Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-09-28 Bd Comm minutesr IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT COMMISSION Iowa City Civic Center September 9, 1982 Members Present: Saeugling, George, Schmeiser, Redick, Tiffany Staff Present: Zehr, Brown Wright Guests Present: E. K. Jones, Dr. Full, C. Neuzil Chairman Saeugling called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. The minutes of the August 12 meeting were considered and approved. Manager Zehr presented the bills for the month and explained them briefly. They were approved for payment as presented. Zehr reported the lease committee had met and worked out some of the finer details of the proposed lease with the Iowa City Flying Service. Attorney Brown reviewed the changes which had been made, mostly consisting of reordering and rewording of certain items. The term of the proposed lease was changed to end in 1991, with an option to renew until the year 2001. Attorney Brown recommended three items for discussion by the full Commission. A recommendation to increase the fuel flowage fee from 2C to 3C was discussed at length. Schmeiser suggested the flowage fee should be reviewed at the same time that the rents are reviewed, and the Commission agreed to this. The second question was whether rental fees should be reviewed every three years instead of every five years. Discussion led to an agreement for every five years. The third item concerned the rent situation for the new shop; it was agreed to leave the amortization at the same rate over the longer period of the proposed lease. It was agreed to hold a public hearing for the new lease at the October 7th meeting. Zehr read a resolution to that effect; George moved to pass the resolution; second by Schmeiser; all voted aye on a call of the roll. Zehr reported on the Fly -in Breakfast held at the Airport on August 29. There were 30 fly -ins and the Sertoma Club served 1600 breakfasts. The event was declared a success, and the Commission agreed to make it an annual event in the future. Zehr reported he has mailed the preapplication for AIA P funds, with the blue prints, and expects afavorable response from the FAA for the proposed projects. The Iowa City Council will hold its annual meeting with commission and board chairpersons on September 22, and Chairman Saeugling plans to attend. Zehr reported on difficulties he has encountered in his effort to improve safety conditions for persons flying into the airport on University of Iowa football Saturdays. Alternatives to the use of vans were discussed, and it was decided to provide orientation for taxi drivers who will drive to the airplanes and also to post a uniformed traffic director at the intersection of the parking runway and the traffic runway. Zehr announced the site for the Non -Directional Beacon has been selected and plans for installation are being finalized. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Recorder: Priscilla Wright M1CR0(ILMED BY JORM MIC RbLAB � CEDAR RAPIDS DES t401:IE8 i i 1610 1 r MINUTES IOWA CITY HOUSING COMMISSION AUGUST 4, 1982 3:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Haendel, Karstens, Farran, Logan, Krause, Ringgenberg MEMBERS ABSENT: VanderZee STAFF PRESENT: Seydel, Flinn, Hencin, Keller, Barnes, Munson 1. Meeting to order. Meeting called to order at 3:37 p.m. by Chairperson Haendel. 2. Minutes of July 7, 1982, meeting. Moved by Krause, seconded by Logan, that minutes be approved as mailed. Approved 6/0. 3. CCN. Hencin discussed roll of CCN in eliminating slums and blight and indicated CCN discussed today updating of budget cycle. Hencin further indicated CCN would like to bring budget recommendations relative to housing to Housing Commission in September. Housing Marketing Analysis. Hencin advised Housing Marketing Analysis is up for staff review at this time, and should come to Housing Commission for review in October. Housing Assistance Program. Keller presented the Housing Assistance Program Progress Report for 1982. 4. Housing Rehabilitation. Barnes presented three cases and discussed the repairs required for each. 1028 H Street - moved by Karstens, seconded by Krause that loan be authorized as presented with reservations relative to the quit claim deed. Approved 6/0. 1210 Second Avenue - Moved by Ringgenberg, seconded by Karstens, that loan be approved. Approved 6/0. 1002 Sixth Avenue - moved by Logan, seconded by Ringgenberg, that loan be approved. Approved 6/0. 5. Congregate Housing. Munson reported 600 questionnaires had been mailed in Johnson County, 400 in Iowa City and 200 in the rural areas, and that a 50 percent response is desired. He indicated that they have been coded and that a second mailing will be made if the to be sent * tonis o the Selnior lower. Center nsonCommitt ewhoassisteed d thank tedn u iletter the mailing. IVB MICROFILMED BY J JORM MICR46LAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I r MINUTES IOWA CITY HOUSING COMMISSION AUGUST 4, 1982 PAGE 2 Task Force Recommendations. Munson presented the recommendations. Moved by Karstens, seconded by Ringgenberg, that recommendation be made to the City Manager that a feasibility study be conducted of Central Junior High School for possible congregate housing. Approved 6/0. 6. Coordinator's Report. Section 8. Seydel reported housing assistance payments made on 396 units August 1, down 16 units. He submitted 82 applications for approval. Public Housing IA 22-3. Seydel reported first estimate of total development costs submitted. Looks like project was $60,000 below maximum budgeted. Also has submitted report on income and expense on initial operating period. Looks like profit of $4,000. Average cost rent is $132 monthly - the highest paying public housing project in the State. Next quarterly inspection to be Monday, August 9, 1982. Public Housing IA 22-4. Seydel advised large scale development project passed Council unanimously. There will be four duplexes and four triplexes. Seven firms have purchased developers packets. Karstens praised Seydel's efforts on the project, as well as his willingness to work with the neighbors at their convenience to alleviate any concerns they might have about the project. Commission set a special meeting for 7 p.m., August 12, 1982, to review the development proposals and make recommendations for a developer. Section 8 Moderate Rehab. Had meeting with interested developers. Three persons showed up to ask questions. 7. Adjournment. Moved by Logan, seconded by Karstens, that the meeting be adjourned at 4:50 p.m. Approved by: Go I dene Haendel, Chairperson RICROEILMED BY JC)RM MIC ROLA eI - � CEDAR RAPIDS DCS MOINES I i 1619 1 l MINUTES HOUSING APPEALS BOARD AUGUST 10, 1982 -- 8:00 AM MEMBERS PRESENT: Goldene Haendel, Carol Karstens, Beth Ringgenberg MEMBERS ABSENT: Mike Farran, Alvin Logan STAFF PRESENT: Mike Kucharzak, Judy Hoard, Kelly Vezina, David Malone, Ron Bogs, Sherri Patterson SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND ACTION TAKEN: Chairperson Haendel called the meeting to order. Ringgenberg made a motion to approve the minutes from the previous Board meeting; this motion was seconded by Karstens. The motion carried. APPEAL OF PAUL A. HEIN: Others present: None Inspector Malone explained that Mr. Hein was not able to appear on his behalf, therefore he would present the facts for both parties. He reported that he conducted a licensing inspection at 117 Clapp Street on June 9, 1982. Two violations were appealed by Mr. Hein. The first was Chapter 17-5.N.(4)(a), lack of required ceiling height for room with sloping roof. This concerns the second floor of this unit which has a ceiling height at the peak of 615". There is adequate natural light and ventilation. Karstens made a motion to grant a variance of Chapter 17-5.N.(4)(a), lack of required ceiling height for room with sloping roof. Haendel seconded the motion. The motion carried. The last violation appealed was Chapter 17-5.I.(2)(9), lack of required minimum door/doorway height. Malone explained that this doorway, also on the second floor, has a height of 511011, lacking the required 6'411. He also mentioned that this doorway was built into a load bearing wall and would be impossible to raise. Karstens made a motion to grant a variance of Chapter 17-5.I.(2)(g), lack of required minimum door/doorway height. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. APPEAL OF ARTHUR WEBSTER: Others present: None Inspector Malone reported that he conducted a licensing inspection at 610 S. Johnson, in the rented portion of the property only. He explained that he was not allowed into the unit presently occupied by Mr. Webster. The appeal concerns Chapter 17-4.(A)(1), lack of valid certificate of structure compliance and/or rental permit. Malone explained further that Mr. Webster was doing some remodeling at the time the inspection was conducted. Mr. Webster stated in his lj�,2-v J I41CROFILI4ED BY JORM. MICR6LAB j , CEDAR RAPIDS • DES 1,1019ES m1NU10 HOUSING APPEALS BOARD AUGUST 10, 1981 PAGE 2 appeal that he would have this remodeling finished by September 1, 1982; he would then allow Malone to inspect the property. Karstens made a motion to table the inspection of 610 S. Johnson, for a period of 60 days, and uphold the violation, Chapter 17-4.0)(1), lack of valid certificate of structure compliance and/or rental permit. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. APPEAL OF ED RUPP: Others present: None Inspector Malone reported that he conducted a licensing inspection at 308-08'h E. Davenport on June 16 and 17, 1982. The violation appealed was Chapter 17- 5.N.(4), lack of required 7' minimum ceiling height. This concerned the ceiling height in a west basement room which was 6'11'4". Karstens made a motion to grant a required 7' minimum ceiling height. motion carried. APPEAL OF HARRY HINCKLEY Others present: None variance of Chapter 17-5.N.(4), lack of Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The Inspector Vezina reported that he conducted a licensing inspection at 113 E. Prentiss on June 10, 1982. Two violations were being appealed. The first, Chapter 17-5.M.(2), lack of required electric light fixture or switched outlet. . This concerned the east room of rooming unit 204 which lacked a light fixture or switched outlet. Karstens made a motion to uphold Chapter 17-5.M.(2), lack of required electric light fixture or switched outlet. Karstens seconded the motion. The motion carried. The last violation appealed was Chapter 17-5.N.(4), lack of required 7' minimum ceiling height. This concerned the ceiling height in,room 301, which was 6'8h". Ringgenberg made a motion to grant a variance of Chapter 17-5.N.(4), lack of required 7' minimum ceiling height. Karstens seconded the motion. The motion carried. APPEAL OF JOHN HAYEK: Others present: Peter Hayek Inspector Hoard reported that she conducted a licensing inspection at 427 E. Market on June 18, 1982. This structure contains 7 rooming units. The violation appealed was Chapter 17-5.N.(4), lack of required 7' minimum ceiling height. This concerned a third floor room with varying ceiling heights in three areas. These heights were 6'91', 6' and 6'11". The room has adequate light and ventilation. MICROFILMED BY { JORM MICRdLAB -J 1 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES � I i MINUTES HOUSING APPEALS BOARD AUGUST 10, 1981 PAGE 3 Mr. Hayek pointed out that they purchased the building in 1969 and at that time it had a valid rental permit. He also noted that it was a very large room although not a tall one. He stated that the shorter of the three areas was being used as a storage area. Karstens made a motion to grant a variance of Chapter 17-5.N.(4), lack of required 7' minimum ceiling height. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. APPEAL OF STEVE KOHLI: Others present: None Inspector Vezina reported that he conducted a licensing inspection at 1015 N. Governor Street on June 3, 1982. The only violation being appealed is Chapter 17-5.N.(4) lack of required 7' minimum ceiling height. This concerned a basement apartment with ceiling heights as follows: livingroom 6'9", bedroom 6'7", kitchen 6'9h". The apartment has adequate light and ventilation. Karstens made a motion to grant a variance of Chapter 17-5.N.(4), lack of required 7' minimum ceiling height. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. APPEAL OF ELLEN SCHELLIN: Others present: None Inspector Hoard reported that she conducted a licensing inspection at 621 S. Dodge on June 2, 1982. This is a 9 dwelling unit structure. The violation appealed was Chapter 17-5.N.