chi has been at its present location since 1928 and has no intentions of leaving. Sandra Eskin, who said she lives in the Woodlawn Historic District, said all fraternities and sororities should be included. She said all through the community there are houses which are not strictly residential, such as room- ing houses or Preucil School. She said the key word is not residential, but historic. She said she remembers other occasions where fraternities wanted to be excluded such as in density or parking rules. She said too many exclu- sions harm the tone of the neighborhood. Paula Brandt, who lives at 824 North Gilbert, said she and her husband are concerned about the future character of the neighborhood. She said they are also concerned that the brick streets may be asphalted over some day. She said the proposed district may give the neighborhood more leverage regarding this issue. She said that she doesn't care one way or the other about ex- cluding Sigma Chi fraternity, but that it is on an entrance to the City. She said she wondered if anyone had ever thought that the Cliff Apartments could everCortmittee wasformedas eyesore. are an diirect result t of aid t be built as the Cliff Apartmentshe Urban being nt Ad Hocbeing built. Pat Eckhardt, who lives at 514 North Linn, thanked the Commission for all the research and work that has been put into the proposal. She said she felt the boundaries could be negotiated. She said she felt people who have opposed the proposed district do so because they fear their investment will be lost or their rights to do what they want with their property will be inhibited. She said current zoning laws already tell you what you can and cannot do with how many square feet of property you have. She said the proposal will just add what it should look like, which doesn't mean a property has to look old. Eckhardt said a property could be modern but still blend in so that it con- tributes to the neighborhood. She said investment property owners are fear ful of hurting their income. She said she thought the proposal would not hurt investment property owners' income but would increase their income. Bob Saunders asked how many physical structures would be affected by the proposed district. Moen said 253 structures would be affected with approxi- mately 35% being renter -occupied and 55% owner -occupied. She said the infor- mation was obtained approximately two years ago from the City Assessor's office. Saunders said he would rather have the boundary lines drawn by someone who would be in Iowa City for a while. He said he would be here five years from now an agreed ch the linesof the should previous bigger. Hespeakers saidwould henot. Msaid one had ahardtime -t =1j, r- Historic Preservation Commission March 12, 1986 Page 8 saying to himself that if he were two doors down he would not be in the proposed district. He said he has trouble with where some of the boundary lines go. He said he felt the boundary lines were drawn capriciously. He said the area should be inspected more closely for what should and should not be included. He said otherwise he would join the Sigma Chi fraternity in asking that his property be excluded from the proposed district. Moen replied to Saunders that, in his experience as a member of the Johnson County Zoning Commission, he may be aware that the edge or absolute boundary of any district is going to be cause for concern for those located adjacent to the boundary because of the different restrictions which are placed on different property owners. She added that there are other areas which are being proposed as historic districts in the community, such as the College Hill area and the Goosetown area. Saunders said, if the boundary lines were expanded to include the area from Bloomington to Dodge, he would have an easier time accepting the boundary lines. Saunders said if he were to sell his property he would have to tell any prospective buyer that his property is in an historic district. He said he can sympathize with those who have lived in the area a long time and want to preserve it but he would rather see a new duplex next door than the dump that is next door to him at present. A member of the audience asked Saunders where he lived. Saunders replied he presently lives in Coralville with plans to move to Iowa City. He said he planned to live in his property on Fairchild or build a home on the south side of Iowa City. Pat McCormick, who lives at 230 East Fairchild, said from past experiences in dealing with historic preservation in Ohio, that as people obtain more educa- tion and understanding about preservation, they are less fearful of it and see how preservation affords them a protection which they otherwise would not have. She said through her involvement as a board president of a sorority, she has found that the National Board is more interested in how a sorority or fraternity looks and will be very sure that what is built will look nice. She said she hoped that any persons at the hearing tonight, with major concerns and misunderstandings, will contact other persons in the area so that those questions can be answered before this proposal goes any further. Rettig responded that the National Board will not let any structure be put up on a particular property which is not in keeping with the tradition of a fraternity and that he would rather have National dictate the parameters than a committee in Iowa City. He said he doesn't see how the Sigma Chi frater- nity would ever leave its present site. Rettig said he must take issue with the fact that the boundary lines are drawn in his fraternity's area without any real guidance or insight. He said it appears that, at some point, it was decided to take everything north of the line which includes many fraternity houses. � FP �f� r- Historic Preservation Commission March 12, 1986 Page 9 Rettig said, regarding a previous comment about including all fraternities, that the Commission can't include all fraternities because, by law, there is a limit of 160 acres. He said there are fraternities in all directions of Sigma Chi and the size of the proposed district would then be more than 160 acres. Horowitz asked Rettig if his national organization had any materials avail- able regarding experiences with historic preservation. She asked if National would be opposed or in favor of his fraternity participating as part of an historic district. He said he didn't know what precedents exist at National but there is a housing committee that gives money to fraternities for housing improvements. Horowitz said she would appreciate receiving any information which could be found on the issue of historic preservation from his national organization. Jones asked for clarification regarding what Sigma Chi is asking to have deleted. He asked if OL33 and 32 were wanting to be deleted, as well as similar fraternity properties across from these plots on the east side. Rettig explained that he could not speak for the other fraternities but that to be consistent, those exclusions would be the best plan. He said Sigma Chi definitely would like to be excluded. Cecelia Ridgeway asked why Sigma Chi is so concerned about being part of the proposed district. Rettig responded that his fraternity is the only one being included rather than all the fraternities. Bielfeldt said he would like the Lutheran Campus Ministry property, OL32, excluded form the proposed district. DISCUSSION OF HISTORIC HOMES TOUR PLANS: Nathan asked for volunteers from the Commission for the various committees for the Homes Tour. She passed around a sign-up sheet for the Commissioners to sign. She said she would like to see a mixing of members' talents on the committees from the other participating organizations, Johnson County His- torical Society and Friends of Old Brick. Commission members then volunteerd for some of the subcommitees. Horowitz asked why the Commission was wanting to raise funds and if it had the legal authority. Jones stated that in the past the Commission has needed funds for items such as brochures and educa- tional materials. Moen said the Commission has obtained permission to organ- ize and raise money for the Homes Tour. She said the Commission has never had "blanket approval" to hold money raising events but it has been granted approval on a situation -by -situation basis. DISCUSSION OF THE AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT GIFTS: Moen said staff has been directed to draft a policy regarding the acceptance of gifts and solicitation of donations. She said staff is looking at the policies of other cities and that some of the factors which need to be con- sidered are (1) who would accept the gift/donation, (2) what types of gifts/donations are desirable, and (3) what tax benefits are donors eligible for. 11 =1� Historic Preservation Commission March 12, 1986 Page 10 Moen referred the Commission to the memo from the packet regarding Historic Preservation Commission recommendations to Council. She said the Urban Environment Ad Hoc Committee has endorsed the recommendation with the provi- sion that the tax relief would go only to historic properties. Moen said the Council has given staff its approval to pursue the tax benefit proposal. COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS: Nathan asked if the Historic Preservation film is now available for schools to view. Moen said it is and that the library has purchased a copy which the schools may be able to check out for their use. She said Nathan could in- quire at the audio visual desk at the public library. Wagner presented Jones with a Certificate of Appreciation for the time and effort he has put into working with the Commission. Jones said he thoroughly enjoyed working with the Historic Preservation Commission. