Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-02-13 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES IOWA CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THURSDAY, JANUARY 25 - 7:30 PM CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS Subject to Approval MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann 8ovbjerg, Richard Gibson, Jane Jakobsen, George Starr, Lea Supple MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Scott STAFF PRESENT: Charles Denney, Sarah Holecek, Scott Kugler, Bob Miklo, James Erwin CALL TO ORDER: Vice-Chairperson Starr called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ARTERIAL STREET PLAN ITEM: Set a public hearing for February 1, 1996, to consider amending the Comprehensive Plan by revising the JCCOG Arterial Street Plan to include Oakdale Boulevard. Starr advised that the setting of the public hearing be moved to February 1, and that the hearing be held on February 15 to allow public notice requirements to be met. He noted that a representative from JCCOG would be present at the February 15 meeting. IVlOTION: Bovbjerg moved to defer the setting of the public hearing on amending the Comprehensive Plan by revising the JCCOG Arterial Street Plan to February 1. Supple seconded. The motion was carried by a vote of CODE AMENDMENT ITEM: Public discussion of an amendment to the Sensitive Areas Ordinance steep slopes section to allow consideration of development activities within areas containing previously altered slopes. Denney said this amendment may be appropriate for man-made slopes. He noted that currently, slopes of 40% or greater are protected. However, he said the protection of man-made slopes may not always be in keeping with the intent of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. Denney stated that allowing some grading might improve slope stability. He then used the example of the slopes around the Hy-Vee development on First Avenue, where the slope is not part of a larger ecosystem and is not very attractive. He noted that development in some cases could introduce hazards. He also noted that all developments would require the approval of a geologist or professional engineer. Planning & Zoning Commission January 25, 1996 Page 2 Denney stated that grading such slopes was not necessarily against the intent of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. Staff recommended that the amendment be approved, in order to institute case by case review of development activities on previously altered protected slopes. Denney noted in conclusion that the amendment had drawn no criticism from the Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission. It was also sent to the Sensitive Areas Committee for comment. Bovbjerg noted that certain soils tended to erode rapidly when disturbed, and asked if any provision for soil surveys had been included. Denney replied that a soil survey could be required by the Public Works Department, which could require different technical reports on a case by case basis. Bovbjerg asked how possible abuse was to be checked. Denney replied the case review should prevent any abuse, and noted that any development would still be covered by the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. Bovbjerg said she wanted to assure that any exceptions would not simply be an administrative sign-off. Jakobsen noted the amendment seemed reasonable, as it pertained only to man-made fill. Bovbjerg asked whether a concrete wall would be acceptable. Gibson noted that such a structure would not necessarily be bad when considering this sort of situation. Public discussion. Richard Rhodes, 2014 Rochester Avenue, said he had served on the Sensitive Areas Committee. He noted that Section 0 already allowed applicants to appeal provisions that seemed unreasonable to the Board of Adjustment. Denhey noted there were very specific requirements for an appeal to the Board of Adjustment including the need to find that reasonable use of the property could be denied if the provisions of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance were enforced. Denney said this amendment would allow applicants to change their development, which was not the intent of the appeals provision. Rhodes said that many man-made slopes are stable, well-vegetated, and have an aesthetic appearance as well as providing habitat for urban wildlife. He said the poor appearance of many slopes was due to owner neglect. Rhodes then said he was shocked at the speed at which this amendment had come forward. He noted that the Sensitive Areas Ordinance had been adopted only a month before. He expressed his disappointment that the City would propose amending the Ordinance without first attempting to find another solution. He noted that some fill slopes Jn Iowa City were over a century old, and were in no danger of erosion. He said this amendment would allow development of the quarry hills, and noted that such development had previously caused environmental degradation. He cited the case of the Cliffs Apartments north of the Mayflower. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Supple moved to approve the amendment of subsection 2c of the steep slopes section of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance, as proposed by staff. Bovbjerg seconded. Planning & Zoning Commission January 25, 1996 Page 3 Bovbjerg asked that the phrase "slopes created by cutting" be changed to emphasize their man-made characteristics, possibly to "slopes previously created" or "slopes that had been created." Gibson also noted that inserting "i.e." would help to clarify the amendment. Gibson then urged a deferral, and suggested a substitute motion to defer. The motion to approve was withdrawn by Supple and Bovbjerg. MOTION: Gibson moved to defer consideration of the amendment of the steep slopes section of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance to February 1, 1996. Bovbjerg seconded. Gibson noted that slopes created by cutting were significantly different from slopes created by fill, and that older slopes have often taken on a natural character. He thanked Rhodes for his comments. The motion to defer was carried by a vote of 5-0. REZONING ITEMS: REZ95-0016. Public discussion of an application submitted by Danette and John Raley to rezone a 0.14 acre parcel located at 24 N. Van Buren Street from RM-44, High Density Multi-Family Residential, to R/O, Residential Office. (45-day limitation period: February 16, 1996) Kugler noted that the building currently had four dwelling units, and the proposed use would result in commercial space on the first floor with two dwelling units on the second floor. He said if sufficient parking was available, the development would be compatible with the intent of the RIO zone. Kugler noted staff was concerned over an apparent lack of parking. He said no concept plan that demonstrated how the parking requirements can be met on the site had been submitted. Staff recommended that the rezoning be deferred until a concept plan, which included satisfactory parking space, was submitted by the applicant. If compliance with the parking regulations cannot be demonstrated, staff would recommend denial. Public discussion. Danette Raley, 730 College Street, introduced herself as one of the co-applicants. She agreed with staff over the parking issue and sa~d she was willing to wait until a concept plan was submitted. She requested deferral of the application until February 15. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Gibson moved to defer the application to rezone a O. 14 acre parcel located at 24 N. Van Buren from RM-zt4 to RIO to February 15, 1996. Jakobsen seconded. The motion to defer was carried by a vote of 5-0. Planning & Zoning Commission January 25, 1996 Page 4 o REZ96-0001. Public discussion of a request by Dave Larson to amend the Conditional Zoning Agreement for the D&L Subdivision, located southeast of the intersection of Highway 1 and Sunset Street, to eliminate the requirement to provide access to property to the south. (45-day limitation period: February 12, 1996) Denney said the Conditional Zoning Agreement for this development had required access drives to all internal lots and the north and south boundaries of the property. At the time of the rezoning, there had been discussion about the possible relocation of the airport. If the airport was relocated, the area to the south would be available for development. Therefore the Conditional Zoning Agreement made provisions to ensure access to the property to the south. Denney said the decision not to move the airport has removed the need for access to the south. Staff felt the application was appropriate and recommended approval. Bovbjerg asked if it would be possible to split the south lots if they were sold as one parcel. Denney noted the lots had been platted and to split them would require subdivision approval. Holecek asked Bovbjerg for a clarification of her question. Bovbjerg noted that she was trying to determine what might be possib!e in the future if the south area of the property were developed. Public discussion. Dave Larson, Wellman, Iowa, introduced himself as the applicant. Gibson asked if he was the owner of the land. Larson replied that he had an interest in the property. Gibson then asked if the south lots were to be developed as one parcel. Larson replied that they were, and that the planned construction would require both lots. Public discussion closed, Starr noted that a deferral would be acceptable. Denney noted as well that deferral to the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting would not affect the date the item would be placed on the City Council agenda. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to defer the request to amend the Conditional Zoning Agreement until February 1. Jakobsen seconded. The motion to defer was carried by a vote of 5-0. REZ96-0002. Public discussion of an application submitted by Kevin Kidwell for a Sensitive Areas Development Plan for a 0.32 acre property located in the PRM zone at 515 and 521 S. Linn Street. (45-day limitation period: February 12, 1996) Denney said the proposed development will take place on a site with protected slopes. He also stated that the currenu development had made use of bonus points to allow construction of a slightly taller building that will cover a larger portion of the property. Field inspection showed that the slope had previously been filled; that there was rubble in the slope. He noted that the current ordinance requires a buffer around the slope. However, if the proposed amendment to the steep slope section of the Sensitive Areas Planning & Zoning Commission January 25, 1996 Page 5 Ordinance is approved, the proposed development plan could be permitted with City Council approval. Denney noted that the slope was isolated ecologically, and was neither scenic nor a significant wildlife habitat. He said the applicant still needed to demonstrate that development within the slope area would not pose any hazards. Staff recommended that the application be deferred until a decision had been made on the proposed amendment of the steep slopes section of the Sensitive Area Ordinance. Gibson said it was impossible to reach a decision. He suggested that the Commission defer its consideration of this item, Starr agreed that it should be deferred, Bovbjerg asked for clarification of markings on the site plan. In response to a query from Bovbjerg, Denhey said that the development was within the area affected by the Parking Facilities Impact Fee. Public discussion. Kevin Kidwell, 2162 Sugar Bottom Road, Solon, introduced himself as the applicant. He said his understanding was that the proposed amendment to the Sensitive Areas Ordinance was being discussed before he submitted his application. He agreed to a deferral. MOTION: Gibson moved to defer consideration of a Sensitive Areas Development Plan for a .32 acre property located in the PRM zone at 515 and 521 S. Linn Street to February 1, 1996. Bovbjerg seconded. The motion to defer was carried by a vote of DEVELOPMENT ITEM: SUB95-0032. Public discussion of the preliminary plat for Galway Hills, Parts Three and Four, a 27.77 acre, 78-1ot subdivision located south of Galway Drive, east of Highway 218. (45-da¥ limitation period: February 1 2, 1996) Kugler noted that the plat was in conformance with the subdivision regulations, but the Grading Plan and the Sensitive Areas Site Plan were still under review. He also noted that the proposed plat was within the limits of the City's secondary access guidelines, and no second access was required at this time. However, staff recommended that secondary access be provided for any future development on this property. Staff recommended that a trail from Tipperar¥ Road south to the dedicated open space be required. in order to prowde adequate public access. Kugler then noted such a trail could be extended to the Cit¥'s proposed Willow Creek trail in the future. Staff recommended that the plan be approved pending the approval of a Grading Plan and a Sensitive Areas Site Plan prior to Council consideration, and subject to the legal papers addressing the need for an 8-foot wide trail being constructed from Tipperary Road south to the useable open space to be dedicated on Outlot 3. Gibson asked staff to indicate the location of the proposed trail. Supple asked if Outlot 2 could become part of the open space. Kugler said it would not be suitable for public open space, because it does not meet the frontage requirements for neighborhood Planning & Zoning Commission January 25, 1996 Page 6 open space; the steep slopes and storm water management basin to be located on the site limit its use as public open space. Gibson indicated that he had received a letter requesting that Part Two be redesigned to include more open space. Kugler also noted that some residents in the area had expressed a desire for more open space near the