HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-04-20 Bd Comm minutes04-20-09
5b(1)
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 5, 2009 - 7:30 PM -FORMAL
CITY HALL, EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
APPROVED
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Freerks, Josh Busard, Charlie Eastham, Elizabeth Koppes,
Tim Weitzel, Michelle Payne
MEMBERS ABSENT: Wally Plahutnik
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Karen Howard, Sarah Greenwood Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT: John Beasley, Brad Houser, Dan Black, David Kieft,
Don Stalkfleet
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
The Commission recommended approval of REZ09-00002, an application submitted by the City of
Iowa City for a rezoning from Interim Development ~ID-1) zone to General Industrial (I-1) zone for
approximately 100 acres of property located on 420 h Street SE, west of Taft Avenue. The vote
was 6-0 (Plahutnik absent).
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:33 p.m. by Chairperson Ann Freerks.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
ZONING CODE ITEMS:
Discussion of amendments to the Zoning Code to regulate Drinking Establishments and Alcohol
Sales Oriented Retail Uses and to establish minimum spacing requirements between such uses.
Howard stated that in early January the City Council expressed their concern about the concentration of
bars and liquor stores in the downtown area. City Council asked the staff to draft regulations for the
Planning and Zoning Commission's consideration requiring a minimum separation between bars and
liquor stores. The regulations require a 500 foot separation between bars and a 1000 foot separation
between liquor stores. These regulations would apply to new bars and liquor stores being established in
the downtown area. Howard said that Staff has created some draft regulations for amending the zoning
code to comply with City Council's request.
Howard shared a map of the downtown business area which outlined the areas that would be affected by
the new regulations. Other illustrations demonstrated the concentration of drinking establishments and
alcohol retail stores downtown by showing the areas which would separate bars and liquor stores under
the new regulations, and highlighting the overlapping areas that exist currently.
Planning and Zoning Commission
March 5, 2009 -Formal
Page 2
Howard said that in order to regulate bars and liquor stores, Staff needed to establish a definition of what
a Drinking Establishment is as opposed to a restaurant, theater, etc. that sells alcohol. Staff proposes a
use classification process that would apply to any use for which an application has been filed for a liquor
license or wine or beer permit. Through this process, it would be determined if a new business would fall
into one of two categories: 1) Drinking Establishment, or 2) Alcohol Sales-Oriented Retail Use (liquor
store). Howard said that Staff also created a system to define uses in which alcohol sales are merely an
accessory use to the principal use of the property, e.g., a grocery store such as Hy-Vee, which sells
alcohol but not as its primary purpose.
In order to be classified as a Drinking Establishment, a business would have the following characteristics:
1) the principal activity of the establishment is the preparation, dispensing and consumption of food
and/or beverages; and 2) the establishment is licensed by the State for the sale of alcohol for on-site
consumption; and 3) the establishment is open for business any time between 12 AM and 2 AM.
Howard noted that restaurants that have a liquor license but are not open to the general public after
midnight are not considered Drinking Establishments and are therefore not subject to the separation
requirement. Other establishments such as theaters, bowling alleys, etc., which sell alcohol are not
classified as Drinking Establishments because the principal business is not eating or drinking; as a result,
they are not subject to the separation requirement. Restaurants and bars that are associated with a hotel
or motel are not subject to the requirement as they hold Class B liquor licenses which are issued only to
hotels/motels. Alcohol sales for all of the above uses would be considered an accessory use and
therefore not subject to the separation requirement.
Howard said that Staff has defined Alcohol Sales-Oriented Retail uses as any establishment for which a
Class E liquor license or wine or beer permit has been issued that allows the sale of alcohol or alcoholic
beverages in closed containers for off-premise consumption. In order to determine whether or not those
alcohol sales are a principal part of the business, Staff had to come up with a system for classifying
businesses. If an establishment can show that its income from alcohol sales is less than 25% of gross
yearly income then that establishment qualifies for an accessory alcohol sales certificate and is exempt
from the separation requirement. Businesses must renew this certificate every year at the time their
liquor licenses are renewed.
The proposed regulations state that a Drinking Establishment must be separated by a minimum of 500
feet from any other Drinking Establishment. This regulation would apply in all commercial zones that
currently allow bars.
For Alcohol Sales-Oriented retail uses, liquor stores/convenience stores, staff recommends that the
regulations apply only in the Central Business zones. These establishments must be separated by a
minimum of 1,000 feet. Staff does not recommend requiring the 1,000 foot separation city-wide because
Staff feels the City Council's main concern was the concentration of liquor stores in the downtown area.
The problem with applying the regulation city-wide would be that every grocery store, convenience store
and gas station in town would then have to go through a fairly onerous process to submit their income
statements to the City each year; which would be a problem both administratively and for business
owners.
Howard pointed out that Staff is recommending that Drinking Establishments not be allowed in the Mixed-
Use or the Commercial Office zones. These zones typically contain or are next to residential areas. To
Staffs knowledge neither of these zones currently have bars in them.
At their informal meeting, Commissioners had requested a map showing all of the commercial zones that
would be affected by these regulations. Howard shared such a map.
Howard noted that existing businesses would be grandfathered in. If the businesses do not comply with
the 500 or 1,000 foot space requirement they would be considered legally non-conforming and would
have the right to continue in their present use. If the liquor license lapses, is revoked or is discontinued
for a period of one year, or if there are changes to the use such that it no longer meets the requirements
Planning and Zoning Commission
March 5, 2009 -Formal
Page 3
of a Drinking Establishment or an Alcohol Sales-Oriented Retail use, then the building would be required
to come into a conforming use. For example, if a nonconforming bar was changed into a clothing store, it
would not be able to be converted back into a bar. Once non-conforming uses are changed into
conforming uses, they cannot revert back to the non-conforming use. Non-conforming uses cannot
expand; though the interiors can be renovated, the square footage and the exterior footprint cannot be
increased. Howard noted that these things are true of any non-conforming use, not just in the case of
these specific regulations. However, the regulations are written to exclude sidewalk cafes from the
definition of expansion, so that they would be allowed as long as they met the requirements for sidewalk
cafes.
Miklo noted that in the case of sidewalk cafes there are no guarantees that a Drinking Establishment
could establish one as the City Council considers many factors; however, the exception written into the
regulations is intended not to prevent them.
Freerks asked for clarification on when a use would have to change from non-conforming to conforming.
Howard stated that in the case of suspensions of liquor licenses then the legally non-conforming use
could be continued so long as the use was re-established within the year. She clarified that if a bar
closed and a clothing store opened, then the use would be considered converted after the new use was
established for a period of seven days. Once converted to a conforming use it could not be changed
back into a nonconforming use.
Eastham asked if a liquor license suspension of more than 365 days would constitute a change in use.
Greenwood Hektoen said that state code allows the local authorities to suspend a liquor license for a
period not to exceed one year. She noted that the code does give the City the authority to revoke or
suspend, however, the City Council has a policy of not making those types of determinations and instead
makes a recommendation to the Alcohol and Beverage Division and lets them make the decision. The
goal behind this policy is to remove the politics from any local suspensions. Eastham asked if the State
could suspend a liquor license for more than a year. Greenwood Hektoen said that the State could not
suspend for more than a year; however, the State could revoke the license.
Eastham noted that the definition of a Drinking Establishment included the provision that the business is
open between the hours of 12 and 2 a.m. Eastham asked if it was possible then to establish a bar within
500 feet of another so long as it closes before midnight. Howard said that this would be possible;
however, she said that practically speaking bars generally stay open until 2 a.m., and that she cannot
think of an instance of a bar that closes before midnight. Eastham said that he could not think of an
instance either but that it could come up. Howard said that the goal was to find a system of classification
that would make a clear distinction between a bar and a restaurant and would provide a level of certainty
for both the City and the business owner. Howard said that the proposed definition makes it very clear
whether a business is a Drinking Establishment or not. She said that if someone were to undertake a
new business, they would not want to take the risk of establishing what they believed would be a
restaurant only to find out after 6 months that their percentage of alcohol sales had classified them as a
Drinking Establishment and thus become an illegal use. Howard said using a percentage of sales for the
bars vs. restaurants would make the whole process a lot muddier and less certain. Howard noted that
since most of the problems that occur which are causing concern in the community happen after
midnight, it Is best to use a definition that will focus the regulation on establishments that are truly bars
whose primary business is selling alcohol after midnight.
Eastham said that as he understands it the Drinking Establishment definition does not depend on
percentage of sales. Howard said that is correct. She said that Staff felt that using a percentage of sales
to determine what businesses were Drinking Establishments would not have given enough notice to
people in the process of starting new businesses downtown and would have created administrative
headaches for both the City and the business owners. Howard said the current definition targets the
problem itself and does not require every single restaurant to submit their books and verify their income
every single year.
Planning and Zoning Commission
March 5, 2009 -Formal
Page 4
Koppes asked if special occasions like wedding receptions and renting out restaurants would be affected
by the 12-2 a.m. requirement. Miklo noted that the policy says "open to the public," which a wedding
reception presumably would not be. Howard said that city code has a whole section on classification
systems used to determine what is an accessory use and what is a principal use. In the case of the
occasional private party or reception that would cause a restaurant to be open after midnight, the City
could consider that an accessory use.
Payne asked Staff to address the issue of grandfathering in current businesses. Payne asked if under
the current language it was possible for a business to retain its status as legally non-conforming if it had
its liquor license reinstated on the 365`h day of suspension. Greenwood Hektoen said she believed so but
would have to check. Howard said that typically suspensions are for short periods of time, and a series of
suspensions is generally handed down prior to revocation. Howard noted that the intent in the non-
conforming chapter of the code is that non-conforming uses will go away over time, and this regulation is
not an exception to that. Greenwood Hektoen said that the way she reads it, if the license is suspended
for a year, the use would have to be brought into conformance. Eastham asked if it was correct that if a
suspension was in place for a year then the use would have to become conforming. Howard said this
was correct.
Freerks asked what the history is of a bar losing its license for a period of more than one year. Howard
said it was extremely rare. Miklo noted that Doug Boothroy, who has worked at the City for 30 years,
recalled only one instance where a bar had its license revoked for a year.
Freerks asked about the administrative and staff time that would be needed to enforce the code. Howard
said she thought that for Drinking Establishments the requirements would not be strenuous. For the
Alcohol Related Retail Sales certificate the staff time would be greater, as would the time required by the
business owner. She noted that the accessory alcohol sales certificate is optional for the business owner,
upon whom the onus of applying lies.
Koppes asked for clarification on the CC-2 and Intensive Commercial zones downtown and whether they
would be affected. Miklo noted that there were still a few pockets of CC-2 zoning south of the downtown
where a liquor store could be opened under these regulations. Howard noted that the Drinking
Establishment requirements would be applied citywide. She said that the intent of the regulations is not
to disallow liquor stores and bars but to reduce the concentration.
Eastham asked Staff to talk a bit about how they determined the separation should be 500 or 1,000 feet.
Miklo said Staff did a considerable amount of research on what other communities across the country do.
Miklo said the distances of 500 and 1,000 feet were pretty typical distances. Miklo said that as liquor
stores are a pretty specialized business, there is not a need for a lot of them. Bars and restaurants tend
to be a little more common than liquor stores, thus their required separation distance is lower. Miklo said
different communities required separation distances that ranged from 250-1,000 feet. Miklo said that
given the pattern of uses already established in our downtown, the distance of 500 feet seemed a good
fit.