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 10:26 p.m. Minutes submitted by Kim Dittmer. 411 i PROPOSED NORTH SIDE RESIDENTIAL HISTORIC DISTRICT PUBLIC HEARING March 12, 1986 Civic Center Council Chambers 7:30 P.M. NAME ADDRESS 91bnrLQ. 7/prrw 0 3/7 Wvu�'a- �ri✓� G. �ik.- GaO � %�wcalda aeL4 g: '. e?10L�. //"z � . GermsJ. J4C4�c,ry say, v\ - ,ma .rt "/zo N, & '-c,6Zz7 57- 613 r G(3 No Ubi � tin f/ 1 + �,,h:� 13to(Cr�t— 330 -3z8' N L'Hti PHONE NO. 3s6 - sad-, 337 -9S -s -d' .Za-;7, 7s1-7zsl 337- 3 S 23 33,V- 3a�S 337 - 7e// 331R-5iz`( 33 7- 3963 337-s5�3 551-(, 79 Ss 3S/'(a3K 3&C-0437 Iry 35n- 33� G ff e, =l -Q r � ' NORTH SIDE RESIDENTIAL HISTORIC DISTRICT PUBLIC HEARING (larch 12, 1966 7:30 PM NAME ADDRESS PAGE 2 PHONE NO. 337-3o�f 3vr`-007C ml r MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FEBRUARY 12, 1986 - 4:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COU14CIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Mask, McDonald, Messier MEMBERS ABSENT: Fisher, Randall STAFF PRESENT: Beagle, Boyle, Van Steenhuyse ROLL CALL: McDonald moved that Mask be appointed temporary chair. Messier seconded. Mask convened the meeting at 4:45. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES: Mask pointed out that her name had been misspelled in the January 8 min- utes. McDonald moved that the minutes be approved as amended. Messier seconded. The minutes were approved unanimously. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: SE -8601. A public hearing on an application submitted by Ware McDonald o'io. for a special exception to modify the front yard requirement for property located at 828 S. Dubuque Street. Applicant has requested that this item be deferred until the March 12, 1986, meeting. Mask motioned that this item be deferred. Messier seconded. The motion passed unani- mously. INTERPRETATION ITEMS I-8601. A public hearing on a request submitted by Pat Moore Construction o. concerning the side yard requirements for zero lot line construction for property located at 1425 and 1427 Dolan Place. Beagle summarized the staff report. The applicant is appealing a determi- nation of the Zoning Code Interpretation Panel concerning the side yard requirements for zero lot line dwellings. The applicant divided an exist- ing duplex located on one lot into two attached zero lot line dwellings, each located on a separate lot. After the split had already taken place, the Housing and Inspection Services became aware of it and noted that the lots could not meet the side yard requirements for zero lot line construc- tion in the RS -8 zone. The side yards for the non -zero lot line sides of the dwellings are only nine feet from the side lot line, while the ordi- nance requires ten feet. The applicant said that covenants guaranteeing thathetno lot iniquestion woulon an d meetgerected thewithin feet ordinance. Beagle said that the Zoning Code Interpretation Panel was asked to make a ruling on the matter. The Panel ruled that as a provisional use, zero lot line dwellings are subject to both the requirements listed with that use (Section 36-55 listing the requirements for zero lot line dwellings) as well as the dimensional requirements of the zone in which it exists. While the Panel `'J ; r MI11UTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FEBRUARY 12, 1986 PAGE 2 agreed that the covenants the applicant had secured would meet the re- quirements of Section 36-55, the point is moot since the dwellings do not comply with the dimensional requirements of the RS -8 zone. Beagle pointed out that Section 36-55 is only applicable when the abutting lot has been developed with a principal building having a setback of less than ten feet from the side lot line. In this case, the dwelling on the lot to the north has a setback of 12 feet from the side lot line, while the adjoining lot to the south is undeveloped. Therefore, Beagle said that the provi- sion of Section 36-55 is not applicable in this case and the buildings must meet the dimensional requirements of the RS -8 zone. He said it was staff's position that the interpretation of the Zoning Code Interpretation Panel was correct, and that the Board should affirm that decision. McDonald asked if the applicant's covenant would meet the spirit of the ordinance. Beagle replied that the requirements for a provisional use in the RS -8 zone have not been met. He said that even if they negotiate an easement with the adjoining property owners, they still can't meet the requirements of the RS -8 zone on their own lots. He said that developers of zero lot line dwellings must meet two provisions of the Zoning Ordi- nance; the requirements of Section 36-55, and the dimensional requirements of the zone. The requirements are mutually exclusive, and both must be met. Beagle also said that Section 36-55 does not come into play because one of the adjoining lots is undeveloped and the opposite lot has a build- ing which is too far from the common lot line to be considered under that section. He said that the intent of Section 36-55 was to allow "infill" development of zero lot line dwellings in developed areas. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: Tom Gelman, attorney for Pat Moore Construction Company, rose to speak in favor of the applicant. He said that neither of the two requirements for zero lot line dwellings supercede the other, and that both are in play. Gelman stated that the intent of the ordinance is to maintain ten feet between unattached buildings on adjoining lots, not just ten feet from the cannon lot line. He said that since Section 36-55 would have to be met, then it is meaningless if it is allowed to be superceded by the RS -8 dimensional requirements. He asked that the Board give meaning to both provisions by agreeing that the covenants meet the intent of the side yard requirement. Messier asked if easements had been obtained for both adjoining lots. Gelman answered yes. Messier then asked why the developers didn't thor- oughly investigate the ordinance before dividing the lot. Gelman answered that the developer's attorneys interpreted the ordinance in such a way as to give both provisions meaning. Boyle said that by definition a lot does not include easements gained from adjoining lots. He said that portions of adjoining lots cannot be "bor- rowed" in order to meet the dimensional requirements for a specific lot. rM I MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTME14T FEBRUARY 12, 1986 PAGE 3 Mask asked Beagle to further explain the Panel's and the staff's interpre- tation of the ordinance. Beagle said that both provisions must be met. He said that the Code doesn't make sense if the dimensional requirements of the zone can be avoided by another section of the Code. He said that the easement required under Section 36-55 is mainly intended for maintenance. The side yard requirement for zero lot line dwellings in the RS -8 zone is ten feet from the structure to the side lot line for the non -zero lot line side. Beagle said that the breakdown occurred when the applicants did not meet this requirement. Messier asked Beagle if the zero lot line lots would meet the requirement if a structure was built on the adjoining vacant lot at one foot from the common side line. Beagle said no, the intent of 36-55 is to allow zero lot line dwellings in developed areas and only comes into play when both adjoining lots have been previously developed. Boyle pointed out that the Because this provision has play. Gelman asked if the side yard requirements are 21 feet separate the zero adjoining developed lot to each structure is required Code requires a ten foot setback on each lot. not been met, then 36-55 does not come into City interpreted the Code as saying that the controlling in this case. He pointed out that lot line dwelling from the structure on the the north. Boyle responded that each lot and to meet the side yard requirements. Boyle asked Gelman what the effect would be on Pat Moore Construction Company if the Board accepted the interpretation of the Zoning Code Inter- pretation Panel. Gelman answered that any affect to the applicant was irrelevant. Beagle pointed out that if there is a conflict between two or more provisions of the ordinance as suggested by the applicant, then the most restrictive would apply. He said that in this case, the most re- strictive is the dimensional requirements of the RS -8 zone. Gelman said that he did not see any conflict in the provisions, and that Section 36-55 becomes meaningless if it is superceded by the general provisions of the RS -8 zone. BOARD DISCUSSION: McDonald felt that the easements obtained in the covenants solve the problem. Messier felt that the easements had no impact on the case. Mask said that a motion would be in order. She moved that the Board find in favor of the applicant by sustaining its interpretation of the provisions. Messier seconded. Mask said that it was her conclusion that Section 36-55 applies to infill development only, so it is moot in this case. Therefore, she said, the requirenents for side