Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-06-06 Bd Comm minutes,%- MINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT · WEDNESDAY, MAY 10, 1995 - 5:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER - COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Bender, Patricia Eckhardt, Bill Haigh, Tim Lehman, Rich Vogelzang MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Melody Rockwell, Anne Burnside, Jeff Haring OTHERS PRESENT: Theresa Carbarey, John Rummelhart, Jr., Dick Pattschull CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Vogelzang called the meeting to order at 4:30 P.M. CONSIDERATION OF THE APRIL 12, 1995, MINUTES: MOTION: Bender moved to approve the minutes of the April 12, 1995, meeting of the Board of Adjustment as printed. Lehman seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM: EXC95-0010. Public hearing on a request submitted by Carnegie Plaza Padners, on behalf of property owners GWG Investments, for a special exception to permit off-street parking for property located in the CB-10 zone at 315 E. College Street. Rockwell said the Board had previously approved a special e~(ception on September 8, 1993, to permit 69 underground parking spaces on the site. Since that date, the Board had granted three six-month extensions to allow the appNcant to resolve soil contamination issues and complete its negotiations with New Pioneer Co-op, the prospective commercial tenant for the proposed commercial/residential structure. The last extension was granted by the Board on April 12, 1995. Rockwell noted that except for hotels or motels, private off-street parking can only be provided in the Central Business (CB-10) zone through the granting of a special exception. She said the applicant now requests approval of a special exception to permit surface parking as well as underground parking to better serve the proposed grocery store by facilitating easier access to parking stalls. A marketing study completed by consultants for the New Pioneer Co-op suggests that the proposed store should have close to 70 parking spaces on the site to be viable. The applicant requests that the Board consider allowing 48 underground parking spaces and permitting 18 surface parking spaces immediately west.of the building, for a total of 66 on-site parking spaces. All but one of the 48 underground parking spaces and all 18 surface parking spaces are intended for the exclusive use of grocery store clientele. The actual number of parking spaces requested is for three fewer spaces (66 instead of 69) than the Board previously approved for the sile. Rockwell said the applicant has submitted a revised plan that now incorporates a mezza- nine level restaurant above the surface parking on the west side of the building. If the requested special exception was not approved, the applicant would not be able to provide Iowa City Board of Adjustment May 10, 1995 Page 2 sudace parking on the properly. The area now proposed for surface parking could be replaced with commercial floor area and/or open plaza area. The applicant has attempted to compensate for the space taken up by the surface parking by introducing a mezzanine level into the design of the building. The restaurant/kitchen area and the grocery store offices are now intended to be located on the mezzanine level rather than the ground level. The total amount of commercial floor area (approximately 20,000 square feet) has not changed with the redesign of the project to include surface parking, Rockwell noted that although the same amount of commercial floor area will be retained, the potential streetscape development for this property will be altered. The current building design does not have a continuous, ground-level commemial storefront along College Street. Also, the amount of pedestrian plaza open space will be diminished from what was to be provided with the previous ribsign. However, the applicant does intend to include some amenities to enhance the remaining pedestrian plaza area. The applicant also intends to include a combination of screening techniques to meet the screening requirements of the Code. Rockwell said the revised plan appears to meet the screening requirements for both the underground and surface parking areas, Rockwell pointed out that the underground parking area will have an entrance from the alley to the south, and exits either to the alley or via a one-way exit drive onto College Street. The surface parking would be accessed using a one-way drive from College Street and exit to the alley. City staff have reviewed the proposed access points and have determined that they are acceptable, as long as the driveway from the underground parking to College Street remains a one-way exit. A sign cautioning drivers exiting the parking lot at College Street to yield to pedestrians should be provided, and City approval of the exit driveway design should be required to assure adequate sight distance for both pedestrians and vehicles at this point on College Street. Rockwell said the Board will need to weigh the value of having a grocery store downtown against the problems associated with allowing surface parking to exist, Overall, staff views the requested exception as balancing in favor of the public interest. Rockwell said staff recommends that EXC95-0010, a special exception to permit up to 66 on-site parking spaces; 48 underground parking spaces and 18 surface parking spaces for property located in the CB-10 zone at 315 E. College Street be approved, subject to 1) City approval of the screening provided for the surface parking area, 2) the applicant providing either a stop sign or a yield sign cautioning drivers exiting the underground parking lot onto College Street to yield to pedestrians, and 3) City approval of the College Street exit drive design to assure adequate sight distance. Public hearing: Theresa Carbarey, 4110 Winter Eaqle Road SE, Education Director for the New Pioneer Co-op, said the Co-op wishes very much to remain downtown and would like to locate on the proposed site. She said it is important to the Co-op to attain a safe, active and pedestrian friendly facility. Carbarey said a grocery store downtown that includes a delicatessen is a great attraction for the downtown. Carbarey also stated that in retail foods, accessible parking is an essential. Carbarey described the typical shopper and the importance of accessibility. Iowa City Board of Adjustment May 10, 1995 Page 3 Carbarey described amenities to be included on the site to make it pedestrian friendly, both on the ground level and in the underground parking area. Carbarey explained that one-third of the New Pioneer Co-op clientele arrives at the store on foot. At the same time, the store feels it is important to supply accessible, surface parking that is exclusively set aside for store patrons. Carbarey described the sidewalk placement, open space design and several other amenities the Co-op has introduced to make the design attrac- tive, handicapped-accessible and user-friendly for all people, including families. Carbarey once again stated that the Co-op feels it is imperative to provide the surface parking. Carbarey said their research tells them that if significantly fewer than 70 parking spaces are provided on-site, the site will not be viable for the store. Haigh asked whether bicycle parking is to be provided on-site. Carbarey said yes, and deferred to Dick Pattschull. Dick Pattschull, 315 Fairview Aven;Je, architect for the Co-op, said the plan is to provide bicycle parking just to the side of the front entrance. Pattschull said the Co-op would look into the possibility of providing bicycle parking along the north side of the building as well. Pattschull explained the dilemma of trying to design for parking that was visible, yet invisible. Pattschull said the mezzanine would extend across the south side of the building as well as west side, and would include the stairway on the west side to and from the underground parking level, thus providing an alternative means of access. Pattschull said the Co-op is proposing angle parking, rather than 90 degree parking, as angle parking will be more user friendly. Lehman asked how the Co-op intends to control the parking in order to make it exclusive to store patrons. Carbarey said the Co-op had looked into several measures, but decided that Co-op employees, who could serve as on-site monitors, shopping cart attendants, shoppers' aides, and roving security eyes, would provide the best and most convenient measure. Lehman asked how many parking spaces in the City parking lot will be lost to construction on the site. Rockwell said the parking lot was never intended to be permanent; the parking spaces have been replaced by spaces located in the Chauncey Swan parking facility. Lehman was skeptical about providing 99 efficiency apartments in the structure in addition to the commercial space for a business that needs a good deal of accessible, on-site parking to be viable. He didn't feel there was a net gain in parking spaces. Lehman felt that a majority of the apartment dwellers will own an automobile and asked if this has been taken into consideration. Rockwell said the residential tenants will need to make other arrangements for storing their vehicles and some may not own a vehicle. Residential tenants will not be allowed to park on-site. Rockwell said these provisions are consistent with the intent of the CB-10 zone, which is to deter parking, especially surface parking, which is consumptive of land intended to have high intensity commercial uses. Rockwell added the policy also supports the provision of parking in public parking facilities and ramps in the downtown. Rockwell said it is likely that another public parking facility will be constructed south of Burlington Street. John R. Rummelhart, Jr., P.O. Box 3108, Iowa City, prospective developer of the site, said that if apartment dweller parking is a concern to the City, they would be more than happy Iowa City Board of Adjustment May 10, 1995 Page 4 to look into the possibility of providing another level of parking below the underground parking. Rummelhart also clarified that perhaps 10 of the approximately 99 apartment units will be one-bedroom units. Rummelhart described how, as opposed to most devel- opment downtown, the plan also intends to place the structure ten feet off of the alley in order to contribute to pedestrian and auto traffic flow. RummeJhart said the design of the revised plan works rather well in meeting all aspects of Code requirements and the Co- op's needs. Rummelhart said they can survive without the Co-op as the commercial entity for the site, but the Oo-op has made extraordinary efforts and done significant research in order to work within the layout of this particular site. Rummelhart felt the proposed changes are not that much of an alteration from the original design plans, and are perhaps an improvement. The public hearing was closed. MOTION: Eckhardt moved to approve EXC95-0010, a special exception to permit up to 66 on-site parking spaces (48 underground parking spaces and 18 off-street surface parking spaces) for property located In the CB-10 zone at 315 E. College Street, subject to: 1) City approval of the screening provided