Eastham asked if Staff felt that if the 500 foot separation of bars were in effect presently it would allow for
a reasonable number of drinking establishments in the downtown area. Miklo said Staff did not get into
that kind of analysis. Miklo said that Staff looked at what was presently there and then re-examined it in
light of the goal of not increasing that concentration.
There were no further questions for Staff and the public hearing was opened.
John Beasley, 321 E. Market Street, said that he was present on behalf of some property owners in
downtown Iowa City. He said that as he sat at the back of the room listening he was trying to get a sense
of what the Commission intended to do with this proposal. He asked if the Commission was considering
this proposal, just discussing it, or was prepared to make a recommendation to City Council. He said that
the answer to that question would play a role in some of his remarks. Freerks replied that the
Planning and Zoning Commission
March 5, 2009 -Formal
Page 5
Commission could vote on the matter and make a recommendation or they could vote to continue
discussion at a later date. Freerks said it depends on discussions that take place.
Beasley urged the Commission to take time to sort through the matter, as there are multiple perspectives
to take into consideration. Beasley said that he was present on behalf of landlords as well as bar owners
in the downtown area. He said that before enacting this kind of regulation, the Commission needs to look
at it from all perspectives. Beasley noted that the downtown property owner is not necessarily the bar
owner, and may have an entirely different perspective. Beasley noted that the discussions seem to lump
the property owners and the bar owners together as though they are both "The Drinking Establishment,"
when in fact their interests and perspectives may be quite different. Beasley said that this proposal could
have far-reaching effects on the party that owns the real estate and rents it to the bar establishment.
Beasley said that ultimately the landlord is responsible for the real estate taxes. Beasley asked if any of
the Commissioners had had a chance to sit down and look at the amount of real estate taxes being paid
on some of the properties that have bars in them, and how significantly some of those taxes have
increased in the last four to five years. Beasley said that the taxes on one of his client's downtown
properties have gone up 13% in the last year. He said that before the Commission makes a
recommendation they need to dissect the matter more fully. Beasley expressed surprise that there were
not more bar owners or property owners present at the meeting because of the large impact this matter
will have on them. Beasley said that this is a big deal. He said that it is an even bigger deal if a landlord
has an empty property that is not currently a bar. He said that not only does that landlord have to find a
new tenant, but the pool of potential tenants is severely affected.
Beasley said that he also would ask the Commission to delay making a recommendation until they had
fully considered how this piece of legislation would work with other legislation under consideration that
governs the City Council's relationship with the Alcohol and Beverage Division (ABD) and how the
licensing process works. Beasley said the City Council makes a recommendation to the ABD for liquor
license renewals. He said that there is a new piece of legislation under consideration which states that if
the licensee has had more than one PAULA (Possession of Alcohol under the Legal Age) citation in a
minimum of 18 visits by the police department within the last year, then the City Council will recommend
that the ABD not renew the license. Greenwood Hektoen clarified that it was actually an average of one
PAULA per visit by the police department. Beasley said that the point was that the Commission really
needed to understand the interplay and relationship of the City with the ABD and the terms suspension of
license, revocation of license and non-renewal of license and how they fit together. Beasley said that it
was his understanding that if an employee of a bar sells alcohol to an underage person the ABD has what
Beasley terms a "ladder system." The first offense is an administrative fine to the licensee. For the
second offense within a one or two year period (Beasley was not sure which) a suspension of the license
is levied. The third offense within a three year period would result in a longer suspension, and the fourth
time could receive a revocation. Beasley said that a revocation means that not only is the licensee out of
business, but that premises cannot be licensed to serve alcohol for a period of one year. That bar
owner's license revocation could thereby permanently disallow the property owner from renting the
property to a bar in the future under the proposed regulations.
Beasley stated that the proposed statute has a lot of implications, is very complicated, and has great
impact on a number of parties. Beasley said that he is not condoning the bad things that have occurred
to prompt this proposal for downtown Iowa City, but he said there is a lot more to this proposal than
meets the eye. He said that he himself is just beginning to get his arms around all of the possible
implications.
Beasley said he would be happy to answer any questions the Commissioners might have for him.
Freerks asked Beasley when he received the proposal. Beasley received the proposal on March 15`. He
said one of the reasons he had come to the meeting was to hear Staffs perspective on the issue and the
questions the Commission has. He reiterated that the property owner and tenant perspectives on the
matter were not necessarily one and the same.
Planning and Zoning Commission
March 5, 2009 -Formal
Page 6
Payne asked if Beasley believed that a building that has a Drinking Establishment as its current use today
could be worth more money under this proposal since it already has that use; if it was more valuable as a
result of its legally non-conforming use. Beasley said that anytime a landlord has more options and
opportunities to rent to a greater diversity of uses then the value of the property is greater. Beasley said
that he did believe this would make some properties more valuable because anytime potential uses for
the property are taken off the table, value is lost. Beasley said that the harsh reality of it is that he is
concerned that taking action on the number of bars/restaurants in downtown Iowa City is a good way to
wind up with a lot of "for rent" signs and vacant buildings. Beasley said that he had advised the then-
mayor of Iowa City of this at the time Coral Ridge Mall moved into the area. He said that a bar that is well
run and well-maintained is a good tenant, and that is the facts of the matter. He said that the exorbitant
real estate taxes that come with downtown property can be paid if you have a good bar as a tenant.
Beasley said he is not condoning excessive alcohol use in downtown Iowa City, but he cautioned against
winding up with a bunch of "for rent" signs in the downtown as that leaves a different negative impression
on people (referring to the negative impression the Council fears will be left on people by the sight of too
many bars downtown). Beasley noted how beautiful the College Street Billiards Company was, and how
intricately it was decorated with woodwork. He said that he asks himself who will put that kind of money
into downtown Iowa City if you cannot have arestaurant/bar in the building. He said that legislating
against bars and restaurants can have much more far reaching affects than those intended.
Eastham said that it seems to him that this proposal could in fact reduce the number of bars in the
downtown area. Eastham asked Beasley if he had an opinion as to whether or not the downtown area
should allow for additional bars than what is currently there. Beasley replied that if an individual is willing
to take the risk, invest the time and money and sign a contract with a landlord, then they should be
allowed to do so. Beasley said that this would be a business decision on the part of the bar owner.
Beasley said that at some point, a perspective bar owner will reach the business decision that there are
too many bars downtown to make a profit with a new one. Beasley said that supply and demand will work
itself out. He said that at the point where there are too many bars, the market will take care of the
concentration.
Weitzel asked Beasley what he proposed. He said that if City Council's directive was incorrect in
pursuing regulatory controls to prevent a concentration of bars and liquor stores he wondered what
Beasley's clients would propose as a means of preventing concentration. Weitzel said that the city had
already had about five years of waiting to see if the bars would regulate themselves, with no sign of that
actually happening.
Beasley replied that his clients work hard to properly train their help and to monitor who goes in and out of
their establishments. Beasley said that one of his clients has even taken the initiative to go to a 21-only
policy for his establishment. Weitzel said that if that was the case these bar owners would not suffer any
adverse consequences from this legislation. Beasley shared an anecdote with the Commission about
how sometimes the best training and supervision does not necessarily spare a bar owner from receiving a
ticket for serving minors. Beasley said that an establishment had been ticketed for selling alcohol to
someone under the legal age and was going to lose its license for a period of time. Because of the
suspension, a lot of money was at stake. The employee who had served the minor swore that the
individual had presented a legal I.D., but no identification of any kind was found on the person when
searched by police. On the surface, it appeared clear that the establishment had violated the law. Just
before trial, it was learned through eyewitness testimony that the individual who had purchased the
alcohol had possessed a fake I.D. and had discarded it prior to being stopped by the police. In fact, the
establishment had followed the law exactly, and still would have been penalized as though it had broken
the law were it not for the witness who came forward. Beasley said that the problem is that sometimes
bar owners despite their best efforts are penalized for the actions and mistakes of the kids working for
them. Beasley acknowledged that there were in fact bad bar owners out there, but he contended that
most tried hard to do the right thing. He said these regulations are a big deal because the property owner
remains on the hook for $50,000 per year in real estate taxes even if the tenant's 19 year old employee
made an error or someone pulled a shenanigan. Beasley said he could tell by the questions the
Commission was asking that they would give the matter their full consideration because they were asking
good questions.
Planning and Zoning Commission
March S, 2009 -Formal
Page 7
Busard asked how Beasley would feel if the language was changed so that the use remained legally non-
conforming for a year and one day so that the non-conforming use did not go away because of a one-
year suspension. Miklo said that though it was possible to change the language in that way, Staff would
not recommend it. Howard said that every other non-conforming use in the community is held to the
same standard and the bars would receive an extra day if that were done. Greenwood-Hektoen said that
it would be problematic to treat bars differently than other nonconforming uses.
Beasley said he felt it was very important to look at the impact of the proposal on not just the existing bars
downtown, but also on the property owners who do not have existing bars. Beasley offered the example
of a property owner who rented to a T-shirt shop. If the T-shirt shop goes out of business and the
property owner needs to find a new tenant, that property owner cannot rent to a bar or liquor store under
the proposal as it is currently written. Freerks said she thought the Commission understood that dynamic.
Beasley said that when he first heard about this he called the ABD in an effort to understand the
differences between license revocation and denial or renewals, and how the ramifications of this proposal
on those different scenarios.
Howard said that if the license was revoked the property would lose its legally non-conforming use
designation as a revocation means that the premises may not be licensed for a period of one year.
Greenwood Hektoen stated that Iowa Code 123.39 states that when a liquor license, wine, or beer permit
is suspended after a hearing as a result of violations of the code, the premises shall not be relicensed to
another person until the suspension has been terminated or the time of the suspension has occurred or
90 days has gone by, whichever occurs first.
Eastham asked if the provisions for revocation are different from those for suspension in terms of how
they affect the premises. Eastham asked if it was correct that a license holder who has had their license
revoked cannot obtain another license. Greenwood Hektoen said that in order to get a license a person
must be of "good moral character," and that she imagined that the definition of what that means may
contain some prohibition for those who have been revoked in the past. Howard said the relevant
implication for revocation is that it affects the property. Howard said that even without the proposed
revocation no one lets the matter get to revocation because it has serious repercussions for the property
owner as well as the business owner. Miklo said that for someone's license to be revoked the offenses
have to be egregious. Miklo said that given the Council's directions, if someone is operating a business
in such a way that their license is revoked perhaps there should not be a bar in that location.
Eastham said that he thinks Council's direction is to reduce the number of bars. He asked if that
necessarily meant that the Council intended to prevent landlords and property owners from having a
reasonable opportunity to rent their space to a business that is going to be a bar. Miklo and Howard said
that from their discussions with the Council it seemed clear that Council actually wants to see a reduction
in the number of bars downtown.
Freerks cautioned that the Commission was still in public hearing, and that she wanted to make sure
there was adequate time for public comment before embarking on discussion.