yards must be followed. Messier agreed. Mask also said that the ordinance as interpreted by the Zoning Code Interpretation Panel makes restrictive covenants unnecessary. McDonald said he believes that the covenants meet the spirit of the ordinance. Mask said that the need for covenants to meet the requirements of the ordinance bothers her. Beagle added that such covenants bind future developers. Messier said that it was his conclusion that the easements do not meet the side yard re- quirements. McDonald asked what recourse the applicants have to meet the 40 r MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FEBRUARY 12, 1986 PAGE 4 ordinance. Boyle answered that they can apply to the Board for a special exception, or buy enough land from the adjoining landowners to meet the requirements, in this case at least one foot on each side. McDonald called the question. It was determined that a no vote would affirm the interpretation of the Zoning Code Interpretation Panel. Beagle polled the Board. The motion failed, 1-2, with McDonald voting in favor of the applicant. The interpretation of the Zoning Code Interpretation Panel was upheld. Messier moved that the meeting be adjourned. McDonald seconded. The meeting was adjourned at 6:06 p.m. usan as c ing aairperson �lG%GGLCti� Karip FranKlin Secretary 699 al a r - MINUTES APPROWS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MARCH 12, 1986 - 4:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS ME14BERS PRESENT: Fisher, Mask, McDonald, Messier, Randall MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Beagle, Boyle, Franklin, Van Steenhuyse CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES: Mask noted that the minutes of February 12, 1986 should have a signature block for her signature since she had been appointed temporary chair for that meeting. Randall moved that the minutes be approved as amended. Mask seconded. The motion passed unanimously. VARIANCE ITEM: 1. V-8601. A public hearing on a request submitted by Doyle Signs, Inc., oar a variance to the sign regulations to permit a free-standing sign at 600 N. Dodge Street. Franklin said that Doyle Signs was representing the Eagle Supermarket at 600 N. Dodge. They are requesting a variance to allow them to change the face of the sign from the existing "Eagle Discount Super- market" to "Eagle Food Center. She explained that the property is in the CN -1 zone, which prohibits free-standing signs. Also, the sign exceeds the general height requirements for a free-standing sign. However, since the sign was built prior to the enactment of the pres- ent zoning ordinance, it is allowed as a non -conforming sign. Accord- ing to the ordinance, any alterations made to a non -conforming sign require that the sign be brought into conformance; in this case, it would require removal of the sign. In order to make alterations, then, it was necessary for Doyle Signs to seek a variance. Franklin said that the application fails the hardship test for a variance. She said that the existing sign could be left in place, or that the store could erect one of the sign types that are allowed in the CN -1 zone. free- standing sign is o necessary for the ownersfailede said that the store toenjoy prove eas able return on their property. Franklin said that the application fails to pass the uniqueness test because other businesses in the CN -1 zone have been required to con- form streetoandthe thesign HyrVeelsupermarket She further the to the northas station asacross the examples. She also said that the application passes the public interest test: since the sign has been in its present location for several years, there is no evidence that the public interest would be compromised if the sign is altered. 419 r MINUTES BOARD OF AOJUSTI1EIlT MARCH 12, 1986 - 4:30 P.M. PAGE 2 Franklin said that since the application fails two of the three re- quired tests, staff recommends that the application be denied. She noted that the sign overhangs the public right-of-way by 2.5 feet, and that the owners will be required to obtain a permit from the City Council for this portion of the sign. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: Terry Doyle of Doyle Signs spoke in favor of the application. He noted that the sign was erected in 1964 in accordance with the regula- tions in force at that time. He mentioned that Eagle had changed its public image from a grocery to a full service supermarket and wanted to alter the sign to reflect that change. He said that the sign types allowed in the CN -1 zone are not viable alternatives; visibility would be a problem from all directions for facia and monument signs, and that monument signs present a problem for snow removal and vandalism. He said that the proposed sign would benefit both the store and the community. He showed photos of the existing and the proposed signs to the Board. Doyle also noted that there had been a mistake in their application in that the height of the sign is actually 25 feet and not 28 feet 'as written in the application. The sign is therefore conforming with the height limitations for free-standing signs. McDonald asked if the present sign is lighted; Doyle answered yes. Randall noted that proving hardship is a problem, and pointed out that a free-standing sign is as susceptible to vandalism as a monument sign. Doyle an- swered that maintenance is an added hardship with monument signs. BOARD DISCUSSION: askedRandall raonemonument Franklin answered that the ordinance allowsonlyone Shealso showed that a monument sign would have to be placed behind current parking spaces, since the parking area along Dodge Street extends beyond the property line. Randall said that it was difficult to see how the applicant had met the hardship requirement. Mask added that she did not see how the uniqueness requirement could be met. Messier said that there will be a sign there whether or not the wording is changed, so why not allow the store to change it if the new sign will be more aesthetically pleasing. Fisher answered that the intent of the ordinance is to mance. M owners sk addedof that the non-conforming 8 ands responsibilitns to y ishto see iftem intoconfor- appli- cations meet the required tests; the Board cannot make judgments based on aesthetics if the tests are not met. Fisher agreed that the public interest would not be compromised in this case, but the City Council has determined that signs should be covered by variance law and not by special exceptions. VO/ r MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MARCH 12, 1986 - 4:30 P.M. PAGE 3 Randall moved that the application be approved. Mask seconded. Franklin polled the Board; the motion failed 2-3 with McDonald and Messier voting in favor. APPEAL ITEM: A-8601. A public hearing on a request for an appeal submitted by i7F'c and Ziock concerning issuance of a building permit for property located at 119 Myrtle Avenue. This item is related to SE -8603. Franklin presented the staff report. She said the position of staff is that the permit issued January 26, 1986, is valid. All construc- tion has met building codes, and parking requirements have been met. Since no plot plan is in City files from the 1979 building permit, the staff has speculated that the inspector considered S. Riverside Ct. to be the required rear yard. Richard Ziock, of 207 Myrtle Ave., #21, rose to say that he had had a title A ­search conducted which proved that he owns S. Riverside Ct. He said that Gregory Apel, current owner of 119 Myrtle does not own it, nor did a Mr. Ziegler, who Ziock said owned the building in 1979. He said that it was his belief that the City was misled by the applicant in 1979, and that the City is not at fault. McDonald asked if Ziock lived at his current address when the addition was built. Ziock said he moved in about a month after the addition was built. He added that the ordinance regarding non -conforming uses states that if a use is established which is unlawful, it cannot be allowed to continue. Boyle made it clear that the 1979 permit is at issue; if the 1979 permit is seen as legal, then the legality of the 1986 permit is moot. He reminded the Board that the City has no proof that the 1979 permit was illegal, and that there is a presumption that the City official acted correctly. Therefore, it is up to Ziock to prove that the 1979 permit was illegal. Ziock said that the applicant misled the City. Boyle said that this presumes that the City acted properly in the issuance of the permit. Unless Ziock can prove that either the City or the applicant acted improperly, the Board cannot rule that the 1979 permit was illegal. Fisher suggested that a decision be deferred until Ziock can produce some evidence of ownership of S. Riverside Court. Mask said that he should produce a title search showing that Ziegler did not own S. Riverside Court in 1979; McDonald added that it should show clear ownership of the land by someone. Randall agreed. Ziock went on to claim that the building does not meet the parking requirements. He claims that there are only 22 spaces instead of the required 24. If this is the case, then all building permits issued are illegal. He asked to see the plot plan submitted with the build- ing permit showing parking spaces. The staff attempted to find the plan, it was not in the file. ME 11l'1UTES BO?RO OF ADJUSTMENT MARCH 12, 1986 - 4:30 P.M. PAGE 4 Fisher asked Ziock if he wanted continuation