for the surface park- Ing area, 2) the applicant providing either a stop sign or a yield sign cautionlng drivers exiting the underground parking lot onto College Street to yield to pedestri- ans and 3) City approval of the College Street exit drive design to assure adequate sight distance. Haigh seconded the motion, Haigh said it appears to him that the revised plan would provide an attractive amenity for the downtown district. There is an apparent need for a food outlet in the central downtown area. Haigh did voice his reservations about the practicalib/of having such a vast number of efficiency apartments, but said that aspect is up to the developer. Haigh said the plan meets the requirements and intent of the CB-10 zone. He said he'd definitely vote in favor. Eckhardt agreed with Haigh. She felt the plan had been well thought out. Eckhardt was a little dismayed about the lack of parking the Central Business zone requires, especially if tenants are allowed to live in the zone, but did agree that the policy helps suppod the City's philosophy of creating a good pedestrian environment. She felt the design now proposed by the applicant was a good solution for providing needed parking for the grocery store. Eckhardt said she would vote in favor of the special exception. Vogelzang commended the Co-op and the City planners for their attention to detail in the changes to the design of the development. Vogelzang said although he would rather do without the parking facility altogether, he does appreciate the idea of angling the parking spaces. Vogelzang felt the adjacent surface parking is a major contribution to the plan. Vogelzang said he is in favor of the changes. Bender agreed with her colleagues. She said as someone who regularly shops at the Co- op, the proposed store will be a vast improvement over the present facility. Bender said having a grocery store downtown was in the public interest. She felt the applicant was proposing a good design for the parking; that it was a well thought out plan. She said she would vote in favor. Lehman said his major hangup is the lack of adequate parking for a commercial entity that relies heavily on automobile traffic, as well as the complete lack of parking for 99 apart- Iowa City Board of ADJustment May10,1995 Page 5 ment units. Lehman said he does understand the intent of the CB-10 zone, but finds it tough to get around the parking issue. Lehman said staff had done a good job of reassur- ing him and he would also vote in favor of the special exception. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. EXC95-0011. A request submitted by the Chumh of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, on behalf of property owners Myles and Lorraine Braverman, for special exceptions to permit a religious institution to be established, to modify the off-street parking require- ments, and to modify the yard requirements for properly located in the RS-5 zone at 503 Melrose Avenue. Rockwell said that due to complications involved in the project, the applicant requested a deferral of this item to the June 14, 1995, Board meeting,. Rockwell provided back- ground information to the Board, and noted that the applicant has expressed the desire to meet with neighboring property owners and has set up a meeting for 7:00 p.m., Mon- day, May 15, 1995, at the Latino/Native Amedcan Law Student Center located on Melrose Avenue. Rockwell said the applicant hoped to resolve several issues prior to the June Board meeting, MOTION: Bender moved to defer EXC95-0011 to the June 14, 1995, meeting of the Board of Adjustment. Halgh seconded the motion. Bender asked whether the application would affect the portion of Melrose that is to be widened, Rockwell said the widening will occur along this portion of Melrose, but the widening will occur within the right-of-way that already exists. If any more is needed, the University has agreed to allow more right-of-way on its side of the road. Eckhardt was pleased that efforts have been made to save the historic house. Rockwell said staff agrees, and is likely to request that a condition be placed on the proposal requiring that changes to the exterior of the structure be approved by the City's Historic Preservation Commission. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION: Vogelzang announced that he will be resigning from the Board of Adjustment, effective at the end of the June 14, 1995, Board meeting. Vogelzang said he will be moving to Rochester, New York. Vogelzang said it has been an honor and privilege to serve on the Board and for the City of Iowa City, Rockwell said staff will miss the leadership Vogelzang has provided throughout his tenure ~ith the Board. The Board agreed. OTHER BUSINESS: Rockwell proposed that the election of the Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson of the Board take place at the June 14, 1995, meeting. The Board decided not to wait as all members were present tonight. This would not be the case in June when Eckhardt would be absent. Iowa City Board of Adjustment May 10, 1995 Page 6 MOTION: Haigh moved to nominate Eckhardt as Chairperson of the Iowa City Board of Adjust- ment, effective June 15, 1995. Bender seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 4-0-1, with Eckhardt abstaining. MOTION: Eckhardt moved to nominate Bill Haigh as Vice-Chairperson of the iowa City Board of Adjustment, effective June 15, 1995. Vogelzang seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Haigh moved to adjourn the meeting at 5:20 p.m. Eckhardt seconded. The motion carded on a vote of 5-0. Rich Vogelzang, Chairperson M I~c~ell, ard Sec~ Minutes submitted by Jeff Haring. pp~admin~min$~BO^5.[O. IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING WED~AY, MAY I0, 1995 - 4:30 P.M. CMC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 2. 3, 4. Namq Addre~$ 7, 10, I1. 12, 16. MINUTES IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APRIL 11, 1995 o 5:30 P.M. LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM - CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Kay Irelan, Betty Kelly, Sue Licht, Mike Pugh, Doug Russell, John Shaw, Ginalie Swaim MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Kugler, Haring OTHERS PRESENT: Liz Swenson CALL TO ORDER: Russell called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: MOTION: Swaim moved to nominate Douglas Russell as Chairperson of the Historic Preservation Commission, Itelart seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. IV]OTION: Swaim moved to nominate Sue Licht as Vice-Chairperson of the Historic Preservation Commission, Irelan seconded, The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. DISCUSSION OF NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION: WALTER ECKEL HOUSE, 829 KiRKWOOD AVENUE: Liz Swenson, applicant, was present to report to the Commission. S~venson said there are two rehabilitation projects in progress. Much of the front porch is being replaced using fir, the wood of the original structure. Of the $2,700 cost of this project (which is $1,700 over estimates), $1,000 is covered by a grant from a local historic preservation group. The southeast corner porch was also rehabilitated in October and November, 1994, mainly adding energy conservation and insulation features. Swenson said the next project, which is already in progress, is refurbishing of the southern addition, primarily by adding structurally cognate windows, siding and trim, akin to the main structure. Swenson feels the changes will make a big improvement to the appearance and open the interior of the structure up a little more. Historic Preservation Commission April 11, 1995 Page 2 Swenson said there presently is no window treatment on the windows that are to be installed. Swenson said the windows are wood casement and she intends to put some primer coat on them, but she has not yet settled on the exterior color. Swenson said she would be open to Commission suggestions, Licht questioned the reason for the switch to casement windows as most the rest are double-hung. Swenson said she is continuing the look of a window on the east side of the structure which has a casement appearance. The Commission also questioned the size and placement of an eyelet window, similar to that in second floor hallway on the east side of the original structure. The Commission felt the window was'larger than necessary and to be installed on a very visible side of the structure (west side). Swenson said that originally she had intended to install a smaller, two foot eyelet window that would be identical to that on the east elevation, however, due to construction alterations she was forced to install a larger window. Swenson feels a window treatment can make the window blend in and not be as obtrusive. Russell the renovations are a marked change from the original structure, but added that the 1950's addition/refurbishing was a marked change from the original structure. The Commission agreed. Russell said the first question is whether the proposed changes will affect the nomination to the State Historical Society. Russell said to keep in mind that it is often more preferable that a restoration/refurbishing project, such as this one, not attempt to copy the original structure, as if to create the appearance that the restoration/refurbishing was part of the original structure, but rather set it apart slightly. Second, Russell questioned whether the proposed changes comply with the Secretary of the Interlot's Standards for Rehabilitation. Kugler said Standard 9 is most applicable. Russell reminded the Commission that as the structure does not lie in a historic district the Commission does not have design review, but said the owner is open to suggestions. Shaw questioned some facets of the eyelet window, but said he feels the overall changes will be a big improvement over what he considered a detriment to the structure. Shaw appreciated the attention to appearance in relation to the rest of the structure. Shaw did not feel the changes conflict with the Secretary's Standards for Rehabilitation. Licht agreed, and added that the rest of the structure has such historical significance that whatever happens to this back corner is not going to be a serious detriment. Licht feels the rehabilitation is more historically correct than the 1950's addition, Licht did want to have some input in the window treatments and said she does not feel white is preferable. Swenson welcomed any input. MOTION: Shaw moved to recommend to the State Historical Society, that the Walter Eckel house, 829 Kirkwood Avenue, is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Pugh seconded. Kugler asked Swenson to submit a copy of the exterior renovations to staff, which will be forwarded to Kerry McGrath at the State Historical Society. The motion carried on a vote o'f 7-O. Historic Preservation Commission April 11, 1995 Page 3 DISCUSSION OF NATIONAL REGISTER DELlSTING: M.T. CLOSE & CO. FLAXSEED WAREHOUSE, 521 SOUTH GILBERT STREET: Kugler referred to the Federal Reqister, Vol. 51, No, 150, Tuesday, August 5, 1986, Proposed Rules, Section 60.9, Removing Properties from the National Register, item (a), which states, Properties may be removed from the National Register by the Keeper on the