Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-09-15 Bd Comm minutes09-15-09 3b(1) MINUTES Approved PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION I I June 10, 2009 MEMBERS PRESENT: David Bourgeois, Lorin Ditzler, Maggie Elliott, Craig Gustaveson, Aaron Krohmer, Margie Loomer, Ryan O'Leary, Jerry Raaz, John Westefeld STAFF PRESENT: Mike Moran, Terry Robinson, Kris Ackerson GUESTS PRESENT: Diana Harris, Ed & Mary Flaherty, Pete Kollasch, Steve Merkel-Hess, Pete Brokaw RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Moved by Gustaveson, seconded by Bourgeois, to accept the one year contract proposal between the Citv and JC Do~PAC as presented by Do~PAC. Passed 7-1 with Krohmer opposing. Moved by Raaz, seconded by Bourgeois, that Citv Council vote for or against the Commissions recommendation to rename the Sand Lake Recreation Area the Terry Trueblood Recreation Area at their next Council Meeting. Unanimous. OTHER FORMAL ACTION TAKEN Neumann noted a change to the minutes on page 5, the section regarding "Neighborhood Meeting Updates." In this paragraph in the last sentence it states that the next neighborhood meeting is scheduled for June 2l, should state July 21. Moved by Bourgeois, seconded by Krohmer, to approve the Mav 13, 2009 minutes as revised. Unanimous. Moved by Krohmer to oppose the selling of city-owned land located immediately south of property owned by residents on Friendship St. until more information is gathered from the Iowa City Planning Department. No second. PUBLIC DISCUSSION Ed and Mary Flaherty, along with other neighborhood residents that live along Friendship St., were present at tonight's meeting to discuss their desire to purchase the land just south of their property from the City. In a letter written to Mike Moran and to the Parks and Recreation Commission, the neighborhood residents state that as each of them have tended and cared for the city property to the south of their homes for years, they believe it would be beneficial to the City and to them if the northern portion of the city-owned land were to be sold to them. Their intent is to bring forward an offer to the City Council and they are asking that the Commission to consider this matter and hopefully give their endorsement or neutrality on the proposal before they make a formal offer. Moran noted that the Public Works Department prefers that the City look at a land lease rather than a sale, thus still allowing City access to the property. Parks and Recreation Commission June 10, 2009 Page 2 of 8 Krohmer asked if there was a recommendation from the Planning Department regarding this property. Moran stated that there has not been. Krohmer is concerned with how the sale of this land will affect the district master plan. He is not sure that this property would be useful, but would like the Planning Department to have a part in the decision making process. Krohmer asked for clarification on the location of this property. Robinson reported that it is property running toward Meadow Street near Court Hill Park. Raaz asked what precedent has been in the past for these types of situations. Moran stated that as far as he knows there is none. Gustaveson asked property owners what they see as the advantage of taking ownership of this land. Flaherty stated that it is simply for long term planning, i.e. can we plant gardens on this land in ten years? He further noted that he would assume that there would be a permanent easement by the City, therefore, allowing access Westefeld asked for comments from the Commission. Gustaveson said he has no preference either way. Krohmer said he would like to hear from the Planning Department. Raaz noted that if we follow the recommendations of the Master Plan, the Department and Commission are to look at protecting land and in this case may need to look at the bigger picture. He would like to hear from other departments as well regarding proper or proposed land use for this area. Bourgeois also voiced his desire to hear from other departments before making a recommendation. Krohmer said he would vote against selling the property until more details are available. Elliot is hesitant to make a recommendation as well until we find out where the City stands. Moved by Krohmer to oppose the selling of city-owned land located immediately south of property owned by residents on Friendship St. until more information is gathered from the Iowa City Planning Department. No second. Bourgeois stated that the motion needs to include more detail. Moran will ask Planning for more information and their input and will report back to the property owners. Gustaveson suggested that if City does not sell to the residents, perhaps they should look into turning this into parkland. Item pending. WATER TRAIL APPLICATION UPDATE: Kris Ackerson, Assistant Transportation Planner, discussed two water trail grant programs that may fund improvements along the Iowa River. The Iowa Water Trails grant application (due October 31, 2009) funds water trail signs, kiosks, and maps, while the Low-head Dam Safety Cost Share Program (due June 30, 2009) provides money for portage trails and dam warning signs. The Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the City apply to both programs for improvements between Waterworks Prairie Park and City Park. Those improvements would include interpretive kiosks, directional signage, and a portage trail around the Iowa River Power Dam. Ackerson also noted that the City plans to submit two applications to the Iowa DOT State Recreation Trails Program for trails at Sand Lake and a pedestrian bridge over the Iowa River at Rocky Shore Drive. DISCUSSION OF DOGPAC SHARED USE AGREEMENT: JC DogPAC presented Parks and Recreation staff with a proposed agreement regarding sharing of fees. Parks and Recreation Commission June 10, 2009 Page 3 of 8 The new contract would run through June 30, 2010 with review at that time. This plan would continue the 90/10 split between DogPAC and the City. They presented some ideas regarding management and cost sharing measures to reduce the Parks and Recreation Department's park-related expenses. DogPAC's goal is to reduce the Parks and Recreation expenses 35-50%. Their ideas to achieve this are as follows: Change mowing schedule for Lucky Pawz/Emma's Run (TOP) and Rita's Ranch to once every 16 days; maintain Linder Tire at every 8 days. Frequent mowing in Linder Tire Yard needs to be continued as this is used by small dogs and their waste is easier to find in shorter grass. Also, smaller dogs are not as hard on the grass so that turf can remain healthy with more frequent mowing. • JC DogPAC will solicit sponsors to support the purchase of waste bags used at the off-leash parks. • Parks and Recreation has purchased and will install rubber mat at fence lines, thus removing the cost of trimming the fence lines. To raise revenue: Beginning l/1/10 change permit fee structure to $25/year with $5 discount for spay or neuter. Allow purchase of 3-year tags to coincide with expiration of rabies vaccination. Three-year fee would be $75 with a $15 discount for spay or neuter. • Increase event fees put on by JC DogPAC by $l . • JC DogPAC will investigate hiring county sheriff or city police to patrol off-leash parks at high- use times (evenings after 5 pm and weekends). DogPAC will provide a quarterly report of all of their expenses and revenues to the Parks & Recreation Department and Commission. Revenues will be used to directly benefit the existing dog parks, activities at the parks, and for the development of other dog parks in Iowa City as agreed upon by the City. DogPAC will also work with the Animal Center Foundation and the Iowa City Animal Shelter to sponsor events held at locations other than the Animal Center, where people can purchase permit tags. Parks and Recreation staff has discussed and are recommending the proposed agreement as written by DogPAC. Craig Gustaveson noted that people he has talked with have indicated their desire to have their money go back into maintenance of existing dog parks or establishment of new dog parks. He agrees that aone-year time frame for this agreement with reevaluation at that time is feasible with the idea that a longer term agreement be made in the future. Raaz referred to the Master Plan and that it says that we need to look at ways to increase revenue. He would like to see a more active role by the City in monitoring where this revenue is spent. He feels that there should be a threshold set at where DogPAC has to come to the City to grant permission for certain purchases. Robinson noted that staff would not let them do anything that would be deemed harmful. He does not think that DogPAC can legally make changes without department input. Parks and Recreation Commission June 10, 2009 Page 4 of 8 Krohmer says he is fine with the one-year agreement; however, it is his understanding that we are going to other affiliate groups to make changes. He feels that we should use this situation as a model; however, without any changes being made, this will not be the case. Westefeld feels that this particular case comes down to more than just money. He noted that there has been a long term relationship with DogPAC and that they have gone to great lengths to work in cooperation with the City. While he agrees that revenue is certainly important, there are many other factors to consider when making such agreements. Moved by Gustaveson, seconded by Bourgeois, to accept the one year contract proposal between the City and JC DogPAC as presented by DogPAC. Passed 7-1 with Krohmer opposing. DISCUSSION OF ANIMAL SHELTER: Moran reminded staff that at the May meeting Misha Goodman, Iowa City Animal Services Director, proposed the construction of the new animal shelter at the Sand Lake Recreation Area. Mike Moran discussed this issue with Misha and stated to her that staff and the Parks and Recreation Foundation Fund Raising Team for the Sand Lake Recreation Area are adamantly opposed to such construction as this was never a part of the initial planning for this parkland. SAND LAKE NAMING DISCUSSION: Mayor Regenia Bailey and John Westefeld will be meeting to go over this in more detail. It is her wish that the Commission discuss writing a naming policy. Gustaveson noted that he has recently discussed this with Mayor Bailey and in his opinion some of her concern is that naming of an entire park is perhaps somewhat grandiose, and perhaps Commission should consider naming a pier or a shelter for instance instead. At the time of this meeting, Gustaveson that he ha no issues with naming the entire park after Terry Trueblood, especially in-light of all of Trueblood's accomplishments during his tenure as Parks and Recreation Director. Westefeld asked for comments from other Commission members. Raaz suggested that it be discussed with the Sand Lake Recreation Area Fundraising Committee. Krohmer suggested that there should be a formal policy written and that it be noted that it not only be considered in cases where money has been donated. Dianna Harris, member of the audience, reminded Commissioners that this was proposed by Jean Walker, member of the public. O'Leary agreed that naming rights should be .applied in more cases than just those where money is donated. He does not want to give the impression that these privileges are for sale. Gustaveson would like to see this item on the Council agenda soon so that it can be discussed further. Moved by Raaz, seconded by Bourgeois, that City Council vote for or against the Commissions recommendation to rename the Sand Lake Recreation Area the Terry Trueblood Recreation Area at their next Council Meeting. Unanimous. Terry Robinson and Mike Moran met with Snyder and Associates regarding continued construction at the Sand Lake Recreation Area. It has been determined that the proposed beach to be placed at the north portion of this property is not feasible for such due to the amount of debris Parks and Recreation Commission June 10, 2009 Page 5 of 8 in this area. There is still to be considered the Public Works Building and the Furniture Project Building. Brian Gutheinz will be present at the July meeting to give a more detailed update of this project. PEDESTRIAN MALL LITTERING FINES: Bourgeois supports the idea of placing a fine as high as $500 on littering offenses. O'Leary stated that he doesn't consider it a waste of time for PD to handle these issues when you consider the impact on the general public. However, it needs to go beyond just the Pedestrian Mall. He feels it is important to keep the fines manageable and agrees with Bourgeois that $500 is feasible. He noted that there does need to be a period of education prior to enforcing the fines. He added that it may be a good idea to attach community service to a lesser fine. He also noted that it will depend on routine enforcement to be successful. Moran will let the Legal Department know of Commissions' wishes and will also work with the Downtown Association. BUDGET CUT UPDATE: Moran reported that a proposal to increase Cemetery Fees in FY10 will go before Council at their next meeting. The Cemetery Supervisor has discussed this proposal with local funeral directors who feel the increases are within reasonable limits. There will also be discussion of FY11 budget and the revenue increases proposed by the Parks and Recreation Department. COMMISSION TIME: He also recommended that we look closer at appropriate land use for properties and get a better understanding from the experts. Moran will discuss this with Planning and Zoning. Raaz commended Arts Festival organizers for a great event. Krohmer asked that we start the next Commission Meeting by going through the Master Plan, shared use agreements and naming issues. He suggested that perhaps the Commission form subcommittees to discuss these type of issues and report back to full Commission. Krohmer noted that in the transcripts from the recent Council Meeting that the incorrect Commission member names were attached to certain statements. Moran stated that he had to give names after the fact to Clerks Office and may have incorrectly identified some. Krohmer will call Clerk's office to correct. Loomer commended Mike Moran for the great job he is doing as Acting Director of the Parks and Recreation Department. Gustaveson brought up concern regarding a crossing located on First Avenue near the Hy-Vee. He has witnessed many near misses there and it is unclear who has right-away. Moran will follow-up with Engineering Gustaveson would like Commission to perhaps present City Council with a quarterly report. Moran said that he could certainly look into this. At this time, he only attends when we have something on the agenda Parks and Recreation Commission June 10, 2009 Page 6 of 8 or by request of Council or City Manager. Westefeld suggested that we further discuss this at the next meeting. Bourgeois reiterated that he would like to see improvements in the budget made through increased revenues. Ditzler suggested that meetings with the council be kept constructive and positive and kept in the spirit of relationship building. O'Leary stated that there are wires dangling from the entrance to the crosswalk on First Ave. so that it appears that lights were planned for this area. He agrees that more signage is necessary. O'Leary reiterated Ditzler's statements that meetings with Council be kept constructive and positive and also let them know that our priority is sticking to the Master Plan. O'Leary enjoyed the Arts Festival. One of his pet projects for the Master Plan is to create another festival. He would like to look at creating an international food festival and would like beer and wine be included in such an event. He reminded staff that Master Plan consultants were surprised that the City does not allow alcohol at its festivals. He also suggested that perhaps the "Terry Trueblood" (Sand Lake) Recreation Area be a great location for a festival or other special events as well. O'Leary thinks that we can make constructive suggestions on the littering issue. He noted that it is taxing our staff resources to keep ahead of the littering, especially on the Ped Mall. This proposal would be a gift to the rest of the city and he feels that this two-prong approach seems appropriate. He stated that he feels strongly enough that perhaps a motion be made that staff remove themselves from cleaning the Ped Mall until addressed. Ditzler supports the idea of writing a naming policy as a way to better balance opportunities for revenue. CHAIRS REPORT Westefeld talked with a reporter from the Press Citizen today about the Master Plan which will be ran in the Sunday newspaper. The Westefelds will be hosting apot-luck for Commission Members and staff. They will send out an email with possible dates. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Ditzler has talked with Moran about a better Commission orientation for new members. Moran will work with Ditzler on this. The next neighborhood meeting is July 21. O'Leary is signed up to attend. Tom Riley has approached staff about purchasing property that abuts up to the Mesquakie Park property where his business sits (Hawkeye Moving & Storage). Public Works is looking into possible environmental issues that may be a concern as this is the site of a previous dump. Parks and Recreation Commission June 10, 2009 Page 7 of 8 Moran distributed and reviewed fliers regarding summer programming at Grand Wood School. There is a new sex offender law going into effect on July 1 that will allow sex offenders to get permission to enter schools, recreation centers, pools, etc. The Recreation Division keeps close tabs on the sex offender list and makes sure that staff is aware of those that are on the list. Parks Department staff has been working on Riverside Festival Stage reconstruction. The Green Stage is being completed tonight and the first performance is also tonight. FEMA regulations have made it somewhat confusing, not knowing whose responsibility it is to rebuild, replace etc. Moved by Raaz, seconded by Bourgeois to adiourn at 7:00 p.m. Unanimous. Parks and Recreation Commission June 10, 2009 Page 8 of 8 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2009 NAME ~ ~ ,-, ~ ,..r ~ ~ cn o ~ e~ ~ ~ ^' o, TERM RES David Bour eois 1/1/ll X O/E X O/E X X Lori n Ditzler 1/1/l3 X X X X X X Maggie Elliott 1/1/13 X X X X X X _ Craig Gustaveson 1/ 1/ 11 O/E X X X X X Aaron Krohmer 1/1/13 O/E X X X X X Margaret Loomer l/1/12 X O/E X X O/E X Ryan O'Lea 1/1/10 X X O/E X X X Jerry Raaz l/1/12 X X X X X X John Westefeld 1/1/10 X X X X X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting LQ = No meeting due to lack of quorum 3b 2 MINUTES APPROVED HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION THURSDAY, JULY 9, 2009 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Thomas Baldridge, Lindsay Bunting Eubanks, William Downing, David McMahon, Jim Ponto, Ginalie Swaim, Alicia Trimble MEMBERS ABSENT: Esther Baker, Pam Michaud, Frank Wagner STAFF PRESENT: Robert Anderson, Christina Kuecker, OTHERS PRESENT: Helen Burford, Jeff Clark, Kristen Eastlund, Zach Eastlund, Russ Garrett, Brad Lynch CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Bunting Eubanks called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: Bunting Eubanks introduced McMahon as the new representative from the Longfellow District. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS: 607 Rundell Street. Anderson said this property is a contributing property in the Longfellow Historic District. He said the owners would like to replace eleven windows on a one and one-half story gable roof house. Anderson stated that ten of the windows are double hung windows, and one is a slider window. Anderson said that the proposed windows are Pella architect series wood windows and appear to be of the same dimensions as the original windows with the possible exception of the kitchen window. Anderson said that window is proposed in the application with three divided lights, and the kitchen window currently has four divided lights. Anderson the one other possible issue is the slider window. He said the guidelines recommend against modern-type windows unless they conform to the architectural style, and staff feels that this window does. Anderson said staff recommends approval of this project as proposed, with the option of three or four divided lights for the kitchen window. Lynch, the owner of the property, said he was available to answer any questions. Bunting Eubanks said the Commission frequently looks at window replacement, but windows can also be redone, which would be a cost savings. Kuecker pointed out that neither the kitchen window nor the slider window is on astreet-facing facade. She said that in a Craftsman house, especially a Moffitt House like this, it would not be atypical to find a slider type of window. MOTION: Swaim moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 607 Rundell Street as proposed in the application with the option of three or four divided lights for the kitchen window. Trimble seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Baker, Michaud, and Wapner absent). Historic Preservation Commission July 9, 2009 Page 2 6 South Johnson Street. Anderson said this is anon-historic property in the College Hill Conservation District. He showed a photograph of the current structure, which has a flat roof. Anderson stated that the applicant is proposing to add a pitched roof to the existing structure. Anderson said the applicable guidelines prohibit significant alterations to a roofline; however, exceptions have been made in the past, stipulating or allowing for any change that does not further detract from the historic character of the district, does not create a false historic character, and if it is compatible with the style and character of the non-historic property. He said staff feels this pitched roof is acceptable, as it does not conflict with any of the exceptions. Anderson stated that further, staff recommends that the simple option one be approved. He said it is the option without the dormers. Anderson said staff feels the simpler option is more consistent with the style and theme of the house. He said staff further recommends that a cornice board be placed below the roof and that a simple shingle be used. Clark said that what it does not show is that there is right now aluminum that goes down below the eaves. He said that is not going to be removed. Kuecker said staff was not sure if the cornice would be retained, and if it was going to go, they wanted something in place of that. Clark responded that if it does get removed, he would put the eight-inch cornice board on, but right now he does not believe it will be removed. Clark said the project is being done for drainage and to keep water away from the building. Downing said that this building is only eight years away from being eligible for historic status. He said that one of the challenges of historic preservation worldwide is that buildings that are too young for people to really have nostalgia for are going to move into this realm of historic preservation. Downing said that even now buildings are being lost to demolition because of this feeling. He said that maybe this is something that could be turned around some time in the future. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for 6 South Johnson Street as presented with the conditions that: the roof be constructed as shown in option one; either to leave the existing aluminum cornice or, if it is removed, to replace it with an eight-inch cornice; and simple shingles. Swaim seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-1, with Downing voting no (Baker, Michaud, and Wagner absent). 837 Maggard Street. Kuecker said this property is in the Clark Street Conservation District. She said this is a non- contributing structure in the district, primarily because of the porch enclosure, the second-story deck, and the application of wide replacement siding. Kuecker stated that those three alterations impair the integrity of the property. Kuecker said the applicant is proposing to remove the porch enclosure and to rebuild the deck above. She said the guidelines recommend the removal of alterations that detract from a building's historic character, and this would be one move in the right direction. Kuecker said that getting rid of the closed-in porch would be removing one of the reasons the house was considered non-contributing. She added that staff does not feel that reconstructing the deck will further detract from the historic character that may be there. Historic Preservation Commission July 9, 2009 Page 3 Kuecker said, however, that since this is anon-contributing structure because of alterations, when alterations are occurring it would be beneficial if the owner brought the structure closer to being a contributing structure. She said staff is therefore recommending that there be some care taken with regard to the type of handrails and detailing on the porch, such as the cap on the columns, handrails that tie into the top and bottom rail, having a cornice board at the base of the deck area, and having a handrail that is sloped so that the water will run. Kuecker said that overall, staff is recommending approval of the proposal as presented in the application with the conditions that a simple balustrade or railing be used as shown in the drawing provided, a cornice board be placed below the decking of the second story as shown in the drawing provided, that the porch/deck appear similar to the design shown in the drawing provided, that all exposed wood be either painted or stained and not left as raw lumber, and that variations to these conditions be subject to staff approval. Bunting Eubanks asked if it wouldn't be more accurate for the wood to be painted and not stained. Kuecker said that is true, but it is not regulated by the Commission; the Commission can say that the wood has to be finished but cannot say how it is to be finished. Bunting Eubanks said it seems like this is a move in the right direction. Baldridge said the photographs make the house look nicer than it is in actuality. Ponto said that right now it looks like the porch extends farther north than the side of the house. Kuecker said that it does extend farther north. Ponto asked if it will have the same footprint when it is rebuilt. Kuecker replied that she understands that it will be brought back to being flush with the house. She said the owner wants to move the stairs to the other side, which may be better, because it would be the less visible side for most people. Ponto asked if the stairs would overlap the double windows on the south side. Kuecker did not know. Kuecker said that if the stairs do go in front of the windows, the windows would probably end up being removed or have to be changed. Ponto said that from a safety point of view, one does not want to have stairs in front of windows. Swaim asked if a deferral might be in order. Kuecker said she did not believe a deferral would be beneficial. She said it looks like currently the stairs start way back, and in the new plan they would start up a little farther. She said that if the stairs did go in front of the windows, the Building Code would require the window to change, and that would require it to come back to the Commission. Bunting Eubanks said the project would make this closer to a contributing structure. She said that then if someone new comes along and buys it, they could easily take off the deck and remove the stairs, and then it might be a contributing property. MOTION: Swaim moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for 837 Maggard Street with the following conditions: that a simple balustrade or railing be used as shown in the drawing provided, a cornice board be placed below the decking of the second story as shown in the drawing provided, that the porch/deck appear similar to the design shown in the drawing provided, that all exposed wood be either painted or stained and not left as raw lumber, and that variations to these conditions be subject to staff approval. Downing seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Baker, Michaud, and Wagner absent). Historic Preservation Commission July 9, 2009 Page 4 326 North Linn Street. Kuecker said this property is in the newly created Northside District. She said the proposal is for a pergola addition and a fence construction. Kuecker said this is a contributing property in the Northside District; however, it does have an addition to the rear that would be considered a potentially non-contributing, non-sympathetic addition. Kuecker said that the fence addition is along the raised platform, and the pergola is above the third-story deck. She said the pergola would only be on the portion of the deck that is behind the existing house. Kuecker showed a view from the rear, pointing out where the fence and where the pergola would be. She said that based on the drawings, the pergola would be no wider than the existing house and it doesn't look like it would be any taller either. Kuecker showed an elevation drawing with the pergola addition and the fence. She said that the fence is very unique, but the Building Department said that it would be classified as a fence. Kuecker said that overall, the guidelines do allow for additions that don't detract from the existing structure to the rear of the property and also allow for the construction of fences and recommend that they be similar to historic fence styles. She said that since the pergola will be on the back of the house and will not be highly visible from the street, in staff's opinion, it is appropriate for the building. Kuecker pointed out that the rear addition is already incongruent with the historic house, and she does not feel the addition of the pergola will add to that distraction. Kuecker said also that although this is not a traditional fence and is not a historic fence style; staff feels the decorative fence does not detract from the historic character. She said she sees the fence more as a piece of lawn art rather than a permanent structure. Kuecker said if the next owner does not like the fence, they would likely remove it. She said that staff recommends approval as presented in the application. Swaim asked if the fence runs right up to the house. Kuecker responded that the fence does not touch the house but does connect to the garage and is along the raised platform. Swaim asked about the material of the statues, and Kuecker replied that they are concrete. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for 326 North Linn Street, as presented. Trimble seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Baker. Michaud. and Wagner absent). 815 Brown Street. Kuecker said this is a contributing structure in the Brown Street Historic District. She said it is an example of a Goosetown cottage that is typical of the east end of Brown Street. Kuecker said it is a very simple cottage and has been well maintained over the years with the original windows, siding, and roofing materials. She said it is a very well-preserved example of a Goosetown cottage, which Iowa City does not have a lot of. Kuecker said the applicant proposes atwo-story addition to the west of the house. She said there is a very large, healthy tree in the backyard that prevents an addition from going too far to the back. Kuecker pointed out that this house does sit on a wider lot than most so that there is room to add on to the west. Kuecker said the proposed addition is a 14 by 18 two-story addition that is taller than the existing structure. She said the owners have tried to match many of the details of the existing Historic Preservation Commission July 9, 2009 Page 5 house. Kuecker said the desire is to increase the second-story headroom and livable space as well as create a second story master bedroom and bathroom. Kuecker said the guidelines do allow for additions to historic houses, provided the addition is compatible in design with the historic building and does not detract from the structure. She said the guidelines state the following as recommended, "Designing an addition that does not diminish the character of the historic structure and constructing additions that are consistent with the massing and roofline of the historic building." Kuecker said the guidelines also list as not recommended, "Constructing additions that expand an historic house vertically and increase its overall height." She said staff has concerns that this proposed addition overwhelms the existing house and will change the architectural style of this house from a simple cottage to more of a Craftsman-style house. Kuecker said staff also feels the proposed rooflines are not compatible with the existing roofline, adding busyness to a simple roofline. Kuecker said, however, that staff does understand the need for an addition to this house. She said that currently there is a bathroom only in the basement of the house. Kuecker said, however, staff feels that an addition can be designed that balances the needs of the applicant with the needs of historic preservation. She said that she had met with the applicants to discuss the alternatives. Kuecker said the applicants did not feel the alternatives would meet their needs and wanted to bring forward their proposed addition to get the opinion of the Commission. Kuecker said she consulted with Marlys Svendsen, a preservation expert, on this application, and her indication was that an L-shaped addition with gables and possibly some dormers would be more appropriate, which is what Kuecker has shown in the two alternatives. Kuecker said that alternative A shows a cross gable roofline that is slightly higher than the roofline of the house and would address the need for headroom. She said that on the rear of the addition there is a shed gable that would allow more room. Kuecker said that alternative B still has the L-shape and is not taller than the existing house, so the owners don't get the headroom they would like. She said, however, that it could expand farther into the backyard, perhaps creating a first floor bathroom/master bedroom. Kuecker said staff consulted with Svendsen on this, and Svendsen indicated that something similar to what staff has proposed would be a more appropriate addition than the one presented by the applicant. Regarding materials, Kuecker stated that all the materials the applicant has proposed meet the guidelines for whatever addition is done. She said she recommends approval of alternative A or B, subject to staff approval of the final design. Kuecker said if substantial changes need to be made, the project would need to come back before the Commission for review, or the Commission could vote to defer this project until a suitable addition is proposed. Kuecker said she does not recommend approval of the applicant's original plan, because it does not meet the guidelines and would result in the loss of the character of this small cottage. She said the cottage design of this house is important to the Goosetown characteristics of Brown Street. Kuecker said that if any plan is approved by the Commission tonight, the applicant should have the option of using either wood siding or smooth faced fiber cement board siding with a reveal to match the existing, and the applicant should have the option of using a standing seam metal roof that matches the existing metal roof, using asphalt shingles on the addition or Historic Preservation Commission July 9, 2009 Page 6 reroofing the entire structure in the same material, with the final roofing material subject to staff approval. Kuecker showed a massing illustration that she sent to Svendsen. She said this is what brought to light that the addition that the applicant proposes is overwhelming to the existing house. Zach Eastlund, one of the owners of the property, said that they have been fighting this headroom issue for about five years now. Kristen Eastlund, the other owner, said that they love the house and want to stay there and raise a family there. She said they think Kuecker's alternative is cute but doesn't solve the height issue. Kristen Eastlund said they considered having the bathroom and bedroom on the main level. She said, however, that when they have kids, they want to be on the same level with them, and they therefore like their proposal. Bunting Eubanks asked about the first alternative that is more elevated with more headroom. Zach Eastlund said they have been looking at this issue for about eight months. He said that they like their proposal, as it was the first thing they came up with, and they like the way it looks from the outside. Zach Eastlund said that making this work on the inside is just as important to them. Kristen said the pictures don't really accurately give a sense of how this will be. She said that it is almost like a story and one-half. Garrett, the consultant for this project, said the roof comes down all the way to the floor on the second floor. Zach Eastlund confirmed this. Garrett said that with the pitch of the roof, there is six feet down the center of the room that has six feet eight inches of headroom. He said that if one stands in the center of the room and puts his hands up, he hits the ceiling in both directions. Garrett said the problem he has with the proposed addition is that it does not allow for what the homeowner wants. Garrett also said that for the amount of money that would be spent on the addition; there would be so little usable square footage. He said that basically there would be a place all the way around the perimeter of the second floor, except where the dormer is, where there will be four or five feet in from the edge of the house before one will be able to do anything - even set a dresser