(4) lack of required 7' ceiling height. This concerns a second floor apartment in which the bedroom has a ceiling height of 6'11" and the livingroom ceiling height is 6'1Ov,". Ringgenberg made a motion to grant a variance of Chapter 17-S.N.(4), lack of required 7' ceiling height. Karstens seconded the motion. The motion carried. REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION OF A CODE SECTION OE RICHARD WAYNE Others present: Richard Wayne Inspector Vezina explained that Mr. Wayne would like the Board's interpretation of Chapter 17-S.N.(4) lack of required 7' ceiling height. This concerns a third floor sleeping room at 518 N. Van Buren that does not have at least one-half of the floor area with a ceiling height of -7' or above. Mr. Wayne questioned why the vertical measurement could not begin at 51911, rather than a 5'. If the measurement were taken at 5'9", half of the floor area ,could have a ceiling height of 7' or above. The Board deferred this matter to Brown for his legal opinion. He stated that Mr. Wayne had a valid point. For the purposes of determining floor area the Code does provide for using an imaginary line or wall drawn at 51. The Code states that in Chapter 17-5.N(4)(a), that "In any habitable room where the ceiling is a 111CROEILMED BY JORM MICR46LA13 1 j CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOVIES `6zv �d MiNUIES HOUSING APPEALS BOARD AUGUST 10, 1981 PAGE 4 part of a sloping roof at least one half of the flour area shall have a ceiling height of at least 71. Floor areas as stated above, shall mean the area of the floor where the vertical measurement from floor to ceiling is five (5) feet or more." Therefore, if the measurements as Mr. Wayne has stated are correct, and that when you measure from 5'9", half of the floor area has a ceiling height of 7' this would comply with the provisions of Chapter 17-5.N.(4)(a). Kucharzak pointed out that this was a sleeping room and the intent was to maintain the use of this room for sleeping purposes only. He also mentioned that Mr. Wayne had explored the possibilities of adding a dormer, which is prohibited as this is the third floor and the Building Department would not issue a building permit to add the dormer to a three story frame structure. It was the opinion of the Board that the vertical measurement could be taken anywhere above 5' in determining the floor area for minimum ceiling height. Therefore, the violation was concerning the ceiling height in the third floor rooming unit was dismissed by the City. Karstens and Haendel both expressed their concern that this room was too closed in. They felt there was a health and safety question here, due to the height of the ceiling. APPEAL OF DETLEF SCHELLIN: Others present; None Inspector Hoard reported that she conducted a licensing inspection at 612 S. Johnson on June 2, 1982. This is a 10 dwelling unit structure. The violation appealed was Chapter 17-6.0., lack of or improper location of smoke detector. The smoke detectors in question were located in apartments 1-9; all of these apartments have identical floor plans. The placement of the smoke detectors are in a central location to the bedroom, but in this case they are too close to the kitchen stove. Hoard consulted with Fire Marshal Kinney; he also felt that the placement was bad for the smoke detectors and suggested that in this particular case the smoke detectors should be placed in the bedrooms. Karstens made a motion to uphold Chapter 17-6.0., lack of or improper location of smoke detector with the recommendation that the smoke detectors be relocated in the bedrooms. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. Ringgenberg made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Karstens seconded the motion. The motion carried. Meeting was adjourned. % 1 Carol A. Karstens, Vice -Chairperson MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB j CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 1 r MINUTES RESOURCES CONSERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 5, 1982 7:00 PM CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Hamilton, Singerman, Hotka, Gartland MEMBERS ABSENT: Sheehan, Cox, Fett STAFF PRESENT: Helling RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL: The Resources Conservation commission recommends that the City Council formally endorse the Sierra Club Community Energy Project and the participation of the RCC in that project as a co-sponsor. The Commission further requests that Council take action on this recommendation at its August 17, 1982, regular meeting. REQUESTS TO CITY MANAGER AND STAFF: None. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND FORMAL ACTION: Approval of Minutes Minutes of the meeting of July 22, 1982, were approved by consensus. Iowa -Illinois Franchise Renewal Status Report Singerman reported that he had not yet drafted this report but will provide a draft at a future meeting, probably after the next meeting of the Franchise Renewal Committee. He noted that the next meeting of this Committee is being planned. FY82 Annual Report to City Council A copy of this report as submitted for publication was provided for each Commission member. At this time Singerman summarized the informal meeting of the City Council which he had attended on August 2, 1982. He. expressed his feelings that the Commission was expected to select its own direction or at least provide some alternatives from which the Council could chose or select the best direction. not a response from the Council had been Hamilton inquired as to whether or received as had been requested in the Energy Use Report submitted some weeks ago. Singerman advised that no response had been received. Gartland pointed out that the Sierra Club Charrette participation and outcome may provoke additional interest on the part of many Iowa City citizens, including City Council persons. 1 mlcRof1L61E1) BY JORM MICROLAB � CEDAR RAPIDS DCS Id014E5 I I i i i1 Resources Conservation Commission August 5, 1982 Page 2 Hotka enough techs noted that issues. He sugl members are not gested st d that perhaps each group (City Counciildand technical energy RCC) is looking for direction from the other. Gartland suggested that the RC staff explore sponsorship of seminars for apublic ssueswas given aich s tans example. issues. Energy efficient housing Singerman noted that he believed the upcoming Ctthatododing esomeocable forerunner to that process. Gartland also suggestedc television energy conservation tapes prior to that time might be appropriate. Sierra Club Project Singerman advised that project plans are moving ahead. The first press release has gone out recently. Pinning down a location and working on invitations are the main focus along with some determination on how to attract potentifor al participants. Those involved in the Cit council. hadng expressed moved aandeSHamilton endorsement of the project by Y seconded to recommend to andytheuparticncil ipationat it fofmthe RCC doinsthat project Club Community EneSierra rgy meeting as a co-sponsor. It was further desired that Counciladvksed that hiserequest, on which this item appears on the agenda. Helling along with the recommendation, ears lin the RCC meeting minarded tute5* Ai short memorandum to rior to the this recommendation app Council will be prepared and this item will be placed on the August 17, 1982, regular City Council agenda. Other Business Referring to an article previously distributed regarding the Wisconsin Solar Rights Bill, Hotka suggested that the most attractive aspects of this bill should be pointed out to the legislature. Members should consider this suggestion and perhaps discuss specific recommendations at the next Commission meeting. Helling indicated that he would like to recommend to the CitCoordinator, that this that one half-time person be hired to fill the position of Energy and this person continue to report to the Assistant cityCoordManager, nator well as staffingrson perform responsibilities of the City Energy the RCC. He pointed out that having a single person would provide some flexibility in time and attention between the City program and the Commission as needs occur. This alternative would be pursued only if a suitable candidate, with some ability and/or experience in both areas, could be found. It was agreed that this alternative would be acceptable for the present. Singerpan pointed out that the top two priorities for the Commission at this time are first, the Sierra Club Charrette Project, and second, Iowa -Illinois copy an article Otherpriorities rweatheriwill zation wasdiscussed proviided bythe Hotka andtwill be P packet. sent to Coiiimissioners in the next meeting p The next Commission meeting will be on September 2, 1982, at 7.:00 PM in the City Manager's Conference Room. /� z / I MICRUILMCD BY I J JORM MICRdLAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I. i J Resources Conservation Commission August 5, 1982 Page 3 Meeting adjourned at 8:15 PM. Respectfully submitted, Dale E. Helling Toni Hamilton, Secretary 1 I mmorll.MED BY -JORM MICR46LA9'- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MDIRES I r MINUTES COMMITTEE ON COMMUNITY NEEDS SEPTEMBER 9, 1982 7:10 PM CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Bonney, Dodge, McGee, VanderZee, Lockett, Whitlow, Lauria MEMBERS ABSENT: Becker, Cook, Hirt, Leshtz STAFF PRESENT: Hencin, Milkman SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Bonney called the meeting to order and asked whether members had any comments on the subcommittee's report on criteria for funding Human Service Projects. The general consensus was that the subcommittee's recommendations were excellent. VanderZee moved and Lockett seconded the approval of the "Criteria for Funding Human Service G Projects with CDBG funds" and the "Criteria for additional funding for Housing Rehabilitation". Approval was unanimous. The meeting adjourned at 7:20 PM. I Minutes taken by: Marianne Milkman I�tt, .ter tZi�1�i �,t 1622 1 micRorIUSED BY CORM MIC R+ L AB CEDAR RAPIDS •DES I401YE5 � 1 � ', C MINUTES COMMITTEE ON COMMUNITY NEEDS SEPTEMBER 13, 1982 - 7:30 PM FREE METHODIST CHURCH - CREEKSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING MEMBERS PRESENT: McGee, Leshtz, Lauria, Hirt, Bonney, Becker, VanderZee, Whitlow, Lockett MEMBERS ABSENT: Cook, Dodge. STAFF PRESENT: Hencin, Milkman, Behrman. RESIDENTS AND OTHERS PRESENT: List Attached. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Bonney introduced the members of CCN and staff. McGee explained how the CDBG program operated, stating:that one of the key purposes of CDBG money is to aid lower -moderate income persons in maintaining their neighborhoods, as well as aiding special populations in the City. McGee reviewed past projects in the Creekside neighborhood which had been funded with CDBG monies, among them, housing rehabilitation and weatherization, tree planting, bus shelters, and sidewalk repair. McGee, reviewed overall CDBG expenditures from June 1975 through December 1981. Whitlow presented a slide show depicting examples of CDBG funded projects. VanderZee distributed copies of the tentative 1983 CDBG budget, stating that recommendations would be made to the City Council in mid-October. He explained that $675,000 rather than $776,000 would be available, due to cost overruns on the North Branch Dam project. VanderZee stated that, if necessary, CCN would reconsider funding work on storm sewers in the Creekside Area. He explained that funds for clearing brush from the creek were also budgeted for 1984. When asked if the storm sewer project would indeed cost $600,000 (as reported in the Daily Iowan), VanderZee replied that new information had been received and the estimated cost of repairing storm sewers at the Dearborn and Center Street intersection was $200,000. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND PROPOSALS: Vincent Cooney, 710 Fourth Avenue, expressed concern at the overgrown vegetation sourrounding Ralston Creek, east of the Fourth Avenue bridge. He stated that the weeds and brush were creating a "millipede" problem in the area, as well as a mosquito problem. Cooney indicated that he had spoken to the Johnson County Health Department, who advised him that a potential health problem existed. He requested that a Ralston Creek brush clearing project be funded. He stated that this portion of the creekbanks an E Street is City owned. Gladys McCrary, 711 Second Avenue, concurred with Cooney's assessment of the brush problem. In addition, McCrary asked that the surcharge problem of the sanitary sewer on First Avenue and D Street be corrected. 