Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-11-26 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES URBAN ENVIRONMENT AD HOC COMMITTEE TUESDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1985 - 4:00 PM IOWA CITY RECREATION CENTER - ROOM A MEMBERS PRESENT: Horowitz, Novick, Nowysz, Baker, Jakobsen, Strait (arrived at 4:25 PM) MEMBERS ABSENT: Koch, Boutelle, McGuire, Jordan, Lundquist STAFF PRESENT: Milkman, Prestemon RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL 1. The UEAHC recommends that the City Council appoint a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission to serve on the UEAHC, and that the membership status of the Chamber of Commerce Environmental Concerns Committee repre- sentative be changed from non-voting to voting. 2. The UEAHC recommends that as the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council consider the Neighborhood Open Space Plan and Ordinance, priority be given to the preservation of natural features and environmen- tally sensitive areas. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Baker called the meeting to order at 4:07 PM.. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 10, 1985 Horowitz moved that the minutes for September 10, 1985 be approved; Nowysz seconded. The motion passed 5/0. DISCUSSION OF THE MEETING TIME After brief discussion, a consensus emerged to keep the meeting at the same time, i.e. the second Tuesday of the month at 4:00 p.m. DISCUSSION ON FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND STRATEGY FOR THE COMMITTEE Horowitz expressed concern that absent members should be included in the discussion on future directions and strategy. Milkman reviewed the charge to the Committee by the City Council, stressing the wide leeway given the Committee. Since the Council has adopted the Urban Environment policies, the Committee needs to complete its recommendations to the City Council on implementing the policies in the five broad areas: environmentally sensitive areas; scenic vistas; neighborhood preservation; open space and buffers; and City entranceways. Milkman stated that the Committee has dealt with environmentally sensitive areas and that the proposed Neighborhood Open Space Plan and Ordinance was taking care of that element. al -20 Urban Environment Ad Hoc Committee October 8, 1985 Page 2 Horowitz expressed concern that the basic premises in the Neighborhood Open Space Plan and Ordinance have been weakened. Testimony has indicated opposition to the districts, and has argued for city-wide purchases. She briefly explained the details of the ordinance. Finally, she stated that the UEAHC should recommend the acquisition of specific sites. There was a brief discussion on the fact that the Parks and Recreation Commission was not represented,on the UEAHC. Jacobsen asked about the status of the "natural features check list" and the recommendations relating to environmentally sensitive areas. Milkman responded that these are third on the priority list of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Baker stated that the work that remains on the natural features checklist is there because the UEAHC intentionally left some aspects of the ordinance rather broad. Novick asked if some sites will be found unsuitable for development due to environmentally sensitive features. Milkman said that standards are not yet determined, she said that some portions *of particular lots may be found unsuitable, and gave as an example areas with very steep slopes. Strait asked the members for their impressions of the degree of support for the recommendations regarding protection of environmentally sensitive areas. Baker. answered that he believed that the City Manager may be reluctant to commit staff time if the City Council is rot supportive. Jakobsen stated that she believed that the majority of the present City Council favors protection of these areas. Strait asked what recommendations or studies the Riverfront Commission has made about the river corridor area. He suggested that the UEAHC needs input from the Riverfront Commission and departments of the City government. After some discussion on Committee membership and liaison with other Commis- sions, Nowysz moved that the City Council appoint a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission to serve on the UEAHC and to change the membership status of the Chamber of Commerce Environmental Concerns Committee represen- tative from non-voting to voting; Horowitz seconded. The motion passed, 6-0. Baker stated that the Historic Preservation Commission will report to the UEAHC at the next meeting on November 12, to be followed by a report from the Design Review Committee at the December 10 meeting. Novick moved that the UEAHC recommends that as the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council consider the Neighborhood Open Space Plan and Ordinance, priority be given to the preservation of natural features and environmentally sensitive areas; Horowitz seconded. The motion passed, 6-0. The Committee then briefly considered the Historic Zoning Handbook of Nashville, Tennessee. Jacobsen referred to a section in the handbook that explained the liability of members. Nowysz urged staff to research the liability of the UEAHC members and to report back to the Committee. Urban Environment Ad Hoc Committee October 8, 1985 Page 3 Nowysz explained the RNC -20 zone in the Iowa City Ordinance, and stated that she will be prepared to discuss the neighborhood preservation ordinance from the City of Nashville in more detail at the next meeting of the UEAHC. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned by acclamation at 5:07 PM. ciao MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 1985 SENIOR CENTER CLASSROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Bill Coen, Geri Hall, Michael Kattchee, Henry Fox, Robert Jackson, Ruth Wagner, Dorothy Whipple MEMBERS ABSENT: Don Crum, Marty Kafer STAFF PRESENT: Bette Meisel, Donita Devance, Jackie Mayer, Practicum Student GUESTS PRESENT: Dorothy Vincent, Reverend Leon Aalberg; Michel Lawson, MECCA; Edith Boldt, COE CALL TO ORDER/MINUTES/PUBLIC DISCUSSION: The meeting was called to order at 3:02 PM by the chair. Fox moved that the minutes of September 11, 1985, be accepted as presented. Kattchee seconded. Accepted, unanimous voice vote. Coen introduced guests, Mike Lawson, Dorothy Vincent, Reverend Leon Aalberg, Jackie Mayer and Edith Boldt. There was no discussion. SPACE APPLICATION: Commissioners considered the space application made by Dorothy Vincent and Rev. Aalberg, requesting permission to open the Congregate Meals Christmas Dinner to poor people in the community. Vincent and Aalberg asked that Senior Citizens meal way for peopleilof u deragElders)0 act as ($2 50)hosts to would be thesepeople. th rough fundsregular the applicants had earmarked for the meal. In addition, Ms. Vincent would be responsible for recruiting sufficient volunteers to aid in preparing and serving the meal. Ms. Vincent explained that she had sponsored a meal for poor and elderly last year but space problems and the large number of people who attended made it impossible to do the same in the facility (a church basement) that was used last year. She felt that by combining the two efforts more people could be served and public knowledge of the program would be greater. Commis- sioners were concerned that the event might start an unfavorable precedent; that it might be in violation of federal guidelines for the meals program; that it might put the Senior Center in the position of answering questions like, 'Why wasn't I invited'; that it would be necessary to pay the weekend janitor additional hours because of the numbers of people in the building. The Council of Elders offered their recommendation of the proposal, contingent upon the Commission recommendation. Hall moved to accept the proposal, contingent upon Vincent and Aalberg supplying adequate volunteer staff to serve the meal, agreement of the Nutrition Advisory Board, providing for the janitor's salary for the additional time and paying for meals of people under 60. Whipple seconded. Accepted, unanimous voice vote. BUDGET DISCUSSION: Commissioners reviewed the Senior Center budget proposal for FY81. Meisel responded to questions regarding the budget, travel expense request and two Expanded Service Levels: Volunteer Training and Volunteer Specialist. Hail suggested that Councilpersons be informed that the Senior Center is losing services (Widowed Persons Service and Alzheimers Support Group, in the last month) because there is no person coordinating volunteer services on a full- time basis. Current staff cannot fully meet the needs of volunteers and continue programming duties at the same time. Volunteer services will continue a/a/ Senior Center commission October 9, IS Page 2 to suffer without a full time Volunteer Specialist to support such activities. Corrections and suggestions were noted and discussed. Kattchee moved that the budget draft, with agreed upon changes, be submitted to the Council. Hall seconded. Accepted, unanimous voice vote. GOALS DISCUSSION/PROGRAM DIVISION STATEMENT REVIEW: Coen led Commissioners in the first discussion and definition of terns relative to developing hands-on, 'signature' objectives for the Commission to pursue. Commissioners were urged to share individual ideas (see attached). Hall observed that yearly goals set by the Commission would not interfere with the overall goals set forth in the Program Division Statement. She moved for the adoption of the PDS as written. Fox seconded, unanimous voice vote. COUNCIL OF ELDERS REPORT: Committee reports: The Outreach Committee is working on finding ways to keep people