there. Garrett said that there will still only be about eight feet of usable space in the center and there is not any way to get headroom. Garrett said therefore they have discussed doing a larger addition to the back. He said there is a massive fir tree back there, and it is hard to come up with an addition to the back that would not be a continuation of the existing roofline that would create a tunnel that sticks out that back. Garrett said the owners would really like to have three usable rooms on the second floor and a bathroom. Bunting Eubanks asked if it is possible to put two bedrooms on the main floor, if there were a bigger addition there. Kristen Eastlund said that it would be possible, but the kitchen would then be in the middle of the house. Garrett said that one just about has to be inside the house to understand how small it is. He said that it is 24 by 26. Downing asked if anyone has drawn a cross section to determine actual headroom. Garrett replied that the top of the windows are just over six feet off the floor. He said that there is a horizontal member holding the roof together so that tallest one could be now, going all the way to the ridge with no drywall or anything in it would be about 8 feet 6 inches. Historic Preservation Commission July 9, 2009 Page 7 Garrett said that Alternative A would increase the headroom and give more space. He said that ultimately might be what would get most of what the owners would like. Garrett said he finds it unattractive. He said that the dormer out the back doesn't have the impact on the front, and he realizes that what people are after is to keep the impact on the front as minimal as possible. Garrett said that the alternatives just do not serve the objective. He said that he has even thought about trying to build the addition so that one steps down three steps to the main floor and then also steps down into the second floor. He said that would help with the massing of the roof, and the ground falls away pretty dramatically to the west so a first floor addition would work well to be stepped down into, but there would be the same problem on the second floor that there wouldn't be enough headroom. Bunting Eubanks asked if removal of the tree is a viable option. Kristen Eastlund said that they love the tree and added that it is a huge tree. She said that she would never cut it down. Garrett said there is also an issue with going straight out the back of the house. He said that when one comes up the stairs, the dormer to the left is the stairwell. Garrett said that when one comes up the stairs one walks in front of the window, and then there is a hallway that goes back. He said there is a bedroom on the right and one on the left. Garrett said that with an addition going out the back, the bedroom on the left would have to become a hallway. He said that would be throwing away space to go out the back, although he agreed that there could be a much larger addition going out the back to redeem the space. Garrett said that the roofline would have to be very similar. He said that if this could be taller, to gain headroom, it could go up another four feet on the back side and have the back roof elevate four feet above the existing roof, and that would give some headroom to work with. Garrett said that one would be able to see it from the street, and it would not be very attractive to see the gable of the rear addition. He said that if he stays at the same line, he runs into the same problem of no headroom. Bunting Eubanks asked if this could go out the back for the basement and have steps that go down for the master bedroom area. Garrett said he could do that out the back, but there is also the issue that the kitchen is right there, and they would lose the kitchen window. Bunting Eubanks said the Commission has to abide by its guidelines and cannot exercise them arbitrarily. She said the Commission cannot consider the interior of the house, so the issue is to not be unfair to others who might have been denied something that didn't comply with the guidelines. McMahon asked why there is so little headroom here. Kuecker said the area might not have originally been habited. She said the building codes when the house was built might not have required as much headroom. Kristen Eastlund said that in one of the drawings for an alternative addition, the pitch of the roof is higher than the one proposed. Bunting Eubanks said that Kuecker differentiates between the original house and the addition by virtue of the L shape. Bunting Eubanks said that in the applicants' proposal, it looks like the house was always like this and really makes the footprint bigger. Kristen Eastlund said that what they wanted was to make this not look like an addition. Bunting Eubanks said that it overpowers the original house. Historic Preservation Commission July 9, 2009 Page 8 Kuecker said the guidelines stating that an addition should not be taller than the house fall into the not recommended category, where the Commission has a little flexibility. She said if there is no other way to build an addition without it being taller or if the addition being taller is compatible with the style of the house, then the Commission can approve those projects. Kuecker added that if the taller addition is not compatible with the house, then the Commission should not approve it. Kuecker said her thought with option B is that there would not likely be an additional bedroom upstairs and that maybe a bathroom would fit up there but the additional bedroom would be on the first floor. Bunting Eubanks asked if there would be enough space to wrap around and have two bedrooms on the first floor without affecting the tree - if it could go back far enough. Kuecker said that part of the addition could be extended farther this way, but that gets into the roofline, which may present some problems. Garrett said the owners really just want a bedroom and a small bathroom. He said the room on the first floor is just a bonus, and then there can be a bedroom on the second floor, because it has to have a foundation. Kuecker said that it might be best to defer this application to work toward something to bring to the next meeting in two weeks. Zach Eastlund asked that the Commission consider the original proposal. Swaim that the proposed addition makes the house have a strange telescoping effect where the original house bumps out from the addition and the porch bumps out from there. She said that it makes it hard to distinguish the original house and the addition overwhelms the cottage. Swaim said that in the staff alternatives, the original house is highlighted and the integrity is kept. McMahon said that he is the Commission's newest member. He said there is a dynamic relationship between the past and present, and certainly the neighborhood is evolving and changing. McMahon said that historic preservation is about maintaining the historic character and integrity of the neighborhood, being able to tell a story. McMahon said that he is sympathetic to the need for space here. He said he sees this change from acottage-style to more of a craftsman style. McMahon said that he understands the significance and importance of the guidelines but is also in that gray area where he is not as opposed to this. He said that what is significant to him would be whether the cottage can still be present in the particular facade. McMahon said this is more striking to him, more reminiscent of an aesthetically pleasing design, and in that it has a historical component, even though it is an addition. McMahon said that anything that one does to the house will be an addition. He said the problem comes when the Commission starts considering something like this; the horse is then out of the barn, and everyone wants to do similar things. McMahon said that is a good argument, but sometimes that argument may need to be put aside. Trimble said the Commission is supposed to vote using the guidelines. She said the guidelines say to differentiate and not overwhelm the original structure. Trimble said she does not feel this proposal follows the guidelines. Bunting Eubanks said that she feels that all options should be examined before changing the structure significantly. Garrett said there are a variety of things that could be done to change the Historic Preservation Commission July 9, 2009 Page 9 roofline that would still maintain the character. He said that his perspective doesn't show the angle that Kuecker shows. Garrett said that Kuecker shows an angle that makes it so obvious that the addition is set back eight feet from the front of the house. Garrett said he does not have a drawing that shows that perspective. Garrett said that the addition is eight feet from the front of the house, and that the porch is eight feet deep. He said the windows of the addition are setback almost 16 feet beyond the front corner of the porch. McMahon said one is able to tell more than one story with a property. He said that there is judgment in finding whether this is overwhelming and judgment involved in determining future viability as a property. McMahon said that historic preservation is one value. He said there is a tension between maintaining this as a viable property and preserving it as a historic structure, and all of this comes into play with this example. Bunting Eubanks said that before she is willing to consider bending the guidelines, she would need to be convinced that there were no other options. Garrett said tree removal is not an option for the owners. Swaim said that the tree can have as much to do with the character of a property as the house itself. Zach Eastlund asked if the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) did not feel the proposed addition changed the designation of the property would the Commission be more likely to approve it. Swaim said that even if it did not change the designation it did not automatically means that it would be approved. She said if the Commission is leaning toward not accepting the original proposal, it could just as well say that now and not wait for a determination from the SHPO. Baldridge said that he feels that the setback of the addition does make a clear distinction between the original structure and the addition. Bunting Eubanks said that surveys were done on all the properties, at which time it was decided which properties are contributing and which are not. She said there have to be enough contributing properties to constitute a historic district. Bunting Eubanks stated that if a design alters a building's status as a contributing structure that removes the property from the list of contributing structures for that district. Trimble said one thing that the State can offer as architectural historians is other options. Ponto said that almost all the additions the Commission has approved have been an L or off the back and not something that has changed the front facade. Zach Eastlund asked if the SHPO would look at the whole street. He said that there are a couple of Craftsman houses a couple of blocks away. Bunting Eubanks said they will look at each property individually, because the street is a combination of small cottages and craftsman style. Kuecker said that the SHPO would look at the house itself and the significance within the district. She said the significance of the Brown Street District is that it shows the variety of periods of the settlement of Iowa City and the different types of people who lived and worked in the area. The applicant requested that the Commission vote on the original proposal rather than table it pending and opinion from SHPO. Historic Preservation Commission July 9, 2009 Page 10 MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for 815 Brown Street, as submitted. Swaim seconded the motion. The motion failed on a vote of 1-6 with McMahon voting in favor (Baker, Michaud, and Wagner absent). Bunting Eubanks said that if the owners are really set on the proposal, they could take it to SHPO and get an opinion. She suggested, however, trying to find other options that do not alter the roofline as much. Bunting Eubanks said that the owners could also work with the State on an alternative. Swaim said that going to a larger arena that has more exposure to other situations and communities in Iowa may be beneficial. Bunting Eubanks said the Commission wants the owners to be able to get more space. She said the owners should not feel discouraged. Zach Eastlund said he did not know what the next step would be, since this can't go above the existing roofline. Ponto said the Commission is not refusing to allow this to go above the existing roofline. Kuecker said the Commission is saying an addition cannot go above in the manner proposed. Ponto said the Commission has approved an addition off the back that had an elevated roofline compared to the original house. He said that because it was off the back, someone on the street would be looking at it at an angle and would not see that elevated roofline in the back. Zach Eastlund asked what the procedure would be to get an opinion from the State office. Kuecker said she could send the information to the State office and get some sort of determination from the experts there. Zach Eastlund asked how long that would take. Kuecker said it would depend on the workload there but could vary. Swaim said that even if the classification of the house was changed in relation to the district, she is also looking out for the house itself. She said that the house is more than its particular classification and it tells the story of the original Goosetown inhabitants. Bunting Eubanks said the applicants are welcome to come back in two weeks with a revised plan. She said she is certain there are other solutions. Ponto asked how far west the addition could go. Kristen Eastlund said they have 20 feet to the west. Ponto said that the addition could be extended two or three more feet than shown on the plan. Garrett said probably about eight feet. McMahon said he would be interested in what the State Historical Society has to say. He said that the owners are probably in the best position to make an argument to that office. Kuecker said she could provide the owners with the information. Bunting Eubanks said she would expect the State to say that the proposed addition would change the status, just because it goes against so many of the recommendations for additions. She stated that there is going to be an option other than the proposed plan that will give the owners what they want. Baldridge asked if because the lot slopes down to the west so much, is there a way of using that to greater advantage in a basement level, which would be ground level here. 617 North Johnson Street. Historic Preservation Commission July 9, 2009 Page 11 Kuecker stated that this is a contributing structure in the Brown Street Historic District. She said the applicant recently purchased this house and would like to make some changes. Kuecker said that the siding is quite deteriorated, as shown in photographs in the packet. She said the owner would like to remove the wood siding and replace it with fiber cement board siding. Kuecker said the guidelines recommend repair and only using a substitute material in place of wood when the siding cannot be salvaged. She said that this house is a good candidate for using fiber cement board siding, as long as it has the same reveal as the existing siding, with the narrow clapboard style, and all the trim boards, frieze boards, corner boards, and window trim are replicated. Kuecker said that Anderson did substantial documentation of all the current trim boards, etc., so that it can be replicated. Kuecker said the retaining walls at the side stairs and back stairs are in poor condition. She said the stairs are not to code and do not go on to a stable surface. Kuecker said the applicant would like to remove and rebuild the retaining walls and stairs and likely the sidewalk as well. She said the applicant would like to reconfigure the rear stairs from going to the side to going straight out to the parking lot. Kuecker said the guidelines do not directly address this sort of project, but it seems like a suitable alteration that provides for better functionality and safety. Kuecker added that the applicant would like to put a handrail on the retaining wall, because it is beside a sidewalk. She recommended a simple, metal black pipe handrail, rather than using something more ornate. Kuecker said this house is unique in that it has many Italianate details but also is reminiscent of the foursquare style and was likely built when the two styles were shifting in popularity. She said the porch is a very Italianate porch that is deteriorating. Kuecker said the owner would like to remove the porch and rebuild it using fiberglass columns and cement board siding for the sided rails. She said the owner would like to bring everything up to code and redo the stairs to meet code. Kuecker added that the height of the rail would change. She said the owner wants to use the bead board ceiling and the tongue and groove decking to recreate the details of the porch. Kuecker said staff believes that if the porch is reconstructed, that the sided rail was likely not original and that it was likely a simple balustrade similar to that on a neighboring house, which would be more appropriate. She stated that the guidelines recommend replicating the historic components when replacing the deteriorated portions. Kuecker said that staff recommends approval of the certificate of appropriateness for the project as presented in the application with the following conditions: the applicant using a simple round steel pipe handrail along the retaining wall; the fiber cement board siding must replicate the profile, dimension, and overall appearance of the existing siding; the fiber cement board must be smooth surface; the window and door trim, frieze boards, and corner boards must be replicated in profile, dimension, and overall appearance of the existing; the porch must be reconstructed to match the existing porch in detail and overall appearance (including but not limited to: cornice details, roofline, piers, bead board ceiling, tongue and groove flooring, etc). Accommodations can be made to meet existing building codes; the sidewalk and concrete steps must be recreated to match existing; the railing being a simple wood balustrade as shown in staff's drawing provided in the packet with the porch posts extending to the porch floor; and staff approval of final plans prior to obtaining a building permit. Kuecker said that the posts must have deteriorated at some time or were cut off right below the details, and now there is just a painted four by four below it, hooked on with painted metal Historic Preservation Commission July 9, 2009 Page 12 brackets. She showed what the posts probably looked like originally and said it would be best