of the item. Ziock said yes, and that he would also like to see a plot plan for parking before the appointed meeting time. Gregory Apel, of 116 Marietta Ave., rose to say that he had made all of the required changes in parking on the property. He objected to a continuance of the issue because of the money that he had put into the expansion prior to the appeal. He said he doesn't know who owns S. Riverside Court, nor has he tried to find out. He said that he as- sumed it was for the use of everyone. Fisher stated he did not think it was fair to Apel to make him wait for continuance because of Ziock's lack of evidence. Ziock answered that the City was unprepared as well, since they could not provide him with a plot plan showing parking spaces. Fisher said he was also concerned about this. Boyle said that as a result, continuance was probably necessary. Randall asked Ziock if he could have the necessary evidence in one week. Ziock said that he was unsure if he could do this. Fisher said that since Ziock claims to have a title search, then one week is rea- sonable. Apel showed the Board his copy of the plot plan. Ziock said that the drawing was a misrepresentation. Randall suggested that the members of the Board inspect the site. Apel also showed the Board a lot map showing his lot and no ownership of S. Riverside Court. Boyle said that one of the issues is parking; if the parking require- ments were not met, then the permit was issued illegally. It is reasonable, therefore, to expect the City to have a plot plan; because of this, Boyle recommended continuation. The Board decided, by consensus, to continue the item. The Board will meet to make a decision on Appeal Item A-8601 on Wednesday, March 19, at 4:30 P.M. to allow Ziock time to gather needed evidence and for the City to produce a required plot plan. With the permission of Gregory Apel, applicant for Special Exception Item SE -8603, consideration. of that item was also deferred until March 19 since it is related to A-8601. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: 1. SE -8601. A public hearing on a request submitted by Ware McDonald Oil oC—for a special exception to modify the front yard for property located at 828 S. Dubuque Street. Beagle reviewed the staff report for the Board. The applicants pro- pose to erect a 30 -foot by 44 -foot canopy structure over two existing gas pump islands which will extend 18 feet into the required 20 -foot front yard along Dubuque Street. One of the islands is located within the required front yard, which is allowable under the ordinance. The UA ai r MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MARCH 12, 1986 - 4:30 P.M. PAGE 5 erection of the canopy requires a special exception to reduce the required front yard. No other structures are proposed to be built in the required front yard. Beagle said that the proposed special exception must meet three re- quirements: it must not be contrary to the public interest, nor to the st meet Sectiione36'91. Beagle saidcthat ethe ageneral nd it upurpose ofethe conditions front yard requirement was not compromised since the canopy would not decrease visibility at the corner. It would not affect traffic movement, and thus would not be contrary to the public interest. The proposed structure would not increase density in the area, nor would it have a negative impact on uses of adjacent properties. Beagle said staff recommends that the proposed Special Exception be granted, subject to the following conditions: 1) that the exception granted is to permit only the projection of the canopy 1416" above grade into the required front yard along Dubuque Street; 2) that the canopy be erected and located on site as identified on the site plan dated February 18, 1986, as submitted by the applicant; 3) that at no time may any por- tion of the canopy extending into the required front yard be enclosed. No one from the public spoke for or against the application. BOARD DISCUSSION: Beagle gave the Board a photograph of the site. Fisher asked if the proposed canopy would extend over the lot lines of the property. Beagle answered no. Fisher stated that he was in agreement with staff on the application. Mask asked if any neighbors had objected to the proposal. Beagle said no. McDonald moved that SE -8601 be approved, subject to the conditions outlined by staff. Messier seconded. Beagle polled the Board. The vote was unanimous in favor of approval. 2. SE -8602. A public hearing on a request submitted by Greg Duffey for a special exception to modify the front yard requirement for property located at 1135 Howell Street. Beagle gave the staff report. The house is located at the corner of Howell and Ginter streets, and extends seven feet into the required front yard along Ginter Street. Duffey wants to add a second story to the house. As a non -conforming structure, a special exception is required to allow any alteration to the building. In relation to the tests required to allow a special exception, staff looked at surround- ing properties to see if the character of the neighborhood would be compromised. Beagle reviewed the general character of the neighbor- hood and the orientation of homes in the vicinity of the site. Due to the spacious nature of the site as a corner lot and the orientation and setback of other homes, staff concluded that the proposed special exception would not be a detriment to the neighborhood. Since the second story addition would not increase the size of the house's =,A� i MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MARCH 12, 1986 - 4:30 P.M. PAGE 6 footprint, it would not alter traffic visibility along the two streets. Staff recommended that the special exception be approved for only the addition as shown on the applicant's site plan. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: Greg Duffe , of 1135 Howell Street and owner of the property, spoke in avor of the application. He said that the present roof on the house needs replacing, so he felt that this would be a good time to expand the size of the house. At Duffey's request, Beagle showed the Board a photograph of the house as well as a plan for the proposed second story addition. Mask asked if any of the neighboring property owners had registered any objections to the application. Beagle answered that he had received one letter from a neighbor saying that she had no objection; no one had registered any opposition to the application. No one spoke in opposition of the application. BOARD DISCUSSION: Mask said that she agrees with the staff's position. Randall said that he did, too. McDonald asked how large the present house is. Duffey answered that the house is presently 505 square feet; the second story would increase it to 1300 square feet. McDonald moved that SE -8602 be approved for only the addition as shown on the applicant's site plan. Randall seconded. Beagle polled the Board. The vote was unanimous in favor of approval. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6:57 p.m. Steven J. Van Steenhuyse, Minute -Taker. � 8f M 0 MINUTES HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION FEBRUARY 24, 1986 SENIOR CENTER CLASSROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Reed, Weilbrenner, Bergan, Briggs, Belle, Smithart, Hawkins, Farrant, Mims STAFF PRESENT: Alexander RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: None. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY MANAGER OR STAFF: None. SUMMARY OF RELEVANT DISCUSSION: 1. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairperson Reed. 2. Bergan moved to approve the minutes of January 28, 1986 and Smithart seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 3. The fourth new Comnissioner, Dell Briggs, introduced himself. 4. In conciliation: a. E/S & SO, 4-19-8402. The Complainant has signed the conciliation agreement which will now be sent to the Respondent for their Signa- ture. b. E/R, 11-28-8401. Weilbrenner summarized the complaint and currently conciliation is at an impasse. The Complainant has requested a public hearing. Weilbrenner moved that if the Respondent did not agree to the Complainant's remedy exactly as requested, that the Commission schedule a public hearing unless, of course, the Complain- ant changed her mind and wanted less. Hawkins seconded and the motion passed unanimously. c. H/PAD, 5-24-8501. The Respondent is out of town until the latter part of March. Farrant will contact him upon his return and continue conciliation. d. H/S, 9-16-8504. The team decided upon a no probable cause determina- tion and the appropriate letters will be mailed. 5. In Legal: There are 11 cases in Legal. UZ r Human Rights Commission February 24, 1986 Page 2 6. Cases to assign: Two cases were assigned to conciliation teams: a. H/REL S N0, 12-4-8501. Reed (Chair), Briggs, Mims. b. E/A, 5-20-8501. Bergan (Chair), Smithart, Hawkins. 7. Community Education: a. Hawkins will be speaking to a class at Mark Twain Elementary school. b. Alexander advised Commissioners their cable TV show is televised weekly on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays at 6:30 and 10:30 p.m. on Channel 29. c. Reed advised Commissioners that a Channel 2 news reporter did a segment on the second housing audit conducted by Paula Klein designed to determine compliance by landlords with renting to tenants with children. Commissioners whom had seen the news account complimented the reporter on his in-depth reporting. 