Brad Houser, 3693 Johnston Way, North Liberty, said that he has been involved in real estate in the area
for a number of years. Houser said that he found it amazing that his downtown property will be devalued
by this proposal but that there was no requirement on the City's part to notify him as a property owner of
the actions they were discussing. Houser said that if he were developing a piece of property he would be
required to notify nearby property owners whereas the City can simply put a "graveyard" ad buried in the
Press Citizen as their notification process. Houser said that he believes that the City's notification
process should be more comprehensive. Houser said he would not have known about the meeting if
someone had not called him at 2 o'clock that afternoon. He said he did not think this was a fair situation.
Planning and Zoning Commission
March 5, 2009 -Formal
Page 8
Houser said that he had grown up in Iowa City, and that he could not see that he himself had not been in
downtown bars prior to coming of legal age. He said that the fact that many other people could say the
same thing did not make it right, but it did show that it happens.
Houser said that it is generally not the landlord that has control over the issue of underage drinkers in
bars downtown. Bar owners do the best they can, but sometimes there are fake I.D.s involved which
complicates the matter. Houser pointed out that for the minor involved, the fine is much stiffer for
possessing a fake I.D. then it is for PAULA, so there is no incentive for the individual to admit the use of a
fake I.D.
Houser said that these regulations penalize the bar owner, the landlord and the door-man for something
that they cannot necessarily control. Best of intentions, best training, and best situations can still lead to
mistakes. Houser said that if you look around any office and terminated everyone who made a mistake,
the room would get pretty empty pretty quickly.
Houser said that as a landlord he cannot control what his tenant does. In enacting these regulations,
Houser said, the City would be asking him to do that and that should not be a consideration he has to
have. Houser said he that if he signs a lease with a tenant, he is bound by it. He said it would be nice if
he could put something in his lease saying that because he as property owner is responsible for the
actions of the tenant, the tenant will also be responsible for his actions, but he does not think that would
be possible to do. Houser said that until a lease comes up for renewal, a landlord's hands are tied as to
their selection of tenant.
Houser said that these regulations devalue downtown properties. Houser said that properties are bricks
and mortar and as such have a certain inherent value; beyond that, their value is based on the leases
they hold. The value of a property is higher if the business in it is able to generate high revenues,
regardless of the business type.
Houser said that in all likelihood a clothing store would not be able to pay the same rent as a bar or liquor
store (if the non-conforming use were void), as a result, his property taxes would have to go down
(although they would not at first).
Houser said these regulations require him to police his tenants, and he cannot be the police.
Eastham said that he felt he was hearing two different stories. He said that on the one hand this
ordinance provides that a Drinking Establishment can remain a Drinking Establishment even if it is
separated by less than 500 feet from another Drinking Establishment unless it changes use, or its liquor
license lapses, is revoked, or is otherwise discontinued. Eastham said that his understanding is that it
almost never happens that a license is revoked or suspended for a period of one year. Eastham said that
he understood Houser to be saying that he was concerned that a license could be lapsed, revoked or
discontinued for a period of more than one year. Houser said that Eastham was correct in a sense. The
regulations are themselves putting that possibility in play; although everyone can sit there and say that it
will not happen, the landlord is at the mercy of the bar owner making sure it does not happen, with no
control themselves. Houser said it is also an issue for him that he would not be able to expand under the
non-conforming use codes.
Eastham said the expansion issue is intended to prevent any further Drinking Establishments in the
downtown area. Eastham said that while this is what it was intended to do, he was not sure that it
actually achieved this. Eastham said the question he has now is what is going to happen to existing
businesses as time moves forward. Houser said he agreed with Beasley that the market would take care
of itself to a certain extent.
Weitzel asked how this particular ordinance would be different from any other regulatory ordinances on
alcohol. Houser said he did not claim to be an expert on alcohol, and he did not even know how to
answer that. He said he was looking at the ordinance from a landlord's standpoint. Weitzel asked if it
was not the case that the trend over the last ten years has been toward bars. Houser said he was not
Planning and Zoning Commission
March 5, 2009 -Formal
Page 9
sure that was entirely true. He noted that Old Capitol Mall could easily have reverted to bars, but did not.
He said that he would like to see the statistics supporting that assumption. Freerks asked if the number
of bar and liquor licenses have actually increased over the last several years. Miklo said he thought staff
could get those numbers from the City Clerk. Howard said that one of the things the City Council referred
to when discussing this matter was the market study that was done downtown. Their focus became firmly
fixed on the concentration of this one particular use in the downtown area, and the problems it could be
causing in the market. The consultant recommended limiting the number of bars and restaurants
downtown to open up space to other types of businesses. The hope is that to will help to stimulate the
economy ad influence the number and types of residents who choose to live downtown.
Houser said that if there are tenants that want to rent downtown that are not bars but can pay the same
amount of rent, then that is fine. Houser said that presently there is a lot of change going on in Iowa
City's economic situation, with many people sitting on the fence. Houser said that the uncertain times
and a change of such magnitude are something that should be considered in light of one another.
Houser reiterated that his frustration with the process is that he just found out about the proposal and the
meeting four or five hours ago. Houser urged the Commission to at least wait on the issue to allow more
input from the public.
Dan Black, 1241 Flagstaff, spoke on behalf of Midwest One Bank, which manages commercial real estate
through their trust department. Black said he represents landlords and property owners in the downtown
area. Black echoed the sentiment that he did not have much notice on this issue either, although he
prides himself on trying to keep up with what goes on in town. He said that he did not know anything
about it until he received a call at work two days ago. Black said that Howard had kindly brought him up
to speed on the proposal.
Black said that he would not address things that had already been addressed, but that he wanted to touch
on a couple of things that strike him. Black said that it seems like an unfair proposal because it creates
an instant monopoly on licenses, because no more will be issued in the downtown area. Anyone with a
license presently could have an unfair advantage and financial windfall immediately bestowed upon them.
Black said that the inability to expand a business is another very troubling issue to him. He said that the
notion flies in the face of free market enterprise. Black concurred with others who had suggested that
the free market will take care of this problem. Black said that the last two commercial leases he wrote for
the downtown area were for a deli and a clothing store.
Black expressed concern that this particular solution would not really solve the problems it intended to
address, namely late-night alcohol related issues. He said that he sees it doing very little to address
those problems. Black suggested that better ways to address those problems would be to enact a 21-
only law and step up enforcement. He said these would be much more effective in addressing the
alcohol related problems.
Eastham said he had not considered the idea that this particular ordinance might actually create a
monopoly of liquor license holders in the downtown areas. Eastham asked if Black was saying that even
if he were ultra-responsible as a bar owner he would not be able to open a bar in the downtown area
because he would have to buy a license from an existing establishment. Black said this was correct. He
noted that he could not go open a bar on the 100 block of Iowa Avenue under these regulations because
there are existing establishments within 500 feet, and this creates a monopoly for the existing license
holders. Eastham said that he understood Black to be saying that the only way to establish a new bar
would be to approach an existing establishment to purchase their license, but that the price of the license
would now be exorbitantly high. Black said it just seems to be an uneven playing field and that he cannot
think of any other types of businesses that would be approached this way. Black said that other
businesses are not limited in other zones, and that he understood the reality of some of the alcohol-
related problems, but that this proposal did not seem the best one.
Planning and Zoning Commission
March 5, 2009 -Formal
Page 10
Koppes asked if the regulations were passed it would mean that all bars downtown would become non-
conforming. Miklo said that it would. Payne noted that a bar could become conforming if the bars within
500 feet of it went out of business.
David Kieft, 2500 Rushmore, represented the University of Iowa, saying that he had a somewhat different
perspective than other speakers. The University has been working with the City for months on this and
other issues, he said, and the issue has been well-publicized since December. He said that there is no
right to hold a liquor license, and that it is a privilege which comes with great responsibility. He said that
unless a bar offends multiple times, the issue of PAULAs and suspensions will not come into play.
Without violations, there is no possibility of revocation. He contended that the same establishments are
found to be violation month after month after month. These regulations send a very strong message to
repeat offenders that they need to get their act together. While he understands the concerns of the
landlords present, he said that he felt Council was looking at the matter from a perspective of trying to
control excess drinking in the city. He noted that it is not just University of Iowa students that drink in
downtown bars, but the youth of the city in general. He said that some Iowa Citians do not even come to
downtown Iowa City any longer because of the culture of alcohol that is down there. It is the culture of
alcohol that Council wishes to address, and this is one small measure to do so. Over time, he said, this
measure will help address the concentration of bars in the downtown area.
Busard asked if it was not a part of the Comprehensive Plan to create a downtown with a mixture of uses
that is more hospitable to non-student populations. Miklo said that it was a general goal of the
Comprehensive Plan and for the Strategic Plan for downtown; although the wording in the documents is
different, it is the general direction outlined in the plans. Miklo said the idea is to have downtown be an
around-the-clock business district with some businesses open during the day and not just evening
businesses.
Don Stalkfleet, 3105 Dubuque Street, said that he wished to respond to something that had been said.
Stalkfleet said he had lived in Iowa City for 55 years, and owns businesses downtown. He said that he
did not hear anything about this ordinance until Friday morning. He said that he reads the Press Citizen
every day, watches the City Council meetings and does all he can to be informed but still heard nothing
about this ordinance. Stalkfleet felt that as a property owner it would have been appropriate for the City
to send him and other downtown property owners something notifying them of the ordinance so that they
had a chance to respond to it.
Stalkfleet said he felt very confident that the Commission would do its job well, but that he really felt he
should have been notified. He suggested delaying making a decision on the matter until property owners
had had adequate time to respond. Stalkfleet asked if anything had ever been sent out.
Miklo said that nothing had been sent to individual property owners. He said there had been several
newspaper articles and some television news coverage of the issue. Freerks asked if it was typical for
the City to send out individual notice to property owners for zoning code amendments. Howard said that
this amendment to the zoning regulations applies to every commercial property owner in the city, and as
a result no special notices were sent to individual property owners. Miklo noted that the issue was
covered by the local media and that concerned citizens can subscribe to receive notifications of agendas
for different Boards and Commissions.
The public hearing was closed
Koppes motioned to defer the matter until the March 19`" Commission meeting.
Eastham seconded.
Freerks noted that the March 19th meeting is during spring break so it might be wise to schedule an extra
meeting the following week or wait until the April 2"d meeting.
Koppes amended her motion, suggesting deferment until the April 2"d meeting.
Planning and Zoning Commission
March 5, 2009 -Formal
Page 11
Eastham seconded.
Freerks invited discussion from the Commission
Koppes asked what happens to service clubs like the Moose Lodge with these regulations. Howard
replied that clubs are not open to the general public. If there is a membership then the regulations would
not apply.
Koppes said that she feels she has a lot of unanswered questions on this matter. She said she is not
sure that the regulations treat everyone equally across the city, especially in regard to liquor stores.
Busard said that zoning is not about making money for property owners but about successfully managing
growth in cities. Busard said that he felt the Commission was getting "wrapped around the axle" about
individual property owners when it is really about the city as a whole.
Payne said that one of her questions was what amount of property tax is currently generated by those
establishments, and whether the amount would stay the same if in the future the uses all became
conforming. Payne wondered if the property taxes and values would be lowered because clothing stores,
for example, could not generate the same income as a bar. Greenwood Hektoen cautioned the
Commission to avoid those types of issues as the Planning and Zoning Commission's considerations
should be more focused on what the best use of the land would be and how it fits in with the
Comprehensive Plan. She said she felt it would be more appropriate for City Council to examine such
considerations. Miklo advised that there would be a lot of speculation and assumptions in any answer
that was provided to Payne's question.