111CRUILMED BY JORM MIC ROLAB � CEDAR RAPIDS � DES I401YE5 j 1b22 A Committee on Community Needs September 13, 1982 Page 2 VanderZee asked the staff if that sewer was part of the "horseshoe" sanitary sewer, and Hencin stated that it was. Jim Hynes, 620 Dearborn Street, reported that a task force of citizens had been reformed by the City Council to investigate the sewer surcharge problem. He asked that CCN recommend to the City Council that plans' and specifications be ordered so costs of resolving the sewer problem could be ascertained. Hynes stated that the surcharge problem created a safety hazard and blight, and led to the demoralization of property owners. He urged that promises to alleviate the problem made back in 1960 be fulfilled. Joan Pinkvoss, 2029 I Street, asked if the housing rehabilitation program could be modified to make eligible those persons buying their homes on contract. Pinkvoss suggested that equity in the house could be used as a basis for determining eligibility. Milkman stated that the possibility could be looked into. Lauria asked where the restrictions originated. Hencin explained that many of the restrictions were locally determined. Marie Matthes, 710 Fifth Avenue, asked about the HACAP program. Milkman explained that the HACAP program funded housing weatherization and not rehabilitation. There was some discussion of the HACAP program. Mrs. Duttlinger, 1218 Third Avenue, expressed concern over the sanitary sewer surcharge problem, stating that sewage backed up into her basement. Hynes asked if Duttlinger has filed a claim with the City. Duttlinger stated that nothing had been done. VanderZee explained that the problems of the sanitary sewer experienced by the neighborhood were part of the entire horseshoe sewer and linked to the construction of a new sewage treatment plant. Rhonda Kekke, 1215 Second Avenue, complained that the City's "pet solution" for the sewer problem was to push it down to the railroad tracks. Kekke urged that funding for sidewalks in the neighborhood be foregone in favor of doing something about the problem of water/sewage in their basements. Arleen Deacon, 617 Dearborn Street, agreed, saying that sidewalks had been done rather badly on her street and she still had water in her basement. Hynes urged his neighbors to watch the actions of the newly forming committee dealing with sewer problems. Hynes stated that the problem was not sewage treatment but rather transportation of sewage. He stated that a sewage treatment plant alone would not help. Ken Kekke, 1215 Second Avenue, wondered if draining the creek and cleaning it out was a successful way of tackling the problem. VanderZee said that it was unknown whether draining the creek and clearing the creekbed would affect the flooding problem in basements. Jennifer Ellsworth, 732 Dearborn Street, urged CCN to find a solution to the sanitary sewer surcharge problem. Ellsworth asked if CDBG funds could be used for street repairs, as a section of Center Street where the bridge goes over the i MICROFILMED DY � JORM MIC R(SLA B - CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I I 1 #22 r M1 Committee on Community Needs September 13, 1982 Page 3 creek was full of potholes. She also complained about the City's policy not to shovel or plow snow from the alleys. Sandy Brennan, PPD Intern, urged the neighborhood to organize to solve the sewer problems of the neighborhood. Bonney agreed that organization was crucial as the neighborhood has severe problems that the CCN budget could not resolve. Lauria supported that idea, saying that a written list of priorities from an organized neighborhood would aid CCN's funding decisions. Bonney stressed the importance of a written list of priorities, saying that while the consensus of this meeting was to fund a sewer surcharge solution, past meetings had emphasized the need for sidewalks. Hynes agreed that the neighbors needed to organize. Kekke stated that the unanimous priority at this meeting was to spend money on drainage and sewers and not sidewalks. Bonney indicated that more information, possibly with another questionnaire, might be solicited. Kekke stated that sewer problems were mentioned at the last meeting and all the neighborhood received was bus shelters. VanderZee explained that bus shelters had been part of a city-wide project and not a response to the neighborhood meeting. He noted that a large part of the 1983/84 CDBG allocation would be used in the Creekside Area. Nancy Schneider, 702 Third Avenue, remarked that the intersection of D Street and Third, as well as D and Fourt Street, had water problems. Hencin invited the public to attend the CCN's next meeting on October 13. Bonney thanked the public for attending the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 8:50 PM. Taken by: _ Sara Behrman, Minute Taker `6,2 A 1 I 141CROFIL14ED BY ' JORM MICR#LA13 L � � CEDAR RAI'I DS • DES MOIYES I J I r CP GL Ie,S i( f `' 13, 14,Y 7 30 P6� J yc eo cl u F- v aaj-r,� ZIG3 N• Sr. 7/0 �G 34 a .c. Ila- � C✓�cZ,n-- .,g -t I'3r) �o�e� L kf--• MICROFILMED BY -DORM MIC RE/LAB� CEDAR RAPIDS DES M019ES i i MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 4, 1982 4:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Vanderhoef, VanderVelde, Barker, Slager MEMBERS ABSENT: Harris STAFF PRESENT: Jansen, Franklin, Knight, Marten, Siders, Behrman FINAL ACTION TAKEN: 1. V-8219. The application submitted by Claud and Genevieve Fraleigh fora variance to Section 8.10.8 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a' multi -family unit in the R2 zone at 703 George Street was denied. 2. V-8218. The application submitted by Mercy Hospital for an inter- pretation of the Zoning Ordinance regarding the definition of an accessory use and for a variance to the yard requirements in the south half of block 27 was granted. A variance requested to Chapter 31-59. for a curbcut in the 400 block of Bloomington Street was also granted. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Barker called the meeting to order. Barker outlined the procedures to be followed by the Board of Adjustment. VARIANCE ITEMS: V-8220. Public hearing on an application submitted by Samuel Fomon for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance to permit a reduction in the number of required parking spaces at 900 Orchard Street. Knight outlined the staff report, stating that due to the change in use from a duplex to a tri-plex, the applicant must provide "an asphalt, concrete or similar dust -free surface..." for parking. Since the parking spaces provided by the applicants are part of an existing graveled parking lot located between 900 and 920 Orchard Street, the applicant feels that he cannot provide a dust -free parking area unless the entire parking lot is surfaced. Knight pointed out that a variance would also have to be granted to the area regulations of the Zoning Ordinance in order to permit issuance of a rental permit as the property's square footage is below the required amount. The staff recommended denial of the variance since unnecessary hardship cannot be shown. Knight stated that, since the third IN 3 RICRDFILMED BY ' - JORM MICR46LAS .� � CEDAR RAPIDS DES WINES i r MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 4, 1982 PAGE 2 unit had been constructed without the benefit of a building permit, any hardship was self-imposed. Dave Fomon, 900 Orchard, stated that he had no questions regarding the staff report. Fomon stated that the property in 1979 was an existing nonconforming duplex with a "sleeping room" in the basement. After a January' 1982 inspection, the housing inspector designated the property as a three-plex. Fomon stated that there is no kitchen in the basement; the occupant shares a kitchen with the first floor occupants. Fomon stated that Woody Kendall of Building Inspection has stated that the housing inspector's report showed a kitchen in the basement apartment. Fomon asked that a rental permit be issued for a duplex with sleeping rooms, not a triplex. VanderVelde asked if Fomon wished to address the issue of providing "dust - free" parking. Fomon replied that the nonconforming duplex would not be required to provide a dust -free surface and that such a surface could not be provided without asphalting the entire parking area. Knight stated that it was the housing inspector's understanding that the basement unit was being rented under a separate lease and that plumbing existed for a downstairs kitchen. Fomon replied that this was not the case; bathroom plumbing exists and the basement unit is not leased separately from the first floor unit. Barker suggested that it would be appropriate to defer this item until the housing inspector could answer the questions raised. Knight agreed, stating that if the property remains a duplex, the variances would not be needed. Vanderhoef moved that this item be deferred until the next meeting. Slager seconded. The motion carried unanimously. V-8219. Public hearing on an application submitted by Claud and Genevieve Fraleigh for a variance to Section 8.10.8 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a multifamily unit in an R2 zone at 703 George Street. Marten presented the staff report, saying that a variance to Section 8.10.8 was being requested to allow a three -unit dwelling in a zone limited to two-family dwellings. Marten stated that the applicants claim to have rented out the three units since 1967, although there is nothing in the City's records to indicate that the dwelling consisted of more than two units. Marten stated that the applicants did not obtain either a plumbing permit or a license for a multifamily dwelling. The staff recommended denial of the variance because the property was not unique and unnecessary hardship could not be shown. Marten presented two letters of 1, IdICROEILMED BY 1. -NORM MICRbLAB J CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOMS I I 1423 1 r C MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 4, 1982 PAGE 3 opposition to the variance from the following persons: G. V. Rosenkild, 719 George Street; Merle and Harold Heick, 1214'Oakcrest; Susan Krug- Wiste, 1218 Oakcrest; Charles Jacoby, 1220 Oakcrest; Mary E. Matthews, 1202 Oakcrest; Charlotte Goutee, 701 George and Jon Wispe, 1218 Oakcrest. The letter stated that the neighbors enjoy the low density of their neighborhood and are opposed to the applicants being allowed to rent three units. Jim Houghton, of Barker, Cruise and Kennedy, representing the applicants, submitted a copy of an application for a building permit filed in 1966. Houghton pointed out that the notation on the bottom of the permit reads "conform to ZO code - R3A." Claud Fraleigh, 703 George Street, stated that he thought his property was zoned R3A and since 1966 has rented out two apartments in the basement. Fraleigh stated that he was unaware of any opposition to his rental' property in the neighborhood, saying that he is very careful to provide parking. Fraleigh suggested that the parking problems exist at the new childcare center next door. Fraleigh claimed that he has been assesesd and insured as if his property was a three -unit dwelling. Fraleigh stated that there would be no change in use; the new owners would live on the first floor and would rent out the two other units. Genevieve Fraleigh, 703 George Street, contradicted the staff comment regarding the issuance of permits, saying that plumbing and other permits have been granted and paid for since 1966. Fraleigh argued that the property was unique and well-known for its beautiful garden. Marten stated that a building permit for interior alterations was on file but not a permit for building a new room. Marten explained the meaning of uniqueness as applied by the Board, further stating that a two-family dwelling restriction would not cause any unnecessary hardship. Houghton argued that in 1966, it was clear in the building inspector's mind that the property conformed to R3A zoning regulations. Based on this permit, the applicant had expended funds and paid taxes and the property should be treated as a three -unit rental. Barker asked how many permits had been issued. Fraleigh stated that a Mr. Hunsicker had inspected the property and had posted the permit on the garage. VanderVelde asked the significance of Houghton's comments that taxes were being paid as if the property was a tri-plex. VanderVelde wondered if tri-plexes were assessed at a higher rate than duplexes. Houghton did not know whether this was true. M