8. New Business: a. Commissioners discussed the letter from Joel Gray inviting attendance at the meeting with Dale Anthony of the Johnson County Health Depart- ment for the purpose of educating individuals about A.I.D.S. Commis- sioners decided the substance of the meeting was health -orientated and outside the expertise or jurisdiction of Commissioners. b. Smithart introduced the issue of additional staff now that Paula no longer works with the Civil Rights Division. Different options for obtaining additional staff was discussed. Alexander will look into establishing an intern program with the appropriate University of Iowa department. 9. Meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m. Minutes were taken by Phyllis Alexander. M r- !1)y O MINUTES , FORMAL MEETING 'r PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THURSDAY, APRIL 3, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Cooper, Dierks, Horowitz, Perry, Scott (arrived after Call to Order), Wallace MEMBERS ABSENT: Jordan STAFF PRESENT: Beagle, Boyle, Franklin, Manning RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: 1. Recommend to City Council that the request submitted by John Oaks to rezone 38.5 acres in the County, near Rapid Creek Road be found incon- sistent with the existing Area 4 Fringe Area Policy Agreement. REQUESTS TO THE CITY MANAGER FOR STAFF ASSISTANCE: None. CALL TO ORDER: Secretary Dierks called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. Chairperson Scott arrived and proceeded with the meeting. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: There was no Public Discussion. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF MARCH 20, 1986: Horowitz corrected page 6, Other Business, paragraph 1, deleting text after "realistic alternative." Also in that paragraph, Scott changed "approach" to "approved." On page 8, paragraph 4, Horowitz corrected her motion by deleting "that there is a..." from the first sentence and substituting "to recognize the...." On page 3, paragraph 3, Dierks suggested the deletion of " ..of those being assessment" and substituting "...is to assess property owners." Also on page 3, the motion should be changed to read "until the year 1998, or later." Horowitz moved to approve the minutes of the March 20, 1986, formal meet- ing as corrected. Dierks seconded the motion. ZONING ITEMS: 1. Z-8602. Public discussion of an application submitted by the Iowa City Crisis Intervention Center for the rezoning of 528 Iowa Avenue from RNC -20 to CB -2; 45 -day limitation period: 4/28/86. 6 9/ 01 MINUTES FORMAL MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 3, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. PAGE 2 Scott, prior to the report from staff, informed the public in atten- dance that the Commission was unable to hold the work session on Monday night since there wasn't a quorum. Staff will present their reports, followed by possibly a somewhat lengthier discussion by the Commission. On this application, Scott noted for the public present, that there will be two public discussions, the second will be at the April 17 formal meeting. In his staff report, Beagle explained the applicant would like to relocate from "Old Brick" to the structure at 528 Iowa Avenue. In the RNC -20 zone, the Crisis Center is not a permitted use. The Crisis Center is a non-profit agency providing two services: the Crisis Intervention Program and the Food Bank. The Crisis Program provides a 24-hour hotline and walk-in services from 11:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. daily. The Crisis Program is classified as an office use; the Food Bank is classified as a personal service establishment. Both of these uses are permitted as -of -right in the CB -2 zone. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site, located in a transitional area, for high- density residential development. The site is at the boundary of the RNC -20, CB -2 and RM -44 zones. This boundary was set to hold the line between the downtown and residential areas, and further, to preserve the existing housing stock and established residential neighborhoods. In their decision, staff looked at the area, and felt the rezoning would not be injurious to the surrounding properties. Beagle Contin- ued, stating that there is a natural progression of development in transitional areas. Due to the location of the site on the boundary of use designations, an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is not required. Based on the points mentioned, staff had recommended in the staff report approval of the rezoning of the property, contingent upon the property's use for only the crisis intervention program and food bank operation. Staff also suggested that the structure be retained to maintain the integrity of the area. Staff just recently learned the current law office is an illegal use on the site, relative to parking. While 15-20 spaces are required for this use alone, there are only two spaces on site. The applicant is considering requesting a special exception to the Board of Adjustment to provide parking off-site. The staff no longer felt that condition- ing the zoning for the Crisis Center use was appropriate. Perry asked staff what would happen, in terms of zoning, if the Crisis Center left the property. Beagle explained the zoning would techni- cally remain. Any other use would have to appear before the Commis- sion because of the conditions placed on the site. Perry wondered if there was anyone exempt from this. Beagle felt only another organiza- tion like the Center would be exempt. G 9/ r MINUTES FORMAL MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 3, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. PAGE 3 Dierki expressed concern regarding traffic generated by the proposed use. Beagle deferred this question to the Directors of the Crisis Center. Horowitz, in addition, felt there would be more traffic with people loading and unloading. Wallace questioned if it is up to the Crisis Center to find the required off-site parking. Beagle con- firmed, and added the Center is negotiating with Aguidas Achim Syna- gogue, located at 602 E. Washington, for additional parking. Wallace asked if the Center has approached the University of Iowa Credit Union located adjacent to their property. Beagle stated the Credit Union utilizes all of their parking. In regard to the possible removal of the structure, Scott suggested that if the RNC -20 zoning remains, the structure would probably not be torn down. Horowitz asked if the structure were torn down, what could be built on the site. Beagle responded that only what is allowed in the RNC -20 zone could be built. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: Larr L nch 1402 Willow Creek Court Iowa City. Lynch, representing the m versity of lowa re itneon, is ri Uued a letter delineating their objections to the proposed rezoning. Although he felt the concern with parking may be premature, Lynch stressed that there is an already severe parking shortage in the area. He added that the Credit Union is not against the Crisis Center, in fact they are supportive of the Center, but not at that particular location. He also felt, even with the spaces at the Synagogue, there would not be enough parking. Lynch mentioned hearing the Center would plan on constructing an addition to the rear of the present structure, which he felt would even further limit parking. Lynch asked the Commission how they could consider conditional zoning if the site was already non -conforming. Horowitz questioned Lynch, asking when the Credit Union's peak periods occurred. In Krause 2575 Bluffwood Lane Iowa Cit Krause, president of the re it non, exp aloe facilities parking contains 40 spaces including one space for the handicapped. There are presently 28 employees, of which Krause estimated 75% arrive with cars. Peak periods tend to be Mondays and Fridays at the beginning and end of the month. During the day the peak begins at 9:00 until closing. In addition, with the winter months, and less street parking allowed, cars from nearby apartments use the lot. The Credit Union must con- tinually tow vehicles to discourage this use. Wallace, from Krause's statements, inferred there was only 11-12 spaces left for the custom- ers. Krause interjected sometimes they have no parking spaces. He mentioned that the Crisis Center did approach the Credit Union about parking. Krause told the Center, the Union could not give up space required for their facility, and also there are no spaces to give up. What they have was required by the City. 4 9/ r- MINUTES FORMAL MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 3, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. PAGE 4 Beagle remarked that the parking requirement has received much discus- sion. He explained the conditional zoning was recommended because the use conversion could retain this zoning without burdening adjacent property owners. Since the Crisis Center cannot use the conversion provision or the ordinance and must provide about 17 spaces, the condition may not be appropriate. All uses established in the CB -2 zone would have to come into compliance. Beagle suggested that the Commission look at the appropriateness of the CB -2 uses on the lot and not over -emphasize the parking issue. Scott stated his objection to the rezoning was not predicated on the Parking problem. He felt the question