Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-04-22 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES APPROVED IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, MARCH 12, 2003- 5:00 P.M. CIVIC CENTER - COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Mike Paul, Dennis Keitel, Vince Maurer, Carol Alexander, Eric Gidal MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: John Adam, Sarah Holecek OTHERS PRESENT: Steve Rorbach, Darrell Lamb, Mary Stewart, Darlene Clausen, Robert Carlson CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Mike Paul called the meeting to order at 5:00 P.M. ROLL CALL: Gidal, Maurer, Paul, Keitel, Alexander present. CONSIDERATION OF THE FEBRUARY 12, 2003 BOARD MINUTES: Paul stated that the first motion passed should be "5-0", not "6-0". Gidal pointed out that his name was misspelled in the minutes. Motion: Maurer moved to approve the February t2, 2003 minutes as amended. Keitel seconded. Motion carried 5-0. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: EXC03-00002. Public hearing regarding an application submitted by Mercy Hospital for a special exception to allow off-street parking on a lot separate from the use served in the Office Commercial (CO- 1) Zone at 611-619 East Market Street. Adam stated that Mercy Hospital is cater-corner from the location of the special exception. He said that demand for staff parking has been expanding as Mercy expands its operations. He said the applicant owns the property, which currently contains two houses. Adam said that staff analysis identified two factors early on, one which argued in favor of the application, and one which was not so positive. He said that the neighborhoods near Mercy have had issue in the past with employee parking off-street, so this proposal would relieve some of this problem. On the other hand, he said that sur[ace parking is not encouraged in an urban neighborhood, since this neighborhood contains office uses, single-family homes, multi-family apartment buildings and is located on Market Street, which is an arterial and serves as an entryway into the city for employees and for people who attend the University. He said that large parking areas tend to have negative effects on adjacent properties. Adam said that these issues are more difficult to deal with in denser mixed-use neighborhoods such as this one, as opposed to suburban areas where more land is available to buffer uses. Adam stated that staff's objective in this case was to ameliorate some of these effects with additional setbacks, landscaping, proper drainage and control of lighting. He said that the applicant has indicated a desire to someday develop this property as the hospital expands. He said that, given the policy in the Comprehensive Plan of preserving existing neighborhoods, staff generally promotes growth in a southerly direction toward downtown rather than northward. He said that staff does not want to denigrate the neighborhood, but [ts integrity is not as substantial as it perhaps is north of Bloomington Street. Turning to the general standards for assessing special exceptions, Adam said that the value, use and enjoyment may be affected by having a parking lot next door. He said that the house to the west, on the corner of Market and Johnson, is an owner-occupied duplex, and the owner has spoken to him, expressing concern about the appearance of the parking lot and having people cutting across her Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March '~2, 2003 Page 2 driveway when going to and from the parking lot. He said that there is currently parking behind the neighboring 12-plex, and the property owner says that people currently cut through her property because there is no barrier. He said the owner would like to see a fence in place, continuing to the existing oak tree, in addition to the required arborvitae hedge to prevent trespassing and view of the parking lot. Adam said that arborvitae is required in this case unless soil conditions warrant a fence instead, and the neighbor would like both a fence and arborvitae. He said the neighbor would also rather have the interior of the parking lot blocked off in such a way that no parking spaces face into her yard until they are at or past her garage. Adam said that across the alley are a mix of single family and multi-family uses, with a daily influx of 50 or more vehicles throughout the day will impact the peace and privacy of these backyards, and views from these properties will be opened up to both a surface parking lot and clear through to Market Street. He said that noise from Market Street will likely increase with the buildings and trees being out of the way, which is why the City recommends a fairly solid hedge all around. Adam said that the minimum light fixture height allowed in the CO-1 zone would be 25 feet if within 300 feet of a residential zone, as this property is. However, staff recommends that the height be 15 feet in this case, to decrease the chance of light trespass and glare, with the use of fully downcast and shielded light fixtures. Adam said that the Code states that parking areas will be pitched and curbed and drained to prevent the flow of excess water from the parking area onto streets and alleys that do not have adequate drainage facilities. He said that the City Engineer has approved the concept of having the drain come off at an angle so it does not hop over the hump in the alley, draining instead towards Johnson StreeL He said that the City Engineer would have to sign off on any drainage pattern at the time the site plan is submitted. Adam said that the applicant has not clearly demonstrated how the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He said that surface parking lots close to downtown seem counter to the preservation or reuse of existing urban form, but staff feels that some reduction of hospital staff parking on neighborhood streets argues in favor of this lot. In addition, staff feels that the general pattern of southward expansion toward the downtown is preferable to potential disruption of neighborhoods to the north and to the east. He said the plan lays out the goal of protecting the character of existing neighborhoods, which is why staff is recommending such things as increased setbacks, extra hedges and arborvitae screening along the edges of the parking lot. He said that in the future, the City may want to work with large employers such as Mercy to develop incentive plans for increasing and encouraging the use of alternative modes of transportation, including public transportation, rather than having a need for more parking lots. Adam stated that of the seven specific standards, only three are applicable to this case. He said that the location plan has been provided, it shows the layout, and ownership has been confirmed. He said that the parkin9 lot is within 300 feet of Mercy Hospital, in the CO-1 Zone, which is the same zone as Mercy. He said that in assessing the application, the Board is to consider the desirability of the location of the parking lot, any detrimental effects on adjacent property, the appearance of the streetscape as a consequence of the off-street parking, and in the case of non-required parking, the need for additional off- street parking. He said the appearance of the streetscape is a significant issue in this application since two out of the row of structures facing Market on this block would be replaced by a 145-foot-wide gap. He said that Iowa City's urban streetscapes are defined by their buildings. He stated that improvements that could be made would be to increase the setback; the applicant is not required to have any setback because they are not across from a residential zone. He said the planting of a hedge accented with different species of ornamental trees and shrubs along the street edge could be an improvement, as well as the retention of as much of the existing berm along the sidewalk as possible. Furthermore, Adam stated that two existing mid-lot maples could be incorporated into the parking lot design. In staff's opinion, Adam said that a one-way route around would be possible, as shown by diagram, preserving the trees. The City Forester has recommended that the trees would need at least 10' of open soil around each tree to insure any chance of survival. In conclusion, Adam stated that the use of these lots for parking is technically compliant with the specific standards for this type of exception, but somewhat weak on compliance with the general standards. He Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 12, 2003 Page 3 said that the landscaping provisions staff is recommending are designed to help reduce the offsite impacts. He said that the proposed parking lot would be an interim use that has the benefit of relieving some of the omstreet parking in the residential neighborhoods to the north and east. Adam stated that the plan that the Board was given just prior to tonight's meeting incorporates some of the changes. He said that final approval of a plan would be subject to Housing Inspection Services using the guidance of the Board's recommendations. Adam said that staff recommends that EXC03-00002, an application for a special exception to permit off- street parking in a lot separate from the use served, be approved subject to the following provisions: 1. All parking spaces will be set back 15-20 feet from the Market Street right-of-way; 2. Within the setback area a continuous hedge of Arborvitae, plus Burning Bush or Amur Maple, or other types of shrubs or hedge plants, will be planted; the Arborvitae will provide a backdrop hedge no less than or greater than 4 feet in height at maturity and the other shrubs will provide color and textural variety, the final plan is to be approved by the City Forester; 3. At least one of the mature maples roughly in the middle of the proposed parking lot will be preserved with no less than a 10-foot radius of open soil around and will subsequently be maintained in good health; 4. In any case, the parking lot will conform with the tree requirements of the Zoning Ordinance; 5. Storm water runoff will be directed to a public storm sewer unless the applicant can demonstrate that direct discharge will not adversely impact other properties abutting the alley, subject to the approval of the City Engineer; and 6. Light fixtures would be mounted no higher than 15 feet and be fully shielded and downcast to prevent glare and light trespass. In response to a question from Maurer, Adam stated that the arbor vitae do not extend to the lot in the far northwest corner because the applicant preferred to put in a fence. He said that the fence is four feet high within 20 feet of the right-of-way because that is the height limitation for fences in the front setback. He said that the fence can jump up to six feet after that. In response to a question from Alexander, Adam said that the City has not made a specific assessment of the impact of traffic on the alleyway, but has discussed this issue in joint staff. He said that traffic planning staff do not feel this will become a big issue. He said that the existing parking lot next to the 12-plex has 20 or 30 spaces, and a lot of those will be replaced. In response to a question from Maurer, Adam stated that the current plan shows 52 parking spaces. Alexander asked Adam to expand on the Comprehensive Plan, with regard to the plan being preferable to expansion northward. She felt there were a fair number of residential spaces towards downtown. Adam said that this is a judgment call, and that neighborhood integrity is an important issue. He said that if there is to be an expansion of Mercy Hospital, it would probably be preferable for them to expand southward toward downtown. He said they do own this property, and the City is trusting that someday it will be developed with buildings. He said that the issue of losing housing comes down to a judgment call, based on how each person feels. He said that it seems the integrity of this neighborhood would not be as strong as you would see north of Bloomington Street. In response to a question from Keitel, Holecek stated that this area has been zoned CO-1 for at least nine years. Public HearinR Opened Steve Rorbach, 2364 Sussex Lane, with Rorbach Carlson Architects, stated they are working for Mercy Hospital on this proposal. He said that Mercy has no problem with providing a hedge for the entirety of the fenceline; they just felt the hedge would be blocked by the fence. He said the neighbor would not be able to see the hedge. Rorbach stated that the alley slopes to the center and is not humped, correcting a statement made earlier by Adam. He said water would drain to the center of the alley, sloping to the west and out to the street. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 12, 2003 Page 4 Rorbach said that Mercy has a plan in place to assist staff with public transportation, and they try to encourage that. However, he said a large percentage of Mercy staff does not live in Iowa City, so they have to drive in. In response to a question from Maurer, Rorbach stated that the parking ramp to the north does have the possibility of going up. He said it is also probably going to be developed for health care facilities before it ever turns into a larger parking ramp, but that block is planned for additional vertical parking at some future time. He said the hospital does not have the need for that large of a growth of parking at this time to increase that as a ramp. He said that there are about 113 spaces on each level of that ramp. Rorbach said that Mercy is also expanding the Bloomington Street lot in the northeast corner, and maximizing every square inch of parking they can on that block in lieu of going vertical in a ramp, but some parking there will be displaced by a planned expansion of their cancer center. In response to a question from Maurer, Rorbach said that parking in the St. Wenceslaus lot could possibly be alleviated by this proposal. In response to a question from Paul, Rorbach clarified that this lot will be for nursing and support staff, not physicians. He said that this is part of some expansion that Mercy is also doing on the block north of the hospital. He said the hospital has continued to grow and expand their cancer facilities on the north block, and they need parking that is being displaced by that, as well as the growth of the hospital at that point. In response to a question from Keitel, Darrell Lamb, 4561 Jenn Lane, Mercy Director of Engineering, said that Mercy has not done a recent study regarding parking needs. He said that they have done some parking studies and have always identified that they need more parking from a practical standpoint, but it's different from a zoning standpoint. Lamb said that the largest shift at Mercy would probably contain 500 people. He said that part of the problem is they have parking for staff, parking for patients, others accessing the hospital, parking for the private medical office building, and parking for volunteers and physicians, so most of the parking is filled at all times. Rorbach said that Mercy has about 827 spots right now, accommodating both the hospital and medical office buildings and clinics on or around the site. He said the zoning ordinance addresses parking for hospitals based on the number of beds, and allocates parking for the medical office buildings some on the square footage of the facilities and other ways based on offices, exam rooms, etc. He said this lot is needed for Mercy to conform with the zoning ordinance for all of their facilities on this campus. He corrected himself to say that Mercy does conform now, but as the campus expands, the additional parking will be needed. He said it is hard to put an exact number to the parking needed because the zoning ordinance does not separate staff from public. In response to a question from Alexander, Rorbach said that the parking lot would be needed primarily for the day shift. He said the night shifts park more in the adjacent parking ramp to the west. Mary Stewart, 603 E. Market Street, identified herself and referred to the letter she submitted to the City on this proposal. She said she is concerned about the appearance of the street once the two big houses are gone - it will look very different. She presented pictures for the Board to review to provide an idea of what will be coming down and the space it will generate. She said that the City has been working on the landscaping and so on, but she is still concerned about the great concrete mass that will take the place of the two buildings and how it will make Market Street appear, and how it will affect her property. Stewart thanked Mercy for agreeing to the fence and greenery, but stated she is concerned about parking that would abut her driveway. She said that when she walks to her car, she would have cars facing her driveway into her garage. She said that, if this proposal goes through, she would request that their parking is moved back at least to the front of her garage to give her some privacy. In response to a question from Paul, Stewart said that she understands that this parking lot would be eventually replaced by a medical facility, and she does not have any particular thoughts about that at this time. She said she was just reacting to the letter she received saying that a parking lot with 53 cars would be going into the space next door. She said that she has had a little bit of the parking, but it has been buffered by a building rather than cars coming up right against her lot line. She said she was happy that Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 12, 2003 Page 5 they have agreed to save the tree, and she would like to have as much space as the tree - extending the barrier to give her some protection. Stewart says she values Mercy as a neighbor, but she does not want their parking right up against her building and driveway. Darlene Clausen, 508 E. Bloomington, said she lives on the north side of Mercy Hospital. She said that the first thought she had was that she didn't believe the CO-1 zone was meant to be parking. She said that the block next to Mary's house is the last little segment to become parking. Right now, she said there is parking on the full 600 block of Bloomington; there is a great big church on the corner of Bloomington and there is parking behind it on Davenport. She said there is parking in the next block over, on Fairchild, so this would be like four blocks of parking or large masses of cement. She said in the middle of her block there is a parking lot, which is a large gaping hole in the middle of the block, and to the west of Mercy next to their new emergency entrance, there is parking. She said that across the street from that is a parking lot in the middle of the 400 block for Dr. Kammermeyer's office. She said this area is becoming more and more cement and not small office buildings like anticipated when this was first zoned CO-1. She said with more and more cement going in, they lose the pleasantness of the neighborhood. She said privacy is really affected when you take buildings out in the middle of the block because it will open up the view all the way to Dodge. She said buildings in the neighborhood afford privacy. Clausen said if the trees stay, that will help. Clausen said that she also wondered why Mercy does not expand the red brick parking ramp to the north. She knows Mercy is growing and will need more parking, so they should expand that parking up now and encourage staff to do van pooling for those outside the community. She said that when she saw the view of the proposed lot, the only exit is the driveway going in and looping around. She wonders if it would be possible to make a sidewalk going from the parking lot to Market Street so people would not be tempted to cross the driveways. Clausen said that she found it interesting to hear the parking would be mainly used for day shift. She said she is glad that the lighting would be downcast, unlike the lighting next to emergency. However, she felt that if this parking lot is only for day shift, it would not be necessary to have the lot lit all night long. She said shutting the lights off at night would be a big help. Gidal asked if Clausen could speak to the issue of relief of the potential northward expansion of Mercy, and the issue of relief of on-street parking. Clausen said that they now have five hour parking meters along Bloomington, prohibiting all-day workers. She said that the streets that would have parking start at Johnson and go on up to St. Wenceslaus, so she does not know if 53 spaces in a new lot would take away a lot of the on-street parking in the immediate neighborhood. She said it would probably affect parking fudher north, where commuters park. Adam advised that Mary Stewart had been anticipating that the hedge would be on her side, so this issue is unresolved. Rorbach said that the intent of the fence is that it is solid, presenting an opaque barrier, so you would not be able to see cars through the fence. He said that if the landscaping was put on the other side of the fence, that would create a problem of maintenance with the hedge being on her side. He said they can try to design the fence to make it look as attractive as possible. He mentioned a fence along Dodge Street that Ms. Stewart liked, and said they would be wil~ing to offer that. He said they would be willing to extend the hedge as far north as they can, but it won't be seen because it would be inside the fence. Rorbach said the parking lot does allow access to Market Street, with a walkway that is landscaped containing stone retaining walls and steps directing people to Market Street from the parking lot. He said Mercy is sensitive to people walking across neighboring property and are willing to extend the fence as far as they can within the City requirements. He said they are trying to do as much as they can to beautify the lot, wrapping the property with landscaping. Rorbach said that at this time it is not economical for Mercy to go vertical on their parking ramp on the north side of the street. He said they have future plans for a medical office building to go on that campus, which will go right where the parking ramp is now. He said they will tear down the ramp and build another one on that site in association with the new proposed building. He said it is not feasible for Mercy to go vertical when in potentially five years they will tear it down and put a building there, and/or the hospital Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 12, 2003 Page 6 expand from the east across the street into that area of the campus. He said the parking ramp would still be on that lot, just more to the east side and in conjunction with the building, built up higher. In response to a question from Maurer, Rorbach stated that ingress and egress through the alley was the way Mercy wanted to do it because of security. He said it will be a gated lot, so it will be easier to control. He said they plan to improve the alley by putting in this parking lot. He said it will be a staff lot, so they are coming and leaving at regular times, not continuously throughout the day. In response to a question from Alexander, Rorbach said that the alley is public, so the City is responsible for snow removal. Mary Stewart stated that she did not understand that the proposal included the greenery on the parking lot side, and asked for clarification as to why that has to happen. Rorbach stated that the fence will be as close to the lot line as possible, and Mercy would not want to come onto her property to maintain their property. He said that the fence would be solid, so there will be no view of the parking spaces. Stewart asked why the greenery could not be put in front of the fence, on her side of the property. Adam reiterated that Mercy's objection was the issue of maintaining the hedge. Adam stated the hedge would be within a five foot setback from the lot line. He said the fence they are proposing would be one foot from the lot line, which would meet Code. Adam said the issue came down to whether she would rather see the fence or the hedge, or does she feel it is reasonable to request both. Keitel stated that if she does not want to maintain the hedge, she does not want a hedge. Paul advised that Mercy would have potential liability by coming onto her property to maintain the hedge if it were on her side. Keitel stated that Ms. Stewart could be required to maintain her side of the hedge, and he did not think she wants to do that. Stewart agreed. Rorbach said that the fence would require less maintenance than a hedge. He said that want to make it work for both parties. Stewart said she would like to have it nice, and so that she does not have to look at cars. Rorbach suggested they work together to design a fence that is aesthetically pleasing. Robert Carlson, 1122 Penkridge Drive, Rorbach-Carlson, stated that originally the design of the proposed fence is the same as the design of the fence along the south side of Stewart's property so that she would see fence that was the same on both sides of her yard. Stewart said that it was her understanding the six foot fence can only come a certain length down the driveway. Adam advised it would have to be four feet high at 20 feet back, and should stop short of the oak tree. Stewart said that if Mercy was willing to work with her for a nice fence, that is the direction she will go. She reiterated that she would like to have the same cut they give the tree, so that it is squared off at the garage rather than the middle. Adam advised the Board that would mean a loss of two spaces. In response to a question from Keitel, Adam said that