if the applicant uses something similar. Downing asked if there are any historic photographs of this property available. Kuecker replied that she could not find any. She said that it likely was not too much different than it is now, with the exception that the side porch was probably a usable side porch. Downing asked about the window trim and if it is available in cement board. Kuecker said the owner had not proposed to do anything with the window trim. Kuecker said she was concerned that some of it would be damaged or removed, and the owner needs to make sure it is matched, whether by new wood trim or fiber cement board. Downing asked what the reveal of the siding is. Kuecker said she believes it is about three and one-half or four inches. MOTION: Trimble moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for 617 North Johnson Street with the following conditions: the applicant using a simple round steel pipe handrail along the retaining wall; the fiber cement board siding must replicate the profile, dimension, and overall appearance of the existing siding; the fiber cement board must be smooth surface; the window and door trim, frieze boards, and corner boards must be replicated in profile, dimension, and overall appearance of the existing; the porch must be reconstructed to match the existing porch in detail and overall appearance (including but not limited to: cornice details, roofline, piers, bead board ceiling, tongue and groove flooring, etc) (accommodations can be made to meet existing building codes); the sidewalk and concrete steps must be recreated to match existing; the railing being a simple wood balustrade as shown in staff's drawing provided in the packet with the porch posts extending to the porch floor; and staff approval of final plans prior to obtaining a building permit. Ponto seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Baker. Michaud, and Wapner absent). CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR JUNE 11, 2009. MOTION: McMahon moved to approve the minutes of the June 11, 2009 meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission, as written. Baldridge seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Baker. Michaud, and Wagner absent). OTHER: Burford said the Friend's Board had begun a list of potential HP award nominees. Kuecker said that she meant to bring it but did not. Burford said that the awards are scheduled for Monday, November 2. Bunting Eubanks described the various categories of awards. Kuecker asked Commission members to take note of worthy properties, adding that they can be anywhere in town and don't necessarily need to be in a district. She said the project should preferably have been completed within the last year. Burford said that she had been contacting people about aforum/lecture regarding energy efficiency. She said that the Iowa City Library and the Iowa City Landfill had received a grant to promote ecological programs in Iowa City and that they are willing to have a lecture about adding energy efficiency to older homes. Historic Preservation Commission July 9, 2009 Page 13 Burford said that she had also contacted the Iowa Center for Sustainable Communities and they were interested in having a program in Iowa City. They suggested that she contact Rod Scott with the Iowa Preservation Alliance about coming up with a program. Burford said that the Friend's Board would be discussing it at their next board meeting. Swaim said it sounds great. Bunting Eubanks agreed and asked what kind of effort is needed from the Commission. Burford said just being able to use the Commission's name would be beneficial. Bunting Eubanks asked Burford to let her know if there are specific things with which the Commission could help. Kuecker said she just attended a daylong workshop in Waterloo regarding the historic preservation tax credit. She said there is a lot more money available for small projects, for which the dollar requirement is a project less than $500,000. Kuecker said that to qualify, the project has to be over either 25% of the value of the property or $25,000. She said the tax credit is for 25% of the rehabilitation costs. Kuecker said that in general, historic preservation tax credits went from 20 million dollars per year to 50 million dollars per year. She said she plans to mention this to as many people who come in to see her as possible. Kuecker said it applies to interior or exterior work, as long as it meets the Secretary of the Interior Standards. She said that additions and site work are excluded. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte c O N to .~ '~ U v d c ~ O ~ d R=°o ~ N N C ~ ,di aQ ~L r X O X X ~ X p X X X X X X X ~ X X co O O O N X X X X i i Q X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X M X X X X ~ N X X X X N X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X rn E - N O - .- - ~- ~ ~- ~ N ~ O s- N ~ O ~- N ~ E ~ ~ es ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 r ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0) F - w N M N M N M N M N M N M N M N C~7 N M N M N (~ C O G ~ N ~ O 'O ~ ~. 'a ~ m Y O C ca B v L R ~ R s p O ~ O ~ ~ C E m m O ~ w = ~ .v ~ a° N i- f,C ~ z ~ ui ~ ~ V o a -; C9 Q ~i 0 -~ O ~ o ~Z ~ X O~ C ~ N O .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N ~ Q Z O ~ Q II II Z II II W ~ II XOOZ W Y 3b(3) MINUTES APPROVED YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION August 6, 2009 - 4:00 PM LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL Members Present: Patrick Diamitani, Hannah Green, Jerry Gao, Luan Heywood Members Absent: Zach Wahls Staff Present: Marian Karr, Ross Wilburn Others Present: None RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): None CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 4:15 p.m. Hannah Green chaired the meeting. MINUTES: Heywood moved and Gao seconded to approve the July 22 and July 24 minutes. The minutes were unanimously approved, 4/0 BACK TO SCHOOL EVENT: Diamitani reported that he and Wahls had made progress. Set up and clean up had been arranged through volunteers from 1440 and football squads. Karr presented her check off list, denoting what remained to do. Heywood said she could bring youth art to present in shelter seven. The presentation of said art will have to be adapted to different weather scenarios. The question came up as to whether or not the ice cream was pre-scooped, and if not, the importance to informing volunteers unopened containers can be returned. Karr said she would have a supply box ready for pick up before she leaves on Thursday. The group then turned to the press release. Karr reported that Wahls hadn't heard anything from any of the Regina coaches. Various changes were then made to the press release regarding wording about schools, activities, groups, etc. After modifications, Heywood motioned to approve the revised press release. Gao seconded. The press release was unanimously approved, 4/0. The release will be issued by the City August 10. Next, the commission discusses distribution of extra fliers to neighborhood centers and other schools. Heywood said she would take a part in that. Green asked if we had successfully recruited adult volunteers. Heywood asked if interact volunteers have been properly notified due to confusion she had perceived among their members. Heywood then asked if we had a first aid kit and for procedures in case of disaster. Karr will include on in the supply box. YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION August 6, 2009 Page 2 of 2 Keeping with the weather theme, the group asked what the plan should be if we get rain. Most of the costs are refundable, so expenses shouldn't be a huge issue. Karr said that the YAC needs a way of deciding whether or not to go forward with the event. Heywood asked if YAC could convene a meeting at the park at 3:30 and still be in compliance with the open meetings rules. It was agreed a meeting will not be needed and Wilburn will be the person who makes the final call. Karr will provide contact information to Wilburn should a press release be necessary. Set up will start at 3:15 in Shelter 8, and YAC members were encouraged to wear their blue polo shirts. Diamitani reminded everybody to bring magazines to help with the arts projects and what not. Karr reminded everybody to just let her know if we needed any more supplies for any of the activities and she would try to arrange them prior to her departure on Thursday the 12th. Heywood said that we ought to invite art people, from UAY etc., to help staff the event. Green reminded the Commission that she is unsure if she will be able to attend the event. YOUTH ARTS INTIATIVE: Heywood presented a variety of materials regarding her arts initiative. She also talked to people at the Senior Center who said that they were excited at the prospect of having youth art. She also spoke with people at the Recreation Center in hopes of finding a place to host an art show. Diamitani asked how expensive hosting a show was, and Heywood explained that all expensive venues were going to be ruled out. Diamitani asked about the possibility of three separate shows at each city high school. Heywood said that she'd prefer one central location, due to the anonymous nature of the artwork and collaborative nature of the project. Karr brought up the possibility of using the open space in the Sycamore Mall. Wilburn pointed out that it's a big deal to have art displayed in a big venue. For example, art displayed at Hancher will have more gravitas than art displayed at a high school. Green also suggested the Iowa City Public Library. Karr then suggested Hotel Vitro. Diamintani then pointed out that the emotional content of some this artwork could be pretty heavy in nature. Heywood said that she really thinks the location should be in a Recreation Center or UAY, due to the public space and high volume of kids. She said that in both cases, she's not worrying about vandalism to art, due to the anonymous nature of the art, and that for disposal of it, art could be sent to the Post-Secret proper. Diamitani voiced his support for UAY, due to their ability to reach people. After a brief discussion however, the group rallied around the Recreation Center, and the UAY site for a back up . The opening date for the exhibit will be December 10`h, 2009, from 6-8 PM. MEETING SCHEDULE: Next meeting is Sunday, August 23, 4:30 PM. ADJOURMENT: Heywood motioned to adjourn and Gao seconded. The motion passed 4-0, 5:30 PM. ~DOX n u m u u 0 o Dac~c '+ N N N ~D ~p ~~ 7'~r* c~=rn 3~x s~ ~ ~ o N A~ c 0 -~ c ~6 ~ c ~ G7 c~ ~. ~ . ~ ~ ~' ~- ~; ~. ~ r _ ~ ~ ~- ~ D ~' ~ ~' ~ ~ = ,~ ~ _ ? G7 ~~] ~ m w w w w w w w w ~ ~ ~ \ ~ O O O O O f0 CO O O O C~ CO O z z z z m X X X X ~ Z ~ ~ ~ Z Z Z Z N Z Z Z Z Z N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N x x x x x X X X m x X X >C X X X X N w X ~ x x m x m w >C X X m X X X X X X X ~ m y x x x m x V ' X X X X V m i V X X >C X ~ X N ~ X X >C m x V N X m X X X -C O C _ mD ~~v~ m ~ as N m ~ v oc ~n o ~ m0 ... n ~ O vN ~_ O z 3b 4 MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 16, 2009 - 7:30 PM -FORMAL CITY HALL, EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Freerks, Michelle Payne, Tim Weitzel, Elizabeth Koppes, Wally Plahutnik, Josh Busard, Charlie Eastham MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Karen Howard, Sara Greenwood Hektoen OTHERS PRESENT: Glenn Siders, Kim Edge, Kevin Don Adel, Meigen Fink, Jason Mascher, Brian Fink, Libris Fidelis, Dorothy Dayton, Glen Stockton, Brian Maass RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: The Commission voted 7-0 to approve SUB09-00004, an application submitted by Arlington Development for a preliminary plat of Stone Bridge Estates Part 6-9, a 102-lot, 36.32 acre residential subdivision located north of Court Street, south of Lower West Branch Road, west of Taft Avenue. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairperson Ann Freerks. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. REZONING USE ITEM: REZ09-00003: Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development Company for a rezoning from Medium Density Single Family Residential (RS-8) zone to High Density Single Family Residential (RS-12) zone for approximately 4.29 acres of property located on Walden Road, west of Mormon Trek Boulevard. The 45-day limitation period for this item is August 7, 2009. Eastham announced that he was a member of a Board that has an interest in this application and recused himself. Howard described the property as irregular in shape, and as the last remaining parcel of the Walden Wood subdivision located at Rohret Road, Mormon Trek Boulevard and Walden Road. The Walden Wood subdivision has been developed over the last 30 years, Howard said. Howard presented an aerial photograph for a better idea of the surrounding area and its topography. Just to the north of the parcel is a retirement home. Across the street are some single family homes and duplexes. To the south is a condominium association with attached units. A MidAmerican power station is to the east of the parcel. Howard shared several photographs which showed various viewpoints of the parcel, noting the slope from north to south on the property. Howard said the applicant has submitted a concept plan. She noted, however, that this application was just for a rezoning, and that the concept plan was intended to show how the property would be developed in the future if it was rezoned. The plan shows the developer's intent to further subdivide the property into individual townhouse lots. The concept plan illustrated 18 units that front on both Mormon Trek Boulevard and Walden Road. There would be a private, rear drive with access to the garages behind the units. Howard advised the Commission to keep in mind that this is a concept plan, not a subdivision application at this point. Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2009 -Formal Page 2 Staff reviewed the Comprehensive Plan to determine if the application was compatible with its vision for the area. Howard said the property is in the Willow Creek area of the Southwest Planning District. The district plan indicates that this area is appropriate for single family and duplex residential. The plan specifically mentions this property, as it is one of the few remaining undeveloped parcels in that area. The plan states that the property will require careful design given its topographic conditions and its unusual shape and size. Howard said that the topography and shape would make the property difficult to develop into detached single family homes, which is what would be allowed under the current zoning of RS-8; thus, the request for a rezoning to RS-12. The level of density being proposed would still fall under the RS-8 zoning levels; the RS-12 zoning is being requested to allow for attached townhome-style single family dwellings. Howard noted that there were a number of positive aspects to the proposed rezoning and lot lay-out. The proposal is compatible with the density of the surrounding development, which has quite a mix of different housing types. It allows the construction of townhouses, a popular and affordable housing type. The RS- 12 zone contains requirements for the main entrance of a dwelling to face the street and for a rear drive with garages behind, both of which give the dwellings more of a residential appearance. The Comprehensive Plan encourages compact infill development, Howard said, as well as proximity to neighborhood services. Howard said this property is close by a neighborhood commercial area and would therefore be a good location for additional housing. Howard noted, however, that there are a number of issues that still need to be addressed. First, the concept plan submitted is just that, a concept plan, and as such the achievable residential density cannot actually be determined until the property is designed and engineered. If, for example, MidAmerican Energy does not allow a driveway to be located over the gas pipeline easement, it may mean that fewer dwellings can be achieved. Vehicular and emergency access will need to be from Walden Road, as the City will not allow another access from the heavily trafficked Mormon Trek Boulevard. With access coming from a private rear drive, it will have to be designed to accommodate emergency vehicles. The applicant has also indicated that they would like to dedicate the land that contains the gas pipeline to the City as open space. This idea has been forwarded to the Parks and Recreation Commission, but will not be officially decided until a subdivision application is received. Howard said the biggest outstanding issue was storm-water management. Drainage is a concern for this property due to the sloping topography. The water from the site drains from north to south over land onto the neighboring Walden Court Condominiums. The applicant has proposed a system of one or more stormwater detention basins, but these basins would need to have an outlet into a storm sewer pipe. Given that the only feasible storm sewer available is the private system that serves the Walden Court Condominiums, the developer will have to get permission from the Walden Court Homeowners Association for this connection. Before development can occur, there will need to be an agreement between the Walden Court Condominium homeowners' association and the developer to get the water drained off the property properly. Staff met with both parties today and it sounds like they are willing to work together to come to some sort of resolution. Until a final agreement can be worked out, staff is recommending deferral of this application for rezoning. If the developer and condominium association come to an agreement whereby the proposed development can tie into Walden Court's private storm sewer so the water can drain out to the public storm sewer along Rohret Road, then staff recommends proceeding with consideration of the rezoning application. Howard noted that the City Engineer has indicated that the City may be willing to take over the private storm sewer system in Walden Court if is it determined to be up to City standards. Staff recommends that the application be deferred until the next Planning and Zoning meeting so that an agreement can be reached between the condominium association and the developer on the issue of drainage. If at that time no agreement has been reached, then Staff would recommend indefinite deferral of the application. The staff report outlines Staff's other recommendations, to be resolved after the drainage issue has been worked out. There were no questions for Staff and the public hearing was opened. Glenn Siders, Southgate Development Services, said that he understood that the matter would be deferred at tonight's meeting and that he would not waste the Commissioner's time with a presentation, but that he is available for any questions. He said