following grounds:"; and sub-item (1), which states, "The property does not now meet the National Register criteria." Kugler also noted copies of the original National Register of Historic Places, State Nominations Review Committee Evaluation form for the site, and the National Register Criteria form, both of which were enclosed in the Member packets. Kugler noted alterations that have been made in the current stage of construction. Kugler said the question the Commission Members must answer is does the structure still I~ossess the integrity of the original structure. The Commission Members present felt the facade, size, character, etc., of the entire structure, interior as well as exterior, had been altered too much to keep the structure on the National Register. Kugler referred to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilita- tion, item one, which states, "A property shall be used for its historic purpose or to be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment." Kugler noted that. the owner was aware of the fact that the structure may be altered too dramatically to remain on the Register, as Bob Miklo had talked to the owner prior to the renovations. Some Commission Members commented that the National Register does not appear to offer enough incentives, or not enough incentives over the long term to encourage property owners to keep their buildings on the Register. MOTION: Kelly moved to recommend to the State Historical Society, that the M.T. Close & Co. Flaxseed Warehouse, at 521 South Gilbert Street, is no longer eligible and should be removed from the National Register of Historic Places. Pugh seconded. In the future, the Commission would only like those currently listed on the Register to come to the Commission prior to alterations as they feel the Commission can offer a good deal of technical assistance, and probably without drastically altering the plans of the applicant. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0, SECTION 106 REVIEWS: Kugler said the owners of the three following properties have submitted applications to the City of Iowa City, for funding assistance through the Federal HOME program, in order to assist in rehabilitation of their structures. Kugler said the Commission should determine, first, whether the structures are eligible for listing on the National Register, and second, whether the structures meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. Kugler said he had not had the time to contact the State Historical Society to determine whether the structures had historical significance. Historic Preservation Commission April 11, 1995 Page 4 1034 Conkiln Lane. Staff and the Commission felt the structure had been altered too much to be eligible for listing on the National Register. The Commission did not find the structure, nor the district, to be eligible for listing. 516 Ronalds Street. The Commission felt the surrounding neighborhood could potentially become a Historic or Conservation District, but the Commission did not find the structure in question to have enough I~istorical significance to be eligible for listing on the National Register, The Commission also noted some features and alterations, e.g., windows and siding, that may not meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. 2219 H Street. The Commission did not find the structure to have enough historical significance to be eligible for listing on the National Register. The Commission also found the structure to exist too far away to be included in a ~otential Conservation District for the Longfellow Neighborhood. MOTION: Shaw moved to recommend that none of the aforementioned properties are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Kelly seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0, DISCUSSION OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION AWARDS PROGRAM: A. UPDATE. Swaim reviewed progress to date on the awards ceremony, and items yet to be accomplished, for the Historic Preservation Awards Program. Russell said he had made plans for catering of the event. Russell is to make telephone calls regarding cleanup, catering and billing. The County is to provide Host/Hostesses. Kugler is to look. into attainment of a van for transport. At the May 9, 1995, meeting of the City Council, Pugh is to accept the Proclamation on behalf of the Commission and the City, to announce the date, place and time, etc., of the Awards ceremony. PAINTING AND/OR MAINTENANCE AWARDS. 728 Fairchild Street. 530 Ronalds Street. 747 West Benton. 1128 Seymour Street. 828 North Dodge Street. 416 Grant Street. 603 Grant Street. 1307 Rochester Avenue. 809 Bloomington Street. 20 Evans Street (Woodlawn Apartment Building). Historic Preservation Commission April 11, 1995 Page 5 REHABILITATION/CONSTRUCTION NOMINATIONS. 1. Residential Rehabilitation/Construction: 826 Roosevelt. 602 Clark Street (Mary O. Coldren Home). 1041 Woodlawn. 629 North Linn Street, 420 East Jefferson Street. 725 North Lucas Street. The following two properties are possible for nominations upon follow up: 109 Market Street (Sanxay-Gilmore House). The Commission questioned how the paint was removed as it may not meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standard for Rehabilitation should an abrasive method have been used. 809 Blocmington Street. Is the rehabilitation complete? Possibly to be considered with the painting awards. Staff will submit a follow up report at the April 20, 1995, special meeting of the Commission. 2. Commercial Rehabilitation/Construction: There were none this year. E. SPECIAL AWARDS, 209 North Linn Street (Guitar Foundation). Poppajohn College of Business Administration Building. Licht noted that in the future she would prefer not to consider new construction. Kelly agreed with Licht, F. NOWYSZ AWARD NOMINATIONS. The Commission felt no candidate stood above another to be singled out for award this year. DISCUSSION OF CONSERVATION DISTRICT ORDINANCE: Discussion of this item was deferred to the April 20, 1995, special meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. Historic Preservation Commission April 11, 1995 Page 6 DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED LANDMARK ORDINANCE: Discussion of this item was deferred to the April 20, 1995, special meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. DISCUSSION OF JUNE HRDP GRANT APPLICATION DEADLINE: Russell said the HRDP grant application deadline is June 1. Russell announced that a CLG grant was received for the Dubuque Street/Linn Street corridor, but the College Green grant was declined. Kugler noted, however, that the full grant was not received for the Dubuque Street/Linn Street corridor. Russell suggested that the College Green and East College Street grants be recycled into an HRDP grant, but there was a question as to whether either of these CLG grants could be recycled into an HRDP grant. Kugler is to check into this and report back to the Commission at the May meeting. Other HRDP grant possibilities include surveys for the Kirkwood District and the Downtown District. Kugler added the Commission had previously considered surveys of the Iowa Avenue/North Side area and the Goosetown District. Russell said in terms of order of importance, the Commission had voiced in the past the desire to accomplish the Downtown and North Side surveys, with the Kirkwood survey of somewhat lesser importance. Russell said the Commission had also expressed in the past that the Goosetown District is not a pending area as the area is not threatened by development. The Commission did not decide to take action at this time. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 26, 1995, MEETING: Swaim said the Historic Preservation Awards Ceremony juror name, Metzer, should be spelled Metz.qer. Russell said page four, last paragraph, should read, "commence the historic desi.qnation process." MOTION: Swaim moved to approve the January 26, 1995, minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission, as amended. Licht seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. COMMISSION INFORMATION/DISCUSSION: 1. Memo from Douglas Russell regarding Johnson County Heritage Museum Leaflet (copies of various correspondence was included in the Members packets). Russell reviewed the circumstances and suggested that he send a brief apology letter. The Commission agreed that an apology should be sent. Historic Preservation Commission April 11, 1995 Page 7 Licht questioned whether the windows installed in the Citizen Building were what the Commission had approved. Licht did not feel the correct model was installed, that the frames of those installed are too thin and not the heavy, metal frames approved by the Commission. Russell noted receipt of a letter from Eleanor Steele regarding curb cuts in the north side to install sidewalk ramps. Kugler explained the American Disabilities Act (ADA) and the requirement to install handicap accessible sidewalk ramps, as well as other aspects of the City's sidewalk ramp program. The Commission asked that Public Works preserve the limestone curbing to the best of its ability, and that should limestone be removed that it be retained to replace the curbing in other historic areas when in need of repair. The exterior stairwell and corridor ordinance was reviewed. Russell noted that Council had received no public comments at the first of three public hearings on the Moffitt Cottages. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:1 1 p.m. \hpc4-11 MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING OF THE IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION THURSDAY, APRIL 20, 1995 - 5:30 P.M. LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM - CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: CALL TO ORDER: Miklo, Kugler, Haring Norman Kallaus Kay Irelan, Betty Kelly, Michael Pugh, Doug Russell, John Shaw, Ginalie Swaim Sue Licht Russell called the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED CONSERVATION DISTRICT ORDINANCE AND LANDMARK ORDINANCE: Russell noted that the Commission Members had received another draft of the Zoning Ordinance, in which Chapter Four, Historic Preservation District regulations now incorporate references to both the Conservation Overlay zone and Historic Landmarks. Russell also said Miklo has revised the draft of the Conservation Overlay District, therefore, the Commission has either the consultant draft, the staff draft, or some combination of the two to consider. Russell said he hopes to approve the ordinance in the very near future in o~der to move the item through the Planning and Zoning Commission, and if approved there, on to the City Council, hopefully by sometime in June. Miklo noted that as a result of discussion at a previous meeting, it was the consensus of the Commission that Conservation District appeals should be directed to the Board of Adjustment, rather than the City Council. Miklo said although the State Code requires appeals from the historic districts and landmark designations to be directed to the City Council, the change of directing appeals to the Board of Adjustment had been included in the present draft of the ordinance. Miklo reviewed the differences between his draft and the consultant's