in the building after lunch. A variety of games and activities will be scheduled that will hopefully draw the attention of people after 1:00. The Publicity Committee has sent representatives to various medical offices in hopes that they would make the POST available in their offices. Response has been excellent. Bundles of ten ZTT be sent to each office. { Members engaged in a brainstorming session to find ways to improve newspaper coverage of Senior Center activities (a copy will be distributed at the next meeting). SENIOR CENTER UPDATE Due to the late hour .the update was omitted and Meisel asked if there were questions about any of the packet materials. Meisel reminded Commissioners to check with Coen on assignments for the Volunteer Appreciation Dinner. Wagner asked for help with decorations. Any pumpkins, leaves, squash, gourds, Indian corn, etc. would be of help. Kattchee will work on the newspaper ad and will contact the banks to pay for the ad. Jackson, Hall, and Whipple will be unable to attend, though Hall will be on hand before to assist in the set-up. The weekend janitor will be hired to assist in the clean-up. The speaker has been contacted and has agreed to come. Mayor McDonald and Dennis Langenberg have been invited and accepted also. It was suggested that in the future time limits be set on each agenda item so that the meeting will be less likely to run overtime. The meeting adjourned at 5:35 p.m. Submitted by Ruth Wagner, Secretary Senior Center Commission Prepared by Donita Devance Senior Center Secretary ai.z i MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 9, 1985 - 4:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Barker, Fisher, Mask, Randall MEMBERS ABSENT: Messier STAFF PRESENT: Beagle, Boyle CALL TO ORDER: Randall moved that Fisher be appointed interim chair for consideration of the minutes, since Chairperson Barker had not yet arrived. Approved by consensus. Fisher called the meeting to order at 4:35. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES: Fisher asked the Board to consider the amendments to the July 10 minutes as approved on August 14. Randall pointed out a mistake in the amendments listed on the last page to change after Page 11 from "third paragraph" to "second paragraph." Randall moved and Mask seconded that the July 10 minutes be reapproved with the above correction. Motion carried unani- mously. Mask asked about the progress on the rule changes for administrative procedures for notice of Board hearings. Boyle suggested that the Board make no decisions regarding the matter at this time, since he had come across other rules which construe on the rule change and which he, would like to have more time to study. He stated that the best course may be to adopt new rules, since the rules presently before the Board are "sketchy" and that stronger rules may be necessary. He said that he expects to have recommendations for the Board in a couple of months. Boyle also told the Board that the Meisel matter was being appealed by their neighbors and that the Meisels and their neighbors have reached an agreement, although the court has not yet dismissed the case. He said that since there has been no formal decision in the matter, it may come before the Board again, at which time the City Attorney's office will try to formulate a'decision. VARIANCE ITEMS: V-8506. A public hearing on an application submitted by Kenneth E. KaiTs for a variance to permit a third dwelling unit in the RS -B zone for a property located at 712 E. Fairchild Street. Barker arrived, and proceeded to explain to those present the procedure of the hearing. He also advised the applicants that should they be dissatis- fied with the decision of the Board, they may appeal to the District Court within 30 days. MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 9, 1985 - 4:30 P.M.- PAGE .M:PAGE 2 Beagle explained that the property in question is located in the RS -8 zone, and borders the RM -12 zone to the west. The third dwelling, a basement apartment, was established illegally in 1970 by the Kallaus' son, while he was attending college. At the time the third dwelling unit was established, the property was zoned R-2, which existed from 1962 to 1978, and which permitted only single- and two-family dwellings. The violation came to light in 1980 when Housing and Inspection Services received a complaint; after investigation the Kallaus' were cited with a zoning violation and were instructed to bring the dwelling into compliance with the zoning ordinance. They were recently cited again for non-compliance and initially applied for RM -12 zoning, but since it was found that they have insufficient lot area for a multi -family dwelling, they are instead applying for a variance. Beagle went on to explain that a variance must meet the requirements of two tests specified in Section 36-91(g)(3) of