that he has no conflicts with Howard's presentation or Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2009 -Formal Page 3 the staff report. He said that he is optimistic an agreement can be reached, and that each time the two parties have met over the last two years they have come closer to reaching an agreement. Kim Edge, 2633 Walden Road, said she had lived in her residence for 15 years. She said that she and her husband are hoping that the Commission will not rezone the property to be higher density because they are concerned about noise and traffic. Edge said that the neighbors had been asked by the City to vote ten years ago as to whether or not they wanted this strip of land returned to native prairie. She said that while the residents had voted in favor of returning the property to prairie, the prairie never came to fruition. She said she once called the City to ask what had become of the prairie idea and that the person she spoke with knew nothing about the vote. Freerks asked Miklo if he could show what strip of land Edge might be talking about. Miklo pointed to an area on the map where the gas pipeline easement is located north of the subject property and asked if this was the park land to which Edge was referring. She said that it must be. Miklo said it was an area that was dedicated to the City for a park when the property to the north was developed. He said that generally the Parks and Recreation Commission develops parks with resident input, and that may be the process to which Edge was referring. He said that Staff could check on it. Kevin Don Adel, 43 Coll Court, described himself as a homeowner at the end of Coll Court, in the middle of the cul de sac. He said that he wanted to make sure that the homeowners adjacent to the property are a part of the discussions concerning drainage. He said the adjacent properties currently had some water in their back yards, and he is worried that what might be a solution for the condominium association and the developer, may prove to exacerbate the water problem for other neighbors. He said he just wanted to ensure that homeowners like him are included in these discussions. Freerks asked for clarification on whether Don Adel was a member of the homeowners' association that had met with Staff and the developer earlier in the day. Don Adel said he was not. Meigen Fink, 44 Coll Court, said that she lived right next to Don Adel. She said her family has lived in that residence for nearly 11 years and has had drainage problems almost the entire time they have lived there. She said that her back-yard is always wet, and that they have assumed it is coming from over the hill. Fink said she worries that if this property is developed her yard will become a swamp. Fink noted that where the proposal suggests a sidewalk, currently a wooded easement area exists which she fears will be disturbed. She said she also had concerns about the type of properties that will be developed there and the types of people who will be living there. She asked if the storm-water retention would involve ponds; something which concerned her because there are many small children in the area. Freerks asked Siders if he would mind addressing the concept plan's drainage system. Siders said that he is presently anticipating two storm water basins, and that they are trying to design a system that would shed the water from the parcel into the ponds. Siders said that re-grading the area will go a long way toward assisting neighboring properties with their drainage problems. Siders said the basins would be designed as "dry bottom" ponds, meaning that there is no water in them except when there are heavy rain events. Siders also explained that the rectangular section on the west side of the property is something the Parks Department is looking at. He said that department will determine whether or not a sidewalk would be desirable there. He said that the walkway easement that is shown on the map currently was actually vacated some years ago. Siders said that some language about making a connection between Walden Road and Mormon Trek Boulevard along the northern boundary of the property was involved in that vacation, but that that would probably be renegotiated once the platting of the property begins. Koppes said she thought Fink's other question might be related to the number of units in the development that could be dedicated to low-income housing. Siders said he did not have a clue, and that he did not anticipate any right now. Greenwood Hektoen said that the Commission really should not consider who will be living in the unit. She said the job at hand is to consider what the best use of the land is. She said that zoning cannot be done based on who may live in a certain area, but should be based on the compatibility of the use with the neighborhood. Income level should not be a factor, Greenwood Hektoen said. Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2009 -Formal Page 4 Busard asked how many single family homes could be built on the land if it kept its RS-8 designation. Siders said two homes at best. Siders said there are access issues as he does not think access would ever be granted off of Mormon Trek. He said there is a 100 foot gas line easement that is very limiting. He said it could probably be subdivided into two single family lots. Miklo said that Staff looked at that question and had felt that it might be possible to get four homes on Walden Road with the required 40 foot lots and rear access. He said whether it would be viable to get four more lots on the Mormon Trek side for single family was questionable. Jason Mascher, 45 Coll Court, said he and his wife had moved to their home in April. His concern is the drainage issues in his back yard. He said that all of the neighborhood yards are wet as there is not enough grading for the water to run toward the ravine behind his home. Mascher said that he is worried that the drainage issues would be exacerbated by further development and that he too would like to be a part of discussions with the developer, the condominium association, and Staff regarding drainage. Mascher said he is definitely not in favor of a sidewalk that runs from Walden to Rohret Road as it would severely disturb the privacy of the four homes in his area. He said he is in favor of more single family homes rather than a higher density development. Brian Fink, 44 Coll Court, said that in addition to his concerns about drainage, he had major concerns about the trail shown going through the easement. The easement serves as a very valuable, heavily wooded buffer, Fink said, between his neighborhood and the new development to the right. Fink said he would suggest moving the trail from its proposed location further away from the property lines to promote privacy. Howard suggested that she could clarify this issue somewhat. Howard said that when the property was originally subdivided, there was an agreement to have a sidewalk, a public access in that location. Freerks asked how long ago that was. Miklo replied that he believed it was in the 1980's. Howard said that a portion of the sidewalk was built behind the Walden Court condominiums, but the portion in the gas pipeline easement was never built because the developer asked to have that portion vacated because it was too steep to make it accessible. The City agreed to vacate that easement. Howard explained that even though the easement does appear on the map, it really is no longer there and should be taken off of the map. Howard further explained that there is no plan by the developer to put a sidewalk in that location; it is a remnant on the map of former plans. The developer would like to dedicate the 100 foot wide gas pipeline easement to the City as an open space designation. This would then become park land if the Parks and Recreation Commission agreed to accept it. It would not be until the Parks and Recreation Commission accepted the land that discussions as to what to do with it would take place. Freerks noted that there would be public discussion and conversation about what became of the park. Howard said that was correct, and that at this stage the Parks and Recreation Commission has not even had a chance to take a look at it. Miklo pointed out that to the south of Rohret Road there is a trail that is dedicated to the City as a part of the parks system. The trail goes through the Mormon Trek Village area. Miklo said that the thinking at one time was that it might be possible to extend that trail up through the pipeline easement and through to the north. Miklo said that Parks and Recreation will look at topography as one basis for making its decision about the land's use. Miklo said there is some discussion that the topography of this piece of land may be too steep for a trail. He suggested that property owners in the area who wished to weigh in on the matter send an a-mail or letter to the Parks and Recreation Director. Freerks noted that the necessary a-mail address is available online or could be found by contacting Staff. Jason Mascher, 45 Coll Court, asked who he could get contact information from for Southgate or Walden Court residents in order to collaborate with them. Freerks advised Mascher to wait until the Commission finished and then to talk to Siders directly. She said if he had any troubles he could contact Staff. Libris Fidelis, 320 South Dubuque Street, said that although he had arrived late due to his attendance at a different Commission's meeting, and had neither seen the plans for the development nor heard the discussions regarding them, he would advise against any high density housing for the area as it would not really fit in with the neighborhood. Fidelis said that given the strange shape of the parcel, trying to cram a large number of units into the area could give the wrong impression and would be like an old-fashioned trailer park. Fidelis said that he sympathized with the developer and the property owners, but that he just did not see high density as a good option for that piece of property. Fidelis said there are small houses Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2009 -Formal Page 5 located all over Iowa City that have 1600 square feet or fewer. Fidelis said that smaller houses of this type could be offered to low-income individuals with some sort of steady income; however, not for those who are simply impoverished. Fidelis said there is a need in the community for small residences for low income individuals and retirees. Fidelis said that he personally would like to purchase such a home on Park Street; however, given the economic situation and his own lack of funds, he is left out completely of such an opportunity. He stated that high density housing in that neighborhood would detract from it and would generally not fit in. Dorothy Dayton, Walden Court, said that she has a little trouble seeing why high density would not fit in nicely in that space. Dayton said that on the right side of Mormon Trek there are townhomes; south of Rohret Road there are also townhomes and a condominium association; Walden Court is duplexes. Dayton said that it seemed to her that there was high density development in that neighborhood already so she did not see how Southgate's plan was out of sync with the neighborhood. She said it certainly seemed like a better use of the land than to let it sit there vacant. Dayton said that Southgate's plan leaves about 83% of the land without buildings on it. She said that the property will undoubtedly be developed sometime, and that this is the best plan she has seen for it. Jason Mascher, 45 Coll Court, said he disagreed with Dayton. He said that he believes that having the area less densely populated is also a viable option, and one he wishes the developer would more fully investigate. Mascher said that while there is a mix of housing in the area, if one asked the families in the surrounding neighborhoods, most of them would say they prefer a lower density than that currently proposed by Southgate. There were no further comments and Freerks closed the public hearing. Payne motioned to defer REZ09-00003, a request to rezone approximately 4.29 acres from Medium Density Single Family Residential (RS-8) zone to High Density Single Family Residential (RS-12), until there is a plan for storm-water management that meets City standards. Koppes seconded. Miklo said that the deferral would be until the August 6`h agenda. If there is no resolution prior to August 6`h, then the meeting would be cancelled and the issue would be put on the August 20`h agenda. Freerks noted that generally a deferral would have to be granted by the applicant at this point. Miklo said that the 45-day limitation period would have to be waived in order for the matter to be deferred beyond the August 6`h meeting. Siders indicated that a waiver would be granted if needed. Miklo said that interested parties could check the City's website closer to the 6"', or call into the Planning office that week to make sure there is a meeting. Weitzel said the landscape was clearly steep and that it was obvious something would have to be done on drainage issues given the number and variety of comments on the subject. He said he thought it was entirely appropriate to defer. Freerks said it is clear that there are some issues that have to be worked through and that regardless of what sort of development takes place on the lot in the future, it would have to be something that improves the drainage situation overall and does not make things worse. Freerks said this was something she would be looking at as she considers the matter. She agreed that deferral was the best course for now. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0 (Eastham abstaining). DEVELOPMENT ITEM: SUB09-00004: Discussion of an application submitted by Arlington Development for a preliminary plat of Stone Bridge Estates Part 6-9, a 102-lot, 36.32 acre residential subdivision located north of Court Street, south of Lower West Branch Road, west of Taft Avenue. The 45-day limitation period for this is August 10, 2009. Miklo said that the preliminary plat of Stone Bridge Estates, parts 5-9, was approved in 2006. Miklo explained that Part 5 is down along Court Street and that it has been final platted, allowing the developer Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2009 -Formal Page 6 to actually sell the lots and get building permits. The preliminary plat for the remainder of the subdivision expired after a two year period. Subdivision codes require that a plat expires after two years so that if there have been changes to the subdivision and/or zoning codes in the interim, the development would have to comply with them unless there is some significant reason for granting an exception. In this case, Miklo said, the applicant is submitting an application for re-approval of Parts 6-9. Miklo noted that the plat is essentially the same as it was when originally approved in 2006, with the exception of some minor adjustments to lot lines and sidewalk locations. Miklo said that there have been changes in the subdivision codes that would apply to this development. There is a requirement that street right of ways increase from 50 feet to 60 feet; street widths potentially decrease from 28 feet to 26 feet; and sidewalk width requirements were increased from four feet to five feet. Miklo said that all of the north/south streets have already been started in the development, and only three of the east/west streets have not been started. The City Engineer feels it would be difficult for the developer to transition to the wider right-of-way, given the lack of "T" intersections on the street, without creating difficulties with property lines and maintenance issues. As a result, the engineers recommend that the streets remain at their current widths of 50 feet, maintain 28 feet of pavement, and four foot sidewalks. The exception would be an east/west street that has not been started yet and will connect to Taft Avenue; that street will meet the new standards. Miklo said that another change is that Staff has recommended an additional sidewalk that will provide a path or link to the private open space. Miklo noted that in the area is a parcel that has been donated to the Parks Department, and which contains remnants of a historic stone railroad bridge. The Comprehensive Plan calls for this area to be developed as a park and to preserve that bridge and possibly incorporate it into a trail network. The remainder of the trail is on a series of outlots that are to be owned and maintained by the homeowners' association. There is a 15 foot easement that gives public access or rights to travel on that trail, but does not open the entire outlot to the public. Staff is recommending approval of the plat. Eastham asked if any consideration had been given to just dedicating the outlots to the City rather than the homeowners' association. Miklo said there had been discussion of this a couple of years ago, but that the Parks and Recreation Commission did not wish to take over the outlots due to the maintenance costs. Eastham noted that the plat shows three pillars that are remnants of the bridge, only one of which is actually in the current plat. Eastham asked if Staff was confident that the City would be able to acquire the remaining parts of the old stone bridge when the land to the east was developed. Miklo said Staff was pretty confident of that because the area will require a rezoning. When Stone Bridge Estates was rezoned a conditional zoning agreement requiring the dedication of the bridge to the City was put in place. Staff would recommend a conditional zoning agreement with similar requirements when the land to the east is rezoned. Freerks opened the public hearing. Florence Stockman, Stone Bridge Estates, said she had lived in her current residence about five years. She noted that she came before the Commission a couple of years ago, and that she was returning to echo the same concerns that the park lands in the area remain a high priority for the Commission, just as it is for the neighbors. She said that in the present plat there are a few more inches of park land in the area, and that she was pleased to hear Eastham's comments regarding acquiring the land where the additional pillars stand. She said she was concerned about the outlot and trail system because the neighborhood is not organized in any way yet. She said that hearing that the trail system will be the property of the neighborhood association leads some neighbors to wonder what they are getting into. Stockman said she had come before the Parks and Recreation Commission and that they had indeed expressed an inability to pay for maintenance of more land, but that they did say they would send someone out to keep the parks up. Stockman said that she was glad to hear that Thomas Street was going to be wider, as the trail was to be on one side and the creek on the other and she had wondered how that would all be accommodated. Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2009 -Formal Page 7 Stockman said that she hoped Arlington would be developed closer to Court Street; Part 6 is not completed and there are quite a few lots in Part 5. She said that access to Court Street is good but that there is a lot of traffic on Taft Avenue, which has not been improved. Stockman said she wondered when the City and the County would decide to do something about Taft. She said that if Parts 7, 8, and 9 are approved and development begins soon after, then that could be a problem in terms of more traffic onto Taft. Stockman requested that the Commission once again ask the developer to develop Parts 5 and 6 completely before moving on to Parts 7, 8, and 9, to give time for improvements to Taft. She noted that the developer had been moving dirt in Parts 7 and 8 in recent days. Stockman reiterated that neighbors were not yet organized into a homeowners' association and that she felt the trail system needed to be addressed at the level of the Commission and the City Council. She thanked the Commission for preserving the area with the stone bridge and noted that she had pulled together a history of the area for the Commissioners. Freerks asked Stockman if she was the person who had provided photographs of the area when the preliminary plat had previously been approved. Stockman said that she was. Freerks noted that there had been a lot of discussion about the bridge and the need to preserve it, and thanked Stockman for the information. Brian Maass, 115 Eversoll Lane, said that his concern was with the maintenance of the trail. He said that no homeowners' association had yet been formed, nor had residents had a chance to meet with the developer. Maass said that with Scott Park is so close by, his recommendation would be to try to coax the City into maintaining the outlots as well. Maass said that because the stone bridge is such a wonderful thing he would like to see the developer put in some sort of trail or sidewalk to the area through some of the lots that have not yet been developed. Maass said that on the western part of the plat there are a couple of ponds in the Mayfield Condominium Complex that have nice trails surrounding them. He said this is a great place to go for walks in the evening and that it connects with a couple of other trails off of Court. Maass said he would urge the developer to put in some sort of walkway off of Eversoll or Chadwick to connect down to the park. Freerks asked Miklo to comment on the trail system in that area. Miklo said there is currently an eight foot walkway on Court Street and a trail in Windsor Ridge south of Court Street. He said he believed a trail was being installed in a development on the east side of the creek that will eventually be continued up along the creek. Miklo said the plan is to basically use the creek bed as a trail network. He said he did not believe there were any east/west trails in the neighborhood. Miklo said the trails referred to by Maass were required in order to break up the long blocks in that development. Eastham asked Miklo about the sequence of when the trail might be built and the outlot dedicated to the City. Miklo said the park is in Part 8 of the subdivision, so the answer to that really depends on the housing market and the pace of development. Eastham asked if it was the developer's decision what order to develop the phases, and Miklo replied that it was both the developer's and the City's decision. Miklo said that at the time the plat was first approved, Lower West Branch Road had not been improved and so the preference was to develop from Court Street and move north. Presently, Lower West Branch Road is improved and the developer could final plat those areas and move from the north to the south if he wished. As it stands, the phasing is Parts 6, 7, 8, and then 9, Miklo said. Payne asked if the developer could do Part 9 next if they had an agreement with the City to do so. Miklo said that was correct. Miklo said that sometimes plats are phased for timing purposes but at this point he did not think the City would have any objection to changing the phasing around. Eastham followed up by asking when people can expect trails to be developed. Miklo said the trails are being put in as sections of the development are built, at the time the roads are put in. Miklo said that residential sidewalks are done as individual houses are built, but that if sidewalks or trails are on outlots or common areas, then they are done at the time the streets are put in. Koppes asked if moving dirt on Parts 7 and 8, as the developer was reported to be doing, was acceptable. Miklo said he would have to check with Public Works on that. Miklo said that generally an approved preliminary plat gives authorization to grade. He said that because this preliminary plat was expired, he would have to check to see whether the grading permit was still good or not. Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2009 -Formal Page 8 Payne asked for clarification on the maintenance of the trail. Miklo said that the City will only maintain the portion of the trail in Outlot B, the public part. The developer will initially be responsible for the trail, and the outlots, the private open spaces. Eventually that responsibility will be turned over to the homeowners' association. Access easements will allow the public to travel those trails, but they will not be publicly owned. Payne asked if the homeowners' association will be responsible for removing snow and repairing the sidewalks and Miklo said that they would. Greenwood Hektoen added that the trails and outlots will be maintained by the developer until such time as a homeowners' association is formed and the upkeep is turned over to the homeowners' association. Freerks asked if that was in the legal papers, and Greenwood Hektoen said that it was. Freerks reminded everyone that public hearing was still open. Florence Stockman said that when they purchased their lots they were given a covenant about the homeowners' association. Stockman said the homeowners' association was put into effect in January of this year by the developer sending residents bills for dues. Stockman said that no meeting had taken place, no bylaws had been developed; the neighbors had simply been assessed a fee. Stockman said that there have been promises of meetings in the past, but that nothing has materialized. Freerks asked if Stockman had been able to get a hold of the developer. She said that he talks in a friendly manner about developing the association but that nothing comes to fruition. She said she had called the City to see about forming a neighborhood association, but that it was her impression that a homeowners' association needed to come first. Freerks asked Greenwood Hektoen if she had any comments on the matter. Greenwood Hektoen said that usually the City does not get involved in these matters but that it is typical for a homeowners' association not to be formed until 75% of the lots are sold. Control remains with the developer until that time, even if the dues are already being paid by homeowners. She added that without seeing the documents for this particular homeowners' association she could only speak in general term. Freerks advised Stockman to contact Marcia Bollinger about forming a neighborhood association, which, she cautioned, was very different from a homeowners association. Brian Maass, 115 Eversoll Lane, said that he lives in Part 4 of Stone Bridge Estates. He said that his covenant mentions a homeowners' association but only for Parts 1 through 4. He asked if the developer intended to create a different homeowners' association for Parts 6 through 9. He said he felt like the cart was being put before the horse as they were paying a fee and no association existed yet. Freerks said she did not think the Staff would have access to that information. Greenwood Hektoen advised Maass to read the documents filed at the time he acquired the property. She said they would include information on how to amend the homeowners' association declaration. To include additional parts or phases, an amendment would be required. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Payne made a motion to approve SUB09-00004, an application submitted by Arlington Development for a preliminary plat of Stone Bridge Estates Part 6-9, a 102-lot, 36.32 acre residential subdivision located north of Court Street, south of Lower West Branch Road, west of Taft Avenue. Plahutnik seconded. Eastham said he would go ahead and support the motion in part because he feels this is the best resolution for preserving the stone bridge and developing north/south trails in the area. He said he would like to comment that the questions about homeowners' financial responsibilities in maintaining the outlots have made him wonder if the City is really doing the best it can to promote amenities, trail systems, green spaces, etc., while still being fair to people who buy homes and therefore assume some of these maintenance costs. He said one question to ponder is who is paying for the maintenance of our trail systems that are under the responsibility of homeowners' associations. Eastham said a number of people do not really know how homeowners' associations work and what the establishment of one in the development process entails, nor the transition process between developer control and homeowner control. Eastham said he found this lack of understanding unsatisfying. Plahutnik said he viewed this application as a sort of book-keeping matter. He said the expired application is being brought up to date; the issues with the new subdivision code have been addressed; Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2009 -Formal Page 9 and issues such as relationships between homeowners and developers are outside the Commission's purview. Plahutnik said he would be supporting the application. Busard said the application meets the requirements of the subdivision regulations and he will vote for it. Freerks said she too would be voting in favor of the motion. She said it makes god common sense to continue the roads as they were begun and not to try to re-do them. She said she also thinks it is wise to add to the width of the road that had not yet been developed. She said she was happy to see the bridge will be preserved and an area where a lot of people can enjoy it will be created. She said the application meets all of the requirements and she too will be in favor. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. Miklo added that there is a planned development overlay for this application, a requirement of which is that there is common open space. At the time of the final plat, the developer is required to provide legally binding instruments stating how the financing and maintenance costs will be handled. Miklo said that when the final plat is submitted there will be more detailed information on the maintenance of the open space and the plan for the homeowners' association than is typically available because of this planned development overlay. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: June 18. 2009: Busard motioned to approve the minutes. Eastham seconded. The minutes were approved 7-0. OTHER: Miklo stated that Staff will let the Commission know if there is to be a meeting on August 6tn. If the drainage issues are not yet resolved, then the meeting will be cancelled and the Commission will meet again on August 20tH Busard asked if it would be possible to move the meeting time for Planning and Zoning meetings to 7:00 p.m., rather than its current start time of 7:30 p.m. Freerks noted that this had been discussed in the informal meeting on Monday, and that in the past there had been questions as to whether it would be possible to have Planning and Zoning meetings begin at 7:00 p.m. like City Council meetings do. Commissioners agreed that the 7:00 p.m. time would work for each of them. Freerks said that she felt that before the switch was made effort should be made to notify regular attendees. Miklo said that for anything that is on the agenda the neighbors are notified of the date and time of the meeting. Miklo said when the switch is made, the time will be highlighted. He suggested making the switch not at the next meeting but at the meeting after that, since there had been a number of attendees tonight. Busard asked how the time switch would work for Staff. Staff said 7:00 p.m. would be fine. Freerks said that there had been an article in the newspaper about Hieronymus Square and some of the high rise building projects that were going to potentially go up on Burlington Street. Freerks said the article mentioned some changes to plans. She wondered if Miklo could fill the Commission in on that without going into afull-blown discussion since it was not an agenda item. Miklo reported that the paper said that because of the recession, financing for the size of project originally approved was not available. Miklo clarified that only one project discussed in the article was actually approved by the City Council. The Hieronymus Square project was approved under a conditional zoning agreement requiring at least a seven story building, among other things. If the developers chose to go with a smaller building that was not at least seven stories then they would have to come back before the Commission for an amendment to the conditional zoning agreement. Koppes noted that there was also an article in the paper concerning a green industrial park. She asked if there was anything that the Commission would be seeing with that any time soon. Miklo said he was skeptical that anything would be seen soon. He noted that the property was in an area that has no Planning and Zoning Commission July 16, 2009 -Formal Page 10 sanitary sewer and no street access, though it does have the possibility of water. He said that in order for the area to be developed some very expensive roads would have to be put in. He said the discussions with the developer are in the very preliminary stages. ADJOURNMENT: Weitzel motioned to adjourn. Busard seconded. The meeting was adjourned on a 7-0 vote at 7:45 p.m. s/pcd/m i n s/p&z12009/p8z07-16-09.doc Z O _N ~G ~~ 00 UW C9 ~ ZWo pVo N Z N ZZ a~ Z_ Q Z Z a J a co X X X X X X X X ~ X X X X X ~ ~ X x x x ~ x ~ x x o x x x x co ~ X X X X X ~ X X X X X X X X M X X X X X X X N X X X X ~ X X X X X O X X X W ~~ tea .-- .- ~- ~ M ~ N ~ O ~ O ~- M .- W X ~n ~n ~n ~n ~n ~n ~n F-W o o o o o 0 0 w J ~ W >. J a ~ ~ W m J a = Q q ~ fn ~ V Z a W = U Y ~ F ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ a Y W I ~ W W a ~ w a LL ~ ~ tn v~ w a z } = a - W a z ~ o~ a w ~ u. o Y a a J a z H ~ J 0 LL ~ ~ X X X X X X ~ o M X X X X X X X M X X X X X X X M X X X X X X X O X X 0 X X w ~~ ~a ~ ~ r- ~ M .- N .- O .- O ~ M ~ WX n n ~i ~s n n n HW o o o o o 0 0 W J = W } a W J J a a O C~ z a a = ~ ~ -~ w t? Y i= ~ N ~ a ~ Y w W W ~ W W ~ a a v~ ~ v~ a w ~ a a o z ~ a = ~ ~ W Z m W 11. Y d a C7 z H w w J 0 Z 0 a~i ~ y Z_ `- X ~~ a ~~ ~ w., c ~~ m ~ N E m N ~ .n o •. ~'~QZZ° d Q u n ~~ ~~ W ~~ XOOZ W Y FINAL/APPROVED POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD - MINUTES -June 8, 2009 3b 5 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Michael Larson called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Janie Braverman, Donald King, Greg Roth (by speaker phone), Abbie Yoder MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Legal Counsel Catherine Pugh and Staff Kellie Tuttle OTHERS PRESENT: Captain Richard Wyss, and Officer David Schwindt of the ICPD RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL (1) Accept PCRB Report on Complaint #09-01 (2) Accept PCRB Report on Complaint #09-02 CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by Braverman and seconded by King to adopt the consent calendar as presented or amended. • Minutes of the meeting on 05/26/09 • ICPD General Order 89-04 (Civil Rights) • ICPD P.A.U.L.A. Report -April 2009 Motion carried, 5/0. Braverman pointed out a typo from the previous meeting's handout ICPD SOG #09-01 (Vehicle Crash Review) that she gave to Captain Wyss. Braverman also wanted to confirm that the P.A.U.L.A reports were public. Both Wyss and Tuttle confirmed that they were. Braverman also wanted to be sure that discussion for the Community Forum was on the agenda for the next meeting. OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS None. PUBLIC DISCUSSION None. BOARD INFORMATION None. STAFF INFORMATION None. PCRB June 8, 2009 Page 2 EXECUTIVE SESSION REGULAR SESSION Motion by King and seconded by Braverman to adjourn into Executive Session 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. Motion carried, 5/0. Open session adjourned at 5:34 P.M. Returned to open session at 6:15 P.M. Motion by King, seconded by Yoder to forward the Public Report as amended for PCRB Complaint #09-01 to City Council. Motion carried, 5/0. Motion by Braverman, seconded by King to dismiss PCRB Complaint #09-02 for lack of standing based on City Code section 8-8-3 (B). Motion carried, 5/0. Motion by Braverman, seconded by Roth to submit PCRB Complaint #09-03 based on the allegations contained in PCRB Complaint #09-02. Motion carried, 3/2, King and Yoder opposed. TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change) • July 14, 2009, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm • August 11, 2009, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm • September 8, 2009, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm • October 13, 2009, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm The Board agreed to leave the July 14 meeting in place, but if there was no business to discuss staff would contact the Board and no meeting would be held. ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by King and seconded by Braverman. Motion carried, 5/0. Meeting adjourned at 6:23 P.M. ~~O~C zzyyb ~o ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r ~ y ~'i ~ K~ ~ o ~ r~ a ~, d o. ~ ~~ -: ~ ~ ~ N ~ o ~O ~ ~ o ~D ~ ~ N ~~ X~ -d ~ ~ ~ ~ k W N C W O z ~ z ~ z ~ z ~ z ~ ~'C ~'C ~'C ~'C ~'C n\i Q~ ~"j ~H M.r•I ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~z n d o~ ~~ o b r I^~I l 1 ^~ l l I••1 y c 0 MINUTES 09-15-09 HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION APPROVED 3b 6 July 21, 2009 - 6:00 PM LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL Members Present: Dianne Day, Dell Briggs, Eric Kusiak, Martha Lubaroff, Newman Abuissa, Wangui Gathua, Kelli Shireen-Fleming. Members Absent: Corey Stoglin, Yolanda Spears. Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers. Others Present: Vicki Siefers, Father Rudolph Juarez, Sarah Swisher. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): None. CALL TO ORDER Chair Abuissa called the meeting to order at 18:05 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 19, 2009 MEETING: Lubaroff moved to approve. Briggs seconded. The motion passed 6-0 (Gathua not present). PRESENTATION FROM REVEREND RUDOLPH T. JUAREZ Reverend Juarez discussed the possibility of working with the Commission to make Iowa City more inclusive to all regardless of whether a person is documented or undocumented. Reverend Juarez and Swisher spoke on recent events in the Johnson County area concerning undocumented persons and the impact the actions of law enforcement had on them. They also mentioned Postville as an example. Commissioners requested Reverend Juarez, Swisher, and Siefers to provide more information and the Commission will place this matter on the agenda for the next month. MISSION CARDS Bowers handed out the mission cards to the Commission to distribute. BREAKFAST Willard L. Boyd, 2001 Iowa City Lifetime Human Rights Honoree, Professor of Law University of Iowa College of Law and President Emeritus of the University of Iowa and the Field Museum of Chicago will be the keynote speaker. Bowers will do a press release the week of July 27 announcing the keynote and also notifying the public that nominations are being sought. PROGRAMMING 2009 Kusiak and Day will contact Crissy Canganelli of the Shelter House to discuss possible future programming. Briggs has been working on a program and will discuss it with Commissioners at the next meeting. REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS Gathua reported that her eldest daughter moved to New York City to follow up on her dream of becoming a actress/singer. She also thanked Spears and Bowers for attending her daughters' graduation party. Day mentioned a meeting she had with the Mayor concerning the Senior Center and that the Mayor will direct a song at the Band Concert at the Senior Center. Lubaroff discussed a letter she received from Hospice stating Hospice will suffer cuts in October 2009 on their Medicaid and Medicare services. Hospice is asking constituents to write their legislators and Lubaroff would encourage all to do the same. Abuissa mentioned that he is a member of the Council of International Visitors to Iowa City and they are working on a fundraiser to help support the International Writer's Program and are having a welcome dinner in.the near future. Human Rights Commission July 21, 2009 Page 2 of 3 ADJOURNMENT Lubaroff moved to adjourn. Day seconded. The motion passed 7-0 at 19:04. Human Rights Commission July 21, 2009 Page 3 of 3 Human Rights Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD 2009 Meetin Date NAME TERM EXP. 1/27 2/24 3/24 4/21 5/19 6/16 7/21 8/18 9/15 10/20 11/17 12/15 Newman Abuissa 1/1/10 X X X X X O X Kelli Shireen- Fleming 1/1/10 - - - - - O X Eric Kusiak 1/1/10 O X X X X X X Dell Briggs 1/1/11 X X X X O X X Yolanda Spears 1/1/11 X X X O X X O Corey Stoglin 1/1/11 O O O O O O O Dianne Day 1/1/12 X X X X X X X Wangui Gathua 1/1/12 X X X X X O P Martha Lubaroff 1/1/12 O X X O O X X Joy Kross 1/1/10 O O R R R R R KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting/No Quorum R =Resigned - = Not a Member 3b 7 MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 20, 2009 - 7:30 PM -FORMAL CITY HALL, EMMA J. HARVAT HALL APPROVED MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Freerks, Michelle Payne, Tim Weitzel, Elizabeth Koppes, Wally Plahutnik, Josh Busard, Charlie Eastham MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Karen Howard, Sara Greenwood Hektoen OTHERS PRESENT: Patricia Patton, Margaret Loomer, Sheila Cushing, Peter McNally, Glen Meisner, Brenda Christener RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: The Commission voted 6-1 (Plahutnik voting no) to approve REZ09-00004, an application submitted by Iowa Wireless Services, LLC for a text amendment to allow communication towers in Interim Development Residential zones. The Commission voted 7-0 to approve REZ09-00005, an application submitted by The Breese Co., LLC for a rezoning from Community Commercial (CC-2) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone for approximately 3,450 square feet of property located at 611 Southgate Avenue. The Commission voted 6-0 (Busard abstaining) to approve SU609-00006/SUB09-00007, an application submitted by Johnson County Extension Service for a preliminary and final plat of Johnson County Extension Service, a 1-lot, 1.64 acre subdivision located at 4265 Oak Crest Hill. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairperson Ann Freerks. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. REZONING USE ITEM: REZ09-00003: Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development Company for a rezoning from Medium Density Single Family Residential (RS-8) zone to High Density Single Family Residential (RS-12) zone for approximately 4.29 acres of property located on Walden Road, west of Mormon Trek Boulevard. The 45-day limitation period for this item has been waived. Eastham announced that he was abstaining from consideration of this item. Freerks noted that the applicant has requested the item be deferred to the September 3`~ meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Howard noted that the property owner is negotiating with the owners of Walden Court Condominiums regarding drainage issues and that is the reason the deferral was requested. Freerks said she would open the public hearing on the matter in spite of the deferral as there seemed to be some people present who wished to speak to the issue. Planning and Zoning Commission August 20, 2009 -Formal Page 2 of 9 The public hearing was opened. Patricia Payton, 2428 Walden Court, said her property is at the bottom of the hill from the property being considered for rezoning. She said that her property has suffered water damage many times and that until the association hired a lawyer and an engineer, no cooperation from Southgate, the adjacent property owner, had been forthcoming. Payton said clay and mud run-off from Southgate's property had been a problem ever since the trees and vegetation had been removed fifteen years prior. She said that some neighbors had foundation issues as a result of the clay and mud, and some had issues with the interiors of their homes. Payton said that the idea of densely populated construction on that site is a scary thing to the homeowners below it. Payton said that a lake often forms in the yards of homeowners at the bottom of the hill as a result of run-off from that property. She said the neighbors have had bad experiences with this property and that she is not convinced of Southgate's claims that they will be good neighbors if allowed to rezone the property. She said that she herself has considered moving because of this issue. Freerks asked if the run-off issues had continued within the last year. Payton said that she had had water issues, but that she had had to dig out around her foundation and reinforce it with stone in the past to prevent further mud and clay issues. Payton said that the neighbors had had to install heavy duty fencing to catch the mud as it slid down the hill and prevent it from covering their sidewalks. She said the property was mowed about once a year and had been graded once in about ten years. She said that because the property is a hillside, there will be nowhere for the water to go but down if buildings are constructed on it. Freerks asked if Payton had attended any of the neighbor meetings with Southgate. She said she had but that the information provided had not satisfied her that the development was a good idea. Payton said she believed that by deferring, Southgate is trying to wait out the neighbors until they no longer show up at the Planning and Zoning meetings. Margaret Loomer, 1248 Jensen Street, said she had safety concerns with the development. She said the parking in the area is not sufficient for the density of the area already, much less if the proposed condominiums were built. Loomer said that Walden Road is notorious as a short cut from Rohret Road to Mormon Trek, and that as a result there is quite a bit of traffic in what is supposed to be a quiet neighborhood. Loomer said she is concerned for children who have to walk to school in the neighborhood. She also is concerned about the aesthetics of the neighborhood, especially if the development is intended to be renter-occupied. Loomer said she would like to see the density cut down some at the very least. Sheila Cushing, 2409 Walden Court, said she wished to reiterate the concerns about the traffic flow. She said there is no stoplight and no way of making provisions for one at Walden Road and Mormon Trek, and that it is somewhat of a blind turn for those attempting to make a left turn there. She said adding a high-density unit there would really obstruct traffic flow. She said that the drainage and traffic issues should both be taken into consideration. Freerks closed public hearing. Weitzel moved to defer to the September 3`d meeting. Koppes seconded. Koppes asked if the applicant had indicated if they would be ready by the September 3~d meeting. Freerks noted that it was the applicant who wished to defer to that date. Koppes said it would be a shame to have everyone come back on the 3`~ and then have the matter deferred again. Howard said she had been in contact with the Walden Court Homeowners' Association and Southgate and would continue to monitor the situation. Miklo said that people could call the Planning Department or check the website to make sure the matter was on the agenda before coming to the meeting September 3~. He said he would also like to point out that the Planning and Zoning Commission will begin meeting at 7:00 p.m. instead of 7:30 p.m. as of the September 3`" meeting. Plahutnik asked if he was correct in believing that this matter would not proceed at all until there was an agreement with the homeowners' association regarding the drainage problem. Howard said this was Staff's recommendation. Freerks said that the Commission would make that determination, but that as Planning and Zoning Commission August 20, 2009 -Formal Page 3 of 9 she had expressed previously, she certainly was not interested in making the drainage issues worse than they were presently. Howard said the drainage agreement in question is one that would allow the developer to tie in with the private storm-water system owned by Walden Court. Further drainage issues would be resolved at the subdivision level. Howard said it would be difficult to find a way to properly drain the property without tying into the private drainage. Payne noted that if no agreement was reached it would continue to drain the way it did now, which was also unsatisfactory to the neighbors. Howard said ultimately the property could not be developed without dealing with the drainage issues. A vote was taken and the motion to defer passed 6-0 (Eastham abstaining). Freerks advised the public to check in with city staff regarding the September 3rd meeting to see if the item would be deferred to a later date. REZ09-00004: Discussion of an application submitted by Iowa Wireless Services, LLC for a text amendment to allow communication towers in Interim Development Residential zones. The 45- day limitation period ends September 7, 2009. Howard stated that Interim Development is a designation given to land that has been annexed, but has no public services available to it and is not yet ready for development. She explained that this is a sort of "holding" zone for land. These zones allow certain agricultural uses, single family homes and very limited development. The future zoning for this particular area is marked out to potentially be multi-family residential and single family residential. The request is to allow cell towers in the area. Staff did some research into what other cities in Iowa were allowing and found that many cities were allowing towers in similar zones, though there were strict guidelines and it usually had to go through a special exception process. Howard said that Staff developed language modeled after the zoning code language for Neighborhood Commercial zones and their provisions for cell phone towers. Howard said that Staff recommended including the strict restrictions found in the Neighborhood Commercial (CN-1) zones if the Commission decided to go forward with allowing towers in Interim Development Residential zones. Howard said that one concern is that communication towers will detract from the aesthetics of future residential areas. Howard said the design of cell phone towers has evolved to be less obtrusive. Howard said that either stealth/camouflage design or mono-pole designs could be incorporated into a residential setting. She said that Staff believed that so long as the location of these towers was carefully considered by the Board of Adjustment they could be allowed without detriment to the aesthetics of the area. She noted that there have been issues of poor cell phone coverage in the area, particularly in the northeast area of the city. Howard led the Commission through a series of maps showing areas that could possibly be affected. Busard asked if increasing the height restriction from 120 feet to 150 feet would better serve Staffs goal of having towers co-located. Howard said that it would depend on the tower and its desired coverage, but that 120 feet provided plenty of range. Busard asked about the setback requirements for the towers, and Howard explained that the setback requirements applied only to adjacent residential properties. Plahutnik asked where towers are currently allowed, and Miklo explained that towers are currently allowed in industrial zones and are allowed by special exception in the commercial and public zones. Plahutnik said that he would like to see a map showing where the towers are currently allowed and located to be able to determine if this change was necessary. Howard said topography was a factor in the effectiveness of towers. Payne noted that in the special exception process the applicant would have to prove that the tower could not be effectively placed in an area that already allowed the tower. Howard said an applicant would have to: 1) check to see if the tower could be co-located on an existing tower, and then 2) check to see if there are any other industrial or commercial properties available, and, finally, 3) take it before the Board of Adjustment. Planning and Zoning Commission August 20, 2009 -Formal Page 4 of 9 Miklo gave examples of inconspicuous cell phone towers and mono-poles that are located in populated areas throughout town that one might not notice unless it was pointed out as a cell phone tower. Freerks asked for clarification about the screening provisions in the code. Howard said that the code was drafted after a committee made up of various entities in Johnson County met and tried to come up with similar wording for codes regarding towers. Howard said that if the Commission wanted to add language, now would be the time to do that. Freerks said that the way she read the code buildings would be required to be screened, but not necessarily the towers themselves. Miklo said he believed bases would likely be screened as a result of utility sheds that would likely be built alongside towers. The utility sheds are required to be screened. Eastham asked if the utility cables to the towers would be placed underground as is required of utility cables in residential zones. Miklo said that electric cables are required to be underground in new subdivisions. Payne said that likely whatever was done prior to subdivision would be redone once development occurred. Howard said she could ask Public Works. Eastham said his view is that it would be a good idea not to have above ground cables in a residential zone. Eastham asked if there was a lot size requirement so that in the event the tower blew down it did not damage adjoining property. Howard said she believed towers were designed to collapse on themselves, not to tip over, but she would defer to the applicant regarding the engineering of the towers. Miklo said he believed the practice would be to make these outlots or open space. He said he did not think the City would want these on inhabited lots. Miklo said that he would think that in the subdivision process this question would be sorted out. Eastham asked if there was a separation distance requirement between towers. Howard said there was no requirement of separation, only that all sites within a half a mile were identified by an applicant. Howard said that topography was such an issue that having restrictions on the density of towers might not be wise. Howard noted that the property will be rezoned prior to development, so the cell phone tower would either be grandfathered in as anon-conforming use or it would be made to conform. Eastham asked if it was correct that there were no cell phone towers in residential zones currently. Miklo said there is one on the Elks property, which is zoned ID-RS. It was allowed by special exception under the previous zoning code. Freerks opened public hearing. Pete McNally of Grinnell Group, 225 42"d Street, Des Moines, identified himself as the representative of the applicant, I-Wireless. McNally said that it is not the usual way for I-Wireless to ask a city to change its rules if there were any other viable options to provide service. He said that what customers demand of a cell phone has changed dramatically. McNally said there are now more households in the United States that only have a cell phone than there are households that only have a land line. McNally said that approximately 35% of households are relying on cell phones for their telecommunications needs. He also said that the FCC reports that 50% of all 911 calls come from cell phones, which demonstrates the importance of having good cell phone coverage everywhere. McNally said that after an extensive search, I-Wireless found that it was having difficulty finding places where towers could be located and still provide coverage everywhere. McNally noted that I-Wireless was asking only for the opportunity to ask the City at a later date for permission to place a tower in a residential zone. McNally said that in asking for Interim Development to be a place where towers could be built, I-Wireless was thinking in terms of infrastructure, just like any other utility provider. He said that they were trying to get ahead of the curve and plan for the future while still leaving the control of where a tower was placed in the hands of the City. McNally said that 80-90% of tower agreements are leases. McNally said that he believed the owner would want to keep that parcel in the event the property was developed in order to maintain the income stream. In that case, McNally said, the City would have the opportunity to make sure that all of its setback requirements were met. McNally said that I-Wireless does not generally use utility