draft of the Conservation Overlay District. Russell said Conservation Districts have been defined as separate and different from Historic Preservation Districts, and the Conservation District will include a report with its own set of design review guidelines which are separate and distinct from the Secretary of Interior standards used for Historic Districts. Russell said as Conservation Districts will likely be numerous at some point, the three levels of review are proposed to reduce the administrative burden. Swaim asked whether points 3, 4 and 5 from page one of the Conservation Overlay District will also be placed on page three of the Conservation District draft, following points A and B. Swaim felt the criteria may change depending on the situation and rather than insisting on meeting all of the criteria, one or more may be enough incentive. Russell suggested, rather than the "and's" or "or's" after each criteria, that the definition before the criteria state, e.g., MINUTES SPECIAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING APRIL 20, 1995 PAGE 2 "meet one or more of the following". Miklo, however, felt an "and" was necessary before criteria 5, unless criteria 5 was made criteria 1 and rest bumped down one. It was the consensus of the Commission to make this adjustment, follow the new criteria 1 with an "and", and follow the rest of the criteria with an "or". There was questien as to whether original criteria 2, that a conservation district be adjacent to a historic district, was even necessary; Swaim noted the essence of this was already included within A.5. The Commission appeared to feel this could be deleted. Swaim pointed out that the Conservation Overlay Ordinance should state "Certificate of Appropriateness" wherever it says "Certificate of Approval". P,gh felt the definition of Historic Landmark is redundant with paragraphs A-F of the Historic District definition. Pugh wished to have the definition read, "Any building, structure, object, area, or land of historical, arohitootural, landsoapc architectural, archcological or cultural significance, importance or value consistent with the criteria contained in paragraphs A-F of the definition of historic district...". The Commission suggested that one of the paragraphs, ' perhaps paragraph A, add "landscape architecture", as it was missing from the points. Mikto suggested deleting the word "land" from the definition of historic landmark, and replacing it with, "element of landscape architecture". Some Commission Members weren't sure whether an open field, such as a prior battle field, would be an element of landscape architecture and suggested the word land be left in prior to "element of landscape architecture". Pugh asked how the Powers of the Commission, Section 14-4C-5, would be commenced in the Conservation District. Miklo said the powers would be commenced in a very similar fashion to that of the Historic District. The Commission may initiate the process on its own initiative, or by one of the criteria spelled out in either the Historic Landmark Ordinance or the Conservation Overlay Ordinance. Miklo did feel standard forms, similar to the Historic District form, should probably be put together geared specifically for both the Conservation and Landmark Districts. On the draft of the Historic Preservation Overlay Ordinance, Swaim felt paragraphs A-F of the definition should match paragraphs A-F of the definition of historic district. Swaim pointed out the "or's" are missing, and that she feels an "or" is more appropriate than the word "and". Miklo pointed out these changes may conflict with some other sections of the Code, but said he would look into it. Miklo pointed out that page two should receive the same changes requested for page three of the Conservation District. The Commission agreed. Swaim had questions regarding the requirement for a conservation district that no more than 60% of the structures can be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, and how this figure would correspond to the requirement of the conservation district. Miklo said the amount is arbitrary, that the 60% figure is representative of amounts found in other communities with similar codes. Miklo said Karin Franklin, Director of the Department of Planning, had wondered whether the Commission wished to keep the consultant restriction that the structures within the conservation district have an average age of 50 years or greater. Miklo said leaving this figure out such that the Commission has leeway to decide what is appropriate. Pugh noted that specific dates change over time, but 50 years or greater rides with time. Pugh felt some MINUTES SPECIAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING APRIL 20, 1995 PAGE 3 criteria is needed. Kelly noted that the National Register uses the criteria of 50 years for establishment of a historic district, but she and the Commission were unsure how the figure applies to a conservation district. The meaning of a "traditional neighborhood" changes from person to person, generation to generation. Several Members of the Commission did appear to feel that since the structures would not be eligible for the National Register, then some lesser standard, or age, may be appropriate. Russell did feel some reasonable age figure was necessary so that not just any district can be included, and this would supply a guideline for the Commission, staff and Council on which to go by. It was the sense of the Commission to leave the age restriction on the conservation district at this time, but left it to the discretion of the Commission to decide whether to delete the age restriction at some point in the future. Miklo said Franklin also felt Section 3.A. should include, "construction of a building", in order to give staff and/or the Commission some level of review. The Commission agreed to include this text. Swaim, in regard to the number of property owners needed to request designation of a district, felt the text should state "six or more property owners within the proposed area, as no stipulation on where those signatures come from could mean one property owner and five relatives. Miklo said the City Attorney's office is still reviewing the latest revisions. The Commission asked that revisions and the City Attorney recommendations/alterations be ready for the May meeting. DISCUSSION OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION AWARDS NOMINATIONS: Kugler, in follow up to questions raised about several properties for possible inclusion in the awards ceremony, said the work at 809 Bloomington Street is not finished. He suggested this property be considered for the overall award next year. Kugler said that at 109 East Market Street, the paint was removed with a chemical paint remover, no abrasives were used, some tuck pointing was done, trim was repaired and repainted, steps were repaired, the roof was restored and painted, and some landscaping was done. The Commission did not find chemical removal objective and decided to include this property in the overall awards category. Miklo suggested that the Commission consider the A.W. Insurance building at 309 Bloomington Street for a painting award. Miklo said the painting was well done and done in historically correct tones, Miklo added that to date a business has not been granted a painting award. The Commission agreed to add this property to the painting list under the commercial category. Russell said he had received a call from Ron Johnson who feels his property at 410 East Jefferson Street should be included within the commercial category, rather than the residential category. Johnson's argument was that as the structure operates as a commercial entity, it should be included within the commercial category in order to encourage other commercial property owners to renovate. The Commission felt the structure looks like a residential structure, it resides within a predominantly residential zone, and the structure acts as a MINUTES SPECIAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING APRIL 20, 1995 PAGE 4 rooming house, therefore, it should remain within the residential category. In follow up to the Commission's consideration of new or recent structures for Historic Preservation Awards, Miklo wished to state that the designation of the University of Iowa, College of Business Administration, Pappajohn building for award may not be appropriate. Miklo said the building is a fine example of historically sensitive architecture, but as it is new construction, awards should best be left to other parties, such as the Design Review Com~nittee. Miklo said he can understand the Commission consideration of the Guitar Foundation structure on North Linn Street due to historic significance of the district, however. There was no Commission comment at this time. Swaim said John Robertson, an Old Brick Board of Directors Member, had called her requesting to help out or even present a program of some sort at the awards program. Swaim said as they talked Robertson came to the conclusion to not attempt to pull something together for this year, but rather would like the Commission to consider Old Brick for next year's awards program and/or to present a program next year. The Commission said they will wholeheartedly take this into consideration as the site had worked well in the past. OTHER: Russell asked whether staff had any follow up in regards to curb cuts and the preservation of the limestone in the north side neighborhood. Kugler said staff had not yet received word back from the Public Works Department. Russell noted that Kugler had sent Public Works a memorandum regarding the Butler house which resides on the site of the City's new wa~er treatment plant, Russell said the memo states the structure may have historical significance and alerts them that the Commission is interested in finding out more about the structure. The Commission will have this item on its May 9, 1995, agenda. Russell asked whether staff had concluded whether a National Register Nomination may be considered for an HRDPgrant. Kugler said this can be done and he hoped to have a draft for review at the May 9, 1995, meeting. Russell asked staff to be prepared to submit the proposal before the June 1 deadline. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6:57 p.m. plxladmln~mms~hpc4-20 MINUTES IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION TUESDAY, MAY 9, 1995 - 5:30 P.M. LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM - CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Betty Kelly, Sue Licht, Mike Pugh, John Shaw, Ginalie Swaim MEMBERS ABSENT: Kay Irelan, Doug Russell STAFFPRESENT: Kugler, Haring OTHERS PRESENT: Kathy Oberhardt, Marlin R. Ingalls, Frank Wagner, Barbara Wagner CALL TO ORDER: Vice-Chairperson Licht called the meeting to order at 5:33 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: 1025 WOODLAWN AVENUE: The Wagnets were present to present and explain their plans to Commission. The Commission did not express displeasure in any facet of the design plan, other than the possibility that the proportions appear scrunched in relation to available room. Frank Wagner assured the Commission that there are several ways around this concern and would present this to his contractor. The Commission left these minor modifications up to the Wagner's to work out. MOTION: Kelly moved to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness to 1025 Woodlawn Avenue for rear porch modifications, conditioned upon the design maintaining similar proportions to the front porch design. Pugh seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. DISCUSSION OF BUTLER RESIDENCE, LOCATED ON FUTURE WATER PLANT SITE: Kugler said that a memorandum had been forwarded to the Department of Public Works, noting the Commission's desire to look into the histori.cal significance of the site of the Butler residence in order to determine whether the structure is worthy of preservation. Then, if the Commission feels the structure is worth preservation the Commission may also wish to provide some direction as to the next step. Kugler noted that Public Works has stated that the structure should not be affected by the immediate plans of the City in the area. Kugler said staff had received information on the site from Collette Pogue, who had done extensive research on the site.' Kugler displayed a slide presentation of the site. Kugler said Roger Gwinnup had recently inspected the building and feels that the structure itself is still structuraily sound. Kugler gave a brief rundown on the owners of the site over the years. Historic Preservation Commission May 9, 1995 Page 2 Marlin R. Ingalls, an Archeologist and Architectural Historian for the State Archeological Office, also a Member of the State National Register Review Committee, was present to describe the site and the history surrounding it. Ingalls verbally provided the Commission extensive information on the site. Kugler said staff has much of the background information on file, but was unable to make photocopies prior to tonight's meeting. Ingalls said the structure is still plumb and the interior woodwork, floors, door and window casings are still in good enough condition to be preserved. Ingalls said the Secretary of ' Interior Standards would say this building has extremely high integrity and would be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under the criteria A-D. Ingalls wished to point out that the outward appearance has little to do with the ability to preserve, and that this structure is very much worth preservation, not only structurally, but because of the importance of the site in the history of Iowa City. Ingalls did say that much of the exterior, the porch, the roof, etc., is beyond the point of preservation and will need to be rebuilt. The Commission was surprised that despite its outward appearance that the structure is still in such sound condition. Regarding the barn on the site, Ingalls said although it could be considered a contributing structure, it was not built at the same time as the original structure and is really deteriorated beyond the point of preservation. The Commission did not make any comments to the contrary and appeared to agree with Ingalls. Licht questioned whether the building could be required to be moved from the site. Kugler said that should not be the case as the plans in the area do not infringe upon this site, but Public Works would still like to have a recommendation from the Commission. Shaw said as the building is all stone it would be extremely hard to move and may lose its structural integrity as a result. Licht added that the history of the site is really what make the structure important and this would not be the case should it be relocated. Ingalls agreed that the history of the site is the greatest determining factor in deciding whether to move the building. Ingalls added, however, that the building could be moved and may still be eligible for the Register under criteria A and B. The Commission feels that the Butler residence is a significant structure in the settlement of Iowa City and is worthy of preservation. The Commission asked staff to look into the possibility of there being a Section 106 Review for the site. Ingalls said he would be more than happy to write up something for the Commission, possibly with the assistance of Coilotto Pogue, in order to meet the Register requirement of a recommendation from an Architect or State Historian. Kugler said Bob Miklo, Senior Planner, had mentioned the site may be eligible for an HRDPgrant. One possibility was that the building be moved closer to the river in order to tie into a future park and trail system through the area. Kugler said he was not sure the water plant project required Section 106 review, but would look into this. The Commission did not altogether object to this possibility of moving the structure, although they were concerned about losing structural integrity. The Commission also felt the position of the structure on the bluff is of great importance in the history, Ingalls added that there are a number of very old trees and shrubbery surrounding the site that contribute to the structure and its position on the bluff. Licht said she would like to see some immediate measures taken to preserve the structure, not necessarily restoration, as she understands there are some Historic Preservation Commission May 9, 1995 Page 3 broken windows that are letting in moisture. Licht suggested the Commission set up a subcommittee for the site. The Commission wished to restate that the Butler residence is a significant structure in the settlement of Iowa City and is worthy of preservation. The Commission asked Kugler to send Public Works a memorandum stating the position of the Commission. MOTION: Shaw moved to state that the Historic Preservation Commission recognizes the historical and architectural significance of the Butler residence in the history of Iowa City, and all efforts should be made to preserve the residential structure and its immediate flora. Kelly seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. · DISCUSSION OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION AWARDS PROGRAM: Swaim said the invitations have been mailed. Regarding the luncheon to be held at Season's Best, Pugh and Swaim said they are likely to attend, and Licht, Shaw and Irelan, possibly. Kelly said she will be unable to attend. Regarding whether or not the Commission should consider new construction for awards, Licht said it is her opinion that new construction really falls under the purview of the Design Review Committee. Licht said, being an Architect, she knows some Architects are sensitive to the context in which their structure is considered. Licht said she does not, however, have a problem in recognizing an addition or alteration to a historic structure. Shaw feels this is very much a matter of degree. Shaw feels that a new structure can be significant within a historic district if done in a very similar motif. Shaw mentioned the Guitar Foundation as an example. Shaw did say he agrees that the Commission had probably overstepped its bounds with the Poppajohn building, but was torn over the matter of degree issue as both are worthy of recognition. Several Members agreed that the matter of degree is a difficult issue. The example of a newly constructed garage on the same property as a significant structure, in comparison to these structures within their respective districts was brought up as an example. Swaim said either way, both can be used as an example of successful infill within a historically significant district. Swaim suggested that these two be used as examples of appropriate infill for a booklet or brochure that can be distributed to prospective developers. Pugh said he is impressed with both structures and agrees with the idea of a brochure, but said he does not necessarily feel either deserves an award from this Commission. Licht suggested that the Commission look at anything that comes through the Design Review Committee for inclusion within this brochure. The Commission came to the conclusion that it is probably best to award those in which there is no gray area, and just recognize those other properties, such as new construction, that may be examples of appropriate infill. As the number of assistants in a project may be endless at times, yet there still may be individuals that are forgotten that rightly deserve recognition, the Commission decided that only the owner of the property should receive the actual Certificate, and the Contractors and Architects can be mentioned at the Awards Program. Likewise, in order to not get in the trap Historic Preservation Commission May 9,1995 Page 4 of forgetting to list someone that rightly deserves recognition, the Commission also decided to only list the name of the owner in the program. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED CONSERVATION DISTRICT ORDINANCE: Kugler said based on discussions with the City Attorney, the Attorney suggests that due to public hearing laws, the Historic Preservation Regulations and Historic Preservation Overlay documents add some language stating that notice will be posted at least seven days prior, but not more than twenty days prior to a public hearing. On the Conservation Overlay document, Kugler said the Attorney suggests that anywhere that it says Certificate of Approval on page three, be changed to say Certificate of Appropriate- ness. Kugler said staff will have some additional miscellaneous corrections, mostly typographical errors. Pugh said under the definition of Historic Landmark in the Historic Preservation Regulations document, paragraphs A-F refer to the criteria under Historic District, but does not understand how the additional A-D come into play. Pugh said he believes these pertain to the Conservation Overlay Ordinance. Kugler said these do pertain to the Conservation Overlay Ordinance and should be deleted. MOTION: Swaim moved to forward the proposed Conservation District Ordinance on to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, subject to the changes recommended by City staff and those changes noted at tonight's meeting. Pugh seconded. The Commission volunteered Russell to present the Conservation District and Historic Landmark Ordinance's to the Planning and Zoning Commission at the June 15, 1995, meeting. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. DISCUSSION OF HISTORIC LANDMARK ORD;NANCE; Refer to discussion under Conservation District Ordinance. MOTION: Swaim moved to forward the proposed Historic Landmark Ordinance on to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, subject to the changes recommended by City staff and those changes noted at tenight's meeting. Pugh seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. DISCUSSION OF COLLEGE GREEN/EAST COLLEGE STREET HRDP GRANT APPLICATIONS: Kugler said staff has not had adequate time to prepare a draft of the grant applications. Kugler said much of the information has been transferable from the CLG proposal, but that there is e good deal of required additional information. Kugler said he will mail the Members Historic Preservation Commission May 9, 1995 Page 5 a copy of the compiled information within the next few days to which Commission Members can respond. Kugler said as the next meeting is scheduled for after the deadline date, Members will need to respond to him individually, preferably a week in advance. Kugler said the Commission may have to lower its proposed budget for the College Street area grant based on comments from the State. The Commission said they are very pleased with the work of Jan Nash, that she is very knowledgeable of the matedal and are sure she works more hours than she bills, but said the fee charged by Nash of $45 an hour is at the top of the Consultant fee scale. The Commission noted that they should be able to buy down the grant because Nash has such a vast background on the area. The Commission said they would prefer to continue having Nash work on the project and staff will make an effort to see if Nash will accept a lower rate. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FROM THE MARCH 14, 1995, MEETING: Swaim said on page one under "Others Present", the name is Kallaus., not Kallans. Swaim said on page five, fourth line of text, the name should be Hazell, with two I's. Kugler said Irelan, under the discussion of a Certificate of Appropriateness for 325 Brown Street, had asked to have the stipulation of adding trim removed from the motion. Kelly noted the last line of page three should say the instead of "he". MOTION: Kelly moved to approve the minutes of the March 14, 1995, as amended at tonlght's meeting. Swaim seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. COMMISSION INFORMATION/DISCUSSION: Memo from Jeff McClure, Enqineerincl Division, re.qardinq removal of limestone curbinq as part of the 1994 Curb Ramps Project. Kugler said McClure has said that the limestone curbing being removed was reinforced within the concrete which made it difficult to remove without breaking apart, and no limestone curbing was retained. 2. Iowa Heritaqe Expo information. Kugler said the Department does have funds in the budget to pay the costs of any Commission Member interested in attending this or other preservation conferences. 3. CLG Reqional Traininq Workshop information. Kugler said the Department does have funds in the budget to pay the costs of any Commission Member interested in attending. 4. Illinois Preservation Conference information. Kugler said the Department does have funds in the budget to pay the costs of any Commission Member interested in attending. Historic Preservation Commission May 9, 1995 Page 6 Johnson County Sesquicentennial Commission information. The Johnson County Sesquicentennial Commission is asking for assistance in developing or planning events. There were no suggestions from Commission Members at this time. Kugler suggested this be scheduled as an agenda item for the fall planning session. Memo from Melrose Avenue Residents reqardinq the Melrose Avenue Historic Survey. Kugler briefed the Commission on the concerns of the Melrose Avenue residents. The Johnson County Council of Governments (JCCOG), Policy Board has scheduled a public hearing, though staff did not have that date on hand. Shaw questioned whether the Commission has jurisdiction as the majority of the portions of the Avenue to be reconstructed run through University Heights. Kelly pointed out that there are four structures along the immediate portions Melrose Avenue that are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Licht added that according to the Preservation Plan, the area is scheduled to be surveyed for a potential conservation district. After a brief tossing back and forth of the issues, the Commission came to the conclusion that the majority of the area resides within University Heights and the Commission really does not have the jurisdiction to respond. Licht said she would not want the Melrose residents to feel that the Commission had forsaken them, as they have been very supportive of the Commission, however, as other Commission Members had stated, traffic figures deem the improvements are necessary. The Commission did wish to state that it feels the historical assessment portion ofihe Environmental Assessment report was very incomplete and does not agree with previous assessments of the neighborhood. The Commission does not feel adequate information was provided in the report to make a true assessment. The Commission asked staff to send comments regarding these concerns to the appropriate officials. Licht asked Kugler to draft a proposal and she would be happy to review it. Kugler asked whether it was the concern of the Commission that not enough information was provided. Licht said this is correct, that it was a superficial assessment, in terms of historical context and neighborhood, and basically, does not come-to the same conclusion as the Commission had drawn in its Historic Preservation Plan. The Commission said many aspects were basically ignored. The Commission stated that it would be very supportive of any efforts in the future to produce a conservation district of the Melrose neighborhood. Lonqfellow Survey update. Correspondence from the consultant was distributed to the Commission. Historic Preservation Commission May 9, 1995 Page 7 8. Hitchine Post on Summit Street. Shaw feels that in order to effectively register the two portions of the post back together, someone will need to excavate the base from the ground. Kugler asked whether Shaw is asking the City to dig the base out. Shaw said that would be preferable. Shaw said that in order to create an effective bond between the post and base, you will probably need to overbore up through the bottom of the base and into the bottom of the post, then use four stainless steel rods and fill the gaps in the holes with epoxy, Shaw suggested maintaining a very close connection between the two pieces in order to prevent freeze damage. Shaw said it will likely be a very delicate job and will require some precise calculations. Shaw suggested contacting some stone, limestone quarry companies to see if they can do the work. The Commission suggested that when the post is reinstailed, that it be placed a fe~ feet further back from the curb. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:36 p.m. MINUTES iOWA CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THURSDAY, MAY 18, 1995 - 7:30 PM CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS Subject to Approval MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Bovbjerg, Sally Dierks, Dick Gibson, Jane Jakobsen, Lea Supple, George Starr MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Scott STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Robert Miklo, Lita Sorensen CALL TO ORDER: George Scott called the meeting to order at 7:42 p.m. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommend denial, by a vote of 6-0, of REZ95-0007, an application submitted by Tom Lepic torezone 3.01 acres located west of Walden Road, south of Sylvan Glen Court from RS-8, Medium Density Single-Family Residential, to OPDH-8, Planned Develop- ment. Recommend approval, by a vote of 6-0, of CU9501, an application submitted to Johnson County by Alan Weinstein for a conditional use permit to allow a home business, an art gallery, for property located in Fringe Area 5 at 3880 Owl Song Lane SE, immediately north of Inverness Court and east of Arlington Drive, subject to a time limit of two years, and expiration of the permit if the property is annexed or upon sale or lease of the property. Recommend denial of CZ9510, an application submitted to Johnson County by AI Streb to fezone 73.85 acres located in Fringe Area 5 east of Scott boulevard and .5 mile north of Highway 6 from RS, Suburban Residential, to CH, Highway Commercial (18.39 acres) and to M2, Heavy Industrial (55.4-6 acres). Recommend approval, by a vote of 6-0, of VAC95-O001, an application submitted by Oakes Construction to vacate Oakes Fourth Addition, a 6.25 acre, 14 lot residential subdivision located at the end of Quincent Street, north of Dubuque Road. Recommend approval, by a vote of 6-0, of SUB95-0013, an application submitted by Oakes Construction for preliminary plat approval of Oakes Fifth Addition, a 6.25 acre, 14 lot residential subdivision located at the end of Quincent Street, north of Dubuque Road, subject to verification of the willingness of adjacent lot owners to accept outlots 1 and 2, prior to final plat approval, approval of the grading and erosion control plan, and determination of the neighborhood open space fee prior to Council consideration of the plat. Planning & Zoning Commission May 18, 1995 Page 2 PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: Richard Rhodes, 2014 Rochester Avenue, said that while driving by the Johnson County Fairgrounds he noticed a large development where the developer appeared to be building as much as he could without putting in a subdivision. He said he believed this was the tract formerly known as the Richie Subdivision and now called South Park. He said he had been surprised to see the building because he thought development of this tract had been deferred because the area lacked municipal services. Miklo ssid that this was a city rather than a county tract. He said that the Commission had before it a subdivision proposal that would result in a public street which would intersect with south Riverside Drive and would have resulted in a number of industrial lots being served by the cul-de-sac. He said the previous application had been deferred indefinitely because of a lack of sanitary sewer and a lack of agreement from the railroad, among other issues. He said that the tract is an existing parcel of I-1 zoned land, however, and that the applicant was able to obtain a building permit to build on the land, although he will not be able to sell portions of it to other parties without a subdivision approval. He said that the applicant did receive a permit for private sanitary sewer treatment. Such a permit is required from the County Board of Health in an area where there is no sanitary sewer available. He said he assumed that the building official did not have legal grounds to deny a permit in this case. Starr asked if the area would be serviceable by City sewer in the future. Miklo said it would be eventually, in 10 years at the earliest. He said he did not know what the requirements for the builder tapping into the sewer in the future will be. He said he could check into this if the Commission wanted. Starr asked if there was an interim development zone applicable. Miklo said the city has interim development zones for residential areas but that there currently was none for commercial area. He said this was something the City would have to examine. Dierks asked if the developer could lease space in the building planned. Miklo said that the developer could lease space out but that he could not sell individual parcels that required subdivision approval. REZONINGS: REZ95-0006. Public Discussion of an application submitted by Walden Development Co. to rezone 4.3 acres located west of Mormon Trek Boulevard and north of Walden Court for RS-8, Medium Density Single-Family Residential, to OPDH-8 Planned Development Housing Overlay. Starr said the Commission had received a letter requesting deferral and waiving the 45 day limitation period. He said that it would be the intention of the commission to defer this item to the formal Commission meeting of June 15. Public Discussion: Judy Pfohl, 2229 Abbey Lane, said that she had handed in 60 signatures on petition against the