to answer is if CB -2 is a proper use for this property. David Schuldt 202 N. Westminster Iowa Cit . Schuldt, Chairperson of the rises en er DUCTU, explained a re 0cation of the facility is possible through CDBG funds. He felt it was not fair for the Commis- sion to penalize the Center for a problem that should have been re- solved in 1980. Schuldt remarked that the Center has been looking for six months for a suitable site, adding they would make every effort to comply with the requirements. Although the Center cannot control where clients will park, they will try to educate them. Horowitz mentioned her perception that most clients do not arrive by car. Schuldt agreed most clients arrive by foot or public transporta- tion. Horowitz felt for those clients driving, the problem of finding parking could add to their frustration. Schuldt explained the situa- tion is not much different than the Center's current facility. He further explained the Center is discussing with the Synagogue an agreement to help pave additional spaces. Scott asked approximately how many clients are served in a week. Llo d Geterin 2725 Wa ne Ave. Iowa Cit Getering estimated the ner of clien umbts served lately to be U - 50 over Monday, Wednesday and Friday. This would be 30-40 on a given afternoon. This would probably be 5-6 clients in a given hour who would have cars. In regard to congestion with loading and unloading, Getering explained this doesn't occur all at one time. Horowitz asked where the loading and unloading would take place since the alley is needed as a through- way. Getering said the Center would use the parking space off the alley. Wallace questioned Schuldt on why the Center has had difficulty find- ing a new facility. Schuldt explained the parameters of the grant money involve a specification of area, while the Center also feels a downtown location is more accessible. 4V r - MINUTES FORMAL MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 3, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. PAGE 5 Connie Keeling, 530 Iowa Ave., Iowa City. Keeling, an adjacent prop- er y owner, men lone a er grandm�o Fer had both the house at 528 and 530 built for herself and her son. She also stressed the diffi- culties with parking. Having recently invested $20,000 in improve- ments to her home, Keeling stated she wouldn't appreciate any thing but a home next door. Further, if the Center intends to build on, this addition would involve all of the backyard. She mentioned there is only 9' between the two houses. An 8' fence has been suggested as a buffer to screen the activities of the Center, but Keeling was opposed to this. Scott explained that the screening was required for areas between commercial and residential property. At Scott's request Beagle clarified surrounding zoning and existing uses. Scott suggested at the next informal work session, the Commission should delineate the designation of the zoning, the structure and also look at why and what the RNC -20 zoning was supposed to do. Beagle distributed and noted for public record a letter of opposition received from Edwin Green, 604 Iowa Ave., Iowa City. Krause, in a closing statement, stressed that the Board of Directors of the Credit Union supported the goals of the Crisis Center. Like the Center, the Credit Union also has a volunteer Board of Directors. The Credit Union also recognizes the importance of the Center and the food Bank, but their enthusiasm is tempered by the problem of using the Credit Union parking lot. Those 40 spaces are needed to meet the maximum standards applied to their site by the City of Iowa City. The Credit Union has invested over $14,000 for landscaping to accommodate the City's standards. Krause also felt the parking provided by the Synagogue was unsatisfactory because of the distance. Krause respect- fully requested the Commission deny the rezoning request for 528 Iowa Avenue due to the need for additional parking. Scott reminded the public present this application will be discussed at the next informal meeting, April 14, and publicly at the formal meeting, April 17. In response to Franklin, the Commission felt no additional information would be required from staff prior to the April 14 meeting. Perry moved to defer item Z-8602, a request for rezoning from RNC -20 to CB -2 by the Crisis Intervention Center, until the April 17, 1986, formal meeting. Dierks seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. Franklin suggested to Chairperson Scott a reordering of the agenda since a number of people were present for item S-8605. 61/ _A� r - MINUTES FORMAL MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 3, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. PAGE 6 SUBDIVISION ITEMS: 1. S-8605. Public discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development Company for approval of a preliminary and final subdivision plat for Boyrum Subdivision, Part 3, a 2.52 acre 6 tract between Highland Avenue and Highway , east of Gilbert Street; 45 -day limitation period: 5/2/86, 60 -day limitation period: 5/12/86. Franklin mentioned this item had been discussed when brought before the Commission informally. The Commission indicated a willingness to entertain a formal application. In that discussion, concern was expressed regarding traffic flow. Staff at that time recommended deferral of the application until traffic issues in the area could be examined. In the update of the Comprehensive Plan, the north -south pattern will be examined. For discussion, Franklin stated she would address the specific points in the subdivision assuming the extension is acceptable. A point of concern is the double frontage of lots along Plum Street. The ordinance states that double frontage lots should be avoided. The Commission must consider if the subdivision would be good platting and justify double frontage lots. Another point Franklin addressed in- volved how the properties would be screened. The developer wished to retain the existing chain link fence and add shrubbery. The staff suggested a solid fence. Another point of consideration addresses stormwater management. The Engineering Department feels there is a need for enclosed drainage along Highway 6. Because of the size of the area, a stormdater management system is required, although the water need not necessarily be retained on the premises. It is cur- rently under discussion whether the owners of Lot 1 or 2 could main- tain a swale along Highway 6. There is currently a swale on the east side of Boyrum. The developer and the Engineering Department have discuswould sed t e possibility that road into ahpipersystem.eet be loRaleh Stofferd so the dr325aEe tha Wesh vePopernanlowa eiEngineeringnDiepartme tthe eVmutuallycagreede this tplan would work. Staff is also recommending 37 feet of pavement rather than 28 feet suggested by the developer. This allows for a turning lane. Franklin mentioned there was also concern among staff with access to Lot 2. Staff suggested access to this lot be limited to two points. Concern was also expressed regarding the provision of a sidewalk on the west side of Boyrum. Although the City does not want to encourage pedestrian traffic to cross Highway 6, a sidewalk may be necessary. This issue requires further discussion. al MINUTES FORMAL MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 3, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. PAGE 7 Franklin continued, pointing out the factors raised at the previous informal meeting during which the extension was discussed. - Impact of extension on the function of Highway 6. This would change the timing of the signal lights, as well as slow down the speed of traffic and add to congestion at the intersec- tion. - Impact on surrounding properties. Traffic would enter along the boundary of the residential area on Plum Street and terminate at Highland Avenue. An evaluation is necessary of where the traffic would go from there in terms of a north -south flow: - Highland -Keokuk -Kirkwood - Highland -Gilbert Court -Kirkwood - Highland -Keokuk Court -Diana -Dodge Land uses could also change as a result of the extension. With the connection between Highway 6 and Highland Avenue, the value of the commercial property along Boyrum, and Highland may increase because of increased accessibility and visibility, resulting in changes in land use to higher traffic generators. - Public purpose. The extension of Boyrum could alleviate the traffic congestion at Highland and Gilbert. Truck traffic in the area has a difficult time reaching Highway 6. With the extension, this truck traffic could access Highway 6 by an alternative route. Wallace questioned where the access points on Lot 2 would be located. Franklin stated this issue was under discussion; one proposal was a point approximately 100' north of the south property line and one point 20' south of the north property line. Franklin mentioned the developer would want to discuss the provision of a sidewalk and the necessity of 37' of pavement. Dierks asked if concern expressed in a letter of opposition regarding further subdivision was valid. Franklin felt further subdivision was possible but not foreseen at this time. Scott felt there were enough questions that the Commission would want to defer voting on this application tonight. The Comnission members agreed. 