Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-06-04 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION CIVIC CENTER, LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM APRIL 4, 1996 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lyra Dickerson, Sue Dulek, Michael Kennedy STAFF PRESENT: Anne Burnside, Sylvia Mejia, Andy Rocca, Machele Wiebel, R.J. Winkelhake, GUESTS PRESENT: None RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY MANAGER AND STAFF: Commissioners instructed staff to conduct the promotional process for Police Sergeant. SUMMARY OF RELEVANT DISCUSSION: Chairperson Kennedy called the meeting to order at 8:10 AM. Mejia explained that there will be a need to promote 3 individuals to Police Sergeant, but that the current list will expire before the promotions occur. She described how the process has been done in the past with a weight of 25% given to the written portion and 75% given to the assessment portion of the testing. She explained that the assessment center had been given a heavier weight because the overall feeling was that book knowledge only goes so far, and if an individual can't translate it into action, it's useless. Dickerson questioned what a different weight would do to the ranking. No statistics were available. Mejia steted that this is the first year that the educational guidelines requiring either an AA degree or 60 hours of credit toward a degree, will be implemented. She also reminded the commission that the resulting promotional list will be effective for 2 years. Kennedy expressed a strong preference for the assessment center when testing for a command position. He felt emphasis should not be put on how a person tests on a written test since individuals in a command position don't always have time to get the book out. Dickerson questioned who was best qualified to be an assessor. Winkelhake responded that for a department this size, the chief could do the assessment. For a city the size of Des Moines, lieutenants and sergeants can do assessments. Dickerson stated that she would like to see a mix of assessors, not just chiefs. She would rather see hands-on, knowledgeable people looking for the best qualified person. Mejia said the sign up sheet would be distributed and books on the reading list would be ordered. Dickerson moved and Kennedy seconded the motion to approve the Police Sergeant promotional process as outlined. Old Business: Mejia verified that all of the commissioners received a copy of the McMartin ruling. She introduced the new Fire Chief, And¥ Rocca and explained that there would be no recruitment for firefighter this year since there are no vacartcies anticipated in the near future. Meeting adjourned at 8:25 AM. MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW COMMITFEE MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 15, 1996- 4:00 P.M. CIVIC CENTER LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Nancy FOOther, Laura Hawks, Karyl Larson, Randy Rohowt, Marty Haynes, Billy Nowysz MEMBERS ABSENT: Gary Nagle, Phillip Reisetter, Clara Swan STAFF PRESENT: David Schoon, James Erwin OTHERS PRESENT: Tara Cronbaugh RECOMMENDATIONS Recommended, by a 6-0 vote, approval of the sidewalk cafe design for 211 1/2 E. Washington Street (Java House). CALL TO ORDER AND INTRODUCTIONS Chair Marty Haynes called the meeting to order at 4:05 pro. CONSIDERATION OF A SIDEWALK CAFE AT 211 ½ EAST WASHINGTON STREET (JAVA HOUSE) Nancy Footner noted that the design seemed largely unchanged from last year. Schoon said there had been suggestions that sidewalk cafes should indicate their location in a manner useful to sight-impaired individuals. Tara Cronbaugh said planters would be used. She noted that planters used in this fashion would be subject to abuse, and so mulch would be used instead of plants. She said a nylon rope barrier had been considered but was determined to be dangerous. Cronbaugh said a wrought-iron barrier could be used in the future. Bill Nowysz suggested the possible use of a screen lattice. Footner suggested that potted plants could be used. Cronbaugh remarked that the possibility of theft or vandalism had ruled that out. Haynes asked if e~ght feet was the mandatory walkway width. Cronbaugh sa~d it was. Rohovit asked if everything else had been approved for the application. Schoon said it was in the process of being approved. Foother expressed her approval of the color scheme. Nowysz and Hawks sa~d the planters were a good solution. Schoon asked what kind of mulch would be used m the planters. Cronbaugh said regular garden mulch would be used. Larson asked if any plants would be used. Cronbaugh said none would be used IV1OTION: Hawks moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the sidewalk care design for 211 ½ East Washington Street (Java House), Rohovit seconded. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0, Schoon noted that the design was the same except for the planters He noted that many s~dewalk care applications were coming up for renewal that were similarly unchanged, and said MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE APRIL 15, 1996 PAGE 2 staff would only bring the applications to the Committee for review if the Committee wanted them to be reviewed. The consensus of the Committee was only to review renewal applications for sidewalk cafes that differ significantly from the previous year. Footnet asked if the Uncommon Grounds sign would be changed soon. Schoon said it was staying up. Hawks noted that the sign now contained a functioning thermometer. UPDATE REGARDING THE PROPOSED DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY (ODR) ZONE ORDINANCE Haynes said that Tom Gelman and John Beckord of the Chamber of Commerce, a representative from the Homebuilder's Association, and Anna Buss had spoken against the proposed Ordinance at the City Council discussion. He said it seemed that the Council is split 3-3 on the ordinance with one councilor undecided. Rohovit asked about Kubby's motion to allow preliminary review. Schoon said the language of Kubby's proposed amendment was meant to cladfy the language of the ordinance to indicate that the design review process could occur way before the building permit process or at the same time as the building permit. Haynes said Gelman raised the concern about the delay the proposed ordinance would create in development. Haynes said an eady review would allow development with minimal loss of time. Schoon said the Downtown Association at its Board meeting had also talked about the loss of time, and said the process was too lengthy to justify the prevention of one or two badly designed projects. Foother remarked that a badly designed building could disrupt an entire block. Hawks said that one councilor feared the proposed ordinance could make Iowa City homogenous, like Galena, Illinois. Haynes said that the Committee had always supported diversity in design, and that architectural diversity was one of the City's strengths. Nowysz noted there had been a charge of elitism. He said the Committee was providing free expertise. Haynes said that a threshold of good design was needed. Hawks brought up the suggestion of education as an alternative. Larson said those who did want education already came to the Committee. Footner said an argument should be made about the apparent trend towards the "mallification" of Iowa City. Nowysz said that if a building was being constructed downtown, developers should already have a designer on staff. Larson sa~d a list of cities with design review ordinances and how they do it could be helpful. Haynes noted that education would be important, in order to make people aware of the design process review Footner noted that most of the opposition seemed to come from larger corporations who wanted to insert their signature designs on their property without regard for the context of the community Schoon noted that ~t has been suggested that design review be a mandatory participation process, but voluntary compliance. He said this would not resolve the time issue. Larson noted large corporations would simply ignore the Committee's recommendations. Larson MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE APRIL 15. 1996 PAGE 3 asked if the City Council could amend the ordinance in that fashion without consulting the Committee. Schoon said the Council would probably send the proposed ordinance back. Rohovit asked if the Committee would have an opportunity to change the ordinance if an amendment was needed to secure a majority for approval. Schoon said any substantive change would require the Council to go through the public headng process. Haynes expressed his opinion that the proposed ordinance had come a long way since the Committee first approached the Planning and Zoning Commission. Schoon stated that he would arrange having Committee members present at the. Monday, Apd122, and Tuesday, April 23, Council meetings. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 18, 1996 MEETING MOTION: Hawks moved to approve the minutes of the Mamh 18, 1995 meeting, Rohovit seconded. The motion was carded by a vote of 6-0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION There was none. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION Footner asked how the development was progressing on the Hy-Vee project at First Avenue and Muscatine Street. Schoon replied he was unsure and would follow-up on it. Hawks said that collecting reactions from people who had gone through the design review process might be helpful in the discussion with City Council members. Schoon said he would look into the matter. Larson noted that Jay Ohler had spoken favo. rably of design review at the Planning and Zoning Commission headng. Hawks said that in her research on other design review committees, she had found that St. Louis had a Hedtage Committee which reviewed historical districts and all demolitions in St. Louis. She said the Heritage Committee also reviewed all commercial projects within 300 feet of a historical landmark or district. Haynes asked if the St. Louis Heritage .Committee was a volunteer committee. Hawks said she was unsu[e. Footner asked if the Press Citizen had carried any articles on the Design Awards. Schoon said he did not think they had. Hawks and Schoon listed the awards. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Hawks moved to adjourn the meeting at 5:10 p,m. The motion was carried by a vote of 6-0. MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 29, 1996 - 4:00 P.M. CIVIC CENTER - LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Laura Hawks, Martin Haynes, Karyl Larson, Bill Nowysz. Phil Reisetter, Randy Rohovit, Clara Swan MEMBERS ABSENT: Nancy Footner, Gary Nagle STAFF PRESENT: David Schoon, James Erwin OTHERS PRESENT: Dee Norton CALL TO ORDER: Chair Marty Haynes called the meeting to order at 4:05.. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE PROPOSED DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY (ODR) ZONE ORDINANCE: Marty Haynes reviewed the Council's charge to the Committee regarding the proposed Design Review Ordinance. The charge includes: making revisions to the proposed ordinance; exploring alternatives to the proposed ordinance; and outlining the guidelines that would be used in a design review district. Haynes introduced Councilor Norton to the Committee. Council Norton then quickly presented a long list of questions that he has regarding the proposed ordinance, most of which were mechanical items he hoped the Committee could clarify in the proposed ordinance. Councilor Norton encouraged the Committee to work with those individuals who are opposed to the ordinance to find an alternative that more people would find more acceptable. Norton noted that there are costs associated with a design review process, both for the applicant and for the City. He also said some people are afraid of the unknown given that the guidelines that will be used in a district will not be formulated until later. He asked if there were any way to accomplish design review without an overlay zone. Haynes thanked Norton for his comments. Norton noted that the Committee should not worry tOO much about the June 4 meeting deadline; that the Councd can once again defer the item to g~ve the Committee more time. Norton stated that he hopes a softer alternabve that was not necessardy mandatory could be found that still had some teeth to it. Norton said some bad designs might slip through, but that a compromise was very important. Larson asked how developers would react to a lengthy and cumbersome process w~thout any teeth. Norton suggested that an incenuve program even without enforcement power would help. Norton did state that,f a compromme could not be reached on an alternative, he could support the original ordinance with revisions. Nowysz suggested that the process of the proposed ordinance be streamlined and handled m a less threatening manner. He said opponents of the ordinance should be asked to suggest changes. Schoon noted that a voluntary process would not require the adopbon of an ordinance. Larson said those who wouldn't voluntarily comply were the same people who were now opposed to the ordinance. Reisetter noted that ordinances were always written for MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING APRIL 29, 1996 PAGE 2 ' the lowest common denominator. Hawks suggested a detailed review of the proposed ordinance in order to find alternatives. Schoon said that most of the objections to the proposed ordinance have not been about specifics of the ordinance, but about the concept of requiring a property owner to receive City approval of any change