the Zoning Ordinance. The first test to be satisfied is than of unnecessary hardship. Beagle reported that it was staff's finding that: 1) the applicant was able to make reasonable use of the property as it was previously zoned (R-2), as well as its present zoning of RS -8. At no time in the history of the property was the third dwelling unit permissible under zoning. The applicants were able to gain a reasonable use from the property as a two-family dwelling, which was its use prior to installation of the third dwelling unit. 2) Staff finds that the applicant's situation is not unique, since there are no characteristics peculiar to the applicant's property which make use of the property consistent with Toning impossible. There are other properties in the area with comparable lot sizes that are used in a manner consistent with the RS -8 zone. 3) The condition causing the hardship was of the applicant's own making. Since at no time was the third dwelling unit permissible under zoning, the problem was created by them, and is therefore self-imposed. The second test is whether granting the variance would be contrary to the public interest. Beagle stated that it would be, because it would increase the effective density of the property beyond that permitted in the zone. The proposed variance would also contravene the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, since it would increase the density of the property from 14.52 DU/A (under its legal use) to 21.78 DU/A with the illegal third unit. Beagle concluded that since the application for a third dwelling unit does not meet the required tests for variance, it is staff's recommendation that the application for a variance be denied. Denial was recommended because the hardship was of the applicant's own making, and the third dwelling unit would result in an increase in density, contrary to the intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. Fisher asked if the duplex use of the property would be a conforming use under the current zoning. Beagle replied that the property has insuffi- cient lot size for a duplex under RS -8 zoning, but under the previous R-2 zoning the property had sufficient lot size for duplex use. Since it was legally established as a duplex under the previous zoning ordinance, the duplex use of the property would be a legal, non -conforming use. MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 9, 1985 - 4:30 P.M. PAGE 3 Mrs. Ken Kallaus rose in support of their application for the variance. She said the property just to the west of their lot was formerly the site of a tin shop, but is now the location of a 6-8 unit apartment building. The parking lot serving this building is only five feet from the appli- cant's house, and they claim that this has lowered the value of their property. In addition, she said a parking lot serving Eagle's grocery is to the north and several other apartment houses are in the vicinity; because of this, they don't feel that the neighborhood is strictly a residential one. Mask asked if there were other single-family homes in the neighborhood. Mrs. Kallaus replied that there are only a few along Fairchild Street. Barker asked how long the Kallaus' had lived there. Mrs. Kallaus said that they built the house "20-30 years ago" as a two -apartment dwelling. Barker asked Mrs. Kallaus if they had had a chance to read the staff report, and if the staff report was accurate on how the third dwelling unit came into being. Mrs. Kallaus said yes, it was built by their son while he was in college. She said that many improvements were made on the unit after it was built. Barker asked if the facts of the staff report regarding the discovery of the unit and the subsequent citation for a zoning violation was also correct. Mrs. Kallaus said that they never felt they were in violation, and were not aware of how the City's zoning ordinances operated. Mr.. Ken Kallaus rose to say that the improvements were made on the apartment to meet City building standards. He said that these improve- ments were suggested by Mr. Malone of Housing & Inspection Services who inspected the apartment. Barker asked when Mr. Malone inspected the apartment, and Mr. Kallaus said that it was in 1970 or 1971. Barker then asked Mr. Kallaus if he assumed that if the improvements suggested by Mr. Malone were. made, the apartment would then comply with City Ordinances? Mr. Kallaus said yes. He also said that there had been subsequent inspections of the apartment, but nothing was ever said about a zoning violation; all of this occurred before the zoning citation in 1980. Barker asked if they were ever granted a permit to rent, paid any fees, or had any paperwork from the City showing that the third dwelling unit was acceptable to rent. Mr. Kallaus said that they always assumed that renting the unit was allowable. Mrs. Kallaus added that