6911 MINUTES FORMAL MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COR41SSION APRIL 3, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. PAGE 8 Public Discussion: Rosemary Spauldin 1407 Plum Iowa Cit . Ms. Spaulding questioned if tTe staff= recomnen a "no left urn rom Boyrum onto Highland Ave. Franklin clarified a "no left turn" has been suggested at the inter- section of Highland and Gilbert. Spaulding distributed a letter expressing her concerns with the safety of children in the area, additional traffic in the area, the poor condition of streets in the area, and costs to the taxpayers. She read aloud her letter, conclud- ing with a request to deny the extension of Boyrum Street to Highland Avenue. Scott interjected that Southgate Development would pay the full costs of the extension. Franklin pointed out that Southgate proposed a 28' paving width. The staff recommended 37' of pavement. The overwidth paving should be provided by the City if the reason for the street is to serve traffic flow generated by the community at large. Franklin added that the issue of the pavement width had not been resolved. Scott mentioned that initial discussions of the Commission assumed no cost to the City. If the City would require the over -width pavement, is it automatic that the City pay for it? Franklin stated that if the overwidth paving was necessary because of the development pro- posed, the cost of the overwidth could be placed on the developer. Scott asked the public in attendance to explain whether truck or car traffic was using the Highland to Plum to Keokuk route. Those present felt the traffic to predominately consist of cars. Wallace asked if the timing of the light at Boyrum could increase the noise in the area. Spaulding felt the additional traffic through the neighborhood would increase the noise, as well as diminish the func- tion of the Highway 6 Bypass. Greg Cranston, 1409 Plum Iowa City. Cranston pointed out that with the extension his lame wou ave right-of-way on three sides of the property. He also stressed that Keokuk Court and Diana Street could not handle more traffic, particularly truck traffic. Wallace asked him to define the type of truck traffic he referred to. Cranston felt it was mostly semi -trucks. Cranston also expressed concern with erosion in the area. Franklin stated the drainage issues raised would effect an existing drainage swale north of Highway 6 in the right-of-way and not the residential area. Rich Nelson, 1205 Diana Street, Iowa City. Nelson expressed concern with the increase of traffic on Diana. Nelson raised the problem of the stop signs on Kirkwood Avenue and their placement relative to the stop sign on Diana and Kirkwood. He was also concerned for the chil- 6 9/ r MINUTES FORMAL MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 3, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. PAGE 9 dren in the area, and the flooding on Highland, feeling that the Boyrum extension would compound this. Nelson felt that the only public benefit from the proposed subdivision would be to Southgate Development. In addressing the storm water management concerns, Franklin explained the drainage could flow from Highland south to two catch basins on Boyrum and from Highway 6 north to two catch basins. She indicated that the neighborhood could see improvements to the flooding problem on Highland if the drainage improvements were done in conjunction with the proposed subdivision. Nelson asked who would bear these costs. Franklin stated the developer would absorb them. Diane Nelson, 1205 Diana Street, Iowa City. D. Nelson asked the Com- mission iT�Lri y owneda sma road near the intersection of Highland Court and Gilbert Court, feeling this could possibly be developed to Highway 6 rather than Boyrum Street. It was pointed out that this was private property. Julie Hausman, 1038 Diana Street, Iowa Cit . Hausman spoke in opposi- ion o e extension, stating e s ree was not necessary for devel- opment of that property. She felt Boyrum would create increased traffic through the residential neighborhood, on streets which could not physically handle the additional traffic. Hausman mentioned she would like to see the City consider other alternatives such as making the Highland -Gilbert intersection a 5 -way signal light. Hausman read a statement to the Commission, in opposition, from William Seyfarth, 1017 Diana, Iowa City. Scott suggested those concerned with the signage at the Diana/Kirkwood and Dodge/Kirkwood intersections express those concerns to the City Council. Pat Gil in, 710 Diana Court, Iowa_C�ity. Gilpin reiterated the concern �t�ta eT and�looding on AigFland. Another concern invovled screening. He felt the arbor vitae hedge was ineffective until matur- ity 10 years into the future. He asked the width of Boyrum on the south side of Highway 6. Stoffer responded the width to be 48'. Gilpin wondered how 48' could go into 281. In the 1983 Comprehensive Plan, Gilpin mentioned that a buffer zone providing screening between the CI properties west of the proposal and the residential properties to the east would be required. Gilpin explained that he lived east of Diana Street on Diana Court. Gilpin stated that when he left his home going west on Diana Court to Diana Street, access to Diana Street is difficult with traffic coming down Diana Street swerving away from parked cars on the west side of Diana Street into the northbound lane. 4 9i -1 _A� i MINUTES FORMAL MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 3, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. PAGE 10 Scott questioned the buffer zone requirement in the Comprehensive Plan. Franklin explained there was a general statement in the 1978 Comprehensive Plan. She added there are no specific sites. In the zoning ordinance there is a requirement for screening between residen- tial and commercial areas. Scott asked if Gilpin had noticed an increase in traffic through Diana Street from Highland -north and Kirkwood -south. Gilpin affirmed there to be an increase in traffic. Scott questioned why. Gilpin attrib- uted this increase to the disrepair of the railroad crossing at Gil- bert Court and Kirkwood Avenue. The traffic involves much truck traffic, Gilpin confirmed, from Highland Court businesses. Dierks asked Gilpin if putting Boyrum through to Highland would exac- erbate the problem of traffic on Diana Street. Gilpin said yes, sug- gesting the extension would make it easier to go north with access to Dodge, Governor and Summit. Wallace questioned the 3 -way stop at Dodge and Kirkwood. Gilpin called the signage both a blessing and a curse. The stop signs did slow traffic on Kirkwood, but have made access to and from Diana Street difficult. Wallace asked what alternative route Gilpin would use. He felt Highland would be closest. Johto w�on She herd 2044 Tan lewood Iowa Cit Speaking for his mother the area in the extension 'of Boyrum. a He claimed here uproperty be no valuestfor those close to Boyrum would lessen. He asked if the developer would compensate these people. Todd She herd Route 1 Riverside. Brother to John Shepherd, T. epher a so expresse concerns for his mother residing at 606 In rum Street was not agood ufor the neighbors. pl The ebuffer zone shouldnnotlum be trees or shrubs, but should be space. Helen Schneider 670 Keokuk Court Iowa CitySchneider feared the extens on of Boyrum 11111JI16 eventually run through to Kirkwood. She stressed her opposition to the extension. John Eckermann 1401 Plum Street Iowa City. If Boyrum would be exten a to ig an , c ermann pointe ou s lot would be bordered on three sides by streets. He asked the Commission to keep in mind that people in the area are private home owners, who are long term askedresidents. He e on the residents' peace and quiet, would eallowed to s lower thei rproperty values, and dimish their life savings. 691 r - MINUTES FORMAL MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 3, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. PAGE 11 Horowitz asked if Eckermann considered this a self -generating neigh- borhood. Eckermann explained most people are older, long-term resi- dents, who plan on passing their home onto their children. He added there also are many younger families just starting out. Scott S'994 he herd 601 Keokuk Court Iowa Cit . Shepherd told the Com- mission a as M in a neig or o0 or 25 years, and notes for the record his opposition to the proposed extension. He stated his doubt that the swales would alleviate any drainage problems, feeling that even with two catch basins, water will still drain down Highland to Kathie's Candles and into the creek. Having lived next to a com- mercial area with no buffer, Shepherd mentioned the problems which occur with pollution. If a fast food restaurant under consideration for this project is allowed, the pollution problem would worsen. Ralph Stoffer, as engineer for the plat, remarked the main concern appears to be the traffic issue. He suggested an embargo east on Highland to cut down on the truck traffic into residential neighbor- hoods. Stoffer informed the Commission that Southgate Development had conducted a market study of the neighborhood, realizing that people not opposed or indifferent to the project would not likely attend the public meeting. Horowitz asked if the developer had considered the possibility of a 5 -way signal light at the intersection of Gilbert and Highland. Stoffer had mentioned the possibility to Jim Brachtel, Traffic Engi- neer for the City. Stoffer felt this could make a very awkward inter- section. Horowitz asked that Stoffer consider the possibility and further requested Brachtel to attend the next meeting. Stoffer cau- tioned that sometimes the solutions are worse than the problem. Mike Pau1 227 Melrose Court Iowa Cit . As president of Integrated Mar eting, au istr ute to the Commission copies of the results of the survey of residents living near the Boyrum Street proposed project area. In answer to five basic, open ended questions, those surveyed expressed general overall approval. Although the project may be an intrusion, the people in attendance represent the concerns. Wallace questioned Paul if people asked what would be established on the site when the survey was conducted. Paul clarified his office was retained by Southgate to do the survey, and documentation of the responses were limited to those stated in the report. Cranston interjected that he felt strung along by the interview ques- tions, adding that he would use the street if it were installed, but he does not want it there. Hausman, although not a respondent to the survey, agreed that it was misleading to ask if the street were there would it be utilized by local traffic. 