existing development. Supple noted there was some open space in Part Two. Denney noted that it is private open space and has rugged topography. Starr noted that the issue could be studied in more detail at an upcoming informal meeting. Jakobsen said she would like public input. Bovbjerg agreed, especially regarding the trail. Public discussion. Mark Kamps, 44 Stur~is Corner Drive, thanked the Commission and neighborhood residents for their interest in the area. He detailed his civic involvement. He then noted that he lacked security due to the proposed development. As a realtor, he gave his opinion that the marketing of Galway Hills had been mismanaged and misleading. He said if the developers had handled the development like others in the area, it would have proceeded much more smoothly. He expressed concern that the smaller lots now proposed by the applicant were not compatible with the existing lots already developed in the subdivision. Dale Reiman, 28 Galway Place, said that he had gone through a book of 200 low- budget homes, and found only six that would fit on the proposed lots at Galway Hills. He said the lowest price paid by the families currently living in Galway Hills was $188,000. He noted that houses on tracts of comparable size to those now being proposed by the applicant sold elsewhere in Iowa City for $11 2,000 to $120,000. He said that replatting the area would cost the residents hundreds of thousands in lost investment. Garv Craicl~ 61 Galway Circle, noted that despite the provision for parks on the south end of the subdivision, there had been no provision for playgrounds that are easily accessible to the current homes in Galway Hills. Lorna Warnock, Iowa Citv, said that the residents had trusted the developers to adhere to the concept plan. She expressed her disappointment at the turn of events. John Bayless,524 Galway Drive, said the proposed platting of small lots constituted a direct reduction in the value of the residents' investment that contradicted specific assurances made by the developer. He asked the Commission to prevent the proposed platting. Dori Thomas, Iowa City, said she had moved to Galway Hills in October. She sa~d that she had been shown the original plan and was therefore misled as recently as August as to the type of development proposed for this area. Planning & Zoning Commission January 25, 1996 Page 7 Richard Rhodes, 2014 Rochester Avenue, asked if the open space in Outlot 2 was private, Kugler replied that it was. Rhodes then asked if there was a trail to the open space. Kugler said there was not. Rhodes cited the case of the trail in Mormon Trek Village, and said that this development was equally suited to a connection with the City trail system, Public discussion closed. MOTION: Jakobsen moved to defer consideration of the preliminary plat for Galway Hills, Parts Three and Four, to February 15. Bovbjerg seconded. Supple noted that she would abstain, in order to prevent the appearance of a conflict of interest as she is a close friend with one of the applicants. Gibson noted that he was always troubled by partial development. He then noted that the Commission had little power to hold developers to their promises. He expressed his belief that the housing market in Iowa City was changing. He then noted that the proposal was in conformance with RS-5 standards. Starr said that the proposal also fit the Comprehensive Plan. ' Gibson indicated he had questions over the legalitv of requiring a trail on Outlot 2 since it connects to private property. The motion to defer was carried by a vote of 4-0-1, with Supple abstaininq. CONSIDERATION OF THE JANUARY 4, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION: Jakobsen moved to approve the January 4 minutes. Bovbjerg seconded. Gibson noted that "estimated" at the bottom of page three should be "recalled." He said the word "estimated" did not reflect his intention. The motion to approve the January 4 minutes was withdrawn by Jakobsen and Bovbjerg. .IV1OTION: Jakobsen moved to defer the consideration of the January 4, 1996 minutes to February 1. Bovbjerg seconded. The motion to defer was carried by a vote of 5-0. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION INFORMATION: Miklo noted that Februarv 1 2 would be caucus night. Miklo said the neighbors were withdrawing their objections to the proposed rezoning on Sycamore Street and Deforest Avenue. Miklo noted that the City Council may approve the rezomng over the Commission's recommendation due to this. He said that the Council indicated that they may also approve the CO-1 to CC-2 rezoning on Cross Park Avenue. He Planning & Zoning Commission January 25, 1996 Page 8 said that these issues would be under discussion at the Council's informal meeting at 5:30 p.m. on January 29. Starr and Supple indicated they would attend, and Jakobsen and Bovbjerg said they might attend. Gibson asked whether the neighborhood residents in the DeForest/Sycamore area had retained an attorney, Holecek said 4Cs was handling the covenant. Gibson expressed skepticism, OTHER BUSINESS: Starr reminded the Commission of the American Planning Conference in April. Bovbjerg told the Commission about the Non-Farmer's Guide to Agriculture, which showed participants how agriculture worked, She felt it gave important insights into the basis of Johnson Countv's economy. Starr noted that the joint meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Housing and Community Development Commission had been rescheduled for February 26. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Lea Supple, Secretary Minutes submitted by James Erwin. IOWA CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING THURSDAY, JANUARYS. 19~5 - 7:$0 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCI~ CHAMBERS $1G3/IN SHEET 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Name I~;,'~, //.'d,,~ Addres~ 13. 15. 16. 1Z 18. 19. MINUTES IOWA CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1996 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS PREU AR¥ Subject to Approval MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Bovbjerg, Jane Jakobsen, George Starr, Lea Supple MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Gibson, Tom Scott STAFF PRESENT: Charles Denhey, Sarah Holecek, Scott Kugler, James Erwin RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 4-0, of an amendment to the Zoning Chapter's Sensitive Areas Ordinance steep slopes section, revising subsection 2C to read as follows: Protected Slopes - Any area designated as a natural protected slope (40% +) shall not be graded and must remain in its existing state, except that natural vegetation may be supplemented by other plant material. Any such property shall be required to submit a Sensitive Areas Development Plan and a Grading Plan, unless said property qualifies for an exemption within this Section. Development activities may be allowed within areas containing altered protected slopes, including, but not limited