they would not have invested "about $5,000" in the unit had they not felt that it was allowable. Barker expressed some concern that the Kallaus' were led to believe that the third dwelling unit was allowable prior to 1980, and only then were told that the apartment was in violation of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Kallaus went into more detail about the inspections made by Mr. Malone before 1980. Fisher asked what prompted Mr. Malone to come and inspect the property. Mrs. Kallaus said he came because the contractor doing the improvements on the apartment applied for a building permit. MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 9, 1985 - 4:30 P.M. PAGE 4 Barker asked the Kallaus' if it would be acceptable to them if the Board delayed making a decision until November, to give the Board time to inspect the City housing inspection records. The Kallaus- said that this would be acceptable to them. Beagle asked Mr. Kallaus what year they made improvements on the third dwelling unit. Mr. Kallaus said that he would have to look it up in his records. Barker again expressed concern that the applicants were led to believe that the third dwelling unit was legal due to the actions of the City. Boyle said that the issue would not affect the Board's decision in the matter, but that it would be an issue for the district court to resolve. Beagle said that he had looked over the Housing and Inspection Services' files on the property, and that they showed that the third dwelling unit was not discovered until 1980. The Kallaus' responded that this was not true. Beagle went on to say that the earliest correspondence from the City beginning in 1980 advised the Kallaus' not to make further improvements on the unit until the zoning issue was settled. He said that the Kallaus' claim that the apartment had been inspected before 1980 could not be substantiated and that duplexes were not included in rental inspections until about 1980. The Kallaus' disputed this. Boyle said it would be a good idea to defer the Board's decision on the matter until Mr. Malone could be called before the Board to discuss his involvement. Barker concurred with this. Mask asked Beagle if the Kallaus' were formally notified not to improve the apartment. Beagle said yes, that the first correspondence was in 1980 and that two or three subsequent letters were sent. Mr. Kallaus said that no such correspondence was received by them. Barker said that since there was some dispute regarding this, the Kallaus' should make copies of all the correspondence that they have received and supply it to the staff to review it. Mrs. Kallaus reiterated that the entire house, including the third dwelling, was inspected before 1980. Barker said that he wanted to see some proof of this, either in paperwork or from Mr. Malone regarding when inspections before 1980 were made, and what was the value of the improve- ments made as a result of these inspections. Mr. Kallaus said that staff should have a letter from Mr. Malone regarding these inspections; Beagle said that there was no such letter in his casefile. Fisher moved that consideration of variance item V-8506 be deferred until the next regular meeting of the Board of Adjustment. Randall seconded. Motion carried, 4-0. DISCUSSION OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC NOTIFICATION OF HEARINGS: Barker asked if the rule change, if adopted, would be consistent with the procedures of other City boards and commissions dealing with zoning matters. Boyle said yes. Barker asked if a decision regarding the rule changes could be deferred until such time as they could be considered more In-depth by the Board. Boyle said that that would be acceptable, but a1az MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 9, 1985 - 4:30 P.M. PAGE 5 suggested that the proposed rule change may be inconsistent with the City ordinance change being considered by the Council. He also suggested that the Board not adopt the proposed rule changes since allowing a 7 -day notice may be too short a time for staff to complete its investigation and report. Beagle asked if the Board had approved the August minutes. He pointed out that the corrections the Board approved at the beginning of the meeting were from the July minutes. Fisher said that they never received the August minutes. Beagle said that he would send the Board members the June and August minutes for consideration at the next meeting. The Board then returned to discussion of the proposed rule changes. Barker asked if they should be formally adopted. Boyle noted that Barker had earlier suggested deferring a decision on the matter until the next meeting. Barker said it would be acceptable to adopt the changes if the rest of the Board felt comfortable with them. Mask asked for time to read the memos regarding the changes included in the staff