Weitzel asked Greenwood Hektoen to address whether or not all due process and notification has been
followed. Greenwood Hektoen said that all proper notice had been given.
Busard said that in terms of notice the Commission has done everything to the letter of the law. He said
he saw no reason for a deferral. Miklo noted that there were probably more articles about this issue than
any other recent zoning issue considered by the Commission in the Press Citizen, Gazette, and Des
Moines Register.
Weitzel said that he was mindful of the consultant's study which indicated that a lot of people shun
downtown because of the party atmosphere. Weitzel said he did not see the need for more time either.
Eastham said he was in favor of deferment. He said more often than not the Commission takes more
than one meeting to decide zoning code changes and he sees no reason not to do so in this case. He
said that the Commission has heard often from citizens who are dissatisfied with the City's notification
processes, which doesn't seem to be particularly effective. Eastham said nothing is lost in considering
the matter further, and much is gained in hearing the perspectives of others.
Freerks agreed that more time should be taken. Freerks said that this does not mean that there is not a
problem here that needs to be addressed. Freerks said there is clearly a huge problem in the community
with over consumption of alcohol and the City Council has asked the Commission to work on that in their
capacity. Freerks said that it is the problem of over consumption of alcohol that the Council is really trying
to address. Freerks said that ideas are talked about from time to time to solve this problem, and that this
is one idea being talked about now. Freerks said that underage drinking and the way it affects the
downtown is what the Commission is considering in relation to the Comprehensive Plan and the ways in
which they want the community to grow. She said that she is interested in hearing some of the numbers
that had been requested during the course of the meeting in order to clarify things in her mind. Freerks
said she was glad to have had the perspective of all the public that had spoken, and that she thinks more
discussion is needed. The issue is complex and has many considerations, however, she noted, no one
else is offering better ideas and she would ask the public present to think about that and bring forth their
own solutions.
Planning and Zoning Commission
March 5, 2009 -Formal
Page 12
Greenwood Hektoen noted that the affect of a revocation on the licensee is that they cannot get another
license for two years; the affect on the premises is that it cannot be licensed for one year.
Eastham asked if this meant effectively that the owner of that building could not have a licensed drinking
establishment for one year. Greenwood Hektoen said this was correct: that address could not be
relicensed for one year.
Payne said that this would mean the use of the building would have to be changed if there was a
revocation. Greenwood Hektoen said this was correct.
Koppes clarified that a legally non-conforming use can remodel so long as the footprint of the building is
not changed.
Weitzel said that he had been persuaded by the discussion of others and could now see that a deferral
was in order.
A vote was taken and the motion to defer the matter until the April 2"d meeting was passed 5-1
(Busard voting against deferral; Plahutnik absent).
REZONING ITEM:
REZ09-00002: Discussion of an application submitted by City of Iowa City for a rezoning from
Interim Development (ID-1) zone to General Industrial (I-1) zone for approximately 100 acres of
property located on 420th Street SE, west of Taft Avenue.
This property was recently before the Commission for annexation. The intention with the Interim
Development (ID-1) zone is that the property is intended for industrial use at such time as the City has
extended services to the property. At this time, the City has had interest expressed by an industrial use
for the property -especially the property that surrounds 420th Street south of the railroad-so the City
wishes to move forward with extending services to the property and rezoning it for industrial development.
The City has plans to extend water and sewer services to the property this fiscal year, as well as to
improve the road. The city has hired a consultant to come up with a subdivision plan for this property
giving maximum access to the rail-line and the arterial street system.
Freerks asked if there were questions for Staff.
Eastham asked if the City would in fact improve all of 420th Street from its intersection with Highway 6 to
the eastern boundaries of the current city limit. Howard said this was correct. Eastham asked if this
improvement would occur before any land in the area is sold to an industrial user. Howard said she was
not sure it would be done before it was sold but that it would be done prior to opening for business.
The public hearing was opened.
As no one wished to speak the public hearing was closed.
Busard motioned to approve the rezoning.
Weitzel seconded.
Eastham asked if the City would go ahead and rent for agricultural purposes the parcel south of 420th
Street. Howard said she did not know. Miklo said that there has some discussion about it, but that it is a
portion they are hoping to develop.
Weitzel said he felt this rezoning met the goals for the Comprehensive Plan and intended to vote in favor
of it.
Planning and Zoning Commission
March 5, 2009 -Formal
Page 13
Freerks said she too felt the rezoning was in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and that she
believed it would be a nice addition to the city.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0 (Plahutnik absent).
COUNTY REZONING ITEMS:
CZ09-00001: Discussion of an application submitted by Michael Furman for a rezoning of 40 acres
from County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R3) zone located at 3051 Buchmayer Bend NE.
The applicant has requested an indefinite deferral.
Weitzel motioned to defer.
Koppes seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0 (Busard abstained; Plahutnik absent).
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: February 2 8 February 5, 2009:
Eastham motioned to accept the minutes.
Busard seconded.
The minutes were approved on a vote of 6-0 (Plahutnik absent).
ELECTION OF OFFICERS:
Freerks said that this would be postponed until the next meeting to make sure everyone is present.
OTHER:
Miklo noted that Commissioners had received a survey from the Human Rights Commission. Miklo said
that if Commissioners had a chance to fill it out this evening, and envelope would be passed to collect
them.
Miklo provided a copy to all Commissioners of the Planning Commissioner's Journal which talks about the
planning of school locations.
ADJOURNMENT:
Payne motioned to adjourn.
Eastham seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 6-0 vote at 9:20 p.m. (Plahutnik absent).
Iowa City Planning 8 Zoning Commission
Attendance Record
2009
Name Term
Ex ires
1/15
2/5
3/5
J. Busard 05/11 X x X
C. Eastham 05/11 X X X
A. Freerks 05/13 x x x
E. Ko es 05/12 O/E X X
M. Pa ne 05/10 X O/E X
W Plahutnik 05/10 X X O/E
T. Weitzel 05/13 X X X
INFr1RM01 MEETING
Name Term
Ex ires
1N2
212
312
J. Busard 05/11 O/E X X
C. Eastham 05/11 x X X
A. Freerks 05/13 x X X
E. Ko es 05/12 O/E X X
M. Pa ne 05/10 X x X
W. Plahutnik 05/10 X X X
T. Weitzel 05/13 O/E X X
Key:
X =Present
O =Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
5b 2
FINAL
MINUTES
City of Iowa City Animal Care Task Force
March 26th, 2009 - 5:30 P.M.
ICPL Room E
Call to Order: Meeting called to order at 5:35 p.m.
Members Present: Pat Farrant, Teresa Kopel, Jane McCune, Paula Kelly, Lisa
Drahozal Pooley
Members Absent:
Staff Present:
Others Present: Calista and George Hospodarsky, I,iz Ford
Recommendations to City Council:
Approval of Minutes/Consent Calendar:
1. February 5th, 2009 minutes unanimously approved as submitted via email.
Old Business:
2. Flood update and Center plans
Lisa Drahozal Pooley reported information from a phone call earlier in the day
from Misha Goodman, who was unable to attend the meeting. Misha reported that they
are still awaiting paperwork from FEMA for the rebuilding of the shelter. She and the
City Manger are looking at land currently owned by the city. The final decision lies
with the City Manager and City Council.
Paula Kelly will write a draft letter to the City Manager, City Council, Rick Wyss and
Misha Goodman encouraging a progressive outlook for a new shelter.
The Task Force agreed that they want to be a presence at any City Council meetings
where the new shelter design and placement are to be discussed.
3. Clarify Task Force definition and direction
The Task Force members expressed concern and disappointment that very little seems to
have been accomplished during their term which terminates in June 2009 and that they
have not made any recommendations to City Council -- in part due to several crises at the
shelter. They are also concerned that Misha Goodman rarely has time to spend on
Director duties as she is so busy, and necessarily so, with other tasks due to being
shorthanded or swamped with the daily activities of the shelter.
The Task Force wondered if it might be possible to pinpoint some duties that Misha has
had to take on that could be done by volunteers to help free up her time for duties that
only she has the authority and knowledge to handle. Liz Ford, the shelter's Volunteer
Coordinator, could help to find volunteers for these tasks.
As for a future Task Force, the members did not feel that more people on the task
force would necessarily be a good idea. If Misha is continually swamped due to an
overly heavy workload, more people on the task force won't make a difference.
The Task Force felt that the group should continue in some capacity and that a separate
committee/task force/group should be developed to address planning for the new shelter.
Different ideas were considered as to what the continuing Task Force should look like
and what duties should be assigned to it, but no consensus was reached.
4. Fees/ordinances/permits
Postponed until the next meeting.
5. The Feral Cat Pilot Project
Misha relayed by phone that there are complaints about feral cats by businesses in the
pilot area.
The Task Force devised a 4 part plan concerning this issue;
1) Find out from Misha what the specific complaints are.
2) Find out from Mary Blount how many of the other businesses expressed interest in
participating.
3) Bring together all parties for Mary Blount's presentation and emphasize that trapping
(and euthanizing or relocating) the cats will not solve the problem - in fact, it will cause a
vacuum and will open the door for other feral (and unvaccinated) cats to come in and
claim the property.
4) As a last resort, there could be a mass effort to relocate the cats if necessary but as
noted above, this would not solve the problem, only prolong it.
PATV is willing to do a documentary on this project per Liz Ford.
2
Possible sources of funds for the project: Spay Iowa, a friend of one of the Task Force
members, donations.
Volunteers would be needed to help trap and feed the cats.
6. Local Law Enforcement Issues
Local law enforcement issues were discussed.
New Business:
1. Per Misha's phone call, Petco is now adopting out rabbits from the shelter instead of
buying rabbits to sell! They are also adopting out some degus that were at the shelter.
Applications for adoptions are faxed to the shelter for approval. The Task Force
applauds Petco's participation in this effort.
2. Liz Ford announced that the shelter is going Orange to fight animal cruelty with the
ASPCA's national campaign.
3. Also it was announced that the Obermann Center will be sponsoring a dinner
conversation Thursday, April 16, exploring the question, "Are animals sentient beings?"
Paula Kelly raised the concern that the event will be co-sponsored by Petland.
Task Force Member Comment:
Staff Comment:
Citizen Comment:
7:02 p.m. meeting adjourned.
5b 3
MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
THURSDAY, MARCH 12, 2009
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
APPROVED
MEMBERS PRESENT: Esther Baker, Thomas Baldridge, William Downing, Lindsay Bunting Eubanks, Jim
Ponto, Ginalie Swaim, Alicia Trimble, Frank Wagner
MEMBERS ABSENT: Carl Hirschman, Pam Michaud
STAFF PRESENT: Christina Kuecker
OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Bulmahn, Alan denBelyker, Frank Durham, Steve Hedlund, Will Jennings, Walter
Kopsa, Bill Lake, Phil Launspach, Jim Niebuhr, Michael Oliveira, Judith Pascoe, Wally
Plahutnik, Mark Russo, Catherine Schneider, Claire Sponsler
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Bunting Eubanks called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS:
409 Summit Street.
Kuecker described the proposal for the project at 409 Summit Street. Regarding the spiral staircase, she said she was
recommending against that, but she believes there is a way to accommodate the request on the opposite side, more
interior to the lot and probably more in keeping with the style of the house.