development application. She said that her main concern was an increase in traffic with the increased density in the area, especially on Mormon Trek Boulevard. Planning & Zoning Commission May 18, 1995 Page 3 She said he assumed the water problems and the situation with the slope had been worked out with the applicant's engineers. Miklo said he did not know the status of the water issue. He said staff would report on that at the June 15 meeting. Richard Car,/, 2416 Walden Court, spokesperson for the Walden Court Neighborhood Association, said that he had a story about Mayor Susan Horowitz. He said that when she was campaigning a few year ago, she came to Walden Court where Cary had shown her the water run off problems he was having with the hill to north of his house. He said that her reaction was that he "would have to file a lawsuit against the developer." Cary said that he was trying to avoid filing a lawsuit but that he has accumulated a great deal of documentation detailing the flooding. He said he wanted to review the main issues as the people of Walden CSurt saw them. He said the Walden Court Neighborhood Association is not against development, they would just like to see housing developed that is compatible with the area. He said that there is a history of run off problems in the area where development had changed the slope of the land. He said the biggest problems exist on the west side of the hill, where water runs down to the sidewalk and into the back of his home. He said he is concerned that the City staff has made no decision on the water problem. He said other issues of concern were density, open space, and an Association agreement with the developer. He said he did not understand whey the Commission keeps delaying a vote on the project. Geoff McClennan, 2553 Walden Court, representing the Walden Woods Neighborhood Association, said that the single family homes of Walden Woods are surrounded by high density development. He said that the current housing in the area is very diverse and that he was happy with the community. He said the neighbors were anxious to preserve the community which they see as somewhat fragile. He said that in large cities, high density housing has proven disastrous, and that they would like to maintain and enhance their community by retaining green space and by finding the best sort of development for the area. He said the neighbor's concerns include excess density, water issues, and increased traffic. He said that they would like more support for children in the neighborhood and that there was an opportunity for the development of greenspace or a park. He said that their association has been invited to attend the Neighborhood Open Space Committee meetings. He said that he had collected 42 petitions against the current development plan. He added that the City staff had been helpful in answering the Association's questions. Public Discussion Closed. NtOTION: Jakobsen moved to defer REZ95-0006, an application submitted by Walden Development Co, to rezone 4.3 acres located west of Mormon Trek Boulevard and north of Walden Court from RS-8, Medium Density Single-Family Residential, to OPDH- 8, Planned Development Housing Overlay. Gibson secondeel. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. Gibson noted that the main reason for the Commission deferring an item was that changes would occur in the plan. Bovbjerg said it is rare for the Commission to defer Planning & Zoning Commission May 18, 1995 Page 4 an item just to put off a vote. She asked if the neighbors would be notified when a new plan is introduced to the Planning Department. Miklo said that those interested could contact the City Planning Department. He said that there had been a subdivision application filed for the same property. It will be on the agenda for the June 15 formal meeting. Dierks asked when the plans would be available with staff recommendations. Miklo said staff recommendations are available the Friday prior to the Commission's informal meeting. REZ95-0OO7. Public Discussion of an application submitted by Tom Lepic to rezone 3.O1 acres located west of Walden Road, south of Sylvan Glen Court from RS-8, Medium Density Single-Family Residential, to OPDH-8, Planned Development Housing Overlay. Miklo said he would like to reiterate staff's recommendation that this application be denied. Public Discussion. Judy Pfohl said she had 60 petitions from her neighborhood association and from the Plaenview area showing the neighbors concern about rezoning which would promote added density to the area. Tory Rash, 53 Jensen Court, said that the problem with the development was that the residents o~ the area had been under the impression that the undeveloped land nearby would remain zoned RS-8. He said that his neighborhood is currently surrounded by condominiums. Public Discussion Closed. MOTION.: Jakobsen moved to approve REZ95-007, an application submitted by Tom Lepic to fezone 3.01 acres located west of Walden Road, south of Sylvan Glen Court from RS-8, Medium Density Single-Family Residential, to OPDH-8, Planned Develop- ment Housing Overlay. Bovbjerg seconded. Dierks said she would vote against the plan because it is too high density, the traffic impact was a major concern, and the area is very well suited for single family small lot houses. Bovbjerg said she agreed with Dierks. She said that the land could be used in a much more suitable way without exacerbating an already bad traffic pattern. Supple said she also agreed and stated she didn't feel the building design was very compatible with the neighborhood, She said she understood the neighborhood associations' concerns. The motion was defeated on a vote of 0-6. MOTION: Dierks moved to deny REZ95-007, an application submitted by Tom Lepic to rezone 3.01 acres located west of Walden Road, south of Sylvan Glen Court from Planning & Zoning Commission May 18, 1995 Page 5 RS-8, Medium Density Single-Family Residential, to OPDH-8, Planned Development Housing Overlay. Bovbjerg seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. Miklo said the application does not go on to Council unless the applicant submits a formal request to do so, Dierks said that the neighbors could call the Planning Department to find out about this, REZ95-0008. Public discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development to fezone an approximate 1,82 acre parcel located on Northgate Drive from RDP, Research Development Park, to CO-1, Commercial Office. Miklo said the applicant had submitted a letter requesting that the application be deferred until June 15 and had also waived the 45 day limitation period, He said the applicant had also expressed an interest in amending the existing development plan for the existing RDP zone on the property, Public Discussion. There was none. Public Discussion Closed. MOTION: Supple moved to defer REZ95-008,an application submitted by Southgate Development to rezone an approximate 1.82 acre parcel located on Northgate Drive from PDP, Research Development Park, to CO-1, Commercial Office, to the June 15 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Jakobsen seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. CU9501. Public discussion of an application submitted to Johnson County by Alan Weinstein for a conditional use permit to allow a home business, an art gallery, for property located in Fringe Area 5 at 3880 Owl Song Lane SE, immediately north of Inverness Court and east of Arlington Drive. Miklo said that staff recommends that the application be approved conditioned upon a time limit of 2 years being placed on approval of the conditional use permit, and upon the permit expiring if the property is annexed. He said that without these conditions, staff recommends the application be denied, Public discussion. Brian O'Harra, 4725 American Legion Road, said he lived to the south of the Weinstein property for 2 years. He said that Weinstein had been a good neighbor and that his property is environmentally pleasing and well landscaped, He said he would encourage Weinstein's business, a. nd that he felt it would have very little environmental impact on the area. He said he did not see the necessity of the 2 year condition placed on the application. He added that Weinstein is a very conscientious neighbor. Planning & Zoning Commission May 18,1995 Page 6 Public discussion closed. MOTION: Dierks moved to approve CU9501, an application submitted to Johnson County by Alan Weinstein for a conditional use permit to allow a home business, an art gallery, for property located in Fringe Area 5 at 3880 Owl Song Lane SE, immediately north of Inverness Court and east of Arlington Drive. Jakobsen seconded. Dierks said that there had been changes made at the informal meeting concerning the conditions. She said that it was decided that there was adequate landscaping since it was to be a short term business. She said another change was that rental and sales of the property appeared to be a greater concern than annexation. Miklo said that he believed the consensus of the Commission had been to continue with the annexation clause. Dierks said that the two year limitation period is a safeguard, and that she would be comfortable with a 3 year or 5 year limitation. Starr said that if this is the case, he would like to see the landscape clause added again. Bovbjerg asked if the 2 year limitation period was renewable, and noted that the landscaping may be an issue if this was the case. Miklo said landscaping was no longer a concern to staff. He said that at the time staff raised the concern about landscaping, they did not have an adequate site plan to judge the available parking. Starr said that the applicant had made it clear that this was to be a temperary situation and that he would not view this as renewable. Miklo said that the conditional use permit would require the applicant to reapply through the Planning and Zoning Commission. MOTION: Jakobsen moved to amend the main motion to include the condition of the permit expiring upon sale or rental of the property, and to strike the landscaping clause in the conditional approval. Dierks seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. The main motion carried on a vote of 6-0. CZ9510. Public discussion of an application submitted to Johnson County by AI Streb to rezone 73.85 acres located in Fringe Area 5 east of Scott Boulevard and .5 mile north of Highway 6 from RS, Suburban Residential, to CH, Highway Commercial (18.39 acres) and to M2, Heavy Industrial (55.46 acres). Miklo said that staff recommends denial of the application, He said he wanted to reiterate the sentiment that the best use of the land would be annexation and industrial development in the City. Public discussion, There was none, Public discussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to approve CZ9510, an application submitted to Johnson County by AI Streb to rezone 73.85 acres located in Fringe Area 5 east of Scott Boulevard and .5 mile north of Highway 6 from RS, Suburban Residential, to CH, Planning & Zoning Commission May 18, 1995 Page 7 Highway Commercial (18.39 acres) and to M2, Heavy Industrial (55.46 acres). Gibson seconded, Starr said his understanding was that additional discussions were going on