4 9/ --A, r- MINUTES FORMAL MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 3, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. PAGE 12 Scott Shepherd, a respondent to the survey, conceded that his answers probably did sound positive, but he feels negatively now. Scott, in response to a general question from the public, affirmed that the public is welcome to the informal meeting of April 14, 1986, but stressed that he severely limits public discussion at the informal work sessions. For the public record, Franklin noted that letters in opposition were received from Elaine Shepherd 606 Keokuk Court I Iowa City, and Paul DuffX 613 Keoku ourt, Iowa it telephone ca in favor was receiv—fromSe-TThompson, Plum Street Iowa City. Franklin also received telephone call from Au ie Salm 1431 Plum Street Iowa a Com, saying he was not particularly7opposed to the extension. Horowitz moved to defer this application submitted by Southgate Devel- opment Company until the April 17, 1986 formal meeting. Wallace seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. After a five minute break, the Commission reconvened at 10:35 PM. ZONING ITEMS (Continued) S. CZ -8604. Public discussion of an application submitted by John Oaks for the rezoning of 38.5 acres in the County, near Rapid Creek Road and Highway 1, from Al to RS. Franklin explained the site is included in Area 4 of the Fringe Area Policy Agreement, which, at the Commission's last meeting, was recom- mended to be changed. Franklin added that the request is inconsistent with the existing and the proposed Area 4 policy recommendation. Staff recommends the Commission find the proposed rezoning from Al to RS inconsistent with both policies. Public Discussion: MJohn Oaks Box 222 RR 21. Iowa Cit Oaks felt the rezoning request cons is en wi a res o ie area. He cited a development just across the road which was rezoned in late 1985. Oaks explained he has been holding off on developing this portion of his property to ascer- tain if there would be demand. Now he wants to finish what he started. He pointed out that it would be developed at less than the maximum density permitted because of the topography. In regard to the development currently in place, Oaks related that he has received very positive comments. He clarified that the property is adjacent to the Iowa City city limits. Scott indicated to the applicant that the request is inconsistent with the policy statements in their present form as well as in the proposed policy as amended. He further stated that the Commission must review the application in the context of these stated policies. The appli- 6 9/ r- MINUTES FORMAL 14EETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 3, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. PAGE 13 cant added that he will absorb all of the costs for the extension of gas mains, water, and road maintenance to meet the needs of the devel- opment. Horowitz queried if the Commission could make a recommendation that the applicant is meeting the criteria regarding the protection of environmentally sensitive areas and keeping road costs at an accept- able level in Alternative 4 of the Rapid Creek Area Study, which the Commission considered and recommended for approval. Franklin in- formed the Commission that Alternative 4 is undergoing change in discussions before the Board of Supervisors. Oaks concluded that farming was not a viable use for this property. He indicated that if he could not build on it, he would have to sell the property. But to sell it he would also need to rezone it. Living adjacent to the property, he stressed his desire for a nice area. He also felt the disadvantage stated for Alternative 3 of the Rapid Creek Study are also disadvantages for Alternative 4, and for that reason, he stated for the record his opposition to Alternative 4. Franklin explained to the Commission they have the option of evaluat- ing the application using the existing policy and make a statement with that, or of deferring their recommendation until the policy for Area 4 is resolved. The latter suggestion, Franklin felt, would leave Oaks in limbo. Mark Rhoads, Box 373, RR. 5, Iowa City. Rhoads estimated the addition or more houses on that curve of road --to be a safety hazard. There are pedestrians in the area, and there have already been accidents. The curve will continue to be dangerous unless it is straightened. He also felt it was not fair to allow more houses until the Area 4 policy is resolved. Chuck Dewey, R 5, Iowa City. Dewey described Rapid Creek Road as a seco�n ary o,Tearoad, presently under an annually imposed spring embargo. Being a sensitive road, the extra traffic would further damage it. Cooper moved to recommend to City Council that the request submitted by John Oakes to rezone 38.5 acres in the County, near Rapid Creek Road be found inconsistent with the existing Area 4 Fringe Area Policy Agreement. Perry seconded the motion. Horowitz noted that she would vote against the motion for the reasons she stated in reference to the applicants' attempt to meet the crite- ria contained in Alternative 4. Wallace asked if passage of the motion would stymie Oaks' progress. Scott felt passage would allow Oaks to continue. Deferring until the policy question is cleared up, could tie him up in that process. Horowitz added to her previous 01 =IA, fi MINUTES FORMAL MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 3, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. PAGE 14 statement that voting against the motion might influence the Council and Board of Supervisors in their deliberations on the update of the Area 4 policy. In voting, the motion passed, 5-1, with Horowitz voting in the nega- tive. 2. Public discussion of amendments to the Planned Development Housing Overlatracts 2es uaacr,inSection as planned permit velop entsdevelopment of less than There was no public discussion. Perry o defer ituntil the April ng. Walla esecondedthemotionThe 7 motion carr ed unanimously, 6-0. 3. Public Discussion of an amendment to the Sign Regulations, Section 36-62, to prohibit the use of illuminated awnings. Public Discussion: De Lon 2211 Nevada Avenue, Iowa City. Representing Dave Long av ro ec 1ve ervices, ong e i umina a awnings, devoid of graphics should be considered awnings rather than signs. Scott understood this to mean a reference to the Building code rather than the Zoning Code. Franklin clarified the change was needed since illuminated awnings were becoming signs. Boyle added that the addition of illumination brings attention to the building, making the awning a sign. In response to this, Long cited Howard Johnson's and Red Roof Inn as examples of lighting or color drawing attention to a building. Boyle did not disagree with Long's examples, but felt the illuminated awn- ings were a step further. Long felt an awning is an awning whether it is illuminated or not. Perry moved to defer this amendment to the Sign Ordinance, Section 36-62, until the April 17, 1986, formal meeting. Dierks seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. egula- 4 Public tions, Section �36-58(b)(4)on of an ,netomclar fy the intent ent to the roftthe provision. There There was no public discussion. Dierks moved to defer this amendment to the off -Street Parking Regula- tions, Section 36-58(b)(4) until the April 17, 1986, formal meeting. Wallace seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0. 6 9/ _AT r MINUTES FORMAL MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 3, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. PAGE 15 PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Horowitz presented to staff for reproduction a survey of Highway 6 from Lakeside to Sunset. Horowitz also requested that City Traffic Engineer Jim Brachtel be present at the next meeting to answer questions on the possibility of a 5 -way signal system at Gilbert and Highland, and also Highway 6 and Waterfront Drive. Scott excused Horowitz from the City Council meeting next week. ADJOURNMENT: Wallace moved to adjourn the meeting at 11:20 p.m. Horowitz seconded the motion. The motion carried, 6-0. Minutes respectfully submitted by Linda Manning. Approved by: Sally ter s, etre ary 9/ 11 -Al