to, slopes previously created by cutting or fil- ling activities, exceeding 40%, if a geologist or professional engineer can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that a development activity will not undermine the stability of the slope and the City determines that the development activities are consistent with the intent of the Sensitive Areas ordinance. Recommended approval, by a vote of 4-0, of an amendment to the Zoning Chapter allowing the outdoor storage of recyclable materials in an I-1 zone as an accessory use to a recycling processing facility by special exception. Recommended approval, by a vote of 4-0, of the definitions of "model dwelling unit" and "real estate sales center" and to allow temporary real estate sales centers in residential zones as provisional uses. Recommended approval, by a vote of 4-0, of a request by Dave Larson to amend the Conditional Zoning Agreement for the D&L Subdivision to eliminate the requirement to provide access to property to the south. Recommended approval, by a vote of 4-0, of an application for a Sensitive Areas Development Plan located in the PRM zone at 517 S. Linn Street, and to rezone the property from PRM to PRM-OSA, subject to approval by the City Council of an amendment to the Sensitive Areas Ordinance steep slopes section. Recommended approval, by a vote of 4-0, of a preliminary plat for Newport Ridge Subdivision, subject to approval of a grading plan prior to City Council consideration of the plat. CALL TO ORDER: Planning & Zoning Commission February 1, 1996 Page 2 Vice-Chairperson Starr called the meeting to order at 7:35 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ARTERIAL STREET PLAN ITEM: Set a public hearing for February 15, 1996, to consider amending the Comprehensive Plan by revising the JCCOG Arterial Street Plan to include Oakdale Boulevard. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to set a public hearing for February 15, 1996, to consider amending the Comprehensive Plan by revising the JCCOG Arterial Street Plan to include Oakdale Boulevard. Jakobsen seconded, The motion carried bv a vote of 4-0. CODE AMENDMENT ITEMS: Public discussion of an amendment to the Zoning Chapter, Sensitive Areas Ordinance steep slopes section to allow consideration of development activities within areas containing previously altered slopes. Denney said that the amendment was in keeping with the intention of the City Council to maintain flexibility in the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. He noted that any develop- ments activities proposed within previously altered protected slopes would still require a Sensitive Areas Development Plan, which would require review by staff, a recommendation by the Commission, and approval by the City Council, He emphasized that the amendment would not simply allow an administrative approval. Public discussion. Richard Rhodes, 2014 Rochester Avenue, noted that many slopes were unattractive, and would therefore receive unequal attention. He stressed that in his work drafting the Ordinance, he had tried to keep it as objective as possible, and that the amend- ment would undermine this. He said that staff had asserted manmade slopes were less valuable as wildlife habitat. Rhodes pointed out that disturbing these slopes would reduce the variety of plant species and create an opportunity for less attractive birds, such as sparrows and pigeons to occupy these habitats. He noted that manmade slopes were often hard to detect. He then noted that many older slopes contained hazardous materials, which might be better left undisturbed. He urged that if the amendment were passed, an environmental audit be required. Bovbjerg asked staff if the Environmental Technical Advisory Committee (ETAC) was a standing body. Denhey said the ETAC was summoned as different situations demanded, but did not hold regular meetings. He then noted the amendment could go to the ETAC, if the Commission so desired. Rhodes noted that the members of the Environmental Technical Advisory Committee had little experience with hazardous waste. Starr asked whether hazardous waste could be found prior to excavation. Planning & Zoning Commission February 1, 1996 Page 3 Rhodes noted that an environmental audit performed at Sturgis Corner had required no excavation. Denney pointed out that area was a known garbage dump. Chris Stephan, MMS Consultants, 1917 S, Gilbert Street, noted that any property transfer required an environmental agreement and assessment. Holecek asked whether an engineer was under legal obligation to disclose whether hazardous waste had been discovered at a site. Stephan assured the Commission that any wastes would be promptly disclosed, Holecek then clarified with Stephan that there was a duty to notify the Iowa Department of Natural Resources regarding hazardous wastes. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Jakobsen moved to approve the amendment to the steep slopes section of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance, as recommended in the staff memorandum dated January 18. Bovbjerg seconded the motion. Discussion. Bovbjerg questioned whether it would be wise to limit the amendment to apply only to altered slopas steeper than the 40%, and whether it wouldn't be wiser to review every slope, Holecek noted that such a requirement would be difficult to implement. Bovbjerg agreed, but said that all possibilities should be discussed. Supple asked whether a geologist would be able to deal with environmental concerns. Starr said he was comfortable that the required level of review would preclude the need for an environmental audit. Starr asked what the impact of the phrase "intent of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance" would be. Denney replied that it would be more comprehensive than only referencing the steep slopes section. Holecek clarified that the Sensitive Areas Ordinance was concerned with topographv and physical features, and that regulations requiring subsurface investigations would be something quite different. Supple asked whether developers would be liable for wastes found. Holecek said that any improprieties would be punished, and that the best thing for a developer to do would be to disclose the existence of waste and remove it. Bovbjerg asked what action would be taken when wastes were not reported. Starr noted that the amendment was unlikely to change the level of honesty. Bovbjerg said that she was expressing her unease. In response to a query, Holecek said that the amendments were to Section 2C of the steep slopes section. The proposed amendments were revised to state "including, but not limited to, slopes that had been created..." Jakobsen and Bovbjerg agreed to an amended motion to revise the amendment by inserting the phrase "including, but not limited to" following the phrase "altered protected slopes," and to change the last sentence to read "are consistent with the intent of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance," and