concerning the item, MikJo said that the City staff has been speaking with members of the Council and members of the Board of Supervisors, and were attempting to come to a consensus.on the best way to approach this property, Bovbjerg said she would like to see this particular land become part of a larger industrial park in the area. The motion was defeated on a vote of O-6. MOTION: 8ovbjerg moved to approve that the City Council forward a letter recom- mending denial of CZ9510, an application submitted to Johnson County by AI Streb to rezone 73.85 acres located in Fringe Area 5 east of Scott Boulevard and .5 mile north of Highway 6 from RS, Suburban Residential, to CH, Highway Commercial (18.39 acres) and to M2, Heavy Industrial (55.46 acres). Gibson seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. CZ9519. Public discussion of an application submitted to Johnson County by Howard Winebrenner to rezone 39.3 acres located in the southwest quadrant of the Highway 218 and Highway 1 interchange (Fringe Area 8) from RS, Suburban Residential, to CP2, Planned Commercial. Miklo said staff is discussing voluntary annexation of this property and rezoning it to C1-1 within city limits hinging on the ability and cost of providing municipal service to the property. He said staff will continue discussions with the applicant and therefore recommends that the item be deferred until June 15. Public discussion. There was none. Public discussion closed. I~10TION: Bovbjerg moved to defer CZ9519, an application submitted to Johnson County by Howard Winebrenner to fezone 39.3 acres located in the southwest quadrant of the Highway 1 interchange (Fringe Area 8) from RS, Suburban Reside'ntial, to CP2, Planned Commercial. Jakobsen seconded, The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. DEVELOPMENT ITEMS: SUB95-0011. Public discussion of an applicatio. n submitted by Richard and Julie Berry for preliminary and final plat approval of Rober Subdivision, a 1.19 acre, 2 lot residential subdivision located on Seventh Avenue, north of Rochester Avenue. Planning & Zoning Commission May 18, 1995 Page 8 Miklo said staff recommends that the preliminary and final plat be approved subject to the approval of legal papers and determination of the neighborhood open space fee prior to City Council consideration of the plat and subject to a notation on the plat regarding the requirement for shared access between Lots 1 and 2, with the existing access on lot 1 serving as the shared access. He said that the City Traffic Engineer had visited the site and felt that it was necessary because of site distance concerns. Public discussion. Larrv Schnittjer, 1917 S. Gilbert Street, representin(~ MMS Consultin(~, said that the applicants are not anxious to have a shared driveway situation on the lot. He said that this situation was not conducive to positive neighbor relations. He said that the driveway in question is located relatively close to the existing driveway so that the least amount of conflict will occur. He said the street is a local street and the owners did not want a shared driveway unless absolutely necessary. Dierks asked how far away from the lot line is from the proposed driveway, Schnittjer said that the center line of the driveway is 20 feet from the property corner. He said there is 12 feet between the property line and the driveway. Dierks asked that if the applicant were required to accept a shared driveway, if it would be done by an easement. Schnittjer said that this would be the case, although the lot line could be moved if necessary, Starr said that there did not appear to be much difference between a shared driveway and the existing driveway. Miklo said that the traffic engineer may have felt that the existing driveway was not ideal either and that adding another driveway would compound the problem. Gibson said he wanted to suggest that the application be deferred until the Traffic Engineer approve' or disapprove the driveway issue. Schnittjer said he planned to ask for approval for the plan subject to the concurrence of the City Traffic Engineer. Gibson said he wanted the driveway issue resolved with a recommendation of yes or no from the Traffic Engineer. He said there was a strong message that the driveway be consolidated at the Commission's informal meeting and that he did not want to approve of something when the Commission had not been listened to. Miklo said that if the application was approved subject to approval by the Traffic Engineer of the driveway location, he would have the option of approving this location or the option of requiring the joint access. Gibson said he would rather have that issue resolved prior to the Commission's vote. Bovbjerg said she would like to revisit the area with the driveway problem in mind. Dierks pointed out that the 45 day limitation period was June 12 and asked that an extension be made until the Commission's meeting of June 15. Schnittjer consented to waiving the 45-day limitation period to June 15. MOTION: Jakobaen moved to defer SUB95-0011, an application submitted by Richard and Julie Berry for preliminary and final plat approval of Rober Subdivision, a 1.19 acre, 2 lot residential subdivision located on Seventh Avenue, north of Rochester Avenue to the June 15 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Dierks seconded. Planning & Zoning Commission May 18, 1995 Page 9 Dierks said she would like to see some serious thought given to combining the driveway accesses. Gibson said the ambivalence concerning the driveways troubles him. He said he would like to see it dealt with. Supple said she wanted to point out that shared driveways create easements which create problems with financing and clear titles. She said she would prefer seeing 2 driveways if there was no traffic problem created but would not approve of two driveways if it resulted in a safety concern, Starr sid he wondered if there was indeed that much difference between a shared driveway or two driveways, because they do not appear that far apart on the site plan. Miklo said that he was confident that if the application was approved subject to the Traffic Engineer's approval of the driveway location or a joint driveway easement, that the engineer had the ability to enforce what he thought best. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. SUB95-OO13/VA, C95-0001. Public discussion of applications submitted by Oakes Construction to vacate Oakes Fourth Addition and for preliminary plat approval Qf Oakes Fifth Addition, a 6.25 acre, 14 lot residential subdivision located at the end of Quincent Street, north of Dubuque Road. VAC95-O001. Miklo said that staff recommends vacation of Oakes Fourth Addition. He said that the vacation requirement is a technical requirement if an alternative plat is to be approved on the property. Public discussion. There was none. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to approve VAC95-0001, an application submitted by Oakes Construction to vacate Oakes Fourth Addition, a 6.25 acre, 14 lot residential subdivision located at the end of Quirtcent Street, north of Dubuque Road. Jakobsen seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. SUB95~OO13. Miklo said that this was a redesign of the area that the commission just vacated. He said that the street in the previous plat was being moved slightly to the south and out of the easement on the property. He said that the plat had been revised to correct the previous deficiency. He said staff recommends that the application be approved subject to verification of the willingness of adjacent lot owners to accept outlots 1 and 2, prior to final plat approval, approval of the grading and erosion control plan, and determination of the neighborhood open space fee prior to Council consideration of the plat. Planning & Zoning Commission May 18,1995 Page 10 Public discussion. There was none. Public discussion closed, MOTION.: Gibson moved to approve SUB95-0013, an application submitted by Oakes Construction for preliminary plat approval of Oakes Fifth Addition, a 6.25 acre, 14 lot residential subdivision located at the end of Quincent Street, north of Dubuque Road subject to verification of the willingness of adjacent lot owners to accept outlots I and 2, prior to final prat approval, of the grading and erosion control plan, and determina- tion of the neighborhood open space fee prior to Council consideration of the plat. Jakobsen seconded. Jakobsen said she thought the plan was an improvement and that she would like to compliment the applicant. The motion carried on a vote of 6~0. CONSIDERATION OF THE APRIL 6, APRIL 20 AND MAY 4, 1995, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to approve the April 6, April 20, and May 4, 1995 Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes as amended. Gibson seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION INFORMATION: Miklo said that the ordinance requiring City approval of exterior stairwells and corridors and a set of guidelines on which that approval would be based was discussed at the Council meeting. He said that there had been a Committee meeting with representatives of the Home Builders Association, the City Council, the Design Review Committee, and the Board of Appeals, which suggested an alternative ordinance still requiring City approval of design of exterior stairwells and corridors. However, he said, the guidelines as they were suggested would be adopted as a resolution rather than an ordinance, thereby making it easier to make amendments to address future concerns of the community. He said that the council would be considering both options, the original ordinance and the ordinance as amended to include the guidelines by resolution rather than by ordinance. He said that if the Commission had a preference for one alternative over the other, now would be the time to address it. Gibson said that the substance of what they had approved would be incorporated in the resolution. Bovbjerg asked if this would be just as legal and enforceable. Holecek said that she believed the wording of the ordinance when it left the Commission was that it was to be approved by the City under the guidelines adopted. She said that the guidelines would be adopted by resolution rather than embodied in the ordinance itself. She said a resolution had the same force of providing guidance, that flexibility had been and issue, and that the amended ordinance would not eviscerate anything the Commission had done. Planning & Zoning Commission May 18, 1995 Page 11 OTHER BUSINESS: Dierks said that this weekend was Iowa City Music Carnival at City High with proceeds benefitting the school district if anyone was interested in attending, Starr said her would be absent at both the June 12 and June 15 meetings. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Dierks moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:05 p,m, Bovbjerg seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0, Sally Dierks, Secretary Minutes submitted by Lita Sorerisen, IOWA CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING THURSDAY, MAY 18, 1995 - 7:30 P.M. CMC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS SIGN IN SHEEl' I0. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 18. 19.