they make to the exterior of their building. The objection has been the mandatory compliance requirement. Haynes agreed. Hawks said that by asking them to frame alternatives, the Committee would be making opponents buy into the ordinance. Larson said she was convinced that the opponents of ~he ordinance wanted no form of design review: Rohovit asked if there was any common ground for compromise. Haynes expressed doubt. Nowysz said an advisory design review process would not work, and asked if any Committee member supported a voluntary advisory design review process. No committee supported that concept. Haynes said he agreed that the ordinance needea to be refined. Haynes asked how a task force group could be formed from the interested parties to discuss the alternative process. Schoon suggested that the Committee could send two representatives to work with such a group. The representatives would return with an alternative compromise, and then the Committee could decide whether or not to support the alternative or to continue to support the proposed ordinance. Re,setter asked if opponents would actually bring any alternatives. Hawks noted that Tom Gelman volunteered to help draft a new ordinance. Haynes asked what the Committee should do if there was agreement not to compromise on mandatory compliance. The Committee then discussed if there were four votes on the City Councd to support the original proposed ordinance w~th modifications that streamlined and made the ordinance less cumbersome. In response to a question from Larson, Schoon said that if the Committee felt uncomfortable formulating the alternative they should inform the Council of that. The Council could then direct staff to form a task force to look at the alternatives. Hawks sa~d it might be good to have the Council involved. Haynes noted that he would prefer that the Committee be ~nvolved in investigating the alternatives. Swan stated that she did not know if a compromise was possible. Swan said the Committee should be involved m framing the alternative. Haynes asked if ~t would be more constructive to hold a workshop or simply a meeting to hear public concerns. Committee members agreed that ~t should be a meeting to hear ~deas on the general alternatives to the proposed ordinance and not to wnte an alternative ordinance. Haynes said the meeting would be a way to find out how opposed people are to a mandatory compliance process. Reisetter said the meeting is necessary in order to find people's preferences. The Committee decided to invite representat{ves from the Downtown Association, business owners from the Near Souths~de. Northside Marketplace, Chamber of Commerce, and Retail Task Force. Rohowt suggested the use of a facd~tator and volunteered to find one for the meeting. The Committee dec~ded to hold the meeting at 7:00 on Wednesday, May 8 (Note: The meeting date was later changed to Thursday, May 9). MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING APRIL 29, 1996 PAGE 3 CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 1,5. 1996 MEETING: MOTION: Reisetter moved and Hawks seconded to approve the' minutes of the April 15, 1996 meeting· The motion was carried by a vote of 7-0. · PUBLIC DISCUSSION: There was none. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION: There was none, 'ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Haynes moved and Reisetter seconded to adjour. n the meeting at 6:20, The motion was carried by a vote of 7-0, eeodev~,ORC4- 29.ran MEMBERS PRESENT: . Ann Bovbjerg, Benjamin Chait, Richard Gibson, Jane Jakobsen George Starr, Lea Supple MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Scott STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Scott Kugier, Bob Miklo, John Yapp, James Erwin RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, of the designation of 37 properties as Iowa City Historic Landmarks. (A list of the nominated,oroperties is attached as Table A.) Recommended approval, by a vote of 5-0 with Gibson absent, of a City-initiated application to fezone 12 properties from their current zoning designations to P, Public. These properties are owned by the University of Iowa and are located at and are zoned as follows: 1 E. Park Road (RNC-20), 234 N. Madison Street (RM-44), northwest corner of Dubuque and Church Streets, (RM-44), 230 N. Clinton Street (PRM), 324 S. Madison Street (CB-2), 300 Myrtle Avenue (RS-5), 421 Melrose Avenue (RS-5), 315 Melrose Avenue {RS-8), 121 Grand Avenue Court (RS-8), 127 Grand Avenue Court (RS-8), 129 Grand Avenue Court (RS-8), and 2222 Old Highway 218 South (I-1). Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, of VAC94-0004, an application to vacate the alley between St. Clements Street and St. Mattbias Alley, subject to retention of all necessary utility easements. St. John's Alley and St. Mattbias Alley wdl not be disposed of until an agreement is reached between Roberts Hometown Dairies and the City regarding improve- ments to Dodge Street and the relocation of the water tank. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m. DISCUSSION OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PROCEDURES: Starr reviewed the t~me limits and procedures for public discussion. He indicated that the Chairperson would announce at every meeting those items which would be deferred and not discussed by the Commission. OPENINGS ON CITY COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS: Starr indicated there were two three-year terms on the Design Review Committee open, with appointments to be announced at the June 11, 1996 meeting of the City Council. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. Planning and Zoning Commission May 10, 1996 Page 2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION ITEM: Discussion of the proposed designation of 37 properties as Iowa City Historic Land- marks. Kugler said this item had been deferred at the lest meeting pending remarks from the State Historical Society. He said the State Historical Society had asked for more detail on the wording of the ordinance before Council consideration, but was supportive of the designations. He noted the report from the State Historical Society satisfied the requirements of the Historic Preservation Ordinance. The Commission could now vote on the nominations. Bovbjerg asked if the details that the State Historical Society was asking for changed what the Commission would be voting on, Kugler said no, the Historic Preservation Commission had always intended to describe property boundaries. The ordinance language would be finalized and sent to the State before the City Council considered it. Jakobsen asked if the Park House Hotel was still listed. Kugler said the Historic Preservation Commission had decided to keep the building on the list, He noted it was not yet certain the building would be demolished. Public discussion opened. Michael Brannin, 437 Garden Street, introduced himself as President of Friends of Historic Preservation, He said he had lived in Iowa for 25 years, and was initially impressed by the large number of historic buildings still extant in Iowa City. He urged approval of the landmark measure. He said it seemed inconsistent that buildings recognized on the National Register should not receive local protection. He said preservation of these buildings was important to the preservation of the unique quality of life in Iowa City. Paula Brandt, 824 North Gilbert Street, introduced herself as a member of the Board of Directors for Friends of Historic Preservation. She also supported the landmark pro- gram, and expressed her surprise that the National Register offers httle protection to historic buildings. Public discussion closed. Starr asked ~f any clauses needed to be added to the motion. Kugler said the issue being voted on was whether the des~gnatmns were in line with the Comprehenswe Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and other public improvement plans. NIOTION: Bovbjerg moved and Gibson seconded the motion to approve the designation of 37 properties as Iowa City historic landmarks. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. Bovbjerg noted that the graphic design of the handout had greatly increased the clarity of the report. Planning and Zoning Commission May 16, 1996 Page 3 ANNEXATION/REZONING ITEM: ANN96-0001/REZ96-0012. Discussion of an application submitted by the Langenberg Famdy Trust to annex and fezone from County RS, Suburban Residential, to ID-RS: Interim Development, an approximate 80 acre tract located southeast of Sycamore Street and north of the South Wastewater Treatment Facility. (45-day limitation period: June 7, 1996) Kugler gave the staff report for this ~tem. He said the application appears to be consistent with the City's annexation poli~y. Kugler said dedication of any easements or right-of-way would occur when the property is rezoned and subdivided. He noted that the owner was currently negotiating with the City and a potential developer over road locations. He said the ID-RS zoning was consistent with the Fringe Area 6 land use plan. He noted that the proposed zone was also consistent with the scenarios being developed for the South Area New Neighborhoods Study. He said that staff recommended approval. Public discussion opened, There was none. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Supple moved and Jakobsen seconded the motion to defer ANN96- 0001/REZ96-0012, an application to annex and fezone from County RS, Suburban Residential, to ID-RS, Interim Development, an approximate 80 acre tract located southeast of Sycamore Street and north of the South Wastewater Treatment Facility, to the June 6, 1996 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0, R._EZONING ITEM: Discussion of a City-initiated application to rezone 12 properties from their current zoning designations to P, Public. These properties are owned by the University of Iowa and are located at and are zoned as follows: 1 E. Park Road IRNC-20), 234N. Madison Street (RM-441, northwest corner of Dubuque and Church Streets, (RM-44), 230 N. Clinton Street (PRM), 324 S. Madison Street (CB-2), 300 Myrtle Avenue {RS-5), 421 Melrose Avenue (RS-5), 315 Melrose Avenue (RS-8), 121 Grand Avenue Court (RS-8), 127 Grand Avenue Court (RS-8), 129 Grand Avenue Court (RS-8), and 2222 Old Highway 218 South (I-1). Gibson recused h~mself due to h~s position at the University. Yapp said that land purchased by a publib entity, such as the University of Iowa, must be zoned P, Public. He said that public lands are exempt from City zoning regulations. Staff recommended approval. Public discussion opened. There was none. Planrang and Zoning Commission May 16, 1996 Page 4 Public discussion closed. .IViOTION: Bovbjerg moved and Supple seconded the motion to approve the City- initiated application to rezone 12 properties from their current zoning designations to P, Public. These properties are owned by the University of Iowa and are located at and zoned as follows: I E. Park Road (RNC-20), 234 N. Madison Street (RM-44), north- west corn-~r of Dubuque and Church Streets, (RM-44), 230 N. Clinton Street (PRM), 324 S. Madison Street {CB-2), 300 Myrtle Avenue (RS-5), 421 Melrose Avenue (RS-5), 315 Melrose Avenue (RS-8), 121 Grand Avenue Court (RS-8), 127 Grand Avenue Court {RS-8), 129 Grand Avenue Court (RS-8), and 2222 Old Highway 218 South (I- 1 ). The motion carried by a vote of 5-0-1, with Gibson absent. Jakobsen and-Starr both noted that they worked for the University, but that their posi- tions did not involve property management. REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM: REZ96-0011/SUB96-0010. Discussion of an application submitted by R.D, Phipps to rezone a 2.29 acre tract from RS-12, High Density Single-Family Residential, to OSA- 12, Sensitive Areas Overlay/High Density Single-Family Residential, and preliminary plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan approval of Meadow Ridge, Part 2, a 4-lot residential subdivision located on the east side of N. Dubuque Street and north of Bjaysville Lane. (45-day limitat.on period: May 27, 1996) Miklo said the applicant had requested indefinite deferral, and said neighbors would be notified when the item was brought back before the Commission. Public discussion opened. Cindy KIosterman, 1925 Meadow Ridqe Lane, said that Dubuque Street could not support the traffic from a new cievelopment. Miklo said that traffic ~ssues would need to be examined when the new plan was received. Public discussion closed. IViOTION: Gibson moved and Jakobsen seconded the motion to defer indefinitely REZ96-0011/SUB96-0010, an application submitted by R.D. Phipps to rezone a 2.29 acre tract from RS-12, High Density Single-Family Residential, to 0SA-12, Sensitive Areas Overlay/High Density Single-Family Residential, and preliminary plat and Sensi- tive Areas Development Plan approval of Meadow Ridge, Part 2, a 4-lot residential subdivision located on the east side of N. Dubuque Street and north of Bjaysville Lane. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. DEVELOPMENT ITEM: SUB95-0028/SUB95-0029. Discussion of an application submitted by Lake Calvin Properties for the final plat approval of Saddlebrook. Part I, a four-lot, 62.59 acre residential subdivision and final site plan approval of Saddlebrook, Part I, Lot 4, a 222- lot, 40 acre manufactured housing park located south of Highway 6 and south of the 8on Aire Mobile Home Lodge. (45-day limitation period: June 10, 1996) Planning and Zornrig Commission May 16, 1996 Page 5 Miklo sa~d the area had been annexed ~n August of 1994. He said the final plat ~s in general conformance with the preliminary plat, but does not include the portion of Heinz Road adjacent to Lot 4. He said that staff recommended the inclusion of Heinz Road on the plat for the full length of Lot 4. He said staff also recommended requiring escrow for the constructran of Heinz Road. He noted sidewalks should be constructed north of new housing on Lots 4 and 3. He sa~d staff also recommended that the developer escrow for s~dewalks on the south and east s~des of Lot 4. Miklo said staff recommended approval upon resolution of these items, subject to the final approval by Public Works. Jakobsen asked if the proposal contained in the letter submitted by the applicant this evening satisfied staff's concerns. Miklo said the City Attorney's Office would have to review the letter and see if another legal device was possible as an alternative to the escrow. Holecek said the solution suggested was workable, but led to increased risk that Heinz Road and the sidewalk would not be budt where needed. She recom- mended that the plat be deferred at th~s time. Starr asked what risk would develop from a lack of escrow. Holecek said the issue of fiscal responsibility could be raised when the sidewalk was needed. Starr asked if the proposed east-to-west arterial was included in the CIP. Miklo said that this portion was not. Starr noted that the limitation period would allow the Commission to defer the application and give time for the sidewalk and road issues to be resolved. Public discussion open, J~m Miller, 505 East Burlinqton, ~ntroduced himself as a representative of Lake Calvin Properties. He said Lake Calvin agreed that the extension of Heinz Road and sidewalks would need to occur eventually, but there were several reasons why these features had been removed from the prehm~nary plat. He asked that the escrow not be a condition. He said the construction of the sidewalks and street would constitute a heavy economic burden, as years could pass before sigmficant development occurred along Heinz Road. He said the extension could be completed during the second phase of development three to five years in the future. He noted the expense seemed unjusti- fled when the money could be spent to construct affordable housing. He said Lake Calvin could ~nclude the extension on the final plat, but would prefer to add "reserved for future extension" or a s~milar dewce. He noted that Lake Calvin had a legal commit- ment to construct s~dewalks, and the escrow was therefore unnecessary. He said staff wanted the s~dewalk extension to allow pedestrian access to bus routes. He contended that the bus routes would be too far away untd construction was completed. Public discussion closed, MOTION: Jakobsen moved and Bovbjerg seconded to defer SUB95-OO28/SUB9§-0029 an application for final plat approval of Saddlebrook, Part I, a four lot, 62.59 acre residential subdivision and final site plan approval of Saddlebrook, Part I, Lot 4, a 222- lot, 40 acre manufactured housing park located south of Highway 6 and south of the Bon Aire Mobile Home Lodge, until the June 6, 1996 meeting. G~bson sa~d he would make a statement now, as he would be absent on June 6. He sa~d the lack of Heinz Road might serve as a deterrent to future development. He stated that this development was out of sequence. He noted that the obligations to the developer had created an unusual situation. He agreed that the escrow requirement Planning and Zoning Commission May 16, 1996 Page 6 might constitute an untenable economic burden. Gibson suggested that the appropriate action would be to act on the staff recommendation and send the matter to the City Council. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0, VACATION ITEM: VAC94-0004. Discussion of an application submitted by Home Town Dairies to vacate the alley located between St. Clements Street and St. Matthias Alley. Yapp said the vacation had originally been requested in 1994 by Hometown Dairies and Bill Meatdon. At that time, the applicant requested an indefinite deferral until they had resolved certain issues, He noted that a request for the vacation of St. Matthias Alley had been added to the vacation application. He said staff recommended approv- al, subject to retention of all necessary easements. Yapp said the alleys should not be disposed of until final agreement is reached between Hometown Dairies and the City regarding improvements to Dodge Street and the relocation of the water tank, Jakobsen asked if the neighbors had been notified. Yapp said Robert Dairies owned all adjacent property. Supple asked if the alleys led