hedges will need to be trimmed down to four feet. He said it is a safety issue - they like to have the hedges at least four feet tall to block headlights, but when they are within the setback they cannot be higher than four feet. Gidal asked for a clarification on the reasons for the City's recommendation, stating that it was his understanding those reasons had to do with relief of on-street parking and the encouragement of southward expansion by Mercy. Adam said that the latter is not a direct reason for the City's recommendation; if Mercy is landbanking this lot for future expansion it makes more sense to the City than moving northward. The recommendation is based mainly on relief of on-street parking. Paul stated that he understands Ms. Stewart has come to an agreement with Mercy's architects about the fence, but he feels there is still a large question on the last topic of squaring the parking lot off and losing two spaces. Rorbach stated that Mercy's intent is to maximize the parking they can get on the lot and they would prefer not to lose the two spaces. He said they are trying to make the fence solid, and he understands the concerns of concrete on the other side and potential noise of the car, but he is not sure how different that is from the spaces just to the north, right around the corner from that tree. However, he said if they have to lose those two spaces to get it accepted, they were willing, but felt they were using the fence to screen the parking. Public Hearinq Closed Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 12, 2003 Page 7 Motion: Gidal moved that EXC0$-00002, an application for a special exception to permit off-street parking on a lot separate from the use, be approved subject to the following provisions: 1. All parking spaces will be set back 15-20 feet from the Market Street right-of-way; 2. Within the setback area a continuous hedge of Arborvitae, Burning Bush and Amur Maple, or other types of shrubs or hedge plants, will be planted; the Arborvitae will form a backdrop hedge no less than or greater than 4 feet in height at maturity and the other shrubs will provide both color and textural variety, the final plan to be approved 'by the City Forester; 3. At least one of the mature maples roughly in the middle of the proposed parking lot will be preserved with no less than a 10-foot radius of open soil around it or a similar dimension subject to the approval of the City Forester, and it will subsequently be maintained in good health; 4. In any case, the parking lot will conform with the tree requirements of the Zoning Ordinance; 5. Storm water runoff will be directed to a public storm sewer unless the applicant can demonstrate that direct discharge will not adversely impact other properties abutting the alley, subject to the approval of the City Engineer; 6. Light fixtures will be no higher than 15 feet and be fully shielded and downcast to prevent glare and light trespass, Paul asked if language needs to be inserted in the motion regarding the agreement on the fence between the two parties. Holecek said they can put in a contingency to be satisfied prior to the special exception being complied with. She said that right now the issue is how far the arborvitae hedge would go. Adam said the issue comes down to the decorative nature of the fence. Paul asked if Holecek felt it was important that they insert the language. Holecek reiterated that the Board can include the language. Upon request, Holecek proposed the following language, which Gidal added to his motion: 7. The applicant shall agree with the neighboring property owner to the northwest, Mary Stewart, on a decorative fence to be installed at or near the property line for screening purposes up to 20 feet from the Market Street right-of-way, in compliance with the Code. The motion was seconded by Maurer. Findings of Fact Keitel proposed that the motion be amended on point 3, from 10 feet to 9 feet. He said that they would not be able to comply with a 10 foot radius. Adam stated that Gidal read the note he had written for himself, and that he had added "10 feet or a similar dimension upon the approval of the City Foreste¢'. Keitel said that the intent was that they lose two parking stalls, and that should be clarified. Gidal said he would vote to deny. He said he is confused about the staffs recommendation, stating that the specific standards have been technically reasonably met, but he has to find that the proposal is non- compliant with the general standards. He said that in terms of the policy of the Comprehensive Plan supporting the preservation of existing neighborhoods, the impacts on use and enjoyment of neighboring properties, he feels it is very clear that tearing down two houses and replacing them with a parking lot is going to diminish the value, use and enjoyment of adjoining properties. Furthermore, he said it seems quite clear that for those houses across the alley, in terms of their views, their enjoyment and their use will be diminished, so not simply adjacent east and west, but also to the south. He said that it seems quite clear that in the understanding of the Comprehensive Plan, surface parking lots close to downtown are counter to the preservation and re-use of existing urban form, and certainly this proposed use does not preserve the character of existing neighborhoods, nor does it create a particularly innovative design for that area. Finally, Gidal said that in terms of the seventh specific standard for 14-6N-1C, this specific standard seems to pose a problem. He said the appearance of the streetscape is an issue. Maurer stated he will vote in favor. He said he has a certain amount of sympathy for the North$ide Neighborhood, and for Mary Stewart. He said it does isolate her property, but he feels it creates a situation wherein Mercy will want her property, so he does not feel it harms the valuation of her property, although it does narrow down the potential buyers. He said Mercy already owns this property, and he Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 12, 2003 Page 8 feels it complies in every way he can see. He said even though he thought it better to add to the ramp to the north, the plans they have for the lot in the future seem to make sense. Keitel said he wi1] vote in favor. He said his main concern he has is the increase in surface runoff on the alley, and he wanted to amend point #5 to require the applicant to install a storm sewer. He said an existing storm sewer is shown running south along Johnson Street, and he has been told by City Engineering staff that is a substantial box culvert, so he thinks a storm sewer needs to be installed and not directed to the alley. Holecek stated that the motion has a~ready been made and two members have already stated how they would vote without that inclusion. Keitel said he would leave it up to the City Engineering staff, but it is his feeling that it is not good to take half an acre of paved surface and dump it onto an alley. He said he feels they have met the other points; it is appropriate for the zone that this property is located on, and he will vote in favor. Alexander said that although she is pleased to hear the compromise that is being extended, she will vote to deny based simply on lack of compliance with the language of the general standards, as put forth by Gidal. Paul said he has struggled with this, looking at it from a few different perspectives. He said his feeling is that Mercy campus is going to develop, and they own the property, as well as other properties along that street. He said that in order for that development to take place in an orderly fashion, it has to go south towards downtown. He said that does not have anything to do with them fulfilling the standards, but he feels they are trying to get parking off the street for which they should be commended. He said he likes the idea that it will be an interim use, even though the time frame was not defined. With regard to the value, use and enjoyment of neighboring properties, he feels enough has been done and Ms. Stewart's property value should increase significantly in terms of Mercy's desirability for that property. He said that use and enjoyment are a different story, but he feels the fence and screening and trees are a plus. He said, unfortunately, in an older commercial area where there is not a lot of off-street parking even for the residents, there will be some parking lots. He feels there would De a good enough job done with the landscaping and maintenance of that lot to make this a viable project. He said that, while it is a gap in the block, it is something that is not going to be permanent, and it will be screened so the use and enjoyment factor is mitigated to some degree. He said he feels the applicant has met the specific standards and he will vote in favor. The motion passed on a vote of 3-2, Gidal and Alexander in the negative. OTHER Update on EXC01-00028, 417 Ferson Avenue, a reduction of the side setback. Holecek stated that nearly a year ago the Board granted a special exception to Mr. Chamberlain at 417 Ferson Avenue contingent on him obtaining: 1 ) a building permit and 2) a maintenance easement so the exterior wall of the garage could be maintained in perpetuity without trespassing on the neighbor's property. She reported that as of today, a signed agreement has been reached taking care of the maintenance issues, and resulting in a survey done to quantify the exact encroachment that has been contemplated by the easement agreement. Therefore, the encroachment is legitimized and the City will be able to issue a building permit to legitimize the work that was done without the permit. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION None. ADJOURNMENT Keitel moved to adjourn, seconded by Gidal. The meeting adjourned at 6:13 PM. Board Chairperson Board Secretary Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 12, 2003 Page 9 Minutes submitted By Neana Saylor Approved MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION THURSDAY, MARCH 13, 2003 CiTY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Carlson, James Enloe, Michael Gunn, Michael Maharry, Mark McCallum, Amy Smothers, Tim Weitzel, Michaelanne Widness MEMBERS ABSENT: Peter Jochimsen, Jim Ponto STAFF PRESENT: Shelley McCafferty OTHERS PRESENT: Brad Houser CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Maharry called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: Maharry thanked Widness for her years of service to the Commission. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: 14 N. DODGE STREET: McCafferty said this property is in the Central Planning District and is also within a proposed conservation district. She said that since the City Council has set the public hearing for the rezoning to designate the conservation district, any building permits issued for properties within this area have to conform to the proposed new zoning. McCafferty said typically, if a property is not within a conservation or historic district, the plans would be reviewed by the staff Design Review Committee, but since the property is within a proposed conservation district, the plans require review by the Historic Preservation Commission. McCafferty said the Commission has a couple of sets of guidelines to work with on these plans. She distributed the "Design Standards for Multi-Family Buildings Proposed Within Historic and Conservation Districts." McCafferty said the standards are basically set up on a points system, with a number of mandatary items, as well as additional items for which an applicant earns points. She said the applicant has to have at least 20 points to have the plans approved. McCafferty said this property is in the Central Planning District, so the Central Planning District guidelines apply here. She referred to the College Hill Neighborhood Guidelines as also applying. Gunn pointed out that only the "Design Standards for Multi-Family Buildings Proposed Within Historic and Conservation Districts" would apply. He said this is true because if the College Hill Conservation District were approved, then the "Design Standards for Multi-Family Buildings Proposed Within Historic and Conservation Districts" would kick in. He said the College Hill guidelines only apply to duplexes and single-family homes. Gunn said the "Design Standards for Multi-Family Buildings Proposed Within Historic and Conservation Districts", which were patterned very closely after the Central Planning District in-fill apartment building guidelines, would apply to an apartment building in the College Hill Neighborhood. McCafferty agreed that the "Design Standards for Multi-Family Buildings Proposed Within Historic and Conservation Districts" would apply to a building with three units or more, and there are three units planned for this building. McCallum asked how similar the conservation district guidelines are to the Central Planning District guidelines. McCafferty said the standards are very similar to the Central Planning District guidelines that would be used outside of a conservation or historic district; however, they are more stringent, and there are more mandatory items. Carlson asked if the Commission needed to make an immediate decision regarding the certificate of appropriateness. McCafferty said she had informed the applicant that the Commission would discuss the plans but also informed him that she could not guarantee an immediate decision. Maharry suggested going through the list to see if mandatory requirements are satisfied with these plans. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 13, 2003 Page 2 McCafferty distributed photographs of the streetscape of the block and the current building. She showed photographs with additional views of the streetscape and the current building, as well as a view from the sidewalk to see the relationship between the buildings. McCafferty said the current building sticks out the furthest, with the others being set back a little bit more. McCafferty showed, from the several that were included in the Commission packet, the applicant's preferred elevation for the building. She said she looked at the issue of architectural style to see if there is some way to give the building a more specific style that might be found in the neighborhood. McCafferty produced plans for more of a Prairie-style building, although she said the style is not specifically found in the neighborhood. She showed photographs of two buildings that demonstrate the precedent she was looking at that would allow the Commission to say the style exists in the neighborhood. McCafferty showed a photograph of one building that is a masonry building with a hipped roof. She showed a photograph of the second building that is only two stories but has a central front piece with an arch on it. McCafferty said there is also a blue, foursquare on Iowa Avenue that shows the three-story Craftsman- Prairie vernacular with the narrow, third-story band at the top. Maharry said the Commission could look at the overall design of the building but did not need to come to a conclusion at the present meeting. McCafferty said Houser has indicated that there are some changes to the elevations. McCafferty said the main entrance to this building is on the back, where the exterior stairwells are the entrance to the building. She said another issue with this building is that there are design guidelines for exterior stairwells of multi-family buildings. McCafferty said at this point, and based on the drawings that she has received, the rear of the building does not meet those guidelines. McCallum said the plan McCafferty is suggesting does not seem like a major difference from what Houser is proposing. McCafferty said before spending a lot of time architecturally on the plan, she wanted to first get input from the Commission as to whether the proposed elevation is a good basis or whether the drawing she came up with was acceptable. Smothers said that aesthetically the building is somewhat stern. She said the plan is nice, but she is not certain that it is appropriate for the neighborhood, as compared to McCafferty's proposal. McCafferty said the main difference from Houser's point of view would be the extra brick on the front, as well as the cost of that. McCallum said that would result in reducing the brick at the top. McCafferty said that could be brick of a different color or perhaps stucco, which would be the preferred material. Houser said he doesn't want stucco on the building because of the water damage and mold problems associated with stucco. He said there are only six companies in the United States that insure apartment buildings. Houser said those companies are able to pick and choose what they want to insure, and they don't want to insure buildings with stucco anymore. Gunn said there are a number of elevations in the packet. Houser said he tried to provide a number of elevations to give the Commission some choices. He said he did not have a big problem with McCafferty's plan either; he said the real difference is just the change in the brick on the front. Houser said he is looking at using a brown brick with perhaps a white rail. Gunn asked about the material on one of Houser's elevations. Houser said it was laid out as vinyl. He said one of the reasons he changed the roofline is because he believe he had to have a 20-foot setback. Houser said Julie Tallman was going to go out and measure the adjacent building setbacks for him, since the setback is an average of the adjacent setbacks. Houser said the current house is the closest house to the street. He said it is about eight feet from the front setback. Houser said the house to the north is roughly 12 feet, and the house to the south is roughly ten feet. He said what he would like to propose is pulling the house structure forward somewhat, maybe about six feet. Houser said the porch would then set four feet closer, with the peaks in line with everyone else, so he isn't sitting back. He said if he goes back 20 feet with the original setbacks for the zoning, the house will be set way back compared to everybody else. Gunn said it was written the way it was so that it wouldn't stand out either forward or back. Houser agreed. He said that's why he thought if he moved forward roughly six feet, he would be fourteen back from the structure, and then the porch sticks out about four feet more. Houser said he would then be about ten feet off the line, which is roughly where the other two houses are. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 13, 2003 Page 3 Houser said the reason he went away and went to, looking at the elevation with the siding, is he switched it to not having a covered porch. Houser said the rules state that if it is a covered porch then you can't go within the setback, but if it is a porch, you can. He said that is why he shifted it, but then he found out he could, so he has no problem. Houser said originally he wanted the plan with the brick. He said with the columns, it's hard to tell, but there is a jog back in the foundation where the porch is added. Houser said it is actually eight feet deep total, four feet out from the front of the house. McCafferty said the doors are recessed behind the planes of the windows. Houser agreed the outside planes are out four feet more. Gunn asked how far out the top of the porch, the pediment or gable end, comes forward from the roof. Houser said it is four feet more than the outside pieces and has a two-foot overhang. He said originally he wanted a covered porch too. Houser said he doesn't have a problem with switching the doors and doing something different on the bottom door so that it looks more like a front entry. He said his only concern about going and switching from siding to the other is that this will be student housing, and he would like to keep it as maintenance-free as possible. Houser said if he has a border somewhere between the levels, he will have to figure out how he will cap the brick. McCallum said McCafferty has suggested just using a different color brick to create a visual effect. Houser said his only problem is that when you change or go to a soldier course or something like that, you're allowing a potential water problem again if that cracks or moves. He said typically he likes limestone or something along those lines, but it gets very expensive to go around the whole building in that. He said that was one reason he felt that by the time he did that, he might as well just brick the whole thing. Houser said it is shown with a soldier course going on the bottom lips, and that typically is done in limestone. He said these are preliminary drawings, so the bottom layer is done in limestone, which McCafferty had also talked about. McCafferty said the sills would be in limestone so that there won't be the cracks and mortar joints where water can seep in. She said she was looking at doing, rather than the angled heads on the keystones, keeping them square soldier courses. Maharry asked if there is a keystone pattern elsewhere in the neighborhood. McCafferty said one doesn't see this type of keystone typically in the neighborhood. She said what is seen is, as in the brickwork in the photographed building, just a soldier course across the top. Houser said he doesn't have a problem with that. Carlson said his main concern is the massing of this building, because it would be so much bigger than anything next to it would. He said he knows that in a residential neighborhood, you have to take the average of the block, but that is currently not the way it is done with multi-family buildings. McCafferty said what the Commission needs to do, now that it is more familiar with what is proposed and what the options are, is to go through the list and see where the Commission stands on it and whether there are concerns about any of the issues. Carlson said, as far as the designs go, this is a good start; you could work with these and make changes. He said, however, that this building is going to just look huge in the middle of that block. Carlson asked how wide the building is. Houser said the building would be 33 feet wide. Gunn said the adjacent houses are quite small compared to the neighborhood. He said the houses over there are about 32 feet wide on both sides of the street. Carlson said they are always at two or two and one-half stories tall. Houser said actually the houses all have an attic and stuff, so that the house next door sits a good six feet to eight feet higher than he does, on the other side of the alley alone. He said his house won't be that much taller, step-wise. McCafferty said the tallest building is the one all way at the end. She said the large, third-story dormer give the impression of height. Carlson asked how tall this building would be. Houser said it would be roughly 30 to 35 feet to the midline of the roof. He said it would basically have an eight-foot interior ceiling. He said after adding floor joists, each floor would have about nine feet, resulting in roughly 27 feet to the eave. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 13, 2003 Page 4 Gunn said his impression is that the house actually looks bigger in the elevations than it is going to appear in that neighborhood. He said the elevation makes it look like it could be 50 feet wide. Gunn said it actually is fairly small but is tall, with a little more mass on the top. Smothers asked if the building height is measured to the eave or to the peak. McCafferty said the City typically measures the roof height to the midline of the roof. Gunn asked Houser if he was familiar with the infill guidelines that the Commission is working with and if he had the guidelines in mind when designing the building. Houser responded that he had not yet seen the infill guidelines at the design stage. Gunn said there is a mandatory list under A, which is something that everyone is obligated to abide by. He said after a first look, he doesn't really see anything on the mandatory side that this would not conform to. Gunn said the design point items in B are considered to be the choice of the applicant to get up to 20 points. He said this proposal certainly gets up to 20 points easily. Gunn said he has no real concern with meeting the points and meeting the mandatory items, although he is not certain the plans are far enough along to say that the building would meet every one of the mandatory requirements. McCafferty said there is no information in terms of placement of mechanical and utility meters. Gunn agreed that there are small issues that would prevent the Commission from saying this adheres to the requirements. He said it looks pretty close. Gunn said the Commission is mostly discussing building style and whether this would fit in the neighborhood, although on the whole, this seems to meet the guidelines in most every way. Gunn said looking at these multi-family, three units plus buildings gets into a lot different design issues than the Commission normally deals with. He said the Commission actually wrote the separate guidelines, because the guidelines for single-family and duplex don't mean much in an instance like this. McCallum asked what the zoning is at this location. McCafferty replied that it is an RNC-20 zone. Maharry said the last mandatory item regarding building styles would be what McCafferty has proposed, "Design elements from existing architectural styles found on contributing structures within the district..." He said that was a mandatory element and not part of the points system. Gunn asked Houser if he plans to put in casement windows, as drawn in the plans. Houser said he could put in single-hung windows, which look the same as double-hung but require less maintenance, if