Kuecker said that staff recommends approval of the enclosure of the porch and approval of the windows as shown in
the revised drawing. She said that the recommended motion in the staff report says that the final window and door
type and placement should be subject to staff approval, but she believes these are in keeping with the style of the
house.
Kuecker said the Commission could have a short brainstorming session with the applicant regarding how to
accommodate the egress. She stated that if a satisfactory solution is arrived at, this could be subject to staff
approval. Kuecker said, however, if the Commission cannot come to a satisfactory solution, the Commission might
want to postpone a decision on egress until the next meeting.
Durham, the owner of the property, said that presently the staircase inside the mudroom is too narrow and takes up
space used for storage. He said the spiral staircase seems to fit, but he is interested in discussion from the
Commission about how to accomplish the idea of a second means of egress.
Bunting Eubanks asked Durham if he is therefore tearing out the staircase currently in the mudroom. Durham
confirmed this. Bunting Eubanks said the Commission has no purview on the interior.
Bunting Eubanks asked if the staircase is just needed for egress. Durham said the primary concern is that there
should be a second point of egress for emergency. Bunting Eubanks asked if a ladder would be adequate to meet
code. Durham said he would be open to attaching a metal ladder there. He said he was not certain what the
requirements are.
Kuecker said she was uncertain what the building code requirements are with regard to a ladder. She added that
there are no guidelines in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines with regard to a ladder, so one would need
to look to the Secretary of the Interior Guidelines. Kuecker suggested that if a ladder is what the applicant would
want, he should discuss the issue with the Fire Department and the Building Department, in conjunction with the
Commission.
Historic Preservation Commission PRELIMINARY
Mazch 12, 2009
Page 2
Ponto said he thought it would be okay to have a metal ladder bolted to the side. He said that if a future owner
wanted to get rid of it, the ladder could be unbolted. Kuecker agreed that a ladder would be a reversible change,
which would be in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior Standards.
Swaim said it would also be less visible, but the way it is shown in the drawing gives the sense of the 1980s deck
added on. She said that if it can be made to blend with the house, then a ladder would be a great idea if it is
workable.
Durham said the real point is to be able to get out of the house. He said a ladder is a flexible approach. Baldridge
asked if there were any possibility of putting a spiral staircase inside the house. Durham responded that it would be
possible, but it would cost him space. He said the other thing is that from the other side there is a trap door entrance
to the side where he was going to put an exterior door, instead of having it inside the living room as it is right now.
Durham said the staircase is right over that so that if he put the spiral staircase in that area, it would cost him space
that is needed for storage. He said it could be done but is less preferable.
Bunting Eubanks stated that anything interior to the house is not under the Commission's purview. She said that if
the Commission gave the option for an external ladder, which would be within the Secretary of the Interior
Standards.
Bunting Eubanks said the concern is that a spiral staircase is a more difficult change to remove, because it becomes
more of a permanent structure and is external. She said it would detract from the style of the house. Bunting
Eubanks said the goal is to be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior Standards.
Swaim asked if the application mentions the exterior door to the basement. Kuecker replied that it is shown in the
drawing and referred to the drawing.
Russo stated that essentially there is a courtyard on the other side, and it is completely obscured from view except
from the backyard of the house to the north. He said that even if there were a little balcony, it is very private. He said
they are happy to move it around there; in fact his first drawing showed it there.
Russo said, however, that it made more sense, if the structure was to be built, to put it on the south side. He said he
would be happy to move it around to the north side. Russo said, however, that if one thinks about the intersection of
Burlington and Summit Streets, there is a large, Italianate white brick structure on the southeast side. He said the
second floor southeast corner window has a little metal balcony with a fire escape coming right down it. Russo said
that when he drew the little balcony, he was thinking the Commission might allow something that minimal where it
is maybe a metal structure, where the ladder is affixed to the wall. He said the whole point is for people to get out
safely in an emergency.
Russo said he thought a little balcony out there, if it were built to Commission specifications, would look nice and
would be a little private balcony coming off of that second floor room. He said it is a tucked-away area. Russo said
he and the owner are willing to do whatever the Commission wants, but they are not able to put it inside. He added
that it has to be easy to use.
Bunting Eubanks asked if the balcony would have to be wood. Kuecker said that if this were on the front of the
house, metal may not be appropriate, but in this rear, isolated area, a minimalist metal would be acceptable.
Kuecker asked if the proposal is for a window or door access to the balcony. Russo stated that the contractor, Dan
Lammers, feels that a window would work. Russo said that in the original drawings, if this is going to be a balcony,
one would want a door. He said that if it is inappropriate to have a door, then he would just limit the size and use of
the balcony to an egress structure. Kuecker stated that if a future owner wanted to remove the balcony, a window
would be more appropriate.
MOTION: Swaim moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the proposal for 409 Summit Street,
with the following conditions: the applicant use double hung windows that are similar to other windows in the
house, instead of transom windows; final window and door type and placement being subject to staff
approval; and that instead of the spiral staircase, the applicant install a metal fire escape ladder or a balcony
with the final details to be worked out with staff. Baker seconded the motion.
Historic Preservation Commission PRELIMINARY
March 12, 2009
Page 3
Wagner asked if there would be a hole in the balcony to go down. Russo confirmed this and said that something is
within the space of the balcony.
AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION: Swaim moved to amend the motion to clarify that the ladder or
balcony shall be on the north elevation of the house. Baker seconded the amendment. The motion carried on
a vote of 8-0.
Russo asked if he should come up with a drawing of what the owner would like to put up there. Bunting Eubanks
confirmed this and said that the motion approves a ladder or a balcony with final approval by Kuecker.
815 Washington Street.
Kuecker said this project involves the relocation of a retaining wall. She said the retaining wall runs along the
eastern portion of the property and becomes integrated into the columns of the carport as it goes under the house,
and then it continues on towards the rear of the property. Kuecker said the retaining wall is structurally failing, and it
needs to be rebuilt. She said the driveway is currently just over eight feet wide, which is a tight fit for many modern
cars.
Kuecker said the applicant would like to move the retaining wall to the property line, which is three feet to the east,
and is trying to come up with some solution for dealing with the columns. She said the applicant is not asking for
approval of the columns at this point and is trying to work out some things with building setbacks, etc. Kuecker said
that for now the applicant would like to get approval for moving the retaining wall three feet to the property line and
widening the brick driveway.
Kuecker said that last summer the applicant received approval to reconstruct the retaining walls on some portions of
the property and was able to find matching brick that was a good match.
Kuecker showed a drawing of how the property looks now and a drawing of how the property would look with the
retaining wall moved over. She showed other photographs of the property.
Niebuhr, the contractor for this project, said there are a lot of technical, small issues involved with this. He said that
at this time, the applicant is seeking approval to move, which is allowable under the Zoning Code, the retaining wall
over to the property line. Niebuhr said it is narrow drive.
Niebuhr said that he is currently talking with the Planning and Zoning Department trying to work around the
setbacks. He said that to get this project started for the summer season, he wanted to get at least the front portion
done if possible.
Niebuhr said that the brick that is on there is also on the drive itself. He said the brick in the drive is a loose fit, and
it tends to wear down. Niebuhr said he was told to expect about 50% attrition when the wall is moved, so he hopes
to address that by using a matching sized brick off the driveway in the reconstruction and facing of the wall and then
using a Purington paver of a larger size that is appropriate for that driveway.
Baldridge asked about the widening of the arch. He said the existing elevation shows eight feet three inches, and
then it is widened by three, but the part above it stays the same.
Niebuhr replied that it is confusing because the driveway is what the dimension lines are indicating. He said that at
this time, the arch itself is remaining the same. Kuecker said that essentially the columns would be coming down
into the driveway so that one could pull up and be able to open the car doors, but the car could not open the doors
along the entire driveway.
Wagner referred to the photograph that shows the apron coming off the street. He said it might look nicer to have it
go over. He asked if that is brick, and Kuecker confirmed this.
MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for an application for 815 Washington
Street to move the retaining wall approximately three feet to the east and widen the existing driveway, with
the new retaining wall to match the existing retaining wall in material, color, joint profile, mortar color,
height, and overall appearance. Wagner seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0.
Historic Preservation Commission
March 12, 2009
Page 4
430 Oakland Avenue.
PRELIMINARY
Kuecker said the Commission has looked at this property a few times in the past. She said that this application is a
variation on a previously approved addition, which was athree-story addition with a gambrel roof. Kuecker said the
applicant has built and finished the first story and would like approval of what was done, which is the addition as
constructed.
Kuecker said the applicant did mimic the roofline on the north elevation, extending it a few feet as approved, and the
roofline was approved in the previous application. She said the reason for the different roofline for one portion of
the addition is because the owner wanted to reuse the windows from one wall and move them to the addition, as
approved in the application. Kuecker said that in staff's opinion, this addition is congruent with the style of the
house, and staff is recommending approval of the addition as built.
MOTION: Baker moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 430 Oakland Avenue as
presented in the application. Swaim seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0.
617 Ronalds Street.
Kuecker stated that the proposal for this house is for a new deck on the rear of the property. She said there are quite
a few projects occurring right now on this house, including new windows. Kuecker said that some other projects for
this house have already been approved.
Kuecker showed a front view of the house. She said that part of the application is to remove the side deck and then
construct the new deck. Kuecker said it would be an elevated deck in the proposed location. She said one
requirement for a deck is that it needs to be set back from the side elevation. Kuecker said it is set back on one
elevation. She said it is not set back directly from the side but is set back from the furthest most elevation, and in
staff s opinion, that meets the guidelines.
Kuecker said the other requirement is that the balustrade has a top and bottom rail and the balusters are tied into
those. She said the elevations do show this. Kuecker said the applicant would like the option of using a composite
material such as Trex, rather than using wood. She said the Commission has approved that in the past, and staff
believes it is appropriate in this application. Kuecker said that staff recommends approval as stated in the application
with the door specifications subject to staff approval.
Oliveira, the owner of the house, said that he has been before the Commission in the past. He said he wanted to
extend the deck to the back and to try to use the side door. Oliveira said to try to wrap it around was too much, and
it seems better to just put it right off the back instead of trying to rebuild it. He said he plans to use a composite door
with awood-type molding on it. Oliveira talked about moving the existing door when he moves the deck.
MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the proposal for 617 Ronalds Street
as presented in the application, with the condition that the door specifications are subject to staff approval.
Baldridge seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0.
Ponto said he thinks this will look a lot better than the side deck.
PUBLIC HEARING: NORTHSIDE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
Discussion of an Application Submitted by the Northside Neighborhood Association to Designate a Northside
Historic District.
Bunting Eubanks said that any citizen wishing to make comments should come to the microphone, sign in, and limit
comments to five minutes.
Kuecker said that the application for the proposed Northside Historic District was submitted by the Northside
Neighborhood Association. She said there have been a few other attempts to designate a Northside Historic District
that for various reasons have failed, although there is a National Register Historic District in this proposed district
that has been approved by the National Park Service. Kuecker said it is called the Gilbert Street/Linn Street Historic
District, and a copy of the nomination is included in the packet.