ICRorILMED BY ' JORM MICROLA13 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I /G.23 1 r I MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 4, 1982 PAGE 4 Barker asked Jansen to advise the Board as to the significance of the words on page two of the application for building permit 43A". Jansen stated that it was not known why R3A was inserted if the Fraleigh property was in an R2 zone. Jansen stated that it may have been an error; at any rate, a building permit could not be used to vary the zoning. Jansen stated that he could not attest that an estoppel situation existed. Barker wondered if the error by the building official could have repercussions on the zoning. Jansen replied that many applications were filled out by contractors rather than owners and that they are often inaccurate. It was an error to write that zoning classification back in 1966; the inspector should have checked the classification. Marten raised the issue that this was an application for a use variance. Jansen explained that to grant a use variance meant to vary the zoning ordinance to permit a use otherwise prohibited and that this action was tantamount to amending the zoning ordinance. Barker wondered if the proper remedy would be a request for rezoning. Jansen stated that while it may be, the applicants were advised to apply to the Board of Adjustment for whatever relief might be available. Fraleigh questioned that a "use" in effect for 16 years could be considered a "change in use". Barker requested legal counsel to determine whether the Board could grant a use variance. Jansen stated that he had done legal research on the question. Certain states permit their Boards of Adjustment to grant use variances; others do not. Iowa has not addressed the issue at all. Jansen stated that he could not cite cases in Iowa to guide the Board in its decision. Barker asked Jansen's advice in making this determination. Jansen replied that, in the absence of any court decisions on the issue in Iowa and the lack of any persuasive decisions in other states, he must pass the decision back to the Board. VanderVelde asked the distinction between a use variance and the usual variance. Jansen explained that, unlike regular variances, a use variance "adjusts" the zoning code to provide a change in the use of a piece of property, where hardship is imposed. Siders stated that, while unfamiliar with the building permit form used in 1966, he was familiar with its terminology. Siders explained that the words "Group I, Type S" on the application referred to a duplex/single- family dwelling. A three -unit dwelling would have received a Group N occupancy. Barker stated that the applicant has stated that both the contractor and building inspector visited the premises and were aware of what was being done. Siders pointed out that that was not a documented fact. 14�a3 MICRON DIED BY JORM MIC RdfLAB ' CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES. MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 4, 1982 PAGE 5 Houghton stated that both the Planning and Legal Departments suggested that the applicants apply to the Board of Adjustment. Slager stated that she could not see how the variance could be granted. Vanderhoef wondered if Chapter 414.12 applied under the powers of the Board "to hear and decide appeals where it is alleged there is any error...." Jansen reminded the Board that the issue arose due to a denial of a rental permit and not a building permit. VanderVelde pointed out that, while the opposition of the neighbors referred to this as a zoning change, they were reacting to the idea of a tri-plex in their neighborhood. Barker again asked whether the Board has the power to approve this variance. Slager wondered why the applicant had been sent to the Board. Jansen explained. Houghton explained the neighbors' opposition as being a fear of increased traffic, saying that this would not be the case here. Barker stated that he was troubled at the Board's being cast in the role of "blessing fortuitous errors." Barker said that his primary concern was whether granting a use variance would be a proper action for the Board. G. Fraleigh asked the Board to consider the fact that a daycare center next door forced her to sell her house. Slager pointed out that that was not part of the issue. Slager stated that she felt the Board of Adjustment might not have the power to grant a use variance. ` Vanderhoef asked if alternatives existed for relief to the problem. Jansen stated that rezoning or litigation were alternatives or the Board could reserve a decision pending submission of legal briefs. Barker stated that more detailed advice regarding a use variance would be appreciated. Jansen stated that this.could be supplied and asked Houghton if he wished to submit authorities as well. Barker asked if it was possible for the Board to vote on this item subject to a determination of whether the Board has the power to decide this issue. Jansen stated that that would be a problem. Franklin stated that there was yet another alternative; the Board could pass on the issue and take the chance of litigation. MICRUIUdED BY JORM MICR(>SL 4 B' � CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I i MINUTES BOARD Of ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 4, 1982 PAGE 6 Barker stated that this issue would come up again and this item would set an important precedent. reledelde asked he other de of ewas zoned Martenpiyes Jansennsen sttdthatdaycarecenters are permitted i zones. Vanderhoef wondered if the applicants had been prohibited from renting the second unit in the basement. Siders explained that, while they are currently renting without a rental permit, no action would be taken pending a decision by the Board. Vanderhoef asked if there would be a difference if both units were rented to one person and then subleased. Siders stated that it would still be considered three units. Houghton requested an immediate ruling by the Board; if unfavorable, his clients would proceed from there. VanderVelde moved that the Board follow the staff's recommendation and deny the variance, since within the limits of the three tests for a variance, no hardship could be shown. Slager seconded the motion. Barker suggested that the Board first determine whether or not they have the power to make a decision and then make the decision; otherwise, if granted or denied as requested, no one could determine if the Board's action was based on whether or not it had the power to make a decision on a use variance request. VanderVelde stated that the motion was worded to expedite matters as requested by the applicant's counsel. Slager agreed, stating that in denying the variance, the Board was saying that it did not have the right to decide a use variance issue. Barker stated that if a decision is reached based on this motion, the Board is saying that they do have the power to decide a use variance issue. Slager stated that such a determination could not be made until more legal background was received. Barker agreed. Barker asked if VanderVelde would consider withdrawing her motion so that a motion granting the variance could be made. VanderVelde withdrew the motion and Slager withdrew her second. Vanderhoef moved that the variance be granted as requested by the applicant to allow a three -unit dwelling in a zone limited to a two -unit dwelling. Slager seconded the motion. Vanderhoef expressed support for the motion if the tri-plex could somehow be "grandfathered in." VanderVelde expressed concern at that idea, saying 16 3 111CROEILMED BY J JORM MICRdLAB 1 I CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES i r NO MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 4, 1982 PAGE 7 that the property was going to have a new owner and the question was the validity of its use. Vanderhoef agreed. Behrman polled the members. The motion failed, 2-2, for lack of a majority; Slager and VanderVelde voted no and Barker and Vanderhoef voted yes. The meeting recessed at 5:49 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 5:55 p.m. V-8218. Public hearing on an application submitted by Mercy Hospital for an interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance regarding the definition of an accessory use and for a variance to the yard requirements in the south half of Block 27. A variance is also requested to Chapter 31-59 for a curbcut in the 400 Block of Bloomington Street. Franklin suggested that the application be looked at as three different requests: 1) an interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance definition of accessory use; 2) a variance to the yard requirements on Block 27; and 3) a variance of the curbcut requirements in the 400 Block of Bloomington Street. Barker asked if anyone was present to speak in opposition to the request for variance to the curbcut requirements in the 400 Block of Bloomington Street. No one responded. Barker called for a vote on the question of granting the variance as per staff's recommendation. The variance was granted unanimously. Franklin reviewed the request for an interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance definition of accessory use, saying that one way to look at the parking facility would be as an entity independent of the hospital. The building official had stated that the proposed parking facility could not be considered an accessory use since it would be located on a separate tract. Instead, the primary use of the separate tract of land would be parking, and parking is not allowed as a primary use in an R3 zone. Another way to view the parking facility would be as an accessory use that is functionally incidental to the hospital; the parking facility would not exist if the hospital were not there and it is intended that the parking facility be used only by hospital staff and users. Franklin stated that if the parking facility could be determined to be a functional incidental use to the hospital in the adjoining block, i.e., an accessory use to the hospital, it could be allowed. Franklin stated that it was for the Board to decide whether or not "on -premises" would be the ruling factor. Barker agreed that this was a case of a functional incidental use, stating he would not have favored a commercial parking facility. MICROFILMED BY JORM MIC R(IL AB 1 I � CEDAR RAPIDS DCS FIO14E5 l(a3 1 r MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 4, 1982 PAGE 8 Siders argued that this not be considered an accessory use. Since this facility would be on a separate and independent parcel of land, parking would be the primary use. Barker stated that parking is not required by the Zoning Ordinance for the hospital. Franklin stated that, were parking required, other sections of the Code would allow off-street parking to be located within 300 feet on a separate tract. Slager asked if the proposed facility would be located within 300 feet of the hospital. Franklin replied affirmatively, stating that if the ordinance required parking for the hospital, there would not be a problem. Siders disagreed, stating that it would still be on a separate tract of land. Siders stated that although that question was not researched, it would only apply if parking was mandated by the Code, which it is not. Daniel Boyle, attorney for Mercy Hospital, stated that, while the ordinance specifically exempts the hospital from parking requirements, it would damage the spirit of the ordinance to say that it prevents the hospital from providing needed parking. Boyle cited case law (Buffalo Park vs. the City of Buffalo) to support his argument that parking is an accessory use. Boyle argued that the concept of a "unit of operations" was based on the premise that some occupations need to be on the premises but others, due to size of the prior utilization of the existing property, make it impossible to locate all uses on one piece of land. Boyle pointed out that the property has been used for parking for a number of years; that use was merely being increased. While required parking was allowed within 300 feet, the Code does not prohibit the location of non -required parking within 300 feet. Boyle stated that parking is an accessory need of the hospital and the right to use an accessory use under the ordinance exists. VanderVelde asked if parking would be limited to hospital use. Boyle replied that this would be limited to staff, visitors and patients of the Barker asked if that use could hospital. be controlled. Boyle explained that a charge would be instituted to control both use and the length of time a vehicle parked. VanderVelde asked the use on the remaining parcel of land on the block not yet acquired by Mercy Hospital. Boyle stated that it was a house which the hospital eventually hopes to acquire. Barker read a letter to the Board Street, written in opposition to construction of the parking facility sunlight from her view. from Carrie Lewis, 220 N. Johnson the variance on the grounds that would damage her house and obstruct Barker wondered at the height of the ramp compared with other uses allowed in the zone. MICROFILMED BY -J JORM MICR#LAS ? � CEDAR RAPIDS • DES I401AE5 i r MINUTES BOARD OF.ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 4, 1982 PAGE 9 1 Martin Meisel of Hansen Lind Meyer, architects for Mercy Hospital, replied that the facility would be at street level plus three feet. Vanderhoef moved that the appeal to the interpretation of Section 8.10.3.A.2 of the Code be granted. Barker seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Franklin explained that a variance to the yard requirements for an accessory use in an R3 zone was being requested. The staff recommended denial since unnecessary hardship could not be found since this was not required parking. ;However, Franklin pointed out, parking problems do exist in the area 'and the hospital perceives that the parking facility will alleviate those problems. Franklin presented the design plans for the parking facility. The architects reviewed the plans. Barker stated that the question of hardship was not a problem due to the uniqueness of the area and the parking problems and the residential nature of the neighborhood. Barker expressed support for a variance to the yard requirements in order that the structure as depicted on the blueprints could be constructed. VanderVelde expressed concern for protecting the front yard view of the houses on Johnson Street. The architect explained that the parking structure would "top out" at ground level along Dodge Street and a brick wall would screen cars from view. VanderVelde stated that she has supported granting the appeal to the interpretation of accessory use because the proposed structure would not impact the neighborhood. VanderVelde asked how far the structure would be from the sidewalk and was told eight to ten feet. VanderVelde requested that the issue of hardship raised by providing 158 spaces rather than 236 spaces be addressed. The architect explained that Mercy Hospital currently has 320 spaces with the peak number of spaces needed being 472. If the structure was built with the required setbacks, the net gain would be 33 spaces and it would be impractical to build under those restrictions. Barker called for a vote on the question. A variance to the yard require- ments for an accessory use in an R3 zone in order that the structure as depicted on the blueprints could be constructed was granted unanimously. lG�-3 nICROFILMED BY J DORM MICR6LA13- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MDIYES I i MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 4, 1982 PAGE 10 OTHER BUSINESS: Vanderhoef moved and Slager seconded that the minutes of May 5, May 13, June 9, and July 8, 1982, be approved. The motion carried 3-1-0; VanderVelde abstained. The next meeting was set for September 1, 1982, at 4:45 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Taken by: Sara Behrmaq,, Minut-Taker,�-r Submitted by: DOVg Boothroy, Secretary ' 1 i I IdICROf ILIdED BY JORM "MOCR46LAS J , CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I I � 16,73 J� r MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION FORMAL MEETING AUGUST 5, 1982 9:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Scott, Jordan, Blank, Jakobsen, Baker MEMBERS ABSENT: Horton, Seward STAFF PRESENT: Boothroy, Franklin, Behrman RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: None. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Scott called the meeting to order. There was no public discussion of any item not included on the agenda. The minutes of July 1, 1982, and July 15, 1982, were approved as circulated. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF THE INNER CITY AREA REPORT: George Woodworth, 226 S. Johnson Street, expressed his displeasure at the way in which the meeting had been scheduled. Woodworth asked when a formal discussion of the Inner City Area report would take place. Boothroy explained that there will be four neighborhood meetings and two public hearings to solicit public input into the preliminary report. Woodworth stated that Burlington Street was being abandoned; one does not have to be an undergraduate to want to live on Burlington Street. Woodworth stated that he was unhappy about the small number of individuals whose opinions were reflected in this report. Margaret Nowysz, 1025 River Street, expressed displeasure at the lack of i opportunity for public input into the Inner City Area report. Nowysz questioned the credentials of the report's author. Nowysz stated that she had not been able to obtain a copy of the report and had difficulty finding out about this evening's meeting. Boothroy explained that the scheduling of the informal meeting prior to the formal meeting had been done so as to give the Commission more time in which to discuss the Inner City Area report. Boothroy stated that the report was not being adopted nor forwarded to the City Council with any recommendations; the report was being prepared for input at public meetings. Boothroy stated that it was the City's policy not to distribute preliminary reports until the Commission had an opportunity to receive them. These reports are available upon request after they have been mailed to the Commissioners. Staff has received no request for copies of the report but extra copies have been provided for tonight's meeting. Boothroy asked that the Commissioners be specific as possible about their concerns so that staff could address them and the report forwarded to Council expeditiously. MICROFILMED BY JORM MIC RbLA E1- - CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES i j 1 r I I Planning & Zoning Commission August 5, 1982 Page 2 Jakobsen stated that she would like to see the Historic Districts map changed. Baker apologized to the public for any disservice done, saying that the entire procedure for reviewing this report had been hurried. Boothroy disagreed and stated this report has had more review by the Commission than some of the other area reports. Both Jordan and Scott agreed. Baker stated an unwillingness to forward the report to the City Council tonight. Jakobsen moved that the Planning and Zoning Commission forward the Inner City Area report to the City Council. Scott seconded the motion. Jakobsen stated the reason for making the motion as being an opportunity for the Commission to discuss specific concerns with the report. Jakobsen said that she would vote against the motion. Baker stated that he would also vote against the motion. Baker stated that the report ignores the consequences of higher density, for example, the encouragement of deterioration in neighborhoods; demolition of houses that are not deteriorating and the concreting of large sections of town. Baker stated that "open space needs" need to be clearly worded. Baker expressed dissatisfaction with the density map, in particular the west side of Dodge Street from Burlington Street to Governor Street. Jakobsen asked that all objections be itemized for discussion at the next meeting. Baker objected to the designation for the north side of Burlington Street. Baker strongly objected to the depiction of the area west from Summit Street to the middle of Van Buren Street, saying it should be 16-24 D.U./acre. Baker recommended that the northwest corner of Johnson and Washington Streets be zoned commercial/office and not residential. Baker stated support for the rest of the area being zoned RM20, with the area along Iowa and Jefferson Streets being zoned 8-16 D.U./acre. Baker stated that he was the least committed to down - zoning the extreme northwest side of Van Buren Street. Baker's general justification for his comments was that the entire area needs to be stabilized and is nearing the point where high density is unacceptable. Jakobsen requested that the text of the report explain that the recommended densities would create many nonconforming buildings. Boothroy stated that existing usage may be zoned conforming. Blank stated the report indicated that high density is needed but that fact had not been substantiated. Scott pointed out that, while this report was not an accomplished fact, it was being perceived as such because of the implications it might have if submitted to the City Council in its present form. Scott questioned the increase in density in the College Hill area recommended in the Comprehensive Plan from B-16 to 16-24 D.U./acre. Boothroy explained that the area had overlapping zones and that the RM20 designation for that area was adequate. MICROFILMED RY JORM MIC ROLAE7 ' j CEDAR RAPIDS •DES MOINES r � i f_ Planning & Zoning Commission August 5, 1982 Page 3 Jordan requested a list of the number of non -conforming structures which would be created by this plan. Jordan asked to see a map which depicted the difference between those areas nominated to the National Register of Historic Places and those historic districts already existing. Boothroy stated that the Inner City Area report should not be confused with zoning issues. The motion to forward the Inner City Area report to the City Council failed zero to five. OTHER BUSINESS: 1. Public discussion of the proposed procedure for rezoning certain areas of Iowa City to Residential -Manufactured Housing (RMH). The concensus of the Commission was to go ahead with the staff report. 2. Public discussion of a recommendation by the Board of Adjustment to consider amending the Zoning Ordinance to provide for signs regarding gas pricing and type of services offered (i.e., full service or self-service). Scott requested more information. Baker stated that if the present sign ordinance conformed to state law, the staff should not proceed with the recommendation of the Board of Adjustment; if not, then the staff should consider the recommendation. The meeting adjourned at 10:45 P.M. Taken by: Sara Behrman 1 Approved by: iTom Scott, Secretary I r i MICROFILMED BY -JOCEDAR RAPIDS IN B" RAPIDS ,DES O _.1 1 r LF�• 1 MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 1982 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Jordan, Seward, Jakobsen, Baker MEMBERS ABSENT: Horton, Blank, Scott STAFF PRESENT: Boothroy, Jansen, Knight, Myhre, Behrman RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: 1. The Planning and Zoning Commission forwards the Inner City Area Report with reservations. REQUESTS TO CITY MANAGER FOR STAFF ASSISTANCE: The Planning and Zoning Commission respectfully requests that the Council Chambers be air-conditioned during their formal meetings. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Seward called the meeting to order. Jakobsen moved and Jordan seconded that the minutes of July 22, 1982, be approved. The motion carried unanimously. ZONING ITEMS: I. Z-8205. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa Ti— y for the rezoning from C1 to RMH of a 16 acre tract located at 2254 S. Riverside and known as Thatcher Mobile Home Park; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. Knight reviewed the staff report, noting that in accordance with previous discussions with the Commission, only the existing manufactured housing uses would be considered for rezoning at this time, other areas will be considered on a request basis. Knight stated that the staff's main consideration in determining whether an area was appropriate for rezoning was whether: 1) the park met the required minimum zone area of ten acres; and 2) a manufactured housing land use conformed with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. Knight stated that rezoning Thatcher Mobile Home Park would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. The staff recommended not to rezone Thatcher Mobile Home Park at this time pending completion of the Comprehensive Plan Update. 2. Z-8206. Public discussion of application initated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from R1A to RMH of a 15.6 acre tract located at the north end of Laura Drive and known as Forest View Trailer Park; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. The staff recommended rezoning this item. 3. Z-8207. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from R1A to RMH of a 2.46 acre tract located at 1705 Prairie du Chien Road and known as Hawkeye Mobile Home Park; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. Fi ICROEILMED 61' JORM MICROLAB - 1 ,J CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVES r I A PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 1982 PAGE 2 Knight reported that rezoning this item would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and, in addition, land was not available to meet the required minimum zone area of ten acres. The staff recommended that this park not be rezoned to RMH. 4. Z-8208. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa City far the rezoning from R1A to RMH of a 0.97 acre tract located at 1515 Prairie du Chien Road and known as Larsen's Trailer Camp; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. Because the rezoning of this park is contrary to the recommendation of the Comprehensive Plan and the ten acre minimum zone area could not be met, staff recommended that this park not be rezoned. S. Z-8209. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from C1 to RMH of a 2.46 acre tract located at 1225 S. Riverside Drive and known as the Iowa City Trailer Park; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. Because rezoning would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and it does not appear that a ten acre area of RMH zoning could be provided in this area, the staff recommended that no zoning changes be made in this area at this time. 6. 2-8210. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from C2 to RMH of a 7.9 acre tract located at 2312 Muscatine Avenue and known as Towncrest Mobile Home Park; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. Although this area does not have the minimum ten acre requirement, rezoning would conform to the Comprehensive Plan. The staff recommends rezoning to RMH in the short run to recognize the existing use. 7. Z-8211. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa CitCit—fir the rezoning from C2 to RMH of a 15.88 acre tract located at 1960 Waterfront Drive and known as Hilltop Mobile Home Park; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. Because it would conform with the recommendation of the Comprehensive Plan, staff recommended that this park be rezoned to RMH. 8. Z-8212. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from C2 to RMH of a 62.11 acre tract located east on Highway 6 and known as Bon Aire Mobile Home Lodge; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. Staff recommended that all land owned by Bon Aire Mobile Home Lodge, excluding the 300 foot deep strip of land fronting on Highway 6, be rezoned to RMH. Because commercial development has occurred there, the appropriate land use for this strip of land should be established as part of the Comprehensive Plan Update. 9. Z-8213. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from C1 to RMH of a 20.88 acre tract located at 2128 S. Riverside Drive and known as Baculis Mobile Home Park; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. niCRof ILnED BY 1 JORM MICR6LAB 1 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOVIES i I 1 r PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 1982 PAGE 3 Because an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan would be required, staff e mmo ion that the zoning in this park remain the same. Ralph Stoffer, 1902 Broadway, representing Hawkeye Mobile Home Court, requested that this court be rezoned due to the difficulties in obtaining bank financing for improvements to upgrade a nonconforming use. Baker asked if the applicant was currently working on bank financing. Stoffer replied that he was not presently trying to obtain bank financing. Knight wondered if there was potential for expansion of the RMH zone to a 10 acre area. Stoffer replied that there was. Jakobsen asked if the manufactured housing use could be expanded to ten acres. Stoffer replied that while adjacent land to the rear was owned by others, there was undeveloped land and the potential for expansion of the zone area existed. Boothroy mentioned that it would take a lot of fill to make the land suitable. Stoffer agreed that the terrain was rough but stated that a feasibility study could be done. Bob Albrecht, Forest View Trailer Court, requested that his enti:re 45 acres be rezoned. Albrecht wondered if expansion would be permitted. if rezoned RMH. Knight explained that Forest View Trailer Court would then be a conforming land use and expansion would be permitted. Seward Wondered if the Planning and Zoning Commission should be receiving any; additional requests for rezoning at this time. Jakobsen suggested that subsequent recommendations for rezoning should come in after the ordinance,is adopted. Knight stated that the Commission could begin reviewing other areas on a request basis at any time, they did not have to wait until the ordinance was adopted. Boothroy stated that if the Commission wished to expand the process it was up to them. Albrecht requested that the Commission add ten acres to his rezoning request. The Commissioners debated whether or not a new application had to be filed. Boothroy stated that the Commission could request that the applicant file another application and that the fees be waived. Knight stated that the Commission also had the option of expanding the City -initiated request. Jansen agreed that the Commission could follow either alternative. Seward asked if a Commissioner wished to make a motion to initiate the rezoning request for Albrecht. Jakobsen stated that she was not supportive of such a motion due to terrain problems in the area. Jakobsen stated that she would prefer to have Albrecht apply for the rezoning but would favor recommendation of a waiver of fees. Knight pointed out that the Bon Aire Mobile Home Lodge had filed an official objection, and therefore an extraordinary majority vote of the Council will be required to approve the rezoning. OTHER BUSINESS: 1. Public discussion of the Inner City Area Report. Boothroy stressed that this was not a public hearing and that no action on the report would be taken. Boothroy stated that one of the issues remaining was the provision regarding historic preservation. Boothroy suggested that the Commission invite a representative from the State Historic Preservation Office to discuss the State's action in Iowa City. Boothroy reiterated the fact that everyone -would have the opportunity for input at their neighborhood meeting. Boothroy said that another issue yet 141CROrILMED DY JORM MICF46LAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES J PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 1982 PAGE 4 to be resolved was whether or not the current density would be maintained along Iowa Avenue and Burlington Street. Boothroy stated that the Commission would be proceeding with the moratorium rezoning process at their next formal meeting. Boothroy reported that under any downzoning plan, a good deal of nonconforming structures would be created; 44% of the area would be nonconforming under the R3 zone and 29% of the area would be nonconforming under the RM20 zone. Boothroy said that a number of property owners in the College Hill Park area have objected to downzoning. Myhre pointed out that some of last Monday's discussion concerned zoning at the existing densities. Myhre stated that while the staff is suggesting lower densities for the College Hill Park/South Dodge Street neighborhoods, the preservation of an interior neighborhood may mean higher densities would be allowed in areas possibly more suitable for higher densities. Boothroy stated that the Commission should discuss the proposed RM20 zone at their next informal meeting. Steve Rohrbach, 512 South Dodge, asked for an explanation of the RM20 zone. Boothroy explained. Rohrbach wondered why the College Hill area could not be downzoned as recommended in the Comprehensive Plan. Myhre explained that the area has been zoned R3A for 20 years. Boothroy pointed out that, to downzone to R3, 44 percent of the properties would be nonconforming. If the area were downzoned to RM20, only 29 percent of the properties would be nonconforming. Boothroy pointed out that the Inner City Area Report assumes that the new zoning ordinance will be in effect. Boothroy stated that the purpose of these meetings was to make the staff aware of the Commission's concerns; if the concept was not acceptable to the neighborhoods, it could still be changed. Jim Hawtrey, 534 South Dodge, wondered if the number of people living in the area was considered when zoning an area. Boothroy explained that the number of people in an area was controlled by the housing code. Boothroy mentioned that presently under consideration is a parking requirement based on the number of bedrooms per unit. Hawtrey expressed concern about the demolition of houses and the overwhelming construction of apartment buildings on South Dodge Street. Boothroy stated that the City does not prohibit demolition. Hawtrey wondered if there was a mention of parks and open space in the Inner City Area Report. Boothroy stated that the only provision in the present ordinance dealing with mandatory open space referred to planned area development (PAD). Hawtrey again expressed the concern at the push in the neighborhood build up without regard to the people already living there. Jakobsen reminded the public that they had to become reconciled to the idea that Iowa City was no longer a small town but a metropolitan area. Baker reviewed the densities for the R3, RM20 and R3A zones. Baker stated that zoning does control density in an area. Dave Arbogast, 770 East Market, asked Jakobsen when her house had been built. Jakobsen replied in 1965. Jakobsen stated that she has lived in the Inner City Area for 23 years. Arbogast stated that there were two effective ways of destroying viable neighborhoods: 1) transportation corridors, and 2) surrounding the neighborhood with inappropriate zoning. Arbogast said that the staff recommendation for higher density along Burlington Street would destroy the College Hill Park area. Arbogast blamed student populations for many of the problems in the neighborhood. IIICRONUIED DY JORRA MIC ROLAB I � CEDAR RAPIDS DES Id019E5 i r PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 1982 PAGE 5 Baker stated that he did not see how a consensus could be reached, particularly concerning the corridor issue. Baker stated that he has always objected to corridor concepts. Baker stated that the du/acre figure was misleading. Baker said that the City should recognize that density has reached the saturation point in the area and the consequences of higher density cannot be ignored. Seward asked if there was any discussion of the area north of Jefferson Street. There was none. Bob Hess, 515 South Dodge Street, agreed with Hawtrey's comments. Hess stated that the density per unit was out of control and expressed concerns about parking problems in the neighborhood. Hess agreed with Baker's remark that the area had reached the point of saturation. Pat McCormick, 230 East Fairchild, wondered if there was any difference between the information in the Inner City Area Report and what had been agreed on at the end of the moratorium plan for the north side area. Jakobsen stated that there was not. Myhre stated that there was a small change in the area between Church and Bloomington Streets; the density of the entire block had been changed to 16 to 24 du/acre. McCormick expressed concern over the near north side area, stating that area had fought the density battle four years ago. McCormick wondered if everything would remain as agreed to at that time. Boothroy stated the area would essentially remain the same with the exception of the area between Church and Bloomington Streets. McCormick wondered about the effect of the recommendations in the report on sororities and rooming houses. McCormick mentioned that she has seen CDBG funds allocated to changing the Comprehensive Plan a number of times and that neighborhoods were constantly being called upon to defend their way of life against the contractors of the City. McCormick stated that every time apartment buildings go up it allows for greater density. McCormick urged the Commission to determine once and for all the type of zoning desired and to adhere to that plan. David Schor, 438 South Dodge Street, stated that his area has changed dramatically in the past three years. .Schor stated that there have been sharp increases in density and that this process under current zoning could continue indefinitely. Schor urged the Commission to take action as the area has reached the point of saturation. Schor requested clarification of the relationship between the discussion of the Inner City Area Report and the moratorium area. Seward explained that there was no direct relationship between this document and the moratorium issue. Boothroy pointed out that the moratorium resolution may ultimately revise the Inner City Area Report. Boothroy announced that at the September 2nd meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission a public hearing would be set on the moratorium issue. Margaret Nowysz, 1025 River Street, addressed the corridor proposal on Iowa Avenue and Burlington Street. Nowysz argued that while plantings provide screening at the sidewalk level or lower, the buildings were visible from a two-story level. Nowysz described the visual effect of parking lots in the rear of every building on College Street and urged the Commission to take that into consideration and consider a buffer. 11ICROEILMED Dl' JORM MICROLAS CEDAR RAPIDS • DES 1101NES J r L PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 1982 PAGE 6 Dorothy Moeller, 623 East College, disapproved of the corridor concept in the report. Moeller stated that a corridor that snakes through an area violates the integrity of that area. Moeller described her walk of the neighborhood from Johnson to Summit Street on Iowa Avenue and Burlington. Moeller stated that high density encourages the demolition of houses worth saving. Moeller wondered if one particular part of town was being asked to take more than its share of the burden, saying that the neighbors honored the quality of life more than money. Seward stated that a housing study has indicated that there is a demand for higher density near downtown Iowa City. Seward stated that the Commission is attempting to deal with the economic realities and Iowa City's need for additional density. Seward urged that the public consider the impact of the University community on the Iowa City community. Jakobsen stated that the Commission was happy to receive written comments on the report and reported that Elizabeth Hazard, Candelaria Velasco, and Sue Dane had written to the Commission concerning this item. Sandra Eskin, 1047 Woodlawn, stated that higher density housing was not necessarily needed near the University. Esking pointed out that the City also needs middle density housing affordable to low- and middle-income persons. Eskin stated that older housing stock was necessary for this purpose. Eskin took exception to the corridor concept and agreed that encouraging higher density destroys what might better be preserved. Hawtrey wondered why zoning could not control the number of people in a neighborhood. Boothroy explained. McCormick stated that provisions for open space had been made when zoning was changed in the near north side area. Boothroy stated that no provisions for green space were required in that downzoning. McCormick questioned the housing study and mentioned that enrollments would be declining in the near future. McCormick wondered if the City really wanted to build high density apartments in the center of town. Jordan wondered how the Commission should take action on this report. Boothroy suggested that, if a consensus did not exist, the report should be sent to City Council and the concerns relayed. Jakobsen stated that the Commission had not tried to come to a consensus because they were planning to vote on each separate issue. Boothroy suggested that that was best done in a public hearing and the Commission should note the concerns and discuss them with the City Council. Boothroy stated that the major issues yet unresolved were the Iowa Corridor and the Burlington Corridor. Jakobsen stated that it was hard to come to a consensus with only four to five Commissioners present. Baker stated that a consensus had not been reached and that the corridor concept needed to be more strongly reviewed. Baker stated that the recommendations in this report neither solve nor alleviate the demand for high density housing and suggested that the report be sent to City Council with strong reservations. Boothroy pointed out that many issues may be resolved when the moratorium issues are resolved. Seward stated that the Inner City Area Report should be forwarded to the City Council with a memo indicating the concern of the Commissioners with respect to the corridor issues as well as the minutes outlining public discussion. r-ucRor ILMED DY JORM MICR6LAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOVIES 1 r PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 1982 PAGE 7 Jakobsen stated that the Commission had received the map that included the entire old town area of Iowa City. Jakobsen asked Jansen for a legal recommendation about the appropriate method to downzone or spotzone to make the area conforming even though the area's predominant zoning is something else. Seward requested that a discussion with a representative from the State Historic Preservation Office be placed on a future agenda. Baker thanked the public for attending the meeting. 2. Public discussion of a proposed amendment to the residential parking requirements of the zoning ordinance. Baker moved that staff be requested to supply the Commission with a copy of the residential parking requirements for the next meeting for discussion. Jakobsen seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 3. Planning and Zoning Commission information. The Commissioners requested that the City Manager consider air- conditioning the Council Chambers during the formal meetings of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The meeting adjourned at 10 p.m. Taken by: Sara Behrman Approved by: Tom Scot Avg - i 141CROrILI4ED BY J ± "'JORM MICR6LAB" _Z CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I I r MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FORMAL MEETING AUGUST 30, 1982 CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Seward, Horton, Jakobsen, Jordan, Baker MEMBERS ABSENT: Blank, Scott STAFF PRESENT: Boothroy, Franklin, Myhre-Gonyier RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: I None. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: A public hearing was set for September 23, 1982, to receive public input on a proposed rezoning of the "College Hill Park/South Dodge Street neighborhood". Jakobsen moved and Jordan seconded; the vote was unanimous. Discussion followed of the coming schedule of Planning and Zoning Commission meetings. It was decided that a formal meeting would be held on September 2, an informal meeting on September 13 and September 20, and a formal meeting on September 23. Jakobsen moved and Horton seconded adjournment of the formal meeting; the motion passed unanimously. i Meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m. Minutes submitted by Karin Franklin. Approved by: _ om Sc t , Secretary 11�40 W r MICROFILMED BY "JORM MIC RfSCA5 l+ CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES ' I MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 2, 1982 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Jakobsen, Horton, Jordan, Baker, Scott, Blank MEMBERS ABSENT: Seward STAFF PRESENT: Knight, Behrman RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: 1. Z-8205. That the application, initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from Cl to RMH of a 16 acre tract located at 2254 S. Riverside and known as Thatcher Mobile Home Park be denied. 2. Z-8206. That the application, initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from RIA to RMH of a-15.6 acre tract located at the north end of Laura Drive and known as Forest View Trailer Park be approved. 3. Z-8207. That the application, initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from RIA to RMH of a 2.46 acre tract located at 1705 Prairie du Chien Road and known as Hawkeye Mobile Home Park be deferred for six months (until the second meeting in March, 1983) and that a waiver be part of this deferral, if determined to be necessary. 4. Z-8208. That the application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from RIA to RMH of a 0.97 acre tract located at 1515 Prairie du Chien Road and known as Larsen's Trailer Camp be denied. 5. Z-8209. That the application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezon ng from C1 to RMH of a 2.46 acre tract located at 1225 S. Riverside Drive and known as the Iowa City Trailer Park be denied, and that the park receive no change in zoning at this time. 6. Z-8210. That the application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from C2 to RMH of a 7.98 acre tract located at 2312 Muscatine Avenue and known as Towncrest Mobile Home Park be approved. 7. Z-8211. That the application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning Drive from C2 to RMH of a 15.88 acre tract located at 1960 Waterfront and known as Hilltop Mobile Home Park be approved. 8. Z-8212. That the application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from C2 to RMH of a 62.11 acre tract located east on Highway 6 and known as Bon -Aire Mobile Home Lodge be approved, with the exception of a 300 foot strip of land fronting on U.S. Highway 6. 9. 2-8213. That the application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from C1 to RMH of a 20.88 acre tract located at 2128 S. Riverside Drive and known as Baculis Mobile Home Park be denied, and that the park receive no.change in zoning at this time. i,. I51CROMMED BY J JORM MIC RbLA6 L , � CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES � I � i r MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 2, 1982 PAGE 2 10. A-8205. That the application submitted by John Sladek for the annexation of approximately 2.5 acres, located south of and adjacent to the Iowa City Corporate boundaries near the intersection of Willow Creek Drive and Highway 1, be approved. 11. Z-8214. chat the application submitted by John Sladek for the rezoning to C2 of approximately 2.5 acres, located south of and adjacent to the Iowa City Corporate boundaries near the intersection of Willow Creek Drive and Highway 1, be approved. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Horton called the meeting to order. The minutes of August 5, 1982, were amended as follows: Page 2; paragraph 5: "Baker expressed dissatisfaction with the density map, in: particular the west side of Dodge Street from Burlington Street to Court Street." Page 2; paragraph 7: "Baker stated support for -the rest of the area being zoned RM20, including the area along Iowa and Jefferson Streets being zoned 16-24 d.U./acre." Page 3, paragraph 7: Jakobsen, not Baker, stated that if the present sign ordinance conformed to state law, the staff should not proceed with the recommendation of the Board of Adjustment; if not then the staff should consider the recommendation. The minutes of August 5, 1982, were approved as amended. There was no public discussion of any item not included on the agenda. ZONING ITEMS : 1. Z-8205. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from C1 to RMH of a 16 acre tract located at 2254 S. Riverside and known as Thatcher Mobile Home Park; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. Knight briefly reviewed the staff report, stating that this item would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Knight recommended that the Commission wait until the Comprehensive Plan was updated to determine the appropriate land use and take no action to rezone the park at this time. Jakobsen asked if the Commission's motions should all be made in the affirmative first, and if voted down then made for denial? Horton replied yes. Jakobsen moved that the application for the rezoning of the Thatcher Mobile Home Park from C1 to RMH be approved. Jordan seconded the motion. Jakobsen stated that she would not support the motion. Scott asked if the reason that the motion would probably be defeated was due to the fact that the rezoning would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Jakobsen stated that that was correct. The motion failed unanimously (0- 5). MICROFILMED BY I -JORM MICR6LAB CEDAR RAPIDS DES MDIRES I i i 1 J r I M1 MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 2, 1982 PAGE 3 (Blank arrived at this point.) Jakobsen moved that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that this application be denied. Baker seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously (6-0). Z-8206. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from R1A to RMH of a 15.6 acre tract located at the north end of. Laura Drive and known as Forest View Trailer Park; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. Jakobsen questioned Mr. Albrecht's comments at the last meeting regarding the possible rezoning of the total 25 acres of land which was requested previously. Knight explained the misunderstanding, stating that the request for the additional 10 acres was not being considered at this time because it would result in a change in use for that land. This would require notification of the surrounding land owners, while recognizing the existing land use did not. Knight stated that the applicant had not yet filed a new application for the additional 10 acre tract and it would have to be considered individually. Scott moved that the request for rezoning from RIA to RMH of a 15.6 acre tract known as Forest View Trailer Park be approved. Jordan seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 3. Z-8207. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from R1A to RMH of a 2.46 acre tract located at 1705 Prairie du Chien Road and known as Hawkeye Mobile Home Park; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. Ralph Stoffer, Rural Route 3, representing the owner of the Hawkeye Mobile Home Park, asked that the area be rezoned to reflect the use of the land. Stoffer explained that rezoning would make the mobile home park a conforming use and allow it to obtain financing for maintenance and repair. Knight pointed out that the alignment of Foster Road was proposed through to the west end of the Hawkeye Mobile Home Park property and along the north property line. He explained that this will impact the amount of land available for RMH zoning, as well as the grade to the west of the park. Knight also noted that the rezoning of this item would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan or the interpretation made that the lines be considered flexible. Knight recommended that the Commission await the completion of the Comprehensive Plan Update and that the area not be rezoned at this time. Stoffer repeated the client's request to rezone this item to RMH. Scott asked how long the area had been zoned RIA. Knight explained that the area had been zoned RIA since it had been annexed from the county. Scott remarked that the Hawkeye Mobile Home Park has been a nonconforming use from the instant it was annexed by the City. Knight concurred. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICR#LAS % 1 j CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES r � ' i r MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 2, 1982 PAGE 4 Jakobsen moved that the request for rezoning be approved. Jakobsen indicated that she would not support the motion. Scott seconded the motion. Jakobsen explained the lack of support as being due to the fact that the property was presently nonconforming so no additional hardship would be felt by the owner. Jakobsen also pointed out that this property does not meet the minimum zone area of ten acres proposed in the RMH zone. Scott mentioned that the possibility exists for additional land to be rezoned to reach the ten acre minimum requirement. Knight explained that, while area to the west could possibly be filled and used as a manufactured housing development, the feasibility of placing the undeveloped land in an RMH zone was questionable at this time due to its severe topography. Knight also pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan Updates' proposed land use for the undeveloped land was not known. Scott asked if the owner would have to instigate a rezoning request if the Comprehensive Plan Update changed the use in density in that area. Knight explained the various options available to an owner. The motion failed unanimously. Jakobsen moved that the application be denied at this time. Scott seconded the motion. Stoffer requested that the Commission defer this application in order to give the applicant an opportunity to have his land rezoned without paying a fee. Knight indicated that staff had no objection. Jakobsen withdrew the motion and Scott withdrew his second. Jakobsen requested that the minutes show that, due to the lack of legal staff, the Commission did not know if a letter waiving the 45 -day limitation period was needed or not. Jakobsen moved that this item be deferred for six months (until the second meeting in March, 1983) and that a waiver be part of this deferral, if necessary. Scott seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 4. Z-8208. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from RIA to RMH of a 0.97 acre tract located at 1515 Prairie du Chien Road and known as Larsen's Trailer Camp; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. Knight explained that this item would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, and further it was highly unlikely that the zone area would ever increase to the ten acre minimum requirement. Scott moved that the request for rezoning from RIA to RMH be granted. Jordan seconded the motion. The motion failed unanimously. Scott moved that the request for rezoning be denied. Jordan seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 5. Z-8209. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa City far the rezoning from C1 to RMH of a 2.46 acre tract located at 1225 S. /14,�,a�z 111CR0EILMED BY L:. JORM MIC R4/L AB 1 1 � CEDAR RANDS DES MOVIES i r MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 2, 1982 PAGE 5 Riverside Drive and known as the Iowa City Trailer Park; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. Knight stated that this item would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and would probably never be able to reach the ten acre minimum requirement. Scott asked if this item would become nonconforming if the rezoning was denied. Knight stated that the area was currently conforming and would be made nonconforming if not rezoned. Scott asked if the owners had commented on that possibility. Knight indicated that nothing had been heard from the owners of the Iowa City Trailer Park. Baker moved that the application for rezoning be approved. Scott seconded the motion. The motion failed unanimously. Baker moved that there be no change in the rezoning of the Iowa City Trailer Park. Scott seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Larry Schnittjer questioned whether existing trailer courts would have "grandfather rights" since they existed prior to the ten acre minimum requirement. Knight explained that these trailer parks could exist under a nonconforming status. Schnittjer pointed out that the Iowa City Trailer Park had been conforming previously. Scott stated that that was the reason for his question of whether or not the park owners had contacted the City staff or the Commission. He further stated that he would be willing to delay this if the park owners objected to the rezoning. Knight mentioned that the staff report for this item was worded in such a way as to allow the rezoning to be reconsidered upon completion of the Comprehensive Plan Update if the appropriate land use of this area is found to be residential. 6. Z-8210. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from C2 to RMH of a 7.95 acre tract located at 2312 Muscatine Avenue and known as Towncrest Mobile Home Park; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. The staff recommended approval although the ten acre minimum zone area requirement was not met because the area does conform with the Comprehensive Plan recommendation. Jakobsen moved and Baker seconded that this application for rezoning be approved. The motion carried unanimously. Knight indicated that the potential for redevelopment in that area should be examined in the long-range Comprehensive Plan. The members questioned how the RMH zoning would affect the existing trailer park. Knight explained that it would not require the park to be upgraded. 7. Z-8211. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from C2 to RMH of a 15.88 acre tract located at 1960 Waterfront Drive and known as Hilltop Mobile Home Park; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. MICRUILMED BY I � JORM MIC RdILAB i 4 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES I401NES llOd Y' W] MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 2, 1982 PAGE 6 Knight indicated that the staff recommendation was to approve this application because it conforms with the Comprehensive Plan. Scott moved and Blank seconded that the application for rezoning be approved. The motion carried unanimously. 8. Z-8212. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from C2 to RMH of a 62.11 acre tract located east on Highway 6 and known as Bon -Aire Mobile Home Lodge; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. Knight requested that any recommendation specifically exclude a 300 foot strip of land fronting on Highway 6. Jakobsen expressed support for the rezoning but stated that she understood the objection of the owner. Jakobsen stated that RMH was an appropriate zone because the area had been used as a mobile home park for a long time. Knight remarked that the owner's objection would require an extraordinary majority vote of the City Council. Scott wondered if the park owner was at the informal meeting. Horton stated that he was not. Blank moved that the application for rezoning be approved with the exception of a 300 foot strip of land fronting on U.S. Highway 6. Jordan seconded the motion. Baker asked why the Commission did not wish to honor the owner's objection. Knight explained that the purpose of establishiqg the zone was to recognize the mobile home use as a residential use. Knight stated that the owner's objection stemmed in part from a claim that rezoning would devalue the property. Knight stated that rezoning would be recognizing the existing land use. Jakobsen stated that, at one time, the legal staff had advised the Commission that if an area remained in a use other than as zoned for a period of ten years, the City had the right to rezone that area to its existing use. Scott stated that this item had been a mobile home park for 20 years. The motion to approve the rezoning carried unanimously. 9. Z-8213. Public discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning from C1 to RMH of a 20.88 acre tract located at 2128 S. Riverside Drive and known as Baculis Mobile Home Park; 45 -day limitation period: 9/16/82. Knight indicated that this item would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and recommended that its zoning remain status quo. Knight stated that the owner had requested that this area not be rezoned but had not filed an official objection because the staff had not recommended the rezoning. Scott moved that the application for rezoning be approved. Jakobsen seconded the motion. The motion failed unanimously. IIICROFIL14ED BY JORM-MICROLAB- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES M01NES r MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 2, 1982 PAGE 7 Scott moved that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that there be no change in the zoning of this park at this time. Jordan seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 10. A-8205. & Z-8214. Public discussion of an application submitted by John Sladek for the annexation and rezoning to C2 of approximately 2.5 acres located south of and adjacent to the Iowa City Corporate boundaries near the intersection of Willow Creek Drive and Highway 1; 45 -day limitation period: 9/20/82. Knight indicated that the staff recommended approval of this item and that it conforms to the recommendation of the draft Southwest Area Study and the Comprehensive Plan. Blank moved that the application for annexation be approved. Scott seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Jordan moved that the application for rezoning to C2 be approved. Jakobsen seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS: Planning and Zoning Commission Information. r Baker asked if a legal opinion regarding the legal status of the RNC20 zone was forthcoming. Knight stated that he would check with the City Attorney concerning that matter. t r Horton announced the change in the meeting schedule for the month of September: September 13, 1982: an informal meeting. There will be no meeting on September 16. { September 20, 1982: an informal meeting. September 23, 1982: formal hearing (moratorium issue). The meeting adjourned at 8:30 P.M. Taken by: Sara Behrman. Approved by: om Scot , Secretary /1-1d�l MICROFILMED BY CORM MIC RbLAB i LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES i + I a