that were acceptable to the Commission. Maharry asked Houser what his timeline was for this building. McCafferty said the Commission should determine if it has a consensus or not for Houser to proceed with one of the designs. She said at the next meeting, Houser could then provide the Commission with detailed elevations, dimensions, materials, and color. McCafferty added that if Houser uses brick, the color makes a big difference. Smothers said she would also like to have Houser provide the color of the vinyl, if vinyl will be used on the building. Houser replied that he has used a brownstone brick, with a cream-colored siding. McCafferty suggested a brownish palette for the bottom. Smothers asked about using the muntin bars, twelve-paned, for the windows. Houser said those are drawn on all the plans as a matter of course. He said if he does use them, they would have to be in the window that is a standard from the manufacturing or none. He said the person who draws the prints put muntins in all of them. Smothers said she likes muntins, but she does not think there is a twelve-paned window in the neighborhood. Gunn said he did not believe there were muntins, in the immediate neighborhood at least. Maharry said this needs to incorporate some elements from the district, and those are two of them. He said he could not specifically think of any more, but he believes this changes this and gives it the appearance that has some elements of other buildings. Houser asked if the Commission then wants to see single-hung windows with no muntins. Maharry confirmed this and referred to above the windows and Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 13, 2003 Page 5 the brick arch. McCafferty said the brick color will be important, and Smothers mentioned eliminating the keystone. McCaffedy said the Commission's next meeting would be held on the second Thursday in April. She recommended that Houser have discussions with her so that if she sees something that is way off base, she can [et him know right away. McCafferty said this should give adequate direction to proceed. Houser asked if the Commission wants to keep the brick archways and that kind of stuff. Maharry said that on McCafferty's drawing two elements stand out: the arch and the simple design above the windows. McCafferty said around the windows she thought thera could be a soldier course at the top and then just a stacked brick around the bottom. Gunn said the Commission is not really looking at much different on the masonry than what Houser has proposed anyway. Houser said mainly the porch, but the arches get fairly expensive. He said as long as he doesn't have to do them in the back, then he doesn't have a problem with it. McCafferty said there is a different stairwell configuration on the back. She informed Houser that she would get him the guidelines for the exterior stairwell in the back. She added that the Commission is less concerned about the back than it is about what can be seen from the street. Gunn asked about the proposed material for the floor of the porch structure. Houser said he planned to use a composite material, something that would be durable. He said if he uses a white trim with a white window, then he would use a white material as best he could for the railing. Gunn asked about the deck itself, since it is open and has to shed water. Houser said he would use some kind of tracks made out of a composite material. He said it would not be a solid surface. Maharry said McCafferty's design with the railings would probably have to include all of the rails. McCafferty said she did the drawing fairly quickly. She said she would envision the brick making up about 18 inches of the rail, with a shorter rail up on top, so that it's not open all the way down, to get a bigger, beefier brick area between. McCafferty said a portion of the floor area would be brick, so that there would be a small railing. She said the Commission could look at some options. Maharry said the all the vertical lines make the structure seem taller. He said eliminating the vertical lines and simplifying the porch and getting rid of those vertical lines makes the building seem more horizontal to the eye. He said he is not wedded to the arch idea. Carlson added that he does not see the arch on the buildings in the neighborhood. Maharry suggested something straight across above the windows, instead of an arch. He said it would be less expensive and could perhaps use a single piece of masonry. McCafferty said doing the lintel now requires a steel beam plate across, and then it just sits on the steel. She said what one sees underneath is steel that is usually painted out the color of the brick, so that it is really not a true masonry detail. Gunn asked how the cost of a limestone lintel compares to the cost of a soldier course. Houser said the limestone is three to four times as expensive. He said usually precast concrete is used, and the cost is one and one-half to two times as expensive as a soldier course. McCafferty said the primary issue with doing a soldier course for the sill is that the joints are exposed to snow and weather, and there is often cracking and water problems with joints on a horizontal surface. She said that is why precast or limestone is often used on the sill. Houser said that is why he typically does his in a cast or a limestone sill. He said if you go around and look at a lot of brick structures, they end up with aluminum caps over a good chunk of the brick so that if it does give or crack at all, then you don't get the water going into there as much. Houser said then you're kind of defeating your whole purpose. Enloe said it's true that the elevations that show all brick look like a lot of mass. Maharry said he likes the look of the banding between the second and third floor. He asked if there were other examples of this in the district. McCafferty said her building has that, and Weitzel pointed out another building that has banding. Houser said he would prefer brick on the third floor because it is less maintenance. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 13, 2003 Page 6 McCafferty said she is looking at the stylistic issue. She said typically when you try to fit it into the arts and crafts vernacular, because of the hipped roof, in terms of the stylistic issues, to meet the mandatory items pulling it all up will be more of a benefit. McCafferty said it will be more difficult to fit it into a stylistic category if you pull it down. Gunn said the banding could be a soldier course of a brick. McCafferty agreed. Gunn said Houser could have brick all the way up but just change the brick to break up the lines. Gunn asked Houser when he expects to start construction on this building. Houser said he plans to begin at the end of summer. He said he would like to have the plans approved, however, so that he can get it bid early and have plenty of time. Houser said he would like to have this part done in the next 30 days or SO. Maharry asked about the potential for moving the house. Houser said Maharry could have the house if he wanted it. He said the house has been well used, and there is not much worth saving. Houser said he would have no problem with someone else moving the house or with salvaging any of the materials instead of taking them to the landfill. Gunn pointed out that it would be difficult for the Commission to approve the preliminary design. He said this is going in the right direction, however. Gunn stated that if Houser works with McCafferty, when this comes before the Commission again, he did not believe the Commission would change the plans. Houser said he expected to then remove the keystones, straighten the brick around the windows and change the entry door more to the way McCafferty has drawn it so that the first floor looks like more of walkway. McCafferty said she also raised it up a couple of steps outside the doorway so that it is not just fiat on the concrete pad. Houser said he would probably do that anyway, because he will have to elevate this a little bit because it's a flood plain. McCafferty added that on buildings of this era, including McCallum's and the bungalows in this area that have brick porches, the brick goes all the way down, as opposed to earlier Victorians that might have a rusticated foundation that is exposed. Houser said he would use single-hung windows and no muntins. He said he would use a hipped porch type deal over the roof. Houser asked Gunn if he wanted to see a row along the third floor to break up the brick a little bit. McCafferty suggested it be right below the windows. Gunn said rather than stucco, it could just be a soldier course or maybe a slight change in brick color. McCafferty noted that the next Commission meeting would be held the second Thursday in April. She said if she and Houser can have things finalized by noon of the first Friday in April, she should have enough time to present it to the Commission at the next meeting. Houser mentioned that he has recently constructed the buildings behind the Hampton Inn in Coralville if Commission members would like to get a visual of how he used the brick for three-story buildings in that instance. CURRENT PROJECTS AND TASKS: Downtown Historic District: McCafferty stated that this is the next big item on the Commission's to-do list. She said she and Maharry recently met with Julie Foreman, Director of the Downtown Association, and she also met with Josh Schaumburger, of the Iowa City/Coralville Visitor Convention Bureau. McCafferty referred to the list she had prepared of things to do with regard to a downtown district. She said one of the things the Commission has discussed is doing a presentation regarding downtown. McCafferty suggested the Commission prepare some kind of sheet or brochure to provide notification to downtown property owners and interested parties and to familiarize people with what the Commission has in mind. She said there could then be a PowerPoint presentation to which interested parties would be invited. McCafferty said she is currently working on guidelines for the CB-10 and CB-5 districts. She said some of the things could be incorporated into the underlying design guidelines, the guidelines for underlying Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 13, 2003 Page 7 zoning that would apply everywhere. McCafferty said she will get the recommendation for the underlying guidelines and then build on that to do the historic district. McCallum asked McCaffer[y if she knew what was going on with Chuck Goldberg and the (SSMID) District and if there is any incentive that could come from that. McCafferty said it appears the Commission will be ready to go prior to the (SSMID) District. She said Karin Franklin and Steve Atkins have been asking her about the progress of the work on downtown, so they are anxious to proceed. McCafferty said in talking with Foreman, what the Commission can do is put together an application to the Economic Development Commission to ask to earmark a portion of its money for fa(;ade improvement loans. She said the Commission needs to apply to have that money committed, and she expected to ask for between $60,000 and $75,000 in order to provide no interest or very Iow interest loans. McCafferty said once a (SSMID) comes into place, what the Commission would want to do then would be to work with them to get a grant program going for fa(;ade improvements. She said that would provide free money as opposed to a loan. She said the business owner would be taxed at a higher rate, and that tax money gets reinvested into the downtown. McCafferty said the City would like to see fa(;ade improvement, and the Commission wants to insure that it is supportive of the historic character. She said the Commission would want to try to therefore work with the Design Review Committee. McCafferty said if the district is in place, the Commission would actually be the design review committee. McCallum said he likes the concept of loans, because that money is renewable. McCafferty said the City Council likes that idea too, but from the point of view of a business owner, free money is better. McCafferty said the Commission will need to put together a campaign, including a presentation to inform people, while at the same time moving ahead. She stated that other tasks include preparing maps and guidelines. Gunn asked McCafferty if she were thinking of the possibility of a conservation district for downtown. McCafferty said that right now, the College Street Pedestrian Mall is not within an historic district, because one side of the block does not have historic integrity left. She said, however, that the south side of the block still has quite a bit of integrity. McCafferty said she would recommend doing portions of the area as a conservation district in order to have control of the whole area. McCallum said a lot of the businesses downtown are leased businesses. He asked if the Commission would require the permission of the property owners to do this and who the Commission should focus on to get this done. McCafferty said that if there is pressure from the lessees to the landlords, that acts as encouragement to the landlords, the property owners, to have the district designated. McCallum asked if the public relations efforts should then be targeted to both the business and property owners. McCafferty confirmed this. McCafferty said Foreman was very positive about this. Maharry agreed but said the bottom line is that Foreman did not want this to cost the owners money. He said obviously downtown owners would support something that gave them undue restrictions and didn't cost them more money to do something than they otherwise would spend. Maharry said Foreman was very positive, but he feels the main stumbling block with the business owners will be that they will have more restrictions and it will cost them more money to do something than they would otherwise pay. McCafferty said she learned that, from Foreman's previous experience, in the Quad Cities there are historic properties that have a lot more of the original materials in place. She stated therefore, to replace a wood window that has deteriorated, the owner has to replace it with a window of like material, rather than with an aluminum flame, Iow maintenance window. McCaffer[y said in that sense, the cost was quite a bit higher than it would have been to use standard materials. She said one of the advantages here, although not historically, is that there are not very many original storefronts left downtown. McCafferty said perhaps the guidelines can be written to offer technical and design expertise such that standard materials can be used but put together in a way that is historically appropriate in terms of the design. McCafferty said the downtown subcommittee is currently composed of Maharry, Smothers, and McCallum. Maharry asked if a subcommittee meeting should be scheduled to go over the tasks on the list for a downtown district. McCafferty agreed and said she would send out e-mails to find an agreeable time. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 13, 2003 Page 8 Historic Preservation Awards: Maharry said he just came from the Johnson County Historic Preservation Commission meeting where he mentioned the need to get applications out and advertise for submissions for the awards. He said the date has not yet been set. Widness said Historic Preservation Week is usually sometime around the teen dates in May. Maharry suggested holding the awards presentation on the Wednesday of Historic Preservation Week as in the past. He said the Commission needs to divide up the tasks for the event. Maharry said the Commission needs to decide on a location. McCafferty said the Commission also needs nominations and said she would prepare a press release for various newspapers to call for nominations. Maharry said the Commission also needs to consider a candidate for the Nowysz Award. McCafferty said the Nowysz Award goes to someone who has been outstanding in preservation efforts over time, although the award was not presented last year. Widness said the meeting place for the awards should be the first priority. Gunn suggested the Masons Building, as the event has been held there in the past. McCallum said one of the downtown churches might be a possibility, and the Unitarian Church was mentioned as a possibility. Widness said it is important that the building have a room that is dark enough to show slides and big enough to hold the 90 to 100 people who attend. Smothers volunteered to make telephone calls to find an organization willing to allow the event to be held in its building. Maharry asked Commission members to look for anything that should be nominated in the categories of: painting, porch restoration, additions, stewardship, commercial, and fa(;ade improvement. Gunn suggested looking particularly at the College Hill area for nominations. Carlson suggested people talk to contractors who do preservation work around town to get ideas for nominees. McCafferty said the Commission also needs to determine who should speak and present the awards at the event. She asked Commission members to e-mail her with any ideas. McCafferty stated that Marlys Svendsen might be willing to present awards and also discuss the downtown area. Maharry asked McCafferty to e-mail the Commission in the interim with things to do on the checklist. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: FEBRUARY 27, 2003: MOTION: Widness moved to approve the minutes of the February 27, 2003 Historic Preservation Commission meeting, subject to typographical corrections and clarifications to be submitted by Carlson. Weitzel seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. QTHER: McCafferty said it has been suggested that the packets be available to Commission members on-line to save on printing and postage costs. Gunn said Commission members need paper copies at the meeting for discussion purposes anyway, especially when making changes to guidelines or doing other updating to written text. The consensus of the Commission was to have the minutes e-mailed, at least on a test basis. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte data on c~tynt/pcd/min ut es/h pc03-13-03,doc MINUTES APPROVED ~ PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 20, 2003 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Benjamin ChaR, Beth Koppes, Ann Bovbjerg, Ann Freerks, Don Anciaux MEMBERS ABSENT: Jerry Hansen, Dean Shannon STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Shelley McCafferty, Mitch Behr OTHERS PRESENT: Corey Hodapp, Dean Spina, Daniel Bernstein, Sarah Horsager, Henry Claustermann, Kristin Wingate RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 5-0, REZ03-00004, an application submitted by the Historic Preservation Commission combining the Longfellow Historic District and the Moffitt Cottage Historic District into one historic district named the Longfellow Historic District. Recommended approval, by a vote of 5-0, SUB03-00003, a preliminary plat of Windy Meadows Addition, a 13.43 acre, 2-lot residential subdivision with two outlots located in Fringe Area C, outside the growth area, at 3125 Rohret Road SW, including the variance in road standard. CALL TO ORDER: Bovbjerg called the meeting to order at 7:35 pm. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES ON CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: Bovbjerg said a listing of current vacancies on the various boards and commissions was posted in the outer lobby. ZONING ITEMS: REZ03-00009, discussion of an application from CJs Construction Inc. for a rezoning from High Density Single-Family/Sensitive Areas Overlay (RS-12/OSA), to Planned Development Housing Overlay (OSA/OPDH-12) on 2.21 acres to allow the development of 13 townhouse style units located at the southeast corner of Meadow Ridge Lane and Nor[h Dubuque Street. McCafferty said the application was for 13 townhouse style units in addition to a single family house. A memorandum had been included in the information packets which addressed questions that had been raised at the previous meeting. In 1983 the property was rezoned from R1-A, Single-Family Residential, to RS-12, High Density Single-Family Residential. Meadow Ridge Part I, was platted in 1989. Meadow Ridge II, the property currently being considered was platted in 1996. Most of the houses along Meadow Ridge Lane were constructed in 1990 or sometime there after. In 1988 a traffic signal study was done at the corner of Dubuque Street and Foster Road. At that time it was concluded that a signalization of that intersection was pre-mature, however it was approaching the threshold for signalization, in 1996 a study found that there had been no significant changes since 1988. In 1999 it was determined that a signal was justified based on federal signal warrants as well as on growth of the Peninsula west of Dubuque Street. There have been no reported traffic fatalities at this intersection between 1993 and 2003. The primary purpose for recommending a traffic signal are the traffic delays along Foster Road or BJ's Ville Lane. A memorandum from Jeff Davidson was also included in the information packet which addressed parking issues that had been raised. McCafferty said at this time there is a curb on only one side of the street (old Hwy. 218). Parking on the street is currently allowed. If the proposed additional condominiums increased Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes March 20, 2003 Page 2 the need for parking or persons began parking on the street, it would be allowed on only one side of the street as long as there was enough space between the vehicles to allow the passage of emergency vehicles. If heavy parking along the road occurred, it would be prohibited, as safety would be the first priority. The applicant had indicated he was willing to install Grasscrete, a concrete paver, which allowed grass to grow through the concrete, allowed for drainage and provided green coverage, to provide 2 or 3 guest parking spaces in the development. McCafferty said Staff recommended approval of this project. However, based on the Commission's conversation at Monday's informal meeting and because two Commissioners were absent at this meeting, they might wish to consider a deferral. Public discussion was opened. Core¥ Hodapp, applicant, said he had worked with Staff regarding this project as to what aim he should take, how many units were possible, what should he do with the project, and to receive their feedback. Hodapp said Staff had worked with him on the project making suggestions as to what should or should not be done, what they thought looked right and what they thought would be acceptable to the Commission. Hodapp said he felt that he had met all the requirements that had been asked of him and was hopeful for a position recommendation. He had done everything he could to please everyone. Bovbjerg said the aim of the Commission was to bring many ways of looking at a project to the table. That was why frequently a project was scrutinized very carefully and possibly altered by the Commission or Council. The process included Staff, Commissioners or the City Council looking at a project trying to do the best thing for the project and for entire neighborhood and for the City. That was why at least two meetings were utilized. Dean Spina, attorney representing the applicant, said the efficient use of land in Iowa City obviously balanced the City's interest in promoting the high density single-family development that had been zoned in this particular tract with the desire to maintain green space. Staff had shown that it had been 20-years zoned as RS-12. The adjacent lots had been platted subsequent to the initial zoning for this padicular tract of land. Hodapp's proposal would bring to this area new housing styles which were part of the Comprehensive Plan goals for the City. In light of the use of the land for high density single-family dwellings, the current zoning for 6-duplex units plus an existing home, was perhaps not an appropriate number of new units to put in the area. The applicant's proposal or possible alternatives for laying out the land should also be considered. They had asked some engineers about potentially platting the site. A potential drawback had been the City's requirement for a public street, which actually required a stub cul- de-sac to accommodate additional lots. That actually meant that one-half of the lot would be either paved or street which allowed a very limited use for the desired high density single-family use. Hodapp's proposal provided an accommodation to the needs of the City in terms of promoting diverse housing style and moderately priced housing, but perhaps in a way which clustered the number of units to be put on the site as opposed to dividing the parcel up into lots. Spina said since it was an OSA district, Hodapp's proposal was compatible with the district and the overlay language of increasing density in one place to protect green space in another place. He said that factor should be considered in terms of the transfer and the ordinance did use the language, "transfer of density from the green space to the developable land." Spina said the applicant felt that because the units would be in a condominium regime that the price would be significant enough so that the current residents would have good neighbors and the concerns that they had expressed would not occur. He said if there were specific things that needed to be addressed, they could do so in the process of drafting the regime for the condominium in terms of usage if those things could be clearly articulated. Spina said the proposed 13 units would have a positive impact on the City. With the proximity of this parcel to the University and to downtown, it was far more likely that residents there would use the bus or bike in as opposed to the same number of residents having to find other accommodations in other parts of Iowa City, Coralville or North Liberty, where they would be less likely to use the City bus or bicycle. The proposed family units would have a positive benefit in terms of ecology, use of alternative transportation and use of the land. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes March 20, 2003 Page 3 The required 40-foot setback from the arterial street would use a significant part of the yard of this parcel. Therefore they had requested a reduction to 29-feet. Spina said he could identify two benefits for the use of a 40-foot setback, one would be a sound barrier and/or reduction of sound by distance. Second, if in the future the City were to need to potentially expand an arterial road the additional setback would accommodate future condemnations. Because the street was located there already, it provided addifional land as a buffer to sound. There appeared to be no need for a future expansion of the arterial road through condemnation. Spina said therefore it would appear that the two primary purposes of a 40-foot setback would not be adversely impacted by allowing a reduction in the setback. Spina said the Comprehensive Plan also called for diverse housing to meet the needs of a diverse population. He had looked at the Plan and also at a 2002 community profile on the city's web site. Both supported action in improving this proposal. Spina said he had found references to "density of 5-7 dwelling units per acre making it easier and less expensive for the City to provide municipal services" and "compact design promoting moderate priced housing". He had also found that the number of housing units shown in the profile and the number of duplex building permits issued in Iowa City, Coralville and North Liberty for 2001 were almost identical - 17 duplex units in Iowa City, 19 in Coralville, 18 duplex unit permits in North Liberty. Spina said it struck him that perhaps there was an area of housing needs that could be addressed and included in Iowa City's solutions to housing by approving this proposal that would allow the number of duplex units as well as the additional 4- or 5-plexes. The dispersal of housing through this area would have many benefits to the community and also meet the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. He asked the Commission to approve the applicant' s proposal. Daniel Bernstein, 1958 Meadow Ridge Lane, said he'd downloaded part of the Comprehensive Plan and other items from the web site. He asked if it was correct that the applicant had requested two variances, one of which was because multiple dwellings were put together so closely that there needed to be a variance because of the density of the projected dwellings. McCafferty said there was a general provision in the Zoning Ordinance that stated in an RS-12 zoning, there could not be multiple buildings or one lot. The variation was from that particular part of the ordinance to allow multiple primary buildings in an RS zone. Bernstein asked if a variance had been requested with respect to the required setback. McCafferty said that was correct. Typically a 40-foot setback was required with an arterial, the applicant had requested a 30-foot setback from the right-of-way line of Dubuque Street which included old Hwy 218. Bernstein asked for an explanation regarding fees in lieu of open space. McCafferty said open space was required to be dedicated to the City for purposes of parks. In this case there was not open space on this lot that the Parks and Recreation Commission would want to accept and maintain for a public park. Therefore they had requested fees in lieu of, to invest in other area parks. Bernstein said with respect to diversity, the applicant claimed that his proposal was an introduction to a new living style type of living abode, mainly mulfi-family dwellings. Bernstein said it was only one type of unit, with a modification that went along with the same type of unit. He was not sure that that was diversity, even though Staff believed it was adding diversity to the area. It added only one new type of dwelling to the area, so it did not make for diverse housing in the Meadow Ridge Lane area. Bernstein said with respect to open space, he had noted in the Northern District Plan thai citizens who had helped with the Plan had affirmed that existing open space was one of the District's greatest assets. Concerns had been expressed that while natural areas abounded in the North District, there was little permanent protection for those areas and there was a shortage of active park space available for area residents. Bernstein said when discussing open space, they were talking about a couple of different things. Once was to in some way control the density of the population of Iowa City. Second was that open spaces acted as a buffer between populated areas, trafficked areas and higher density areas. Third that open spaces were innately beautiful and added to the view of Iowa City. Previously there had been discussion of the beautiful sweep of Dubuque Street as persons entered Iowa City. A lot of that area had not been developed. Already there were the Mayflower apartments and the newer apartment buildings further north along Dubuque Street. The proposed units would be another housing development that would be visible on the way in to Iowa City, which Bernstein felt would reduce the beauty of entering into Iowa City and drastically reduce the buffer between areas of dense population and Meadow Ridge Lane itself for persons living on Meadow Ridge Lane. It would also increase the density of the population in the area of Meadow Ridge Lane. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes March 20, 2003 Page 4 Bemstein said at the last meeting there had been a discussion as to whether a developer should have some sort of heads-up. Developers worked with Staff to develop their plans, then when they went before the Commission they then received arguments from persons who lived in the area. Bernstein said under the operating procedures of the Handbook for Members of Boards, Commissions and Committees, the Iowa City Council supported the principles of the open meetings law. All the Commissions had open meetings in which the public was invited to take part. Bernstein said he would suggest that any heads up that the developers received were not limited to those of Staff's, the Commission's and Council's input, but should also include input from the public. It was not just a matter of meeting the numbers in terms of the ordinance. The heads up that a developer received should include the residents of the neighborhood, which they were getting now. It was only fair that since the open meetings were held, that the neighbors should have their say and it should count for something. Bernstein said in terms of safety more would be presented by other members of the audience. However it was his understanding that Interstate 80 would be further widened to three and eight lanes. That would create a concomitant increase in traffic, which would cause the traffic flow on Dubuque Street into Iowa City to become even heavier in the future. Bernstein said they would ask that the Commission give due consideration to any planned housing development in that area that would increase traffic on Foster Road and cause more problems getting onto Dubuque Street from the housing development on Meadow Ridge Lane. Sarah Horsaqer, 1958 Meadow Ridge Lane, said the applicant's attorney had talked about the option of not having a car and using the bus or a bicycle in that area. Horsager said she had not owned a car in over eight years. She said it had become impossible for her to use her bicycle after she moved onto Meadow Ridge Lane. The intersection at Foster Road and Dubuque Street, even at Iow traffic flows during the day, was not a safe place to cross. Traffic at the intersection moved at approximately 40- to 50- miles per hour. It took approximately 15 seconds to cross the intersection, but at no time during the day was it safe to bike from that development to other areas. The bus was an option, but the bus stop was within 6-feet of traffic that flowed at 40- to 50-mph. That could be unsettling. Horsager showed a video of traffic at the Foster Road and Dubuque Street intersection at peak traffic times, 7:45 am - 8:00 am. Horsager said she felt she needed to ask the Commission to think really carefully about what more cars at that intersection would actually do. It was not just a matter of their safety, although she hoped it would be taken into consideration. It was a matter of safety for everyone who traveled that intersection - hundreds of persons a day. In the packet of information that they had submitted to the Commission, they had noted that development in the peninsula area had increased traffic in the area as well. Before the density in the area was increased, the Commission needed to think carefully about whether or not it could be done safely and ensure the safety of persons who were at that intersection on a daily basis. Henry Claustermann, 1925 Meadow Ridge Lane, said he had purchased a lot and built there in 1994. He didn't know that a multi-story building would be built on the corner. That would add a lot of problems which had already been presented, such as the traffic problem. At times, a person could wait up to 10 minutes at the intersection to get out. That was not only at rush hour, but at most any time during the day. He had seen a lot of accidents occur there. He asked that when the Commission considered the application that they consider all those issues. Parking along the street would also be a problem. Claustermann said no one really parked along old Hwy 218 now which was a fairly narrow street, not a wide area as someone had said earlier. It was a very narrow street. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Chair made a motion to defer REZ03-00009, a rezoning from High Density Single Family Residential/Sensitive Areas Overlay (RS-12/OSA) to Planned Development Housing Overlay (RS- 12/OSA/OPDH) and an amendment to a Sensitive Areas Development Plan on 2.21 acres to allow construction of 13 townhouse-style units in addition to an existing family house located at the southeast corner of Meadow Ridge Lane and North Dubuque Street. Koppes seconded the motion. Chait said he moved to defer so more Commissioners could be present when a vote occurred. Koppes said that was her reason for deferring also. Bovbjerg said this item was a rezoning which required 4 out of 7 votes to pass. As had occurred in the past, it would be wise to have seven persons present to discuss the matter and an additional two weeks Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes March 20, 2003 Page 5 to consider the application. On Monday evening at the informal meeting, when the applicant's lawyer had been present, the Commissioners had discussed that a number of them would like to see a reduction in the number of units. It would be up to the applicant if he wished to consider or not consider that suggestion. The Commission had wrestled with the traffic problem which was actually outside the actual application which they were looking at but which was frustrating for everyone. She felt a deferral would give them two more weeks to think and to allow seven opinions and seven votes at the next meeting. Freerks said she felt it would be good to have all Commissioners present when a vote occurred. She would like to see the applicant reduce the number of units by a few units and the project would have less of an impact. Issues that were being discussed at certain levels would be discussed at different levels. The variance was very important to increasing the density, allowing the variation was a big step because it would have a big impact. She wished the applicant would give that some consideration. Anciaux said he would like to have all Commissioners present and to have two more weeks to consider the application. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. REZ03-00004., discussion of an application submitted by the Historic Preservation Commission combining the Longfellow Historic District and the Moffitt Cottage Historic District into one historic district named the Longfellow Historic District. McCafferty said the letter of recommendation had been received from the State. The Commission was now clear to vote. Staff recommended approval of REZ03-00004. Freerks asked if the letter was clear enough for the Commission to vote on the application. McCafferty said it met the requirements. In her discussion with Carrie McGrath, they were rather understaffed at the State level so perhaps it did not sound as if the letter addressed the issue on the table, but it really did. Public discussion was opened. There was none. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Anciaux made a motion to approve REZ03-00004, an amendment to combine the Longfellow Historic District and the Moffitt Cottage Historic District into one historic district named the Longfellow Historic District. Chair seconded the motion. Anciaux called the question. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. DEVELOPMENT ITEM: SUB03-0000~, discussion of an item submitted by Kristine Wingate for a preliminary plat of Windy Meadows Addition, a 13.43 acre, 2-lot residential subdivision with two outlots located in Fringe Area C, outside of the growth area, at 3125 Rohret Road SW. Miklo said the County had recently approved the rezoning on this consistent with the City's recommendation for approval based on the Fringe Area Agreement. The rezoning included a concept plan for a two lot subdivision with two outlots for open space. The plat had one variance from the fringe area requirements. The roadway normally would be 60-feet wide with a 22-foot wide chip-seal surface. The applicant had proposed a 40-foot wide easement with a gravel road surface. If the area ever had further development then the roadway could be brought up to fringe area standards. Since the roadway was essentially a driveway for Lot 2, Staff felt it was reasonable to allow the variance. Staff recommended approval of SUB03-00003, including the road standards. Public discussion was opened. Kristine Winqate, 2801 Hwy 6 East, said the only change they requested was the name of the road. County Staff had not yet conferred with them for a final name so they would ask to stay with the addition's name and use Windy Meadow Lane. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Freerks made a motion to approve SUB03-00003, a preliminary plat of Windy Meadows Addition, a 13.43 acre, 2-lot residential subdivision with two outlots located in Fringe Area C, outside of the growth Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes March 20, 2003 Page 6 area, at 3125 Rohret Road SW including the variance in road standard. Koppes seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. OTHER: CONSIDERATION OF 3/06/03 MEETING MINUTES: Anciaux made a motion to approve the minutes as printed and corrected. Koppes seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. ADJOURNMENT: Koppes made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:22 pm. Chair seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. Jerry Hansen, Secretary Minutes submitted by Candy Barnhill FINA L/APPR O VED POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES- March 11, 2003 CALL TO ORDER Chair John Stratton called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. ATTENDANCE Board members present: Loren Horton, John Watson, John Stratton; board member absent: Bev Smith. Legal Counsel Catherine Pugh (7:05) and Staff Kellie Turtle also present. Also in attendance was Captain Johnson of the ICPD. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by Horton and seconded by Watson to adopt the consent calendar as amended. Watson made an amendment to the minutes of 3-4-03 changing the language of one sentence in old business. Minutes of the meeting on 03/04/03 · ICPD General Order 99-06 (Internal Affairs Investigations) · ICPD General Order 01-06 (Juvenile Procedures) · ICPD Standard Operating Guideline 03-01 (Vehicle Crashes, Crash Review) · ICPD Use of Force Report - January 2003 Motion carried, 3/0, Smith absent. NEW BUSINESS · Importance of Attendance Stratton noted an attendance chart and the by-laws on attendance, which were included in the Board's packet. Pugh asked about rescheduled meetings in regards to absenteeism. Pugh stated that special meetings are not regular monthly meetings, but are meetings that ara called by the Chairperson or at the request of at least three or more members of the Board. The Board agreed that a rescheduled monthly meeting should be treated as a regular meeting, not a special meeting. The by-laws state that if you miss three consecutive regular meetings as unexcused it is reason for removal. Pugh suggested amending the by-laws for clarification of regular meetings versus special meetings. Stratton asked Pugh to draft an amended by-law for the Board to consider. OLD BUSINESS Watson wanted to acknowledge and appreciate that the Chief changed the age of consent from 12 to 14. Stratton stated that there was a copy of the memo regarding traffic stops that was sent to the City Manager in their packet. PUBLIC DISCUSSION Captain Johnson stated that Kevin Hurd has already started exploring the addition of traffic stop information to the website. BOARD INFORMATION No Board information. DR~4FT STAFF INFORMATION Tuttle asked if listing NACOLE's website on the index sheet was satisfactory with the Board. The Board agreed that it was. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by Watson and seconded by Horton to adjourn into Executive Session. Motion carried, 3/0, Smith absent. Open session adjourned at 7:26 p.m. Based on Section 21.5(1 )(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11 ) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. REGULAR SESSION Returned to regular session at 8:35 p.m. MEETING SCHEDULE · April 9, 2003, 7:00 P.M., Lobby Conference Room · May 13, 2003, 7:00 P.M., Lobby Conference Room · May 27, 2003, 7:00 P.M., Lobby Conference Room · July 1,2003, 7:00 P.M., Lobby Conference Room The Board agreed to add an additional May 27th meeting and due to their busy schedules, cancelled the June 10th meeting. The Board also agreed to reschedule their July 8th meeting to July 1s~. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Horton and seconded by Watson to adjourn. Motion carried, 3/0, Smith absent. Meeting adjourned at 8:44. FINAL/APPR O VED POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD ~ MINUTES - March 24, 2003 CALL TO ORDER Chair John Stratton called the meeting to order at 4:06 p.m. ATTENDANCE Board members present: Loren Horton, John Watson, John Stratton; board member absent: Bev Smith. Legal Counsel Catherine Pugh and Staff Kellie Turtle also present. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by Horton and seconded by Watson to adjourn into Executive Session. Motion carried, 3/0, Smith absent. Open session adjourned at 4:07 p.m. Based on Section 21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. REGULAR SESSION Returned to regular session at 4:28 p.m. Motion by Watson and seconded by Horton to schedule a name-clearing hearing for Complaint #02-01 for April 9, 2003, at 7:00 P.M. Motion carried, 3/0, Smith absent. Staff was directed to send appropriate letters. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Watson and seconded by Horton to adjourn. Motion carried, 3/0, Smith absent. Meeting adjourned at 4:32. MINUTES APPROVED PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE CIVIC CENTER LOBBY CQNFERENCE ROOM THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 2003 3:30 PM. Members Present: Barbara Camillo, Chuck Felling, James Hemsley, Betsy Klein, Terry Trueblood, Emily Walsh Members Absent: Rick Fosse Staff Present: Marcia Klingaman, Karin Franklin Call To Order Chuck Felling called the meeting to order at 3:35 PM. Public Discussion of any Item not on the Agenda None. Consideration of the Minutes of the February 6, 2003 Meetinq Barbara Camillo had a correction to the minutes. She had also volunteered to help with the Poetry on the Busses committee. MOTION: Trueblood moved to accept the minutes of February 6,2003 as submitted with the correction of adding Camillo to the Poetry on Busses committee. Camillo seconded the motion. All in favor, motion passed 6-0. Discussion of the Public Art Lonq-Ranqe Strategic Plan Karin Franklin summarized what had been discussed in the past noting a change in emphasis from the downtown to neighborhoods as locations for public art. She asked what direction and emphasis the committee wants to have for the future. Trueblood suggested that future plans could also be a part of a capitol improvement plan. Franklin and Trueblood stressed that flexibility is the key and the committee may need to reprioritize as different events come up. Felling shared copies of the Cedar Falls, Iowa long- term strategic plan. He stated that the Cedar Falls community plan seemed to follow this committees' goals and may be of help in planning. Franklin noted that the Public Art budget had been reduced from its original allocation of $100,000/year to $50,000/year. Felling referenced the procedural rules. Franklin stated those were basic rules of operation. She reminded committee members of the mission statement and objectives of PAAC and suggested that the members of the committee think about the group's objectives and bring a list to the next meeting to fill in an outline of strategies for the future and see if there is any commonality. This information can then be passed along to the City Council for their approval. Updates Ties That Bind - Franklin noted that they have wanted to get the sculpture on the Pedestrian Mall, but this has been delayed due to the Library construction. Gene Anderson's, "Waiting in the Wings", will be on display for one year as a part of the Iowa Sculptures showcase. Both sculptures should be installed this summer; hopefully dedication will be during the June Aris Festival. Weber Statue ~ Franklin noted the statue is being done in conjunction with the Lions Club. The statue is currently in the wax stage of casting. The installation will be by June of 2003 according to contract. There is consideration for moving the installation and dedication to August for Irving Weber Day. Walsh asked Public Art Advisory Committee March 6, 2003 Page 2 location of statue. The statue will be located on the north side of Linn Street and Iowa Avenue. The Lion's Club also wants to include a time capsule inside of the Weber Statue. Court Street Transportation Center - The center has been renamed. Franklin reported that the old name was the Near Southside Transportation Center. The complete funding for the project is uncertain but the Public Art aspect for the center is moving ahead. The Center is located on Court and Dubuque Streets and will include a bus terminal, taxi center, a parking ramp, bike parking and a daycare center. Franklin showed an example of the fence that will be used with the play area of the daycare center. The fence will be constructed of metal and built in panels with a support along the top and bottom. Neighborhood Art Program - Marcia Klingaman has put together a pamphlet to distribute at the neighborhood art meetings. This pamphlet explains the neighborhood art concept and provides information concerning the project. The Longfellow Neighborhood had a meeting at the end of February and the response was very favorable. An art concept was submitted from Jim Caulkins that gave an idea of what a mural on the Longfellow School might look like. The mural was a profile of Longfellow superimposed on the school building. Klingaman noted that Wetherby Neighborhood will be meeting next week to discuss the program and the Northside Neighborhood will also be meeting in the future. Franklin noted that the City Council will view the new Neighborhood Art Video and will be voting on the project Tuesday, March 11,2003. Poetry on the Buses - Klingaman reported that the name of the project has been changed to Poetry In Public. The change was due to the fact that the poetry will be displayed in other areas such as downtown kiosks, bus shelters, and the library, as well as buses. She also reported that Marvin Bell, poet laureate for Iowa, had been very helpful in getting the project going. The plan for the project is to include work from local poets and the screening committee will determine what work is chosen and placed. The project will begin in April and will coincide with national poetry month. They hope to duplicate the project in the fall of 2003 and provide an open invitation for anyone to provide poetry and to include more work from local schools. Trueblood questioned how the works will be presented, and will it be weather proof. Klingaman noted the most cost-effective way to present the poetry is to print on thin paper and then to laminate. The poems will be an eight line maximum and the finished posters will be 11" X 28". The entire committee had very positive comments on the program and for everyone participating. Committee Time/Other Business Klingaman handed out an example of the Community Initiated Public Art Application Procedure and Form. Adjournment MOTION: Trueblood moved to adjourn the meeting, Camillo seconded the motion. All in favor, motion passed 6-0. Meeting adjourned at 4:32 PM. data on c~tyntJpcd/minutesl03-06-03 doc