to approve the amendment as revised. The amended motion was carried by a vote of 4-0. Planning & Zoning Commission February 1, 1996 Page 4 ,IVlOTION: Bovbjerg moved to accept correspondence from Richard Rhodes and to forward it to the City Council. Jakobsen seconded. The motion was carried by a vote of 4-0. Public discussion of an amendment to the Zoning Chapter to allow the outdoor storage of recyclable materials in the I-1 zone as an accessory use to a recycling processing facility by special exception. Kugler reviewed the proposed amendment noting that it would allow outdoor storage of recyclab]e materials by special exception, with standards to help ensure litter control and screening. Kugler stated that staff recommended approval of the amendment. Supple asked what board or committee would approve the special exception. Kugler replied that the Board of Adjustment would be responsible for approving or denying a request. Bovbjerg asked for a clarification regarding the problem of screening for City Carton, and who requested the amendment. Kugler noted that the screening of outdoor storage areas is required for any I-1 use. The City Carton site is hard to screen in accordance with these regulations due to the grade change between the site and Benton Street. He noted that enforcement officials would need to apply their judgment in individual cases as was done on City Carton's site on the north side of Benton Street. Bovbjerg asked if the Board of Adjustment had the power to require additional screening. Kugler said that the Board of Adjustment could attach conditions to its approval if it deemed them necessary to protect the public interest. Public discussion. There was none. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to approve the amendment to allow outdoor storage of recyclables as an accessory use to a recycling processing center by special exception. Supple seconded. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0. Public discussion of amendments to the Zoning Chapter to allow temporary real estate sales offices in residential zones. Kugler noted that only buildings which will become dwellings would be able to be used as real estate offices under the conditions of the amendment. He sa~d that staff recommends approval of the amendment and the related definitions of "model dwelling unit" and "real estate sales center." Kugler also noted that the amendment has been revised with regard to the Commission's comments at the informal meeting. The temporary real estate center would have to be terminated when less than 10 percent of the dwelling units or five dwelling units, whichever is less, remain to be sold. Public discussion. Planning & Zoning Commission February 1, 1996 Page 5 There was none. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Supple moved to approve the amendment to include the definitions of "model dwelling unit" and "real estate sales center" and allow real estate sales centers in residential zones, subject to the requirements of Article L of the Zoning Chapter, as amended. Bovbjerg seconded. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0. REZONING ITEMS: REZ96-0001. Public discussion of a request by Dave Larson to amend the Conditional Zoning Agreement for the D&L Subdivision, located southeast of the intersection of Highway 1 and Sunset Street, to eliminate the requirement to provide access to property to the south. (45-day limitation period: February 12, 1996) Denney noted that staff recommended approval of this request, as the need for access to the south no longer existed, due to the decision not to relocate the airport. Public discussion. There was none. Public discussion closed. IV]OTION: Jakobsen moved to amend the Conditional Zoning Agreement for the D&L Subdivision to eliminate the requirement to provide access to the south. Bovbjerg seconded. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0. REZ96-0002. Public discussion of an application submitted by Kevin Kidwell for a Sensitive Areas Development Plan for a 0.32 acre property located in the PRM zone at 517 S. Linn Street and a rezoning of the property from PRM to PRM-OSA. (45 day limitation period: Februarv 12, 1996) Denhey noted that the site plan had been revised to address staff concerns. He pointed out several minor changes and said the plan had received an engineer's certification. He then noted that the site had been assigned the address 517 S. Linn Street. He said that staff recommended approval, subject to approval of the amendment to the Sensitive Areas Ordinance steep slopes section by the City Council. Bovbjerg noted that the building appeared to cut into the slope, Denhey said the building would serve as a retaining wall. Bovbjerg asked who would assume responsibility if the design was unable to support the pressure of the slope. Denhey indicated that the engineer who had reviewed the site had found the design adequate. Public discussion. Planning & Zoning Commission February 1, 1996 Page 6 Chris Stephan. MMS Consultants, introduced himself as the engineer for the project. Bovbjerg asked how occupants would exit through the back door. Stephan noted the door had been raised three and a half feet higher than the garage, and would be flush with the ground. He said the slope would meet the building four and a half feet up the wall, and that swales to redirect water flow would be constructed. He noted that the ground would be raised two or three feet to meet the sidewalk, and that the slope was being stabilized. He then noted that the walls and the foundation footings were tied together with structural steel. Bovbjerg asked where the swales were to be located. Stephan indicated on an overhead, adding that swales would be added between the building and the sidewalk. Bovbjerg asked where the extra flow would be directed. Stephan said the flow would go onto the neighboring property to the south. Bovbjerg asked whether the water would then enter a storm sewer. She indicated her unease at the increased flow rate. Stephan said the flow would remain unaltered. Bovbjerg pointed out that the construction of an impermeable structure would increase flow. Stephan indicated that some water was being redirected to the street. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Supple moved to approve the application for a Sensitive Areas Development Plan for property located in the PRM zone at 517 S. Linn Street, and to rezone the property from PRM, Planned High Density Residential, to PRM-OSA, Planned High Density Multi-Family Residential - Sensitive Areas Overlay, subject to approval of the amendment to the Sensitive Areas Ordinance steep slopes section by the City Council. Jakobsen seconded. Supple asked whether the question between City staff and the developer over the slope line had been resolved. Denney indicated that it had. The motion carried on a vote of 4-0. DEVELOPMENT ITEM: SUB96-0001. Public discussion of a preliminary plat for Newport Ridge Subdivision, a 12-lot, 25.5 acre residential subdivision located on Newport Road, 1/4 mile east of its intersection with Prairie du Chien Road. (45-day limitation period: February 26, 1996) Denney said that staff recommended approval of the plat as submitted. He noted that the purposes of the outlots had been stated and that the fire protection measures had been approved by the fire chief of Solon. The well forecast from the Iowa Geological Survey was favorable. He noted the County Health Department still wanted some issues to be resolved regarding septic systems. He said the septic systems needed to undergo testing before final approval, which would be difficult in the current weather conditions. In response to an earlier question from Bovbjerg, Dennay said that a Wastewater Protection District would be required if there were 15 or more lots. He noted that a more stringent review of the proposed septic systems by the County Health Department would be required to gain approval, due to the steep slopes in the Planning & Zoning Commission February 1, 1996 Page 7 development. Denney suggested that the Commission could defer a decision until the next meeting and wmt for more information from County Health Department. Bovbjerg said she would trust the County Health Department. She expressed her appreciation for staff's assistance. She asked if percolation tests would be required. Denhey affirmed they would. Denney then noted that a grading plan also had to be approved. Public discussion. Lucas Van Orden, 3077 Newport Road, identified himself as the applicant. He said that Dan Kramer of the County Health Department had visited the site and approved the placement of the septic systems. He noted that percolation tests would be difficult, but that they would be attempted next week. He stated that he would like the case to stay with County Health. Richard Rhodes, 2014 Rochester Avenue, noted that another plat in the area had been requested for approval. He said that he had no specific comments regarding this plat, but noted that both developments were located upstream of the new water plant. He then said that the new developments were all on septic systems. He asked when the long-term impact of these systems would begin to degrade water quality. Public discussion closed. Starr asked whether any other body had review power besides the Commission, and where these issues were examined, Denhey noted that this site is subject to the Fringe Area Agreement. Bovbjerg noted that she was concerned with several other subdivisions and expressed her frustration that no one had the broad power to regulate these matters. Holecek noted that if there was a concern over the water issue, the Commission could approve the plat subject to an examination prior to Council consideration. Denney also noted that the application needed approval from the County Health Department and Board of Supervisors, and that a final plat will still need to be approved. MOTION.: Bovbjerg moved to approve the preliminary plat of Newport Ridge Subdivision, subject to approval of a grading plan prior to City Council consideration of the plat. Jakobsen seconded. Supple asked why staff had recommended denial in the similar Anderson application. Denney noted that the suggested rezoning was incompatible with the Fringe Area Agreement for Fringe Area 4, as it was residential in nature. This property is already zoned residential and is in a different Fringe Area which is proposed for residential development according to the Fringe Area Agreement policy for Area 4. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0. Planning & Zoning Commission February 1, 1996 Page 8 CONSIDERATION OF THE JANUARY 4, 1996 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to approve the minutes as revised at the Monday, January 29, 1996 informal meeting. Jakobsen seconded. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION INFORMATION: Kugler noted that the rezoning at Sycamore and DeForest had been approved by the City Council on a vote of 6-1. He noted there was a covenant reached between the owner and the neighbors. He said that the C01 to CC2 rezoning on Cross Park had also been approved by a vote of 6-1. He then noted that the proposed RNC-12 amendment had been defeated by a vote of 0-7. Starr expressed his appreciation of attendance at the joint meeting. He also expressed his annoyance that the buffer argument was dismissed in discussion of the Cross Park rezoning, and that an argument for the Sycamore rezoning as a good buffer was then put forward. Bovbjerg expressed her approval of Holecek's performance at the meeting. Jakobsen indicated that she would not be in attendance on February 12. Starr said that the City Engineer was asking for modified design standards pertaining to street widths, and had recommended wider streets. Starr noted that the Commission has often discussed the desirability of narrower streets. He noted that the two possible options were either a joint meeting with the City Council and the City Engineer on February 20, or placing the issue on the agenda for the February 12 informal meeting. He then asked if a recommen- dation would go to the City Council. Denney affirmed that any Commission recommendation would be forwarded to Council. Starr asked if the Council would act without a recommenda- tion from the Commission. Denney noted that this was unlikely. Starr then reminded the Commission of the joint meeting with the Housing and Community Development Commission on February 26. OTHER BUSINESS: There was none. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:10 p,m.. Jakobsen seconded. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0. Lea Supple, Secretary IOWA CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETlNG THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1996- 7:30 P.M. CMC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS SIGN IN SHEET 2. 4. 7. 8. ~0. ~2. ~3. ~?. ~g. MINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS OCTOBER 30, 1995 - 4:30 P.M, LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM - IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Roffman, Carlson, Werderitsch, Staska, Hagedorn, Maas, Buss STAFF PRESENT: Boose, Denney OTHERS PRESENT: Cynthia Parsons, George Frohwein, Ben Moore, Jim Jacobs 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 4:30 p.m. by Chairman Carlson. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF AUGUST 10 AND AUGUST 28, 1995, MEETINGS Roffman moved to approve the minutes of the August 10 meeting as submitted. Staska seconded. The motion carried 5-0 (Buss and Staska absent). Werderitsch moved to approve the minutes of the August 28 meeting as submitted. Roffman seconded and the motion carried 5-0 (Buss and Staska absent). Buss arrived at 4:30 p.m. Staska arrived at 4:46. HEAR REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION OF NATURAL LIGHT AND VENTILATION REQUIREMENTS FOR FOUR APARTMENTS LOCATED AT 815 OAKCREST STREET Boose gave a brief explanation of the information contained in the meeting packets. He said he had attempted to redraw the plans that were submitted for the building permit to illustrate how the building was actually built. Boose said he could not explain the discrepancy. He said the situation was discovered during an HQS inspection for housing assistance. Cindy Parsons addressed the Board and said that she was the property manager and would speak for the owner, George Frohwein, who was also present. They propose to install new apartment entry doors with full light panels which would increase the amount of natural light into the living rooms. Although the doors would open into a corridor, they are directly adjacent to an exterior door which has a full light panel. Werderitsch asked if the plans that were submitted and approved met the Building Code that was in effect at the time. Boose replied that the 1955 Building Code did not contain a specific standard for determining when two adjacent rooms with a partial separating wall could be considered one room. He said that if the kitchen and living room had been considered one room, it would have met coda with the patio door in the kitchen. These two rooms could not be considered one under current code and a sliding window was installed instead of a patio door. Hagedorn said that she liked the proposal of the full light panel doors. Carlson raised security concerns regarding a full glass panel apartment entry door. Board of Appeals October 30, 1995 Page 2 Hagedorn asked if there were cabinets on the kitchen side of the common wall. Parsons said that there are. Hagedorn then moved that the Board decree that the kitchen and living room were rightfully considered one room when the building permit was issued; therefore, a modification of the Building Code is not required and the Board grant a variance to Section 14-5 (of the Iowa City Housing Code) for natural light ventilation. Werderitsch seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Parsons asked if the decision included installation of full light panel doors. Carlson responded that it did not. CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO APPENDIX 70 OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, EXCAVATION AND GRADING Dennay explained the inconsistencies between the current grading ordinance and the sensitive areas ordinance soon to be considered by City Council. He said these amendments should be considered by Council simultaneously with the sensitive areas ordinance to avoid a conflict in the City Code if the sensitive areas ordinance is adopted. Werderitsch asked how the new tree protection standards will be derived. Denney replied that staff has reviewed several national guidelines, some from the National Association of Homebuilders, and will be combining what appears to be the best methods to form the Iowa City guidelines. He said that most of the tree protection guidelines that he has reviewed so far were very similar. Carlson said that the Board should recommend adoption of these amendments contingent upon adoption of the sensitive areas ordinance, whether they agree with the sensitive areas ordinance or not. To do otherwise would create a conflict in the City Code, which would be confusing to everyone. He said debate over the merits of the sensitive areas ordinance should be held at the City Council's public hearing for this issue. Werderitsch said that he was uneasy about recommending adoption of tree protection standards which he had not even seen. Other Board members expressed the same concern. Denney said he would be sure that the tree protection guidelines were forwarded to Board members as soon as their formulation was complete. Werderitsch then moved that the Board recommend that City Council adopt the amendments to the grading ordinance as submitted by staff provided: 1 ) the sensitive areas ordinance is adopted, 2) the Board will be allowed to review the tree protection guidelines before they are adopted, and 3) this motion is not viewed as endorsement of the sensitive areas ordinance. Roffman seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. CONTINUE DISCUSSION OF DEFINITION OF "HABITABLE SPACE" (Discussion of this item and part of Item 6 are missing from the audio tape.) Board of Appeals October 30, 1995 Page 3 Buss left the meeting at 5:55 p.m. Carlson asked each Board member for their opinions on natural light requirements. Following discussion, the Board requested that staff prepare one or more definitions of habitable space that will reflect the concerns of the Board members. 6. CONTINUE DISCUSSION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE 1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE Jim Jacobs provided additional explanation of the framing chart he had developed for "great room" walls at the request of the Board. Carlson asked if more clarification were needed regarding fastening of the bottom plate when the wall was over a basement or crawlspace with floor joists running parallel to the wall. Jacobs agreed that a lot of force was being transferred to the base of the wall so proper fastening is important. Following a short discussion, the Board directed staff to add another provision to the chart notes to require that solid full-depth blocking be installed in the floor framing system on 24-inch centers for at least three joist bases when the floor framing is parallel to the "great wall." Board members expressed their thanks to Jim Jacobs for his assistance in developing some workable alternatives to some of the new requirements and some old structural problems in the areas of the Building Code, The discussion then turned to shallow frost-protected footings. Jacobs raised a concern of homeowners or landscapers destroying the styrofoam insulation when installing plantings. Board members suggested adding some sort of warning to the footing details to help prevent this occurrence. 7. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. B. ADJOURNMENT Hagedorn moved for adjournment at 6:35 p.m. Roffman seconded. The motion carried unanimously, Minutes submitted by Ron Boose, Secretary to the Board. Approved By ob~ Carlson, Chair h~sblgtDoa I 0-30 mtn MINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS DECEMBER 11, 1995 - 4:30 P.M. LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM - IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Carlson, Hagedom, Staska, Maas, Roffman, Buss, Werderitsch STAFF PRESENT: Boose OTHERS PRESENT: Don Williams 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Carlson called the meeting to order at 4:43 p.m. HEAR APPEAL OF HOUSING CODE VIOLATION CITED AT 128 EAST BLOOMINGTON STREET Boose gave a brief background of the cited violations, explaining that the housing inspector that conducted the inspection was unable to attend due to illness. Boose pointed out that the violation regarding the lack of required ventilation in the bathroom was appealed in 1980 and the citation upheld, but for some unknown reason the violation was never corrected. The violation regarding the light fixtures is apparently due to lack of maintenance. Don Williams addressed the Board and provided additional information regarding his appeal. He said that he would like to be allowed to leave the covers off the light fixtures even though the fixtures were designed with covers so that he could use lower wattage or fluorescent bulbs. He also stated that if this appeal were denied, he would install the fixture covers for inspection and simply remove them once the inspector left. Mr. Williams said that he would be glad to provide the mechanical ventilation to the bathroom in question, but he feels it is not possible as the bathroom as no exterior walls. He stated that he has consulted with several contractors who have substantiat- ed his belief. Buss asked how long this room has been a bathroom. Williams responded since the early 1940s. Staska asked if an exhaust duct could be soffitted in through one of the adjoining rooms. Buss argued that Williams should not have to go through the extraordinary measures to correct a situation that has existed for 50 years. Boose said that staff did not feel that installation of an exhaust fan, duct, and soffiting was an extraordinary measure. Buss repeated that she felt this situation should be grandfathered. Board of Appeals December 11, 1995 Page 2 Hagedorn pointed out that it was cited in 1980 and not corrected. Carlson explained that 1980 was about the time that rental housing code enforcement started in Iowa City and that the Appeals Board at that time set precedents for what they intended to be "grandfathered" by their appeal decisions. Carlson asked Williams if the basement below this bathroom was finished. Williams said that it was not. Carlson then suggested installing the exhaust grille in the side wall or floor and running the duct through the basement to an exterior wall. Staska and Roffman agreed that this was a viable option, Carlson suggested voting separately on each cited code violation. Board members agreed and Carlson requested a motion regarding the bathroom exhaust item. Maas moved to uphold the citation and the previous Board's decision to require ventilation in this bathroom. Hagedom seconded. The motion passed 5-1. Buss cast the dissenting vote and Werderitsch was not present for the vote. Werderitsch arrived at 5:00 p,m. Carlson asked for discussion of the missing light fixture cover violation. Maas pointed out that if a fixture was designed with a cover, removing the cover would probably affect the U.L. listing of that fixture. Buss said many people are replacing incandes- cent bulbs with fluorescent bulbs to get better lighting and reduce energy consumption and the fixture covers won't fit over the fluorescent bulbs. Williams that that is the case here. Maas asked what Housing Inspection's policy was regarding substitution of fluorescent bulbs for incandescent bulbs as he was sure he had seen this situation before. Boose said he was not sure of their policy but it appeared that since this item was cited the policy must be to enforce the Housing Code strictly as written. Carlson asked what the difference was between fixtures that are designed without globes or covers and the those that are designed with globes. Boose responded that some light fixtures use the globe to cover wires and without the globe in place wires are exposed. Buss asked Williams if there were any exposed wires in any of his light fixtures, Williams said there were none, Hagedom asked about the location of the light fixtures in question. Williams said that two were outside on a porch and the others were in hallways. Boose said that he was not aware of any light fixture designed without a protective cover that was approved for exterior installation. Maas concurred. Board of Appeals December 11, 1995 Page 3 Buss moved that the light fixture covers be permitted to be removed from the interior hallway lights provided that there were not exposed wires and that the material covering the wires was not cardboard. The exterior lights must have their protective globes in place. Roffman seconded. The motion carried 6-1 with Staska voting in the negative. Staska voiced his concern that the Board was essentially amending the housing code with the granting of this appeal which he did not feel was appropriate. DISCUSSION OF DIVISION POLICY REGARDING INSTALLATION OF NATURAL GAS PIPING Boose explained the changes in the gas meter installation policy that was recently announced by Mid America Energy which resulted in this item being on the agenda. Boose said that as of January 1, 1996, Mid America will no longer perform air pressure tests on gas piping before installing the gas meter and will instead install the meter without a release from the City but will not hook it up to the house gas piping. This will be left up to the contractor. Boose explained that previously, Iowa-illinois would not install a gas meter until the City had inspected and approved the interior gas piping installation. It will now be necessary for the City to verify the contractor's pressure test and assure that the meter is not connected until the pressure test is successfully completed. Buss asked if we could require Mid America to return to their previous policies and procedures. Boose said that he did not think so. The Code states that the supplier shell not supply gas to a structure until the City has approved the gas piping and appliance installation and by not actually connecting the meter, it appears that they are not violating the code even though it makes it much easier for someone else to. Boose said that the point of discussion for the Board was whether or not the City should begin licensing gas piping installers so that we would have some accountability for connection of the gas meter. There was a lengthy discussion concerning the pros and cons of licensing and whether it would serve the intended purpose and dangers inherent with Mid America's new policies, The Board directed staff to confer with the City Attorney's office to see if we could amend the City Code to prohibit Mid America from setting the gas meter without City approval. OTHER BUSINESS Buss asked how the stainless steel flexible gas piping that the Board approved earlier was working out. Boose responded that he wasn't sure how extensively it is being used, but it is being used and he is not aware of any problems. Board of Appeals December 11, 1995 Page 4 Hagedorn said that she uses the product quite often and is very pleased with it. She feels that the central valved manifold provides a safer shutoff svstem for the homeowner. Future meetings were set for January 8, February 5, March 4 and April 1, 1996. 5. ADJOURNMENT Buss moved for adjournment at 6:15 p.m. Staska seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously. Minutes submitted by Ron Boose, Secretary to the Board. Approved By ~ Robert Carlson, Chair