Historic Preservation Commission PRELIMINARY
March 12, 2009
Page 5
Kuecker said that letters were sent to property owners within the proposed district and those with property within
300 feet of the proposed district. She said the map on the back of the letter was not the final map that the applicant
had decided on. Kuecker showed the boundary that the Northside Neighborhood Association would like to use for
the district, focusing primarily on Linn Street, Gilbert Street, and Fairchild Street.
Kuecker said the light gray shaded area is the National Register area, and staff is recommending that, because the
National Register Historic District has already proven its merit at the national level, that that entire area should be
included in the historic district. She asked the Commission to consider the two alternatives -the one proposed by
the neighborhood and the area recommended by staff.
Kuecker said that this neighborhood is one of the oldest areas of town, with many different styles of architecture that
are prevalent throughout Iowa City, but there is a concentration of such in this neighborhood. She said that in the
neighborhood's proposed district, there are 96 properties, 81% of which contribute to the historic character of the
neighborhood. Kuecker said that in the staff recommended boundaries there are 121 properties, and 83.5% of those
properties contribute to the historic quality of the neighborhood.
Kuecker said that the historic preservation guidelines would apply to this area if it is designated a historic district.
She added that staff recommends that the Northside Neighborhood Guidelines that have been compiled for the
Brown Street Historic District also apply to this area.
Kuecker said that the City has a Comprehensive Plan, and part of that Plan is the Historic Preservation Plan. She
said the preservation of this neighborhood is listed as a priority in the overreaching Comprehensive Plan, the
Historic Preservation Plan, and the recently adopted Central District Plan. Kuecker said it is therefore upheld by
many of the documents that the City Council has already adopted.
Kuecker said that staff recommends approval of the district and would like the Commission to consider approval of
the staff-recommended historic district, because it has already proven its merit at the national level. She said that
after the public hearing, staff would send a report to the State Historic Preservation Office to solicit its comments,
and there will be a public hearing at the Planning and Zoning Commission level. Kuecker said then there will be a
public hearing at the City Council level.
Public hearing open.
Pascoe, the representative of the Northside Neighborhood Association, said that the application pretty well expresses
the Association's wishes. She said the NNA had looked at both versions. The Association had proposed a slightly
smaller area but does accept staff s advice about the boundaries just making sense in terms of the rationale for the
historic area. Pascoe said the Neighborhood Association does not oppose the boundaries proposed by staff.
Bunting Eubanks asked if there were a reason the Association cut the area in some places. Pascoe replied that there
is probably not awell-defined reason. She said the Association was partially thinking about where the strongest
opposition to the nomination would be. Pascoe said this is such an old part of the City, and there are so many
properties under pressure in the neighborhood. She said there are the obvious good results for the neighborhood
from having the historic structures preserved.
Bunting Eubanks asked if it would be possible for the Commission to approve both boundaries as an option for the
next level of consideration. Kuecker responded that the Historic Preservation Commission level is where it is
appropriate to make the boundary decision. She said that if the Planning and Zoning Commission doesn't agree with
the boundaries, it would send this back to the Historic Preservation Commission before it would go on to City
Council.
Sponsler said that she had been involved in previous efforts to have this area designated as a local historic district.
At that time, she was excited when it passed through the Historic Preservation Commission and Planning and
Zoning Commission and was very disappointed to find that it did not quite make it through City Council for the final
vote. She said that now she is excited that the neighborhood has decided to once again go forward with this plan. .
Sponsler said this is a natural next step from the National Historic designation that the neighborhood has. She said it
provides a really wonderful opportunity for the City to protect one of its oldest neighborhoods. Sponsler said that
owner occupied residents overwhelmingly support this designation).
Historic Preservation Commission PRELIMINARY
March 12, 2009
Page 6
Bulmahn referred to the corner of Church and Van Buren and asked if it is no longer within the proposed district.
Kuecker confirmed this.
Hedlund said that he owns two properties on Fairchild Street. He said he has owned the properties since the 1970s,
and the whole block now is all rentals. Hedlund said that it has become a slum; it is absolutely trashed. He said that
the only historical house in that area was sold, and a bunch of kids are living there now.
Hedlund said that the people who live there can't afford to fix the properties up any more because of the taxing
problem. He said he thinks that by doing this, there is no way this is going to improve; it will just get worse and
worse. Hedlund said he thinks what the City is trying to do is anti-productive.
Hedlund stated that an area like this should be excluded when there is no possible hope that anything historic is
going to happen out there. He said the Commission needs to look at each of these areas and be more selective.
Hedlund said he would like the area to look better.
Downing said that recent experience has shown otherwise. He said that there are a couple of neighborhoods around
Iowa City and around the country that have received historic preservation designations, which tends to quickly lift a
slum situation. Downing said it does happen that when people are not willing to spend money, they sell their
property to cash out, and someone who does care about the property takes it over and rehabilitates it. He said the
designation isn't affix-all, but it does provide some support to the neighborhood.
Bunting Eubanks said the designated area along Iowa Avenue was affected by the tornado. She said the property
owners were able to access funding, and it was really rebuilt nicely even though it is primarily a rental
neighborhood.
Schneider said that she lives on Church Street. Schneider said that her house is 110 years old. She said that the area
has gone through this process several times, and she hopes that the designation finally goes through.
Jennings stated that he and his wife own and occupy a house on Fairchild Street and are in favor of the designation.
Jennings said that they have found historic preservation to be a beneficial and cooperative process. Jennings said
that this is the sort of thing that does facilitate owner-occupier work in the neighborhood.
Jennings said that he balks at constantly referring to this area as only a student neighborhood. He said that one of
the things that is offered here is affordable housing for families. Jennings said these are properties that are close to
downtown, the University, parks, school -all things that represent long-term investment.
Launspach said that his father purchased a property on Davenport Street in 1960. He said that since then the
property really hasn't changed. Launspach said that he is not part of the Northside Neighborhood Association, so he
doesn't have any idea about the discussions that have gone on there before.
Launspach said one concern he has is that the proposed boundary that was sent out is not either boundary shown
tonight. He said he is seeing three different maps, trying to determine which properties are involved and which are
not.
Launspach said that with the original picture, he took the time to drive through the whole area. He said his biggest
concern is that the options for siding in the guidelines are non-maintenance free. Launspach said that cement siding
would be painted and wooden siding needs to be painted. He said that he went through the area originally shown,
and there are 173 homes in the area. Launspach said that of those 173 homes, 96 of them have some form of
maintenance-free siding, whether it is aluminum, vinyl, asbestos, or steel. He said he is concerned about the fact that
a lot of people don't realize just what it is to live in a historic district.
Launspach said that in the 800 block of Iowa Avenue there was a property that had aluminum siding on it, and it was
replaced it with vinyl siding. He said he did not know how that worked, because it is a conservation district, so
perhaps special exceptions were made for the tornado or flooding. Launspach said his concern is that there are a lot
of people with property in this area who probably don't understand the implications.
Launspach said that he is not against historic preservation. He said he hasn't changed his house in 50 years.
Launspach said he just wants to think that everyone who is going to be part of this agrees with it. He said that he
Historic Preservation Commission PRELIMINARY
March 12, 2009
Page 7
advocates that the Northside District map be more accurate, because they actually have an association and get
together and talk about these things. Launspach said that to include other properties that aren't a part of the
Association really doesn't allow input from those property owners.
Bunting Eubanks said that the map that was sent out was just a larger boundary, and that the boundaries shown
tonight are within the boundary sent out. She said that every property owner with a property on the map and within
300 feet of the boundary was notified. Kuecker said it was her error that the wrong map was sent out. She showed
the map that should have been sent out and noted that it has a smaller boundary, as does the staff boundary, than the
boundaries on the map that was sent out.
Regarding the siding issue, Bunting Eubanks said that it only comes into play when a homeowner wants to put
synthetic siding over the top of wood. She said that when the vinyl is already there, it doesn't have to be removed.
Bunting Eubanks said that it also depends on whether the structure is contributing or non-contributing.
Launspach asked if the Commission has looked at the possibilities for approval of some type of maintenance free
siding. He said that when he went through the area, he could not initially tell if the siding was vinyl or wood on a lot
of the houses except for a lot of them that had paint and he knew they were wood right away.
Bunting Eubanks said that the standards are set by the Secretary of the Interior. She said that although vinyl is
deemed to be maintenance free, it actually only lasts 15 to 20 years before it starts to come apart. Bunting Eubanks
said that wood, if maintained, is a more durable material.
Pascoe said that she had a point of clarification. She said that the entire area is part of the Northside Neighborhood
Association and that no one is excluded. Pascoe said that it is a group of neighbors that try to organize things in the
best interest of the neighborhood. She said that when the neighborhood holds any kind of event, the Association
sends notice out to every single property owner in the neighborhood.
Pasco said that in addition, representatives from the neighborhood actually walked around and left notification on
everyone's property. Pascoe said the Association has tried to be very, very inclusive.
Kopsa said that he owns two properties on Davenport Street. He asked how many property owners were at the
meeting when the Northside Neighborhood Association voted on this issue. Pascoe responded that there were
probably about 20 property owners there. Kopsa asked how many properties are in this area. Kuecker said there are
121 properties in the staff proposed district.
Kopsa said that he never received notification of the meeting. He said the Commission is proceeding with this based
on a recommendation of around 20 property owners in the neighborhood out of 120 properties. Bunting Eubanks
responded that the Commission, as a governing body, responds to any citizen to speak before it; it doesn't matter the
number.
Kopsa said it is not right to freeze this large of an area based on the desires of 20 or 30 property owners. Bunting
Eubanks said that owners were notified because citizens in that neighborhood formed a group to ask the
Commission to consider this. She said that once the Commission is asked to consider something, the City notifies
everyone who would be affected by the decision. Bunting Eubanks said the Commission did not have anything to do
with the neighborhood procedures, because a group of public citizens is not required to make public notice.
Kopsa asked, if a property is destroyed, if it could be put back the way it was. He said that if a property is not in a
district, as long as the damage is less than the assessed valuation of the improvement, the owner can rebuild it
exactly the way it was. Kopsa asked how a historic preservation district would impact this, should a property be
destroyed.
Kuecker said the percentage would be the same as it would be for any other area of town. She said that during the
tornado, there were some properties that were destroyed beyond repair, beyond a certain percentage. Kuecker said
they were required to rebuild to the historic preservation guidelines.
Kopsa asked if insurance would normally cover cost of replacement. Kuecker stated that after the tornado, quite a
few owners were able to get larger insurance settlements or a State grant to cover the difference.
Historic Preservation Commission
March 12, 2009
Page 8
PRELIMINARY
Kopsa said it is wrong to freeze this large of an area with so many different types of properties
Hedlund asked if there is a process, by which an owner could exempt his property from inclusion. He said that his
properties are non-historic and non-contributing. Bunting Eubanks said that if the property is non-contributing, there
are different rules that it would be governed by; it wouldn't be held to the same standards.
Kuecker said that the boundaries are not set until the district is passed by the City Council. She said that it is still
possible to change the boundaries, but there would need to be a reason to exclude a property. Kuecker said,
however, that a historic district does need to be contiguous -properties in the center could not be excluded.