report. Barker noted that the proposed rule change allows applicants the option of being placed on the agenda when a 15 -day notice is not possible. He wondered if allowing this would be at the staff's discretion. Fisher asked if the 7-20 day notice requirement is consistent with other boards. Boyle said yes, since the 7-20 day notice is required by the State for zoning matters. He noted that there are not notice requirements for boards of adjustment, but that the Board should have notice requirements consistent with other bodies dealing with zoning. Boyle said that he did not like the proposal because it looked to be inconsistent with the proposed City ordinance. He recommended that the rule changes not be adopted. Barker again suggested that action on the rule changes be deferred. Boyle said that he would try to get more information on the matter for the Board's next meeting. Action was declared deferred without a motion. Barker read a letter and certificate of appreciation which he would present to Marcia Slager, former chair of the Board of Adjustment. Meeting was adjourned at 5:46. �Steven•J: Van Steenhuyse, Minute -Taker. Scott Bar oerr�,harmJaann— Ka n Franklin, Secretary Bgtrd of Adjustment aiaz MINUTES V I011A CITY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 7. 1985 - 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Jordan, Perry, Dierks, Horowitz, Scott, Courtney MEMBERS ABSENT: Cooper -STAFF PRESENT: Beagle, Franklin, Prestemon RECO14MENDATIOIIS TO COUNCIL: 1. The Commission recommends adoption of CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Scott called the meeting to order at 7:37 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was no discussion. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF OCTOBER 17, 1985: Dierks stated that her name was misspelled throughout the minutes. Horowitz moved the minutes be approved as amended; Courtney seconded. The motion passed 4-0-2, with Jordan and Perry abstaining. ZONING ITEMS: 1. Public discussion of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, Sections 36-17 and 36-58, to permit photographic studios in CO -1 zones. Franklin summarized a staff memo and explained that photographic studios are personal service establishments that generate a relatively low volume of traffic. As a low volume establishment, they appear not to conflict with the permitted uses in the CO -1 Zone, and staff recommends that photographic studios be included as a permitted use. Franklin reminded the Commission of the revisions made at the November 4 Informal Meeting concerning parking requirements, specifically that two parking spaces be required for each office, studio and reception area, provided that there be no less than five spaces. Horowitz moved adoption of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, Sections 36-17 and 36-58, to permit photographic studios in CO -1 zones; Perry seconded. Horowitz stated that the parking regulations were intended to provide for employee as well as client parkino. Scott pointed out that the requirement proposed was similar to that for office/clinics. The motion passed, 6-0. a/.?3 I Planning & Zoning Commission November 7, 1985 Page 2 2. Public discussion of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, Sections 36-61 and 36-62, to permit gas price signs on pump canopy supports at filling stations. Franklin stated that the current ordinance permits filling station signs in all zones without a permit. These signs are defined as those integral to accessory equipment at the filling station, such as oil and tire racks and signs on gas pumps. Other signage such as the name of the establish- ment and gas price signs must be provided on the type of signage permitted in the zone. In the CN -1 zone, free-standing signs are not permitted. The owners of a new station near the corner of First Avenue and Rochester Avenue would like to place 12 square foot gas price signs on the poles which support the canopy over the gas pumps. As the ordinance is currently written, this would not be permitted. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance changes the definition of filling station signs to include price signs for motor fuel and requires that price signs be erected only with a permit. In .response to Commis- sion concerns expressed at the informal meeting, the ordinance was revised to require that the price signs be deducted from the monument signage allowance. Dan Glasgow, 1521 Buresh Avenue, owner of the filling station, displayed a 12 square foot sign and stated that price signage is integral to the gas dispensing business. Perry stated that he had observed signage at filling stations around the city and that the sign requested is similar' to the sign at the Amaco station at the corner of Clinton and Burlington. He stated that since the filling station will be in a residential neighborhood, that the size of the sign is too large. Glasgow responded that the manufacturer's standard size is 12 square feet. Horowitz concurred with Perry and pointed out that the standard larger sign should only be necessary in areas whereh there is heavy competition between stations. Perry pointed out that the signage in a neighborhood commercial area functions differently than signage in more intensely commercial areas; the signs provide information rather than compete with other commercial uses. Scott stated that uses located in a CN -1 zone have to live with some restrictions because of the nature of the surrounding uses. He stated that the present ordinance provides flexibility while protecting surrounding uses. The Commission discussed the signage options available in the CN -1 zone and concluded that Glasgow could install an eight square foot sign, ten feet off of the ground attached to the canopy. Horowitz moved the adoption of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, Sections 36-61 and 36-62, to permit gas price signs on pump canopy supports at filling stations; Jordan seconded. The motion failed, 0-6. 3. Public discussion of the•1985 Neighborhood Open Space Plan and Open Space Dedication Ordinance for the Developing Zone. a/ -?3 Planning & Zoning Commission November 7, 1985 Page 3 Beagle reviewed changes made in the ordinance in response to suggestions from the Commission and the staff. In addition, Beagle reviewed a table showing projected populations and open space needs for each of the districts in the developing zone. Courtney asked Beagle how the population figures for developed areas were arrived at. Beagle responded the projections came from the Bureau of the Census or were calculated based on zoning. Scott urged all Commission members to read the Plan and Ordinance before the November 18 meeting. Loren Hershberger, 7620 Bluffwood: He stated that three issues must be addressed. Does Iowa City need more open space? How much will open space cost? Who will pay for open space? He stated that Iowa City currently had 31 parks with a total of 488 acres. In addition, there are 200 acres of stormwater detention areas, 14 grade schools and 1300 acres in the University of Iowa West Campus area. He pointed out that thousands of dollars in tax revenues would be forfeited if additional acres were made into parks and not developed. He stated that in the Vista Park Village subdivision, total fees with the proposed plan would increase the average cost .by $423 per dwelling. He stated that the City can require all taxpayers to pay for open space, or can require that developers pay. In the latter case, these costs will be passed on to home buyers. He urged that if open space were exacted it be combined with planning for storm water detention. Chairperson Scott thanked Mr. Hershberger for his statement and asked him to forward a copy of his statement to staff. OTHER BUSINESS: 1. Discussion of review of Hunter's Run. Franklin pointed out that the preliminary plat of Hunters Run Subdivision Parts 4-8 would expire November 22, 1985 and that the Municipal Code provided for the extension of a plat for 18 months by the Council. Granting of an extension does not require Planning and Zoning Commission approval. However, the staff felt the Council would probably wish to have input from the Commission. Progress made on the development was discussed. Franklin stated that the staff felt substantial progress had been made in keeping within the time frame of the original plan. Scott stated an behalf of the Commission that there were no objections to the extension. The Commission concurred. 2. Discussion of Urban Environment Ad Hoc Committee recommendations. Franklin reviewed a memorandum to the Commission from Milkman. She suggested that the Commission discuss the recommendations at the December 2 meeting. ai.�j Planning & Zoning Commission November 7, 1985 Page 4 3. Discussion of Planning and Zoning schedule. The Commission reviewed the dates on which the basketball schedule will conflict with the Commission meetings. The Commission agreed to hold their formal meeting on the Wednesday prior to the regular Thursday meeting. 4. Planning and Zoning Commission information. Franklin informed the Commission about two conventions of interest. The Eastern Iowa Planning and Zoning Officials Association will hold a seminar on land use liability on November 13 in Iowa City, and the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials will hold a convention in Des Moines on November 21-23. Horowitz informed the Commission that the League of Waren Voters will host a breakfast with the Johnson County Board of Supervisors on November 21. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned by acclamation at 9:29 p.m. Minutes were taken by Greg Prestemon. Minutes approved by Barrel Courtney, Secretary R