anywhere else, Yapp said they did not. Bovbjerg asked whether the alleys primarily served as a driveway. Miklo said they did. Bovblerg asked if no disposition would take place before agreements were finalized. Yapp said the agreements needed to be finalized before Council consideration. Holecek said the second condition was still under contention. Starr asked if the City would receive money'for the vacation. Holecek said the City would receive no money before the disposition. Public discussion open. William Meardon, 122 S. Linn Street, said he felt the background had not been fully explained. He noted the request was linked to an earher City request to acquire a seven foot strip of land along Dodge Street. He noted that agreements between Roberts Dairms and the City only dealt with that str~p of land. He noted that negotiations on that land now involved the alley, He noted that no final agreement could be made until both the alley and that strip of land were appraised. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved and Gibson seconded to approve VAC94-0004, an applica- tion to vacate the alley between St. Clements Street and St, Matthias Alley, subject to retention of all necessary utility easements, St, John's Alley and St. Matthias Alley will not be disposed of until an agreement is reached between Roberts Hometown Dairies and the City regarding improvements to Dodge Street and the relocation of the water tank, The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. REVIEW OF THE MAY 2, 1996 MINUTES: MOTION: Bovbjerg moved and Gibson seconded the motion to approve the minutes as amended at the May 13, 1996, informal meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. Planning and Zoning Commission May16, 1996 Page 7 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION INFORMATION: Bovbjerg distributed photographs of an apartment complex being constructed in an RNC zone. Gibson said he would be absent from the June 3, June 6, and possibly June 17 meetings. OTHER BUSINESS: There was none. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Bovbjerg moved and Supple seconded the motion to adjourh.the meeting at 8:50 p.m. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. Lea Supple, Secretary Minutes submitted by James Erwin. TABLE A: Attachment to May 16. 1996, Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Proposed Histode Landmarks i Name i i 1 Wentz House 2 Rose Hill _ 3.Windrein House 4 William Bostick House 5 Park House Hotel . $ SI. Mary's Rector/(orig) 7 Hen~ C Nicking House 8 Schindhelm-Drews House 9-Franklin Printing House 10,Old Bdck (N Pros Church) 11, Union Brewery 12 [Oakes-Wood'House Address 219 N Gilbert 1415 E Davenport 604 Iowa 115 N Gilhert 130 E Jefferson 610 E Jeffemon 410 E Market 410 N LuCas ,115 S Dubuque ~26 E Market i127.131 N Linn 11142 E Court 13 Samuel Kid~wood House 1161 Kirkwood 14 McCo ister-Showem Farm 2480 S Gilbert t$1St. Mary's Church & Rect. 220 E Jefferson l$!Fi~'t Congregational Churc,~ 30 N Clinton 171 Billingslay-Hills House 181 Cavanaugh House 19~T,dnity Episcopal Churctt 201George Van Patten House 21 .C.D. Close House 22'Clark House 23 Thomas Carson House _24~ Burger House 25iOpera House Block 26 Jackson-Swisher House 27' Letovsky-Rohret House 281College Block Building 29 Cannon-Gay House 30 A W. Pratt House 31 L~ndsay House 629 Melrose 704 Reno 320 E College 9 S Linn 1538 S Gilbert 1829 Kirkwood 1906 E College i630 E Fairchild '210-212 S Clinton 1120 E Fairchild 1515 E Davenport 1127 E College (320 Melrose ,503 Melrose ;935 E College 32 Ch~ Rock Isl. & Pac RR Dep 115 Wdgl~t 33 Boomer-Fry Co Building 34 Czecl~o Slovak Assoc Hall 35 Paul-Helen Building 36 Summit Apartment Bldg. 37 Economy Advertising .332 E Washington 1524 N Johnson 207-215 E Washington 228 S Summ t 1119-123 N LJnn Buildinc~ Date I BuddinCl Style _ 1847 , Greel~ Revival 1849 Greek Revival ca. 1850 Vernacular 1851 Greek Revival 1852 1854 Greek Revival ca. 1854 Vernacular 1855 Greek Revival 1856 1858 Romanesque Revival 1856-7 Italianate 1858 Italianate 1864 Anglo.-Italtanate 1864 Anglo-ltalianate 1867 Gothic Revival 1869 Gotl~ic Revival 1870 Greek Rev./ltalianate 1870 Gothic Revival 1871 Gothic Revival 1873 Victorian eclectic 1874 Italianate 1874 Victodan/ltal. 1875 Second Empire 1875 Anglo-ltalianate 1875-8 Second Empire 1877 Gothic Revival 1881 Greek Revival 1883 italianate 1884 Italianate 1885 ~talianate 1893 Queen Anne 1898 Victorian eclectic 1900 Anglo-Ilalianate 1900 Colonial Revival 1910 Commercial Brick 1914 I Prairie/Sullivan elem. 1923 I Commercial Brick