Hedlund asked how he would go about asking to be excluded. Kuecker suggested writing a notarized letter of
opposition or request to change the boundaries and send it to the City Clerk. She said also that the Commission
could exclude or omit properties from the boundary when the recommendation is made.
Bunting Eubanks asked Hedlund to point his properties out on the map. Hedlund did so and stated that he owns 207,
209, and 215 East Fairchild, actually two properties. Bunting Eubanks said that those would be non-contributing
properties in the district, which means that exceptions to the guidelines would be allowed for those properties.
Hedlund pointed out that if he has a fire, he would not want to be held to building to historic standards. Kuecker said
that it would depend on what percentage of the house the fire destroyed. She said that if the whole house was
destroyed, the new building would need to be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. Hedlund said that
is his problem; that is just not right.
Hedlund said the buildings are non-contributing in the first place and asked if he would have to go back and make
them historic. Bunting Eubanks said that Hedlund would just have to construct a building that is compatible with the
neighborhood.
Lake said that he owns a key contributing property on East Davenport. He said it sounds like he would be under a
totally different set of rules for this whole thing. Lake said that he has all wood siding, but his concern is what he
could put on the building if he needed to replace siding. He said there is no redwood any more, and the available
cedar is not of good quality.
Bunting Eubanks answered that there are synthetic sidings that are approved. She said that fiber cement board siding
is a valid alternative to wood. Bunting Eubanks said the Commission encourages salvage being used or reusing old
siding, but sometimes that is not possible. She said in that case, fiber cement board siding has been approved.
Lake said that he has lived in Iowa City his whole life and has talked to a lot of people who have had dealings with
this historic preservation thing. He said that a lot of them are really negative for the reason that they can't improve
their property without going through the process of getting it approved. Lake said he is really concerned about
having to go through a different set of rules. He said he feels like he should have a choice.
Bunting Eubanks said that when it comes to historic preservation, it doesn't mean that the Commission will expect a
homeowner to keep everything exactly the way it was. She said that lots of additions have been approved. Bunting
Eubanks pointed out the example of the ladder for the first application and how it involves reworking ideas to keep
the character of the house intact. She said the process is not about trying to limit modern usage of the building.
Bunting Eubanks said that sometimes people don't necessarily understand what would be a historic way in which to
redo their homes. She said that an owner can make a building energy efficient, but there are ways to do that that
don't detract from the exterior of the building.
Lake said one of the contractors for an Iowa Avenue property wanted to use exterior foam to better the energy
efficiency of the house but was not allowed to do it. He said it wasn't allowed because then the windows would
have to be built out and covered and some other reasons.
Lake said that he is not against historic preservation and thinks it looks kind of neat to see the old houses brought
back. He said that he keeps his properties up and is very hands on, even though his properties are rental properties.
Lake said he cares about his properties but just doesn't want to be under the scrutiny of the Historic Preservation
Historic Preservation Commission PRELIMINARY
March 12, 2009
Page 9
Commission to do certain things. He said they are his properties, and he feels the property owners should have a
choice as to whether their property should be in a district.
Lake said that if a property owner doesn't have a big budget for a property in a historic preservation district, then he
has to do what he can do to make the property presentable but may not have enough money to invest in bigger
improvements.
Bunting Eubanks said that except for four at-large Commissioners, the people on the Commission each represent a
historic district. She said there is representation. She said that many of the people on the Commission own older
homes, and the idea of a contiguous boundary makes the district cohesive.
Lake said there are still people who will keep their houses the way they are if they get a choice. He said that he is
not planning on changing his.
Swaim said that there were many different situations on Iowa Avenue in the conditions of the properties and the
contractors and owners. She encouraged Lake to check the facts regarding any certain situation that he has heard
about. Swaim said that Kuecker could give the information and facts regarding any particular situation, because
there were so many different issues there.
Lake said there was a house with steel siding that had vinyl put back on it. He said it sounds like they were not under
Commission scrutiny, whereas he would be with a key, contributing structure. Lake said that if something happened
to the house, he is not a fan of the cement board that has been recommended. He said that he has seen one instance
where the material literally fell apart when subjected to moisture.
Swaim said that there are always many landlords that protest this. She said she wondered if they know what the
rules are and if they believe them to be more restrictive than they really are.
Kopsa said that one of his properties has an old-style seamed roof on it. He said that he sees new steel roofs and
asked if those are approved for use. Kuecker said that they are. Kopsa asked if vinyl clad windows are allowed.
Kuecker said that vinyl clad windows are disallowed by the National Park Service. She said that there are exceptions
for anon-contributing structure.
Kopsa asked if, once a property is in a district, the rules are set somewhere else. Kuecker replied that the
Commission comes up with specific Iowa City guidelines, but all of them go back to the Secretary of the Interior
Standards. Kopsa asked about metal doors. Kuecker replied that they have been allowed.
Kopsa asked about waterproof materials for decks and porches. Kuecker said the Commission just approved a deck
that was of composite material earlier in the meeting on a contributing property in the Brown Street Historic District.
She said that a composite material is usually not allowed on a front porch but may be acceptable for a rear porch or
deck on a contributing property.
Trimble added that just because there is one type of material doesn't mean it has to be replaced with the same type
of material. She said, for example, that a metal roof could be replaced with an asphalt roof.
Kopsa said that he has a rented attic that had hopelessly defective windows. He said that as soon as the district was
turned down the last time it was proposed, he put good vinyl-clad windows in there and updated the fire escape so
someone could get out if needed. Kopsa said that if he had not done that, there would be no real practical way of
improving that attic area.
Bunting Eubanks said that egress requirements would trump historic preservation. She said, however, that vinyl
windows might not have been acceptable. Downing said that Kopsa could have installed aluminum clad wood
windows. Kopsa asked why then he cannot put vinyl siding on the house itself. Downing said that vinyl windows
and vinyl siding have been shown to not be durable. Kopsa said that he has owned a house that has vinyl siding on
it for 20 to 30 years. Downing said that they do not hold paint. Kopsa said that they don't need to hold paint,
because they are already painted. Kopsa said that vinyl siding holds paint.
Swaim said that there are other problems in that sometimes during the installation of vinyl siding, the installer has to
cut off trim on the house that is part of the architectural signature. Kopsa said that the installer wouldn't have to.
Historic Preservation Commission PRELIMINARY
March l2, 2009
Page l0
Swaim said that the installer wouldn't have to, but oftentimes that is what happens. Kopsa asked if the Commission
would allow the vinyl siding if it could control for that.
Swaim said the project on Iowa Avenue is an individual case. She said that another thing that has been found over
and over again is that there are problems with moisture behind the vinyl siding. Swaim stated that then if a future
owner wanted to take the vinyl off, there would be moisture deterioration of the wood siding.
Kopsa said that a lot of new houses are built with these materials, and they don't seem to have problems. Downing
said that they are also built with a vapor barrier, but the older houses were not. He said that then the attic insulation
and exterior surface can contribute to water vapor building up inside the wall and simply rotting away the structure
from the inside.
Bunting Eubanks said that there have been problems with communicating just what the historic preservation
standards are. She said that in an effort to clarify that, there will be a forum aired on television to summarize what is
and is not allowed. Bunting Eubanks said the standards come from the Secretary of the Interior, which uses
information from engineers and architects who test these materials over years. She said the program will be aired
March 26.
Plahutnik stated that he owns a property on North Gilbert Street. He asked if the forum/program could be made
available on a CD so that people could view it when they have time. Bunting Eubanks said that the forum will be on
line, perhaps two weeks after its airing date.
Plahutnik said that he is on the Planning and Zoning Commission and was at the meeting to listen to public input.
He reminded people that no one who lives in Iowa City can do whatever he wants to his house. Plahutnik said that
every single house in the City is governed by some zoning code. He said that the code is more stringent in some
areas and more lax in others, but everyone in the City is subject to the zoning code.
Schneider said the Association is trying to get word out about what the historic designation would mean. She said
that there will be a follow up Neighborhood meeting on March 25`h at 7 p.m. in Horace Mann School. Schneider
said the Association plans to have experts there to answer questions.
Pascoe said that she has talked to a lot of people about this. She said there does seem to be a lot of information out
there that makes it seem like there are more restrictions than there actually are. Pascoe said that the Mr. Hedlund
refers to his area as slums, but she believes that the 200 block of Fairchild is lovely. She said that there is some
student housing there, but there are also a lot of lovely houses that she would like to see stay in that kind of
condition.
Pascoe said it has been demonstrated that property values tend to go up in historic districts. She said, for example,
that on Brown and Ronalds Streets where there is a historic district, most would agree that in general, the historic
character of that area has been maintained and that those houses have appreciated at a faster rate than in some other
areas of the North Side. Pascoe said that if part of the reason for having property on the North Side is investment,
which is true for many people, having historic district designation should be a confidence builder. She asked if the
worry about increased requirements and expense of maintenance is so strong that it would overrule the possible
increased investment value a property owner would have.
Pascoe said that appears to be a real concern about not being able to do certain things with the property, but many
are outstanding property owners doing things that the neighborhood would like people to do anyway.
DenBelyker said that he owns a property on North Gilbert Street. He said that if a tornado would have hit this area,
since it is not a historic district yet, it could have been turned into apartments. Kuecker said that the area is currently
zoned RNS-l2, which is asingle-family designation, so any new buildings would have to meet the zoning code
requirement if a building were destroyed. DenBelyker said that there is an apartment complex on Fairchild and
Gilbert. Kuecker said that was built before the area was rezoned to RNS-12.
DenBelyker said that he has also been kicked out of two different apartments he recently purchased. He said that in
both cases the back yards were turned into concrete, and he was evicted. DenBelyker said that the whole reason for
it was to pack more people into these areas.
Historic Preservation Commission PRELIMINARY
March 12, 2009
Page 11
Baldridge said there are restrictions on the number of people who can live in a rented unit in a particular zone. He
said that sometimes that is exceeded by a landlord or tenants.
Bunting Eubanks said that there is evidence that when a Historic District Overlay is enacted, the neighborhood
stabilizes. She added that it doesn't tend to pull further back; it tends to improve, and more people move in who are
owner-occupiers.
Kopsa said that historic preservation has no effect on density, use or zoning. Kuecker said that is correct. He said
that then the number of units one could have all stays the same, regardless of historic preservation.
Kuecker said that when a City rezones an area to a historic district, the underlying zoning stays the same. She said
the historic district is an overlay.
Public hearing closed.
Bunting Eubanks thanked those who attended the meeting and those who made comments. She added that the
Commission does hear and take into consideration all concerns.
MOTION: Ponto moved that the Commission recommend approval of the proposed Northside Historic
District using the staff recommended boundaries that include the nationally designated district but removing
the properties at 207 Fairchild and 215 Fairchild from the proposed district, because they are not
contributing properties and one of them is anon-historic property. Swaim seconded the motion.
Swaim said that she lived in this neighborhood in the 1970s when she was a student. She said she chose to live in the
neighborhood not only because it was close to the University but because it was an older neighborhood. Swaim said
she loved living there and took good care of the property, although she knows that is not the situation with every
student.