buildings, though other cell companies do. He said they are functionally no different than transformer boxes located in residential neighborhoods. McNally said that electric cables are handled in whatever way the utility Planning and Zoning Commission August 20, 2009 -Formal Page 5 of 9 company requires of them. He said the coaxial cables are not typically buried, but come straight from the top of the utility cupboard to the tower. McNally said that it would be highly unlikely for a tower to fail. He noted that two blocks from the high school that was destroyed in Parkersburg when the tornado hit, there was an I-Wireless tower. That tower remained standing and was operational within 24 hours. McNally said he would not be any more concerned about a tower tipping over than he would any other four story building. He said towers are engineered for local wind and ice conditions and for the exact spot on which they are located. Freerks said she was puzzled by the electric boxes and whether any fencing should be required if it was located in a park area. Howard said that it was important to remember that the Board of Adjustment would look at each case and could add any screening or other specific requirements they felt were necessary. Payne said Freerks brought up a good point because coaxial cables that were above ground could be subject to vandalism or children playing on them if the area became a park. McNally said typically the area would be enclosed with a fence. Freerks said that while they did not wish to require things that were not necessary, they did want to look ahead. Greenwood Hektoen said that during the special exception process the City has quite a bit of leverage for adding requirements such as screening, fencing, etc. Payne said the concern is at the point where the use of the surrounding property changes to residential. Greenwood Hektoen said that at that point it will come back before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council as a subdivision. Eastham asked if it would be good to have an engineer's review of whether or not a tower was necessary in that area. Howard said she did not know if the City Engineers would be qualified to make that determination as they typically deal with structural issues. McNally said that in cities where that kind of a review is required I-Wireless simply submits something by their radio frequency engineers. Miklo said further evidence can always be asked for by the Board of Adjustment if it is deemed necessary. Freerks closed the public hearing. Weitzel moved to approve REZ09-00004. Payne seconded. Eastham said he is not necessarily against voting on the measure, but that there have been a number of suggestions about possible changes. Freerks suggested making very specific recommendations for changes and then seeing what they come up with. Koppes said she would like to amend 4b.5 and other similar sections to add the word "cabinet". Weitzel seconded. The amendment was added by a 7-0 vote. Plahutnik said that he views his job here as looking ahead 25 years into the future. He said that while he is a cell phone user, he would not wish a 100-foot cell phone tower in his own back yard, and so could not wish one on the back yard of his neighbor 25 years in the future. He said that cell phone companies currently have a service tower problem, but that in the future they may be able to resolve this with technology advances using a different solution. Plahutnik said he would not live in such a neighborhood, and he cannot wish it on anyone else. Payne said she had the same opinion as Plahutnik initially, but that she agrees with Staff to a certain extent that anyone buying property adjacent to apre-existing tower knows what they are buying. She noted that the towers are so well camouflaged that it is difficult to even notice they are there in many places in the city. She said that she has become convinced that this is probably a good thing for now. Busard said that cell towers are now part of the infrastructure and that it is easier to design a subdivision around infrastructure than to design infrastructure around subdivisions. Busard said that with the Board of Adjustment and the subdivision processes he believes there will be adequate oversight of the Planning and Zoning Commission August 20, 2009 -Formal Page 6 of 9 placement of towers. Ultimately, cell phone towers must be allowed in the area, Busard said. Eastham said Plahutnik raised an excellent point and that a balance had to be struck between the desire for more cell phone service and the need for more antennas. Eastham said it is important for him that the provisions contain removal requirements when/if the towers become obsolete. Eastham said there is an analogy between electrical service and cell phone service. The number of electrical lines in the area was also once very annoying to look at, but now they are largely underground. At some point, the same sort of transformation may take place with cell phone towers. He said he would go ahead and support the current provisions. Weitzel said it is hard to overstate how much design can ameliorate structure, and how it looks and fits into the community. Weitzel said the code is well written and that the Board of Adjustment will have a lot of control over the way the towers look. He reiterated the point that people will move into the neighborhood with the tower pre-existing, not the other way around. Koppes said she also supports the measure. She said she approves of the camouflaging, and the fact that the towers will be there before the land is developed. Freerks said Staff had looked at the matter carefully and has come up with a solid process. She said she is very much in favor of the provision for removing the towers when they become obsolete, and the co- location aspect of the code. She said she has some concerns about how the tower areas will transition into park lands or subdivisions at some point. However, she thinks it will be dealt with carefully when that time arises. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-1 (Plahutnik voting no). REZ09-00005: Discussion of an application submitted by The Breese Co., LLC for a rezoning from Community Commercial (CC-2) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone for approximately 3,450 square feet of property located at 611 Southgate Avenue. The 45 day limitation period expires September 13, 2009. Howard said the applicant could not be present and had offered his apologies. Howard said this is a minor lot line adjustment. Howard said the building actually straddles the property line. The applicant wishes to remodel the interior of the building and has a tenant that wants to extend into the portion of the building on the other side of the lot-line. The applicant wanted to adjust the lot-line to accommodate the tenant. However, the use that is going in there requires CI-1 zoning, so the zoning boundary line must also be adjusted. The Comprehensive Plan indicates this area as appropriate for Intensive Commercial zoning, as the zoning pattern is fairly set in that area. Basically it is just a minor adjustment to the zoning boundary line, Howard said. The public hearing was opened. As there was no public comment, the hearing was closed. Eastham moved approval of REZ09-00005. Payne seconded. Freerks invited discussion. Freerks said she had one thought concerning the proximity to the apartments next door. Howard said that the building is already in that proximity. Payne said the reason the line is where it is is because of the way the building is situated on a corner lot. Miklo pointed out that it would not happen under current zoning that a single building would be in two different zones. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. Planning and Zoning Commission August 20, 2009 -Formal Page 7 of 9 SUBDIVISION ITEM: SUB09-00008/SU609-00007: Discussion of an application submitted by Johnson County Extension Service for a preliminary and final plat of Johnson County Extension Service, a 1-lot, 1.64 acre subdivision located at 4265 Oak Crest Hill. Busard announced that he would be abstaining from this matter because in his role as a County Planner he has involved the review of this property. He left the meeting. Miklo explained that this property is currently owned by the Johnson County Fairgrounds Board. The Johnson County Extension Service, a state-run organization, currently has office space at the fairgrounds. The proposal involves the Johnson County Extension Service buying a parcel of the fairground property and building a new office on that site. The entire fairground is not included in the subdivision because it is a property of more than 40 acres; this is a one-lot subdivision. There is an easement allowing access to the fairgrounds driveway and Old Highway 218, also known as Oak Crest Hill Road. The Comprehensive Plan acknowledges the current fairgrounds, the residential, and the mixed commercial uses in the area. The Fringe Area Agreement says that commercial and industrial uses should not occur until the area is annexed into the City. Miklo said the Fringe Area Agreement does not address public uses such as the fairgrounds and the Johnson County Extension Service, though Staff feels this particular proposal is not inconsistent with the aims of the plan. The property is under the County's jurisdiction and is zoned County Commercial Agricultural which would allow this use. Miklo said that neither Staff nor the County wants an additional curb cut onto Old Highway 218 because of its arterial function and the high speed of traffic in that area; thus, the driveway easement. The Hills Fire Department submitted a letter stating that they have jurisdiction for providing fire protection for the area. Miklo said the inconsistencies of the legal descriptions in the preliminary and final plats have been corrected. Miklo said Staff recommends approval subject to the legal papers and construction drawings being approved by Staff prior to Council consideration. Freerks asked about parking provisions. Miklo said he believed the Extension Service planned to do their own parking lot on the new property. Freerks asked if there were large trees in that area that could be protected or maintained. Miklo said the subdivision code does not have a provision protecting trees unless it is a significant grove of trees. Eastham asked the size of the building. Miklo said it was fairly significant and referred him to the applicant's engineer. Eastham asked if the entities involved were under the control of the Board of Supervisors. Miklo said he believed the fairgrounds were separate but was not sure, and that the Extension Service is a state agency. Freerks opened the public hearing. Glen Meisner, MMS Consultants, represented the applicant. Meisner said he believed the building was 80x50, single-story. Parking will be on three sides of the building. Plahutnik encouraged the applicant to protect the trees. Meisner said that while efforts are being made to keep as many trees as possible, some will have to be removed. Brenda Christener, 2526 Potomac Drive, said she is currently the business manager for the Johnson County Agricultural Association. She said that they do fall under the Johnson County Board of Planning and Zoning Commission August 20, 2009 -Formal Page 8 of 9 Supervisors, and that she would be happy to try to answer any questions Commissioners had. The public hearing was closed. Payne motioned to recommend approval of SU609-00006/SU609-00007, a preliminary and final plat for Johnson County Extension Service, a 1.66 acre subdivision in the north portion of the Johnson County Fairgrounds, subject to Staff approval of construction drawings and legal papers prior to City Council consideration. Koppes seconded. Freerks said that the proposal is not inconsistent with the Fringe Agreement and that an office use is permitted in the current zone. She said she was glad that there would be no additional curb cuts on Old Highway 218 and that efforts would be made to save mature trees. Weitzel said that the use does seem to be compatible, and an office in the area does seem to be appropriate. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0 (Busard abstaining). CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: June 13 and July 16, 2009: Freerks noted she had one small change that she would give to Staff. Payne motioned to approve the minutes. Plahutnik seconded. The minutes were approved 6-0 (Busard absent). OTHER: Miklo noted that formal meetings would begin at 7:00 p.m. in the future. Miklo noted that there was a short article about the Commission in a publication he passed around. ADJOURNMENT: Plahutnik motioned to adjourn. Payne seconded. The meeting was adjourned on a 6-0 (Busard absent) vote at 9:18 p.m. s/pcd/minutes/p&z/2009p&z/8-20-09.doc Z _O ~_ 0 00 U ~U C9 ~ Z U o NZN DD Q W c~ ~ zQ z z Q J a O p X X X X X X X t0 ; x x x x x x x ti X ~ X X X X X ~ ~ X X X X ~ X X X ~ X X X X c~ ~ X X X X X ~ X ~ x x x x x x x M X X X X X X X N x x x x o x x X X X ~ X X X N W ~~ ~ ~ M N O O M wX ~ -n ~ ~n ~ ~n ~ ~n ~ ~n ~ ~n ~ ~n F-w o o o o o 0 0 w ~ ~ ~ ~ m J ~ J = Q = Z Q "' N ~ V Z Q N W 2 U Y ~ ~ ~ _ ~ W W ~ W w Q r- w a z = ~ ~ v~ v~ w a ~ Q - Q z ~ m Q w m w O Y Q a ~ a w ~ Z w W O X X X X X X ~ M X X X X X X X M X X X X X X X N x x x x x x x ~ o x x o x x o w ~~ ma r- ~ r- ~ M r- N ~ O ~ O ~ M .- w ~C ~n ~n ~n ~ ~ ~ ~ I-W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W J ~ w ~ Q ~ ~ W m J J Q = ~ N ~ V Z Q W _ V Y ~ O Q Y N ~ H J W w a ~ w a z i ~ ~ Q cn ~ cn Q w a a O >- Q Q ~ - w z m w w Y a a ~ Z w w m O z E 0 N ~ ~ O ` X ~ W ;_, ~ c ~ ~ ~~~Ecv a ~QZ o d Q II II II 11 W ~~ , xooz ; w Y FINAL/APPROVED POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES -August 11, 2009 3b 8 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Michael Larson called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Janie Braverman, Greg Roth (5:37), Abbie Yoder MEMBERS ABSENT: Donald King STAFF PRESENT: Legal Counsel Catherine Pugh and Staff Kellie Tuttle OTHERS PRESENT: Captain Richard Wyss of the ICPD; and Public Dean Able, Caroline Dieterle (5:36) RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL None CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by Yoder and seconded by Braverman to adopt the consent calendar as presented or amended. • Minutes of the meeting on 06/08/09 • ICPD General Order 99-05 (Use of Force) • ICPD General Order 00-02 (Harassment and Sexual Harassment) • ICPD General Order 00-05 (Off-Duty Conduct: Powers of Arrest) • ICPD General Order 00-07 (Police Cyclist) • ICPD General Order 01-04 (Bomb Threats/Emergencies) • ICPD General Order 08-01 (Conducted Energy Devices) • ICPD Quarterly/Summary Report (Quarter 2) - IAIR/PCRB, 2009 ICPD Department Memo #09-18 (April-May 09 Use of Force Review) • ICPD P.A.U.L.A. Report -June 2009 Motion carried, 3/0, Roth and King absent. Braverman indicated that for General Order 00-05 (Off-Duty Conduct: Powers of Arrest) section IV(B)(3) there should be a semicolon followed by and to pattern the previous numbers and to also include number four. Braverman also had a question regarding General Order 08-01 (Conducted Energy Devices) section IV(A)(8) and the difference between probe mode and drive stun mode. Wyss explained that the tasers have two options. The probe mode is when a cartridge is fired and a probe is released and sticks into the skin. The drive stun mode is when two metal objects are released they make contact but do not penetrate. Abel asked if the officers have control over which mode is used. Wyss stated that the officers do have control. There is a cartridge that is used with a trigger device when the probes are released. If the cartridge is removed the drive stun mode would be used and the officer must be at a much closer distance. OLD BUSINESS None. Tuttle thanked the out-going Board members (Michael Larson and Greg Roth) for their time and effort while serving on the Police Citizens Review Board. PCRB August 11, 2009 Page 2 NEW BUSINESS Draft of FY09 Annual Report -Minor changes were made to the draft of the annual report. The Board agreed that a member should verify the information given in the report since the report is compiled by staff. Roth volunteered to check the report before his term was over. A second draft with the agreed changes and any discrepancies found by Roth will be distributed at the September meeting. Community Forum -Tuttle suggested that the forum be held after the first of the year in February or March. This would give new Board members time to get familiar with procedures and Board officers would be elected in October. All other local elections would also be over and this would also give students/new residents time to familiarize themselves with the area and Local government. Braverman stated that she was hesitant to wait because she has had some contact with members of the public regarding the Deng shooting in July and was reluctant to put off the forum until February or March, or suggested that the Board hold two per year. The Board agreed to tentatively schedule the forum for October. The Board will discuss at the September meeting topics for the forum. Tuttle will check availability of Harvat Hall and have drafts of press releases, agendas, etc that were used last year in the September packet. Larson agreed to meet with the new Board members and go over procedures, by- laws, SOP's, etc. PUBLIC DISCUSSION None. BOARD INFORMATION None. STAFF INFORMATION Tuttle distributed copies of the applications for the two vacancies on the Board. She suggested that if any of the Board members have any input for the Council regarding the applicants they should contact Council members after Thursday when the Council packet comes out and before Monday night. EXECUTIVE SESSION Not Needed. REGULAR SESSION Continued. TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change) • September 8, 2009, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm • October 13, 2009, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm • October 2009 (Tenative Forum) TBA • November 10, 2009, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm • December 8, 2009, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Rm ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by Braverman and seconded by Yoder. Motion carried, 4/0, King absent. Meeting adjourned at 6:26 PM. ~C ~~O~C zz~~~ oo~~~ ~. ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ fD V~ 'S fD -cc ~. ~ ~ ~' r ~ d ~ ~ ? ~ ~ ~~ .~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r~~ ~ W W N a lp o ~p ~ ~ N b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W A ~ 7 a y y 77 r~ yy a ~7y r~ A i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J i ~ i ~ y F~ 7 ra y ra 7 ra ~' ~ i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ y _~.y ICI ~ ~ ~^ ~ ~ l l d O ~ ~ ~ ..i b r F~1 ~^ l 1 ~I y FBI C