Swaim said it was not long a8er that that old houses were being torn down and some apartment buildings showed
up. She said that even though she wasn't an owner or long-term resident, she was distressed by this, because to her it
was ruining her neighborhood. Swaim said that as she remembers, it was halted only because the City put a
moratorium on that area so that no more houses could be torn down nor apartment buildings put up, because the
neighborhood was at a kind of breaking point. She said this involved a point where the area could shi8 completely to
a neighborhood that didn't have the kind of quality, a sense of the past and a sense of stability, as it previously had.
Swaim said that this is a critical neighborhood in Iowa City. She said that if the moratorium hadn't been put in place,
the neighborhood would be completely different than it is now. Swaim said this is an opportunity to put another
layer of protection on the neighborhood.
Swaim said that the people who put on the moratorium in the 1970s were not just thinking about the neighborhood;
they were thinking about it in terms of the future residents in Iowa City. She said that a lot of what preservation is
about is protecting property for the future. Swaim said that all residents will be selling their homes at some point and
want to get the most out of them but also want to sell them in good condition so that the next owners will pay the
price it deserves. She said that only happens when one takes care of his home.
Swaim said that it behooves us all to look really closely at what the regulations for preservation are. She said they
are pretty sound and basic. Swaim said there is a lot of misunderstanding by the public in Iowa City and all over the
country. She said that before one makes judgments, he or she should really grasp what the requirements are. Swaim
said she thought people would find them far less onerous than believed.
Swaim said that that generally we all need to think of preservation as being on "your side" in that it's as much
interested in your investment as anyone else, because it is looking at the long term stability of the property. She said
the materials used maintain the quality and architectural and historic look, which is what a lot of people are looking
for more and more these days.
Swaim said that if one has a house that is contributing or key contributing, even if he takes exquisite care of it, the
value of the house is not going to stay as high as it is right now if the surrounding houses are not also kept up to par,
with the historic quality maintained. She said that is what a district does; it protects the individual properly and it
Historic Preservation Commission PRELIMINARY
March 12, 2009
Page 12
protects all of them. Swaim said that is where a district has a far greater way of preserving an individual home than
not having a district.
Ponto said that he originally bought a house on Davenport Street in the 1970s and lived there until he bought his
current house on Brown Street. He said that one of the reasons he bought the Brown Street house is that it was a
historic district, and he knew that it would maintain stability and have a neighborhood feel and the atmosphere of
being a vibrant neighborhood with not only homeowners but also renters. Ponto said the area is close to downtown
and close to the University and is a wonderful area. He said that he walks through the neighborhood every day and
would like to see it maintained.
Swaim said that she lives in the Woodlawn District, and in 1991, she wanted to make some alterations. She said that
the contractor and she and her husband came before the Commission and actually came away with a much better
plan than they had proposed. Swaim said the Commission is generally trying to find solutions that are affordable.
She said there is no doubt that it is expensive to maintain an old house, but the preservation way is not always the
most expensive way in the long term.
Ponto stated that earlier in the evening Kuecker distributed an a-mail she had received. Ponto asked if there were
any other comments that should be considered. Kuecker said she had not received anything else in writing, although
she had some phone calls from people who had questions about this issue.
Downing said that he bought his first house on Burlington Street, which was not in a historic district. He said that
when he first looked at it, it was zoned RS-8, so that three unrelated people could live there. Downing said that six
people had signed the lease, and nine people were living in the house.
Downing said that he did a lot of restoration work on the house. He said the historic district was expanded to include
his house. Downing said he supported that, although many of his neighbors did not, but in the long run, the
designation did pass the City Council.
Downing said that he presented a proposal for an addition to his house to the Commission. He said the Commission
discussed the relative merits of the design, and he made some changes that helped keep the character of the exterior
appropriate. Downing said he did not believe the costs were increased one way or the other. He said taking a little
time to consider what one is doing when making an addition to an old house can help in the process.
Downing said that he sold the house after owning it for seven years and bought another house in a historic district.
He said he feels that entirely because the house was in a historic district, the value was considerably more than what
he paid for it. Downing said that it is still owned by owner occupants, and none of the other houses on the street
where he lived have changed from owner-occupant to rental property in that time.
Baker said that she lives in the College Street District. She said that an addition was put on the house by the previous
owner. Baker said the addition had a flat roof and was leaking. She said she came to the Commission and requested
to change the slope of the roof to provide drainage, and the request was approved. Baker said the material that was
approved was EPDM, which is a newer material. She said that the material and slope were both approved, and it has
worked out fine.
Bunting Eubanks said that since she has been on the Commission she has found the members to be reasonable and
interested in feasibility. She said that there is a City staff person who can help resolve issues and review projects.
Bunting Eubanks pointed out that an escape ladder has to be a lot less expensive solution than a spiral staircase
would have been.
Baldridge stated that he has been on the Commission for less than a year, but in that time he has noted that the
restrictions and regulations are much less onerous than many people believe. He said that time and time again, it has
been the case that people should have come to the Commission or to Kuecker earlier to present their ideas, and they
would have saved a lot of agony. Baldridge said that the restrictions are not overly stringent, and the homeowner
sometimes ends up with a better idea.
Trimble stated that the Commission's problems have often been with people who were required to obtain a permit
whether or not they were in historic districts, and they did not get a permit. She said that those have been the biggest
issues, so either way they would have to come before someone trying to get a permit after the fact.
Historic Preservation Commission PRELIMINARY
March 12, 2009
Page 13
Swaim said, taking into consideration everything she has heard and knowing that there are other people on both
sides who have not spoken up, she is going to vote in favor of the designation. She said she looks at this as a long-
term protection for a part of Iowa City that needs it.
Downing said that this proposal is consistent with the Historic Preservation Plan that was approved by the City
Council.
Ponto said perhaps there should be more discussion on the boundaries. Trimble asked if there were any reason why
the two properties on Fairchild were included in the proposed district in the first place. Kuecker replied that when
she discussed this with the Northside Neighborhood Association, the boundaries were drawn with the idea that
Fairchild is a fairly intact street and to try to protect as much of that as possible. She said that now looking at the
map, it would be appropriate to include them or not include them, either way.
Bunting asked the Neighborhood Association for its opinion on the two Fairchild properties. Pascoe said she
believes the more important properties on Fairchild are farther east so that she did not have a strong opinion on this.
Swaim said that one of the arguments for the district as shown is the rationale of not putting the boundary down the
middle of the street. She said in that case one side of the street could be well maintained and the other side might be
allowed to slip away. Swaim said that the two sides of a street are sort of a neighborhood unto itself.
Bunting Eubanks said that one map shows more people who are willing to be incorporated into a district, but the
other map includes the National Register historic district so that all the properties have already been nominated and
received that designation. She said she thought that if the Commission were to approve the smaller boundary, it
could later add on the rest, because there may be a request for that.
Ponto said that he thought it would be easier to do it the other way around. He stated that he would prefer to approve
a larger area to begin with, and then if there needs to be some negotiation, that could come later.
Kuecker said that she thinks it would be hard to justify excluding any part of the National Register District. She said
that that is why she adjusted the boundaries, as it is not as if the part being excluded has lost its historic integrity.
Swaim agreed that the argument has been made.
Pascoe said that the Neighborhood Association would be fine with designating the larger area.
Kuecker said that the Commission's role is to evaluate the historic character of this district and determine whether it
is in compliance with the Historic Preservation Plan. She said that is what the Commission is to consider, taking
into account the comments that have been made. Kuecker stated that the political issues come into play at the City
Council level, while the Commission evaluates this based on the historic integrity of the neighborhood.
Baldridge said that his preference would be to approve the staff boundaries less the two properties on Fairchild, as
the owner specifically requested, because they are on the edge of the boundary.
Lake asked if anyone on the Commission was aware of the balloon framing that all the old houses carry. He asked if
anyone had thought about that. Lake said there was a property on the east side of the 300 block of South Johnson
Street that had balloon framing. He stated that some students threw some fire bombs on the porches, and the
property actually burned to the roof, because it had a balloon frame.
Lake said that is the way the old houses are designed. Several Commission members said they were familiar with a
balloon frame. Lake said that if it is a two-story house, it has a stud that leads all the way up to the second floor. He
said there is nothing to stop a fire from going all the way up there. Lake said that it is a safety issue more than
anything. He said he has the same thing on his property - a front porch and a balloon frame.
Bunting Eubanks stated that when buildings are being constructed, they don't just meet preservation guidelines, they
have to meet egress standards and other building codes, as a new house would, as well. Lake said his point is that
this is the way the old houses were built. He said the way they were constructed, the old foundations are crumbling,
because they were brick and block and everything that could be thrown into those old foundations. Lake said it is
just the way they were constructed back then. He said it is an issue with him, because he knows that is what he has.
Historic Preservation Commission PRELIMINARY
March 12, 2009
Page 14
Lake said he is just asking what happens if his entire property is burned down. He said then he is faced with putting
cement board horizontal siding on it and probably a no-vinyl window to rebuild that property. Lake said his point is,
how is he going to rebuild that property and how many restrictions will he be facing.
Downing said that if one were going to build a new, two-story house today, he would not be allowed to build a
balloon frame. Lake agreed, and Downing asked why that is an issue. Lake said he just wants to know how he
would rebuild a house in a historic district and what kind of materials he could use, composite or wood, in an
economic crisis.
Bunting Eubanks said that sometimes buildings are designed differently than they were before they were torn down.
Bunting Eubanks said that the Commission is very reasonable in how a structure is rebuilt. She stated that the old
building codes do not meet modern standards.
Lake said that he wouldn't want to build the exact same way, but that was the way they did it back then. Bunting
Eubanks said that any new structure would have to meet all current building codes and egress requirements, and then
on top of that, the Commission would review the style to make sure it doesn't look like there is a really modern
house right next to all the older houses.
Lake stated that it is almost a guarantee that he would have to use fiber cement board, which he is against, if his
house were destroyed. He said there is red tape in the whole process.
Ponto added that, looking at the map, the two excluded properties are not in the National Register District, so it
would be appropriate to exclude them.
The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. (Wagner left prior to vote)
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 12, 2009.
MOTION: Ponto moved to approve the minutes for the February 12, 2009 meeting, as written. Swaim seconded the
motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0.
OTHER:
Kuecker asked to move the April meeting from the 9`h to the 13`h. The consensus was to reschedule the meeting to
April 13`h
Kuecker distributed handouts from the Human Rights Commission, which is doing aCity-wide survey of members
of the various commissions and boards to determine demographics.
Kuecker reminded Commission members that the Commission's forum will be held in two weeks, on the 26`h of
April, at 6:00. Swaim asked if there wilt be handouts available for people to take, and Kuecker responded that she
could provide those.
Bunting Eubanks asked anyone with suggestions for the forum to provide them to Kuecker. Kuecker said that she is
sending out invitations to anyone who lives in a historic district or owns a landmark property. She said there will
also be a press release in the newspaper.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte
Historic Preservation Commission
Attendance Record
2009
Name Term
Expires 1/08 2113 3112
Baldridge 3/29/11 X O/E X
Baker 3/29/09 X X X
Downing 3/29/10 X X X
Eubanks 3/29111 X X X
Hirschman 3/29/11 -- -- X O/E
Michaud 3/29/09 X X O/E
Ponto 3/29/10 X X X
Swaim 3/29/09 X X X
Trimble 3/29/10 X X X
Wagner 3/29/09 X X X
Key:
X =Present
O =Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused