Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-01-18 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES APPROVED CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 2004 - 7:00 AM HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL Members Present: Kevin Wemer, Andy Chappell, Karen Kubby, Penny Davidsen (on speakerphone), Naomi Novick, Vicki Lensing, and William Sueppel, Chair Members Absent: Nate Green, Lynn Rowat Staff Present: Marian Kart, Eleanor Dilkes CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Sueppel called the meeting to order at 7:05 AM. APPROVE MiNUTES OF NOVEMBER 22, and DECEMBER 1, 2004 MOTION: Kubby moved to accept the minutes of November 22, 2004, as submitted; seconded by Chappell. Motion carried 7-0 (Green, Rowat absent). MOTION: Novick moved to accept the minutes of December 1, 2004, as submitted (discussion to follow); seconded by Kubby. Motion carried 7-0 (Green, Rowat absent). Novick questioned Page 3, the second paragraph, where her presentation at the community process is noted. She questioned the last bulleted item, and stated that she feels the way it is written up, it sounds like a "conclusion." She also questioned the notation to neighborhood associations and their role in the community. Chappell stated that he was fine with these general descriptions of what their group brought up. After a brief discussion among the members, Novick agreed to keep the minutes as written. PUBLIC COMMENT Sueppel noted that the members had received a letter from Carol deProsse; another from John Neff; and one from Jay Honohan as well. MOTION: Kubby moved to accept correspondence; seconded by Chappell. Motion carried 7-0 (Green, Rowat absent). Sueppel recognized two visitors at the meeting. John McDonald introduced himself to the Commission. He stated he would submit his ideas in writing. The other visitor was a reporter from the U ofI. Kubby noted that John was the Chair of the last Charter Review Commission. REVIEW DECEMBER 1 COMMUNITY PROCESS SESSION Davidsen asked for a brief summary from one of the members on how they felt the public process went on December 1. Sueppel stated that he has had very positive feedback on the type of meeting they had, and he thanked Kubby for her persistence in having this Charter Review Commission December 8, 2004 Page 2 format. Kubby noted that one comment that really intrigued her was made by John Balmer, where he stated he would be "disenfranchised" if he was not able to vote for all of the districts. REVIEW CHARTER Sueppel noted that with both Green and Rowat absent, he would be reluctant to make any final decisions today. He asked the members how they felt about this. It was decided that the members would just discuss today, and would hold off on making any specific decisions until all nine members are present. Kart noted that the January 20 date, for the next public hearing, is the same night as the Chamber's Annual Dinner. The first issue to be discussed was whether the voters should elect the mayor, or stay as is - elected by the other members of the council. He asked the members for their discussions on the strong mayor versus weak mayor concept. Discussion continued on the powers of the mayor, and whether or not these powers should change, and also the perceptions of these powers. Sueppel stated that perhaps the Commission should send a report to the City Council, outlining some of the concerns the public has voiced in this area. Novick stated that a comment made by John Neff struck her as unusual, in that he states that the city manager position has too much power, and that it is due in part to the city council allowing it. Davidsen stated that if these types of things are occurring, she would like to see specific incidents to show this. Sueppel then asked each member to give their view on whether or not they wish to pursue a change to the mayoral position - how elected. The majority of members, Davidsen, Novick, Wemer, Lensing, and Sueppel, were not interested in pursuing a change in this area. Chappell and Kubby were both for a directly elected mayor, by the voters. The issue of term limits was raised, as well. It was decided that this issue would be brought up at a later discussion, after the members discuss the three main issues at hand. The s.econd and third issues, number of representatives elected at large and number of representatives elected by district. Currently it is 4 at-large and 3 district seats. Lensing noted that her group, at the 12/1 public discussion, was for a 4 district/3 at-large split on city council members. (TAPE ENDS) Kubby noted the topic of voter confusion, and she feels this is an important issue. She feels they should "un-confuse" the system so the citizens can understand how their council members are elected. Sueppel stated that the question, as he sees it, is, "Are we comfortable as a Commission, at this stage, with saying let's keep the 3 / 4 representation, but let's have those 3 elected within their district?" This, he states, is a potential next step for a Commission to look at. Sueppel then noted for the record that Caroline Dieterle also showed up for public comments, and he stated that he would like to give her a chance to speak once their discussion is done. Discussion continued with Wemer stating that his group at the public session also noted voter confusion and the need for more education. Novick stated that she would have to reconsider the choice of the mayor if the district representatives were elected by district only. She stated that an at-large representative, elected by the entire city, should be the only one eligible to be the mayor. Davidsen stated that this goes back to the leadership Charter Review Commission December 8, 2004 Page 3 topic, and she feels that good leadership is key. Novick further stated that she would really like to keep the nomination by district an election at-large. Chappell stated that this then begs the question of whether or not the mayor is then really one among equals. Lensing noted that she does not think it's a power issue, but a perception of representation. Sueppel asked the two people present for public comment if they would like to speak. John McDonald stated that he was interested in listening to the discussion today, but would submit in writing any issues he has, or will attend the next Commission meeting. Caroline Dieterle gave the Commission members some history on City government and some of the major issues from past years. She asked the members to think seriously about making some changes, and to not leave things as they are right now. Sueppel then asked the members to give feedback and opinions on the representative issue. Chappell stated he is for the 4 at large/3 district seats, with pure districts, and he wants to think further about the mayoral issue. Novick stated that she would like to do some further reading before she makes a decision. Davidsen stated that she is still for the 4 at large/3 district seats, and will reconsider the true district representation. Kubby stated that she is for the 4 at large/3 district seats, being true districts, and as for the mayoral issue, she would prefer a directly elected mayor but would like to also do some further reading on this. Lensing stated that she has even more questions now, and she asked members for some clarification on the issues. Werner stated he is for the 4 at large/3 district seats, but he still has questions about true districts and the election of the mayor. Sueppel stated that the vast majority of people he has talked with say to not elect the mayor at-large, as it would cause conflict within the City. He said he still questions adding a 4th district. Lensing further stated that her group at the public session brought up the issue of compensation for Council members, and considering the work load and time spent, she feels this is a topic they may want to think about as they make their final decisions. Dieterle addressed the members again, asking them to consider a retention vote for the City Manager position, as this is the seat of power within the City. (TAPE ENDS) Sueppel noted that on the December 1 minutes, page 4 at the bottom, the word "deludes" should be "dilutes." He also questioned the latest redline version of the Charter, stating that under Section 2.05, they had decided to make the one long sentence into two separate sentences. He also questioned Section 7.03 A for clarification. MEET1NG SCHEDULE The members quickly discussed the meeting schedule. The next meeting will be on Monday, December 13. Karr will contact Green and Rowat and make sure they can attend this meeting. She will let the members know if the time of the meeting will be 7:00 AM or not. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Kubby moved to adjourn; seconded by Chappell. The meeting adjourned at 9:05 AM. MINUTES APPROVED CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION MONDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2004 - 7:45 AM HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL Members Present: Kevin Werncr, Andy Chapp¢ll, Karen Kubby, Penny Davidscn (on speakerphone), Naomi Novick, Vicki Lensing, Nate Green, Lynn Rowat, and William Sueppel, Chair Staff Present: Marian Kart, Eleanor Dilkes CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Sueppel called the meeting to order at 7:45 AM. MEETiNG SCHEDULE Sueppel asked all nine members of the Commission be available for final decisions on the Charter review process. After discussion, the meeting schedule was set up as follows: January 6, 2005, 3:30 PM - Charter Review meeting January 13, 2005, 7:00 PM- Public Hearing January 14, 2005, 7:30 AM - 9:00 AM - Charter Review meeting January 18, 2005, 7:00 PM - present Charter Review Commission summary and recommendations to the City Council at formal meeting. Dilkes noted that Novick had given her a copy of the Charter with some miscellaneous corrections, but that she would like to wait until after the meeting on January 6th, where the Commission will be making some decisions, before she updates their redline version of the Charter. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Kubby moved to adjourn; seconded by Chappell. The meeting adjourned at 8:05 AM. MINUTES APPROVED PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION NOVEMBER 10, 2004 MEMBERS PRESENT: Craig Gustaveson, Judith Klink, Margaret Loomer, Ryan O'Leary, Nancy Ostrognai, Matthew Pacha, Sarah Walz, John Westefeld MEMBERS ABSENT: David Fleener STAFF PRESENT: Terry Trueblood, Mike Moran, Terry Robinson GUESTS: Mike Fallon FORMAL ACTION TAKEN Moved by Westefeld~ seconded by Loomer~ to approve the September 8~ 2004 minutes as written. Unanimous. Moved by Westefeld~ seconded by O'Lear~ to recommend acceptance of Outlot J in the Windsor Ridge subdivision. Unanimous. Moved by Klink~ seconded by Ostrognai~ to recommend adoption of the Recreation Division Fees and Charges Proposed for FY2006 and Tentative Proposals for FY07 and FY08 as presented. Unanimous. Moved by Walz~ seconded by Gustaveson~ to accept the listing of Proposed Capital Improvement Proiects and Priorities for FY05-09 as presented by staff. Unanimous. WINDSOR RIDGE~ OUTLOT J Trueblood acclimatized the commission as to the location of the subdivision and previous action taken by them. Outlot J is a linear green space, with a creek running through it, and a concrete trail already constructed. It abuts to Scott Park at its west end and would tie in nicely when a trail is constructed through the park at some point in the future. It is approximately five acres in size. The City will be responsible for mowing the area, but it would not be mowed as often as a typical park. Pacha asked who would be responsible for snow removal; Trueblood noted the City. The Parks Division went to a prioritization system last year, designating high priority areas as those with high traffic such as near schools, etc. This area would initially be a low priority area, meaning the snow may not be removed until the day after snowfall. Moved by Westefeld~ seconded by O'Lear~ to recommend acceptance of Outlot J in the Windsor Ridge subdivision. Unanimous. Parks and Recreation Commission November 10, 2004 Page 2 of 5 RECREATION FEES & CHARGES The commission was provided with a draft of the Recreation Division fees and charges proposed for FY06 and tentative proposals for FY07 and FY08. Trueblood indicated there are 21 proposed fee increases as compared to 63 in FY05, noting staff increases the majority of the fees every other year. Trueblood went over the various proposed fee increases. The bottom line estimates that 38.86 percent of the Recreation Division's budget will be supported by non- property tax revenue. Moved by Klink, seconded by Ostrognai, to recommend adoption of the Recreation Division Fees and Charges Proposed for FY2006 and Tentative Proposals for FY07 and FY08 as presented. Unanimous. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AND PRIORITIES The commission was provided with a listing of the Proposed Capital Improvement Projects for FY05-09 in priority order as proposed by staff and also a listing of non-prioritized unfunded projects. Trueblood stated there were some substantial differences since the last time the commission prioritized the CIP projects. The past two years the commission has emphasized only one or two projects instead of prioritizing their top ten. Pacha noted that previously the commission felt it was not possible to properly prioritized the CIP projects until a master plan was completed, which would enable the commission to incorporate the community's priorities. Trueblood reviewed the various projects. With respect to the new bridge crossing the fiver to the Peninsula, Westefeld asked when the bridge would be completed. Trueblood indicated it is anticipated it will be completed no later than the middle of next summer. Trueblood noted the Sand Lake Recreation Area project was just acquisition costs only for the purchase of S&G Materials property, south of Napoleon Park on Sand Road. Klink felt it was great the City is moving forward on this project. Gustaveson indicated he was unsure if this project should be a priority item; Trueblood noted again it was land acquisition only, with development to be discussed at a later date. Trueblood noted the Soccer Park Improvements project was expanded to include an irrigation pond and pumping system, developing two back-up soccer fields and constructing two practice baseball/softball fields. Pacha asked if there would be any liability issues with respect to the irrigation pond; Trueblood noted no more than the ponds in City Park and the Iowa River. Trueblood stated the prioritized listing will be given to the CIP committee next week, which will determine where the park and recreation projects can fit into the overall CIP plan which will be recommended to the City Council. He noted the City Manager indicated he felt some park and recreation projects will be able to be done. Parks and Recreation Commission November 10, 2004 Page 3 of 5 Moved by Walz, seconded by Gustaveson, to accept the listing of Proposed Capital Improvement Projects and Priorities for FYO$-09 as presented by staff. Unanimous. Westefeld asked if funding for the master plan was gone; Trueblood indicated funding still exists in the parkland acquisition fund. The next step is development of a Request for Proposal, which will be sent to several firms. Staff would then interview selected firms, with commission participation. Walz recommended beginning the process before the rest of the parkland acquisition fund is eliminated. She noted if the commission had a master plan they would be able to ascertain ~vhat kind of projects the community would like before expending money on projects they may not want. FY06 OPERATING BUDGET Staff's budget hearing with the City Manager was held yesterday to review the department's various submissions. Trueblood noted there were no unusual or big increases requested. Staff will be prepared to give an updated report at next month's commission meeting. NOMINATING COMMITTEE Pacha asked for volunteers to serve; O'Leary, Walz and Gustaveson volunteered. The committee will present a slate of officers at the December meeting. MISCELLANEOUS UPDATES Benton Hill Park Robinson reported on the project's progress. More work will be done on the aggregate trails; general shape of landscaping at entryway and play equipment is completed; playground safety surface needs to be installed. Klink noted the alignment of the path was changed; Robinson stated this was the result of a couple of issues relating to accessibility. Loomer asked about fencing; Robinson noted D&N Fence is working with the general contractor on getting it installed soon. Mercer Baseball Moran stated the fence and lights are in and the dugout will be done by a joint effort ~vith the City High School parent's organization. This organization will also be discussing with Babe Ruth about redoing the press box. The irrigation is also in. Robinson stated Butch Forbes went "way beyond the call of duty" to have MidAmerican Energy help with the cost of the transformer, which could have cost as much as $10,000. Dog Park Trueblood stated the DogPAC group is getting into the fundraising mode and may be coming to the commission's December meeting. They would like to be able to name the facility after a major donor if such a donor should come forth. The City Manager informed the group the request should come through the commission first before going to the City Council. Parks and Recreation Commission November 10, 2004 Page 4 of 5 COMMISSION TIME Westefeld expressed gratitude for the annual park tour and the work that went into coordinating it, noting the tour is very helpful. Walz, Loomer and Ostrognai. agreed. O'Leary indicated he was excited to see the new trail going between the ponds in the Waterworks Prairie Park, and it was nice to see progress. With respect to the dog park, he felt it would be great to get a major sponsor to contribute. He noted he reviewed the dog park's landscape drawing and felt it should be designed in line with what the commission wants to do with the rest of the peninsula. He also did not want the dog park to interfere with the adjoining golf course. Klink stated Ostrognai would be going off the commission and she enjoyed the opportunity to work with her. She stated she had the good fortune to talk to many people who know a lot about prairies. She talked with Connie Mutel, a local ecologist, who expressed concern about the follow through for the expensive plantings at the Waterworks Prairie Park. Mutel suggested the book "Practical Guide to Prairie Reconstruction." She also suggested a local person, Mike Fallon, who has extensive experience burning prairie. Mutel stated the first three years are critical for survival of wanting a prairie that will endure for a long time that is aesthetically pleasing and low maintenance. She encouraged having contacts available and making contact with new people so the City will be ready to move in the spring to mow and burn the prairie. She felt it was very important to follow through on this. Walz noted the New York Times had an article about a prairie, and felt it would be great if one day someone wrote an article about Iowa City's largest urban tall grass area. It would be a wonderful opportunity for the department, for natural habitat and economic development. She felt the Waterworks Prairie Park is another thing that can put Iowa City on the map. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Trueblood reported on the following: City's Charter Review. The City Charter Commission is reviewing the existing City Charter, and public input is invited. Board & Commission Meeting. The tentative date is January 10 for Boards and Commissions to meet with the City Council. CHAIR'S REPORT Pacha noted this was Marilyn Kriz's last meeting in that she would be retiring November 19th. The commission as a whole expressed their gratitude to her for 18 years of service, and he offered a toast in her honor, tipping glasses containing sparkling raspberry juice. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7 p.m. Parks and Recreation Commission November 10, 2004 Page 5 of 5 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2004 TERM NAME EXPIRES 1/14 2/11 3/10 4/13 5/12 6/9 7/14 8/11 9/8 10/13 11/10 12/8 Kevin Boyd 1/1/06 X ................................. David Fleener 1/1/08 X X X LQ X O/E NM X O/E NM Craig Gustaveson 1/1/07 X X X LQ X X NM X X NM Judith Klink 1/1/07 X O/E X LQ X X NM X X NM Margaret Loomer 1/1/08 X X X LQ X O/E NM X X NM Ryan O'Leary 1/1/0t5 ......... LQ X X NM X X NM Nancy Ostrognai 1/1/05 X X X LQ X X NM X X NM Matt Pacha 1/1/05 X X X LQ X O/E NM O/E X NM Sarah Walz 1 / 1/07 X X X LQ X X NM O/E X NM John Westefeld 1/1/06 X X X LQ X X NM X ; X NM KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting LQ = No meeting due to lack of quorum .... Not a Member Final/Approved~ MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION NOVEMBER 16, 2004 ROOM G09/8 - SENIOR CENTER Call to Order: Meeting called to order at 2:05 PM. Members Present: Lori Benz, Jo Hensch 2:15 arrival, Jay Honohan, Betty Kelly, Sarah Maiers left at 3:10, and Nancy Wombacher. Members absent: Charity Rowley Staff Present: Michelle Buhman, Linda Kopping, and Julie Seal. Others Present: Betty McKray. Recommendations to Council: None. Approval of Minutes: Motion: To approve the minutes from the October 19, 2004 meeting as distributed. Motion carried on a vote of 6-0. Kelly/Maiers PUBLIC DISCUSSION None SPACE COMMITTEE REPORT ON EXPANDED USE OF THE BUIDING- Kopping The committee met and decided not to relocate any activities at this time, however the committee plans to continue evaluating space to maximize use. The Railroad Club has developed a plan to work on their projects outside of the Center. The Senior Center goal setting session will help to determine the direction of the Center for the next three years which will aid the space committee in developing a comprehensive plan for use of the building. During the discussion pertaining to the goal setting, the commission decided to hold a series of goal setting sessions in order to evaluate the Senior Center's strengths and weaknesses and changes in the environment. The commission will begin the process at the December meeting by reviewing the Senior Center's strategic plan. Kopping will provide commissioners with additional information to use during the evaluation phase. The Commission will set aside some time during the next commission meeting to discuss the evaluation process. The staff will meet with the Participant, Volunteer and Program Advisory Committees to gather input in the evaluation process. After the initial evaluation is completed, further study of the center will come from participants in the form of focus groups and surveys. PROMOTION COMMITTEE REPORT - Hensch The Committee evaluated promotional letters inviting University of Iowa faculty and staff retirees to join to the Senior Center. The committee is in process of creating a Final/Approved promotional flyer. Once the committee has developed a draft it will be brought to the commission for review. UPDATE ON 28 EAGREEMENT DISCUSSION - Honohan Honohan and Kopping met with Councilors Bailey and Elliot and Board of Supervisors member Neuzil to discuss creating a 28E Agreement between the City of Iowa City and Johnson County. Neuzil appeared to be in favor of a three-year commitment however he did not give a formal commitment. The Board will discuss this matter at future meetings and should have a response for the Commission at the January 2005 meeting. REPORT ON HUGHES BEQUEST - Honohan Eleanor Hughes gifted a large amount of money from her estate. A committee comprised of Kelly, Honohan and Rowley will meet to discuss how to recognize the Hughes bequest and develop a plan to recognize future bequests of this size. SENIOR CENTER UPDATE- Operations- Kopping Kopping distributed copies of the proposed budget for FY06. Kopping reviewed the budget with the Commission. The next step in the budget process is for the City Manager to review and revise if necessary. The final step in the process is to go to City Council for review, revision and eventual approval. Motion: To accept the budget as distributed. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. Hensch/Maiers. Kopping reported that the repairs to the water damaged areas of the building are nearing completion. Work has been delayed due to backorder wallpaper and supplies. As discussed earlier in the meeting Kopping is in the process of gathering information to be used in the evaluation process. The promotional letters inviting University of Iowa retirees to join the Center will be mailed once the Winter Program Guide is available. The Winter Program Guide has a new cover. A pencil drawing of the building will be used and if enjoyed the drawing will be used on future covers with some modifications to reflect the changing seasons. Kopping encouraged commissioners to provide staff with feedback on the program guide's cover and content. Programs scheduled in the Assembly Room with a starting time of 1:30 have caused problems due to the need to set-up for the program before people are finished eating lunch. Kopping would like to retain flexibility in scheduling programs in the Assembly Room at the same time provide a positive eating environment for dinners. In order to accomplish this Kopping asked Commissioners to review this issue and provide staff with a recommendation at the next commission meeting. Programs - Seal Seal distributed a copy of programs scheduled for December. For a complete listing of programs see the Winter Program Guide. Final/Approved Vo/unteers - Rogusky Rogusky was not available to give a report. Membership Fundraising Report- Buhman Buhman reported collecting $14,262 during the first four months of FY05. COMMISSION DISCUSSION- Kelly will write the report of the Senior Center web page, Benz will give a report to the City Council, and Honohan will provide a report for the Board of Supervisors. Motion: To adjourn. Kelly/Benz. Motion carried on a vote of 5-0. Final/Approved Senior Center Commission Attendance Record Year 2004 Name Term 1/20 2/17 3/16 4/20 4/30 5/10 6/22 7/20 8/17 9/21 Expires Lori Benz 12/31/05 X X O/E X X X X X X X Jo Hensch 12/31/06 X X X X X X X X O/E X Jay Honohan 12/31/04 X X X X X X X X X X Betty Kelly 12/31/04 X X X X X X X X O/E X Sarah Maier 12/31/06 X X X X X O/E X X O/E O/E Charity Rowley 12/31/05 X X X X X X X X X X Nancy 12/31/06 O/E O/E X X X X X X X X Wombacher Name Term 10/16 11/16 Expires Lori Benz 12/31/05 X X Jo Hensch 12/31/06 X X Jay Honohan 12/31/04 O/E X Betty Kelly 12/31/04 X X Sarah Maier 12/31/06 X X Charity Rowley 12/31/05 X O/E Nancy 12/31/06 X X Wombacher Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E= Absent/Excused NM = No meeting -- = Not a member MINUTES APPROVED IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS MONDAY, DECEMBER 6, 2004, LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM IOWA CITY CITY HALL, 410 E. WASHINGTON STREET IOWA CITY,IA MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Buckman, Wayne Maas, Anna Buss, Gary Haman Tim Fehr and Doug DuCharme John Roffman recused himself from meeting due to a conflict with the 735 Westgate appeals case. STAFF PRESENT: Tim Hennes (Sr. Building Inspector), Sue Dulek (Asst. City Attorney), Roger Jensen (Fire Marshall) and Jann Ream (Code Enforcement Asst. acting as minute taker) OTHERS PRESENT: Valerie Russell (735 Westgate Street) RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None CALL TO ORDER: Vice-chairperson Maas called the meeting to order at 4:15 P.M. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES: Minutes from the July 12, 2004 meeting were discussed. Hennes stated that Vice-chairperson Maas would be signing the minutes since Chairperson Roffman was absent. MOTION: Haman moved to accept the minutes. Buss seconded. Motion passed unopposed. Appeal the decision of the Buildinq Official because: a. There are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of the code. (735 Westqate Street) Hennes stated that the property at 735 Westgate Street received a special exception to convert the single family dwelling to a commercial daycare center. As a change of use from residential to commercial, the property is required to meet current commercial building code standards. The property owner, Ms. Russell, hired an architect, Richard Kruse, to submit plans showing the required changes to the building so a building permit could be issued. A building permit was issued 11/8/2004. The existing interior stairs were built to residential standards and did not meet the required rise and run of commercial stairs so the architect designed compliant stairs that could be built into that space. Hennes said that Ms. Russell is now appealing the requirement to rebuild the stairs. Ms. Russell stated that the house was built 4 years ago and the stairs were compliant at that time for residential use. The stairs now would be only slightly non-compliant for commercial standards. They are one-half inch long on the rise and one inch short on the run. Replacing the stairs would be very costly and also would cause her to lose floor space in an upstairs room in order to create the required headroom for the new stairs. She felt that having to go through the expense and loss of headroom was very impractical since the stairs were close to compliant and had a record of being safe. She stated that there had no accidents on those stairs since she moved in. She described the safety precautions she requires of the children when they go up and down the stairs and stated that the safety of the children is always her paramount concern. Buss asked if the stairs were uniform. Russell replied yes and Hennes reiterated that the stairs comply with current residential standards. Hennes also wanted to inform the Board that John Roffman had recused himself from this appeal because he would be the contractor doing the work at this property. MOTION: DuCharme moved to grant the appeal based on the practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of the code. Making the property owner go through the expense of installation and loss of floor space in order to install new stairs is impractical. The modification conforms with the intent and purpose of the code and such modification does not lessen health, accessibility, life and fire safety, or structural requirements. Buss seconded. DISCUSSION: Buckman stated that subsequent property owners might not be as conscientious about safety as the current owner and code requirements should apply to the property not the owner. Hennes reminded the property owner that all of the other items listed in the plan check notes of the building permit would be required. VOTE: The motion passed 5-1 with Buckman voting in the negative. OTHER BUSINESS: The next meeting was scheduled for January 10th' 2005 if there is an appeal. Hermes said that the Board would be working on the 2005 National Electrical code update in the next year. Roger Jensen reported that the Fire Department will be purchasing a fire sprinkling safety trailer in order to better educate the public and contractors as to the advantages of sprinkling. ADJOURNMENT: Buss moved to adjourn the meeting. Haman seconded. The meeting adjourned at 4:40 P.M. John Roffman, Board of Appeals Chair Date MINUTES FINAL IOWA CITY BOARD Of ADJUSTMENT NOVEMBER 10, 2004 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL - IOWA CITY, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Dennis Keitel, Karen Leigh, Michael Wright. MEMBERS ABSENT: Carol Alexander, Vincent Maurer STAFF PRESENT: John Yapp, Sarah Holecek OTHERS PRESENT: O'Donell Sara CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Keitel called the meeting to order at 5:02 CONSIDERATION OF THE OCTOBER 13, 2004 BOARD MINUTES MOTION: Wright moved to approve the minutes from October 13, 2004. Keitel seconded the motion. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: EXC04-00025 Discussion of an application submitted by Gary Schooley for a special exception to reduce the required front yard from 20 feet to 12 feet for property located in the Low Density Single-Family (RS-5) zone at 1817 Grantwood Drive. Yapp stated that the property is located at the corner of Grantwood Drive and the right-of-way of an un- named street. He said that when Mt. Prospect subdivision was originally platted the right-of-way was planned to extend to the south. However, when the Safety Village was established, the street configuration was redesigned and this right-of-way became a driveway to Safety Village. The area to the south was not developed with residential lots as originally conceived. Yapp said that because the area remains as street right-of-way, a 20-foot front yard set back is required on both Grantwood Drive and the un-named right-of-way. He added that the applicant would like to construct an 18-foot wide addition to the east side of the house. He said there is an existing accessory building, a storage shed, located in the required front yard adjacent to the un-named street right-of-way. If this special exception is approved staff recommends that it also apply to the accessory building. Yapp said that this is a peculiar situation. He said that the zoning ordinance requires a 20-foot set back from streets in the RS-5 zone to assure that homes have a minimum front yard for open space landscaping and stacking space in front of parking areas. In this case, however, the right-of-way functions as Iow-volume driveway, not a street that circulates traffic. Yapp said reducing the setback requirement from the unnamed street right-of-way would not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, would not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood, and it would not impede the normal and ordedy development and improvement of the surrounding property. He said that the property has adequate utilities and services. Yapp stated that Staff recommends that EXC04-00025 an application for a special exception to reduce the required front yard from 20 feet to 12 feet to allow the construction of an addition, and the location of an accessory building for property located in the Low Density Single-Family (RS-5) zone at 1817 Grantwood Drive, be approved. Public Hearing Opened NONE Public Hearing Closed MOTION: Wright moved for the approval of EXC04-00025 an application submitted by Gary Schooley for a special exception to reduce the required front yard from 20 feet to 12 feet to allow Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes November 10, 2004 Page 2 the construction of an addition, and the location of an accessory building for property located in the Low Density Single-Family (RS-5) zone at 1817 Grantwood Drive, be approved. Leigh seconded the motion. Keitel asked if there is any chance that the street will ever be vacated as a public right-of-way. Yapp answered that the staff believes that it will not be vacated because the City wants to keep it as a right-of- way due to the utilities that utilize it. Keitel said that he would vote in favor of the application. He said that there would be no infringement of other properties due this addition. Wright said that he would vote in favor of the application. He said that this definitely meets the definition of a peculiar situation. He agrees that it meets the specific and general standards for a special exception. He said that it would not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, would not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not affect property values in the neighborhood. Leigh said she would vote in favor of the application. The reduction of the setback in this case where the street is more like a driveway is a unique situation. The motion passed with a vote of 3-0. EXC04-00026 Discussion of an application submitted by Merle Miller for a special exception to reduce the required front yard from 20 feet to 0 feet to allow a parking space in the front yard for property located in the Low Density Single-Family (RS-5) zone at 1401 Ridge Street. Yapp said that the property is located at the corner of Highland Avenue and Ridge Street. He said that it is a narrow, substandard lot. He said that the property measures 5150 square feet, and is therefore substandard in the overall area for a RS-5 zone. Yapp added that the fact that the property is located on a corner complicates the size problem because there are two front yards, both which require 20-foot setbacks. Yapp said that the applicant would like to relocate the driveway and off street parking space from the Highland Avenue side of the property to the Ridge Street side of the property. He stated that the zoning ordinance does not allow a parking space to be located in a front yard in a residential zone unless it is a stacking space that is located in an aisle or driveway leading to a garage or parking space located outside of the front yard. Yapp said that there is a maple tree located on this lot which would have to be removed if a parking space was to be installed 20 feet back from Ridge Street property line so that it is located outside of the front yard. However, he said, the applicant is requesting a reduction of the front yard to allow the installation of one parking space within the first 20 feet of the lot. Yapp said that approval will allow for the location of a driveway and parking space on the less traveled of the two streets which provide access to this property, on a flatter portion of the lot and will allow a mature tree to remain in place. Staff recommends that EXC04-00026, an application submitted for a special exception to reduce the required front yard from 20 feet to 0 feet to allow the installation of a driveway and one parking space for property located in the Low Density Single-Family (RS-5) zone at 1401 Ridge Street, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plan submitted with the application. Wright asked if there is an intent to vacate the old driveway. Yapp answered that he believes so, but that the applicant would be able to clarify that. Keitel asked if there is enough room to construct a garage in the future. Yapp said there is 10 feet between the house and the south property line, therefore there is not enough room to construct even a one-car garage. O'Donnell, 2010 Keokuk Street, said that the maple tree would have to be removed in order to put a garage in there. Public Hearinq Opened Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes November 10, 2004 Page 3 O'Donell said that they had the goal of cleaning up the property. She mentioned that they spent a lot of time remodeling the interior, and when they got to the exterior, they found out that they need to comply with City requirements. She stated that she had a chance to discuss with the neighbors and they support the changes that they plan to do. O'Donell said that they plan to vacate the old driveway. She added that the pavement is removed already, and next spring they plan to seed it. Public Hearinq Closed MOTION: Leigh moved for the approval of EXC04-00026~ an application submitted for a special exception to reduce the required front yard from 20 feet to 0 feet to allow the installation of a driveway and one parking space for property located in the Low Density Single-Family (RS-5) zone at 1401 Ridge Street, subject to general conformance with the site plan submitted with the application. Wright seconded the motion. Wright said that he would vote in favor of the application. He said that he visited the property and felt there is a practical difficulty in the way the lot is situated. Wright mentioned that it would not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, would not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. Leigh said that she would vote in favor. She said that the new parking site is an improvement compared to the previous one. Keitel would also vote in favor for the reasons previously mentioned. The motion passed with a vote of 3-0. APL04-00004 The applicant asked to defer the matter for the next Board of Adjustment meeting. MOTION: Leigh moved to defer. Wright seconded the motion. The motion passed with a vote of 3-0. OTHER Request from Verizon Wireless to reconsider the October 13, 2004 vote regarding the EXC04~00022, a request to locate a telecommunications tower in the Interim Development Single Family (ID-RS) zone at 637 Foster Road. Yapp said the applicant has provided new information that the tower will not need to be lighted or marked. MOTION: Leigh moved to reconsider, at the December 8, 2004 meeting, the request from Verizon Wireless to locate a telecommunications tower in the Interim Development Single Family (ID-RS) zone at 637 Foster Road. Wright seconded the motion. The motion passed with a vote of 3-0. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION NONE ADJOURNMENT Leigh moved to adjourn; Wright seconded. The meeting adjourned at 5:24 PM. Board Chairperson Board Secretary Minutes submitted by Bogdana Rus s:lpcdlminuteslboal2OO41boal 1-10-04.doc Board of Adjustment Attendance Record 2004 Terii1 Name Expires 01/14 02/11 03/10 04/14 05/12 06/09 07/14 08/11 09/08 10/13 11/10 12/08 Carol 01/01/08 NM X X X NM X X X NM X O/E Alexander Dennis Keitel 01/01/05 NM X X X NM X O X NM X X Karen Leigh 01/01/07 NM X X X NM X X X NM X X Vincent Maurer 01/01/06 NM O X O/E NM X X X NM X O/E Michael Wright 01/01/09 NM X X X NM X X X NM X X Key: X = Present O -- Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting ..... Not a Member MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBEP, 2, 2004 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Beth Koppes, Bob Brooks, Ann Freerks, Don Anciaux, Benjamin Chair, Jerry Nansen MEMBERS EXCUSED: Dean Shannon STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Mitch Behr, Steve Nasby RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:, Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, the amended Northgate Corporate Park Urban Renewal Plan, as proposed. CALL TO ORDER: Anciaux called the meeting to order at 7:32 pm. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None URBAN RENEWAL ITEM: Discussion of the proposed amended Northgate Corporate Park Urban Renewal Plan. Miklo said that Steve Nasby, Community and Economic Development Coordinator was present to discuss this matter. Nasby said the Northgate Corporate Park Urban Renewal Area was originally adopted by the City Council in 1999 and noted that "Urban Renewal" is essentially a TIF district. He said that Southgate Development owns land north of Northgate Drive and requested that the City consider adding it to the existing Northgate Corporate Park Urban Renewal Area. Nasby noted that staff and the Council Economic Development Committee looked at this amendment as a proactive approach by getting an economic development tool in place to facilitate the continued development of the Northgate Corporate Park Area. Nasby said that the proposed additions to the Urban Renewal Project Area would include the Weiler parcel (approximately 12 acres), the Jones/Southgate Development Company Parcel (approximately 34 acres) and the Fuhrmeister Parcel (approximately 2 acres). The intent of the Council Economic Development Committee and supported by staff was to extend the area from the Southgate parcel to Highway I as there had been conversations with Weiler about development. Nasby also said that in the long-term future of the area Oakdale Boulevard was expected to eventually clip the northeast corner of the Southgate parcel. Freerks asked if staff had had several discussions with the property owners. Nasby said that Southgate had made the request to add their property, but no discussions with the other two property owners had taken place yet. Staff would make the appropriate notifications to the property owners and because two of the parcels were currently used for agricultural purposes, the City would need the owners to sign agreements for including land that is currently in agricultural use. Hansen asked about the current zoning. Miklo said that the parcels were currently zoned Interim Development. Hansen asked why rezoning did not come before the TIF. Nasby indicated that the owner was considering requesting CO-1 of ORDP zoning for the property. Either were compatible with the TIF. Hansen asked what was the Commission's preview for this type of mandated review and comment. Miklo said to decide if the proposed lands in the Urban Renewal Plan met the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Behr read the charge to the Planning and Zoning Commission from the State Code. Hansen asked how much of the City was in a TIF district. Nasby said it is about 1.13%. He said Coralville is 33%. Tiffin is 54% and the County is about 12%. Anciaux opened public discussion. There was none. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Freerks made a motion to approve the amended Northgate Corporate Park Urban Renewal Plan, as proposed. Koppes seconded the motion. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes December 2, 2004 Page 2 Freerks said she felt the proposed amended Northgate Corporate Park Urban Renewal Plan met the goals of the Comprehensive Plan as outlined in the Introduction section on page 3 of the amended Plan. She said that the City may need to use tools such as this to be competitive with other communities. Koppes agreed. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. OTHER ITEMS: Hansen brought in an article regarding Portland, OR. Miklo will make copies of the article and this item will be discussed at the next Commission meeting. CONSIDERATION OF THE NOVEMBER 4, 2004 MEETING MINUTES: Motion: Hansen made a motion to approve the minutes as typed and corrected. Brooks seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. ADJOURNMENT: Motion: Hansen made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:50 pm. Chait seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. Elizabeth Koppes, Secretary Minutes submitted by Candy Barnhill sJpcd/rninuteslp&z1200412004o12-O2-O4.doc Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission Attendance Record 2004 FORMAL MEETING Term Name Expires 01/15 02/19 03/04 04/01 04/15 05/06 05/20 06/03 06/17 07/01 07/15 08/05 08/24 09/02 09/16 10/07 10/21 11/04 12/02 D. Anciaux 05/06 X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X B. Brooks 05/05 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B. Chait 05/06 X X X X X O X X X O O X O/E X X X X X X A. Freerks 05/08 X O/E O/E X X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X J. Hansen 05/05 X X X X X X X X X O/E X X O O X X X X X E. Koppes 05/07 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X D. Shannon 05/08 X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X X O/E X O/E INFORMAL MEETING Term Name Expires 01/12 03/01 05/17 06/14 06/28 08/02 10/04 10/18 11/01 11/18 D. Anciaux 05/06 X X X X X X O/E X X X B. Brooks 05/05 O/E X X X X X X X O/E O/E B. Chait 05/06 X O X O O O O O X O A. Freerks 05/08 X O/E O/E X O/E X O/E X X X J. Hansen 05/05 X X X O/E O/E X X X X X E. Koppes 05/07 X X X X X X X X X X D. Shannon 05/08 X X X X X X X O/E X O/E Key: X = Present 0 = Absent O/E - Absent/Excused N/M= No Meeting .... Not a Member APPROV~ MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 2004 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Brooks, Ann Freerks, Jerry Hansen, Don Anciaux, Dean Shannon, Beth Koppes, Benjamin Chair STAFF PRESENT: John Yapp, Bob Miklo, Mitch Behr OTHERS PRESENT: Larry Schnittjer, Klm Kirchner, Ed Pierson, Linda Huff, Brad McDowell, Robert L. Croush, Rich Oberfeld, Dave Alatalo, John Arthur, Victoria Concha, Kenneth Moss, Jim Beeghly, Glenn Siders RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:- Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, REZ04-00005/SUB04-00006, a rezoning from Medium Density Single Family Residential (RS-8) zone Sensitive Areas Overlay (SAO/RS-8) zone and a preliminary Planned Development Housing Plan and a preliminary plat of Olde Town Village, a 33.21-acre residential and commercial subdivision that will allow 10 commercial lots and 62 dwelling units on 32 lots for property located south of Rochester Avenue, east of Scott Boulevard and north of Lower West Branch Road subject to review by City Public Works Department, Parks and Recreation Department and the Corps of Engineers. Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, ANN04-00002, severance of approximately 194-acres of land from the Iowa City corporate limits to allow these properties to be annexed to the City of Coralville. This property is adjacent to Camp Cardinal Road. Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, setting a public hearing for 1/6/05 on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to amend the Southwest District Plan to change the land use designation from Large Lot/Rural Residential to General and Office Commercial for property located north of Hwy One, west of Hwy 218 and east of Kitty Lee Road. CALL TO ORDER: Anciaux called the meeting to order at 7:33 pm. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. REZONING/SUBDIVISION ITEMS: REZ04-00005/SUB04-00006, discussion of an application submitted by Plum Grove Acres, Inc. for a rezoning from Medium Density Single Family Residential (RS-8) zone Sensitive Areas Overlay (SAO/RS- 8) zone and a preliminary Planned Development Housing Plan and a preliminary plat of Olde Town Village, a 33.21-acre residential and commercial subdivision that will allow 10 commercial lots and 62 dwelling units on 32 lots for property located south of Rochester Avenue, east of Scott Boulevard and north of Lower West Branch Road. Miklo said the southern portion of the property was zoned RS-8, Medium Density Single-family Residential and the northern portion was zoned CC-2, Community Commercial. Much of the property was annexed into the City in 2001 and was subject to a conditional zoning agreement that spelled out conditions that needed to be adhered to when the property was developed. One of those conditions had been that there would be a planned development housing overlay for the RS-8 area prior to the development of that property. The CZA also specified that several features of the Comprehensive Plan be followed when laying out this area. A large wetland area is currently the location for the sanitary sewer lagoons that served the Iowa City Care Facility. That facility will be hooked into the City's sanitary sewer system, the lagoons will be abandoned and rebuilt as part of the reconstruction of the wetland area. Some additional lower quatity wetlands will be removed as part of the redevelopment and reconstructed with the larger wetland which will become a private open space maintained by a homeowners association. The redeveloped wetland area will also contain the stormwater management facilities for the overall development. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes December 16, 2004 Page 2 Staff felt the plan as submitted adhered to the policies of the Comprehensive Plan as it provided for a reasonable mix of housing types. The proposed plan provided a good transition to the existing single family homes south of Lower West Branch Road and also a transition from the single family homes to the large residential tract to the east. The area in the central section was devoted to zero-lot line units, the area along Scott Blvd and Olde Town Road would be multi-family townhouse units. A commercial development would be on the northern portion of the property laid out as a town square or main-street type of development. Staff felt the plan also complied with the CZA which stipulated fees to be paid to the City for improvement of Lower West Branch Road; fees for the sanitary sewer system; and a water main extension fee. A revised plat had been received earlier in the day but City engineers had not had a chance to review it. Staff recommended approval of REZ04-00005/SUB04-00006, subject to Public Works staff signing off on the plat that had just been received. Koppes asked if Lower West Branch Road was a collector street. Miklo said that was correct. The City did allow residential lots to access collector streets when there was no other alternative but not direct lot access to arterial streets. It was by design that the streets in the existing and proposed developments didn't 'line-up' exactly. When the annexation had occurred, the residents of Hummingbird Lane had been concerned that as the commercial area developed, traffic from south of Lower West Branch road would use Hummingbird Lane to access the commercial area. They'd requested that there be an offset so traffic would use Lower West Branch Road. Hansen asked if there was only one style of townhouse? Miklo said that was correct. There was a note on the plat that said townhouses would include at least three different fa(;ade designs including a variety of colors, bricks and architectural details. If that was a concern for the Commission they could defer and ask for more detail from the developer. The townhouses were to be in clusters of three or four which would offer some variety in terms of scale of the units. Hansen said the Comprehensive Plan stated that it should be varied. Freerks asked how Outlot B and the wetlands played into this development. Miklo said it was likely to be a private open space maintained by a homeowners association. It would have a conservation easement for the wetlands and also stormwater management. The Director of Parks and Recreation was consulting with the Parks and Recreation Commission regarding if the City wanted the wetland area. It was likely that they would not because of the maintenance responsibility and because it was not suitable for active open space. Staff reviewed the wetland mitigation plan and felt it complied with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. The Corps of Engineers will also have to review and approve it. The neighboring property owner had built a building that had gone over the property line so a little triangle of land would be transferred to the homeowner to rectify the situation. Public discussion was opened. Larry Schnittier, MMS Consultants, said he was there to represent the developer and would be glad to answer any questions. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Chait made a motion to approve REZ04-00005/SUB04-00006, a rezoning from Medium Density Single Family Residential (RS-8) zone Sensitive Areas Overlay (SAO/RS-8) zone and a preliminary Planned Development Housing Plan and a preliminary plat of Olde Town Village, a 33.21-acre residential and commercial subdivision that will allow 10 commercial lots and 62 dwelling units on 32 lots for property located south of Rochester Avenue, east of Scott Boulevard and north of Lower West Branch Road subject to review by City Public Works Department, Parks and Recreation Department and the Corps of Engineers. Shannon seconded the motion. Anciaux said he liked the step down from single-family and the blending which protected the single-family residences from the surrounding commercial and multi-family areas. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. REZ004-00017/SUB04-00017, discussion of an application submitted by Third Street Partners for a rezoning from Low Density Single Family Residential (RS-5) zone to Planned Development Housing Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes December 16, 2004 Page 3 Overlay - Low Density Multi-Family Residential (OPDH-5) zone and a preliminary plat of Village Green, Part XXIII and XXIV, an 83-1ot residential subdivision on 25.67-acres of property located on Wintergreen Drive. Miklo said this entire area was subject to a planned development housing overlay which was approved in 1993. The approved 1993 plan had included single family lots toward the western portion of the development adjacent to Sterling Drive and zero-lot lines in the south and east and the open space. The applicant was proposing to amend the planned development housing overlay including the stormwater detention and open space areas in order to add additional zero-lot lines which would replace some single lots and a cul-de-sac to replace a loop street. A planned development housing overlay provided the opportunity to cluster development and introduce housing types that normally might not be allowed. There was an expectation of an amenity or some open space features in exchange for the increase in density or change in housing types. Staff felt there might be some ways to increase the density that had been proposed in 1993 but had some concerns regarding how that was to be done. In order to increase the density the applicant had proposed an alley system in the center of the block resulting in fairly narrow lots of 27- to 35-feet in width. Staff had a concern regarding open space and had suggested the elimination of one unit in a particular area. Staff was also concerned about some lots which were under the minimum 8,000-square feet required in the RS-5 zone and a concern with the proposed width of a corner lot and the adjoining narrower lots. Staff had suggested the elimination of one lot to allow more space for the remaining lots. Staff's biggest concern was with the introduction of the new housing type. They wished to encourage the developer to give some consideration to the other side of the street opposite the alley units and design something that would be compatible. Staff and the Commission had received some elevation drawings but Staff felt the drawings could use more work to make them compatible with the housing units proposed on the other side of the street. Only two basic housing models had been proposed for the center area. Staff suggested that there be some variety in the facades so that there would be more variety throughout the entire general area. In summary, staff felt there might be a possibility to use the planned development to increase density but: · there needs to be more design consideration for the lots on the side of the street opposite the alley units in order to make it more of a compatible/consistent neighborhood · there should be more open space · increase the size of the corner lot and adjacent lots by eliminating one proposed lot Miklo said Staff recommended that this item be deferred until those issues could be addressed. The applicant agreed to a deferral. Freerks asked if it was still proposed to be a 5-foot setback which was very narrow. Miklo said the applicant had proposed the 5-foot setback along two streets. The photograph on the plan showed a fence and some landscaping in the 5-foot area to compensate for the reduction. Staff felt that that might be something the Commission would want to make a requirement for approval. Public discussion was opened. Klm Kirchner, 2906 Sterling Drive, read a letter she had written. She said approximately eleven years ago her neighborhood had fought for and received approval of the final plat for the neighborhood being discussed. The plan had been acceptable to the surrounding neighborhood and the developer of the land. The land had since been sold twice, most recently to Frantz who had submitted a different plan for the neighborhood. Kirchner said eleven years ago they had been promised that they would not need to worry about this area being rezoned, there would not be water or traffic issues, the existing property owners would receive a proper transition from single family to multi-family properties. Kirchner said she and her neighbors were disappointed that they were attending another meeting in regard to the development of this land. The approved plan consisted of 62-units of which 32 were single-family units and 30 were zero- lot line units. The plan had included a pond, two areas of green space and bike trail. The new proposal was for 83 units of which only 21 were single-family residences and 62 zero-lot lines. It also included only a small green space with play-ground area but no bike trails. Several neighbors had expressed concerns with the rezoning process, the proposal to rezone the area from RS-5 to OPDH 5, the quality and quantity Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes December 16, 2004 Page 4 of the houses, the constant problem with flooding of yards and streets, the congestion of traffic on the streets and inadequate policing of the area. Impacts the proposed development would have on the neighborhood: Quality/Quantity: Quality of the nei,qhborhood. Many of the residents had been in their homes over ten years. They would like to see a development that would appeal to a population that was likely to put down roots and invest in the neighborhood. Increase of green space so children could also enjoy the space where they lived. Number of proposed units - would like to see the land developed into more single family homes rather than the opposite. Water a concern in two ways: 1) For property owners immediately adjoining the development off Sterling Court, every new development phase in Village Green had raised the level of the land and the earlier developments got the run-off. 2) Storm sewers from Dover to the end of Sterling Court and Sterling Drive already flooded heavily during rainstorms. The proposal was for less green space and more concrete, how would the system absorb that added burden. Traffic. Sterling Drive and Dover Street were not designed to handle the amount of traffic that will come in/out of the proposed area. The streets are hazardous due to on-street parking. There have been many close-calls with people not being courteous drivers and speeding. The neighborhood assumed this would only get worse with the increased traffic entering/exiting their neighborhood. Access to Sterling Drive from the east. Other concerns that the neighborhood wished the Commission to consider: · Will there be a buffer to the noise created from the railroad and industrial buildings to the south of the development? · How will Lucas, Southeast Junior High and City High be impacted with the increase in density of housing? · Are there enough transit stops? · Are the utilities installed at a level to handle the requirements of the proposed density? · Was there an additional need for this type of housing? · Was there adequate access and support for emergency and service vehicles? · Would there be sufficient off-street parking? · Did the placement of an alleyway in a remote area provide easy access to the neighborhood from the railroad and would it invite inappropriate and unlawful behavior? Kirchner said they were concerned with the process of the development in the Village Green Area. They felt they had done their work 11-years ago and she was there to express her concerns. Ed Pierson., 2054 Hannah Jo Court, asked Staff to speak to traffic flow and to street connectivity. Pierson said at the time his subdivision had been developed the three developers had indicated that there would be landscaping around the water retention basin in the south central section along the railroad tracks. It was to be developed at the time the lots were sold. It was his understanding that with the lots being sold that might not be the case now. Pierson asked who had responsibility for the landscaping development in the park area around the water retention area. Miklo said Sterling Drive would go to the east and hook up with Wintergreen Drive which would provide ways for getting to the east and to the west. This was basically the same street pattern that had been approved in 1993, there were no significant changes in the street pattern. A cul-de-sac had been changed into a loop street. In 1993 the plan submitted by the developer Jim Anderson, had required landscaping and a bike trail. Frantz would be responsible for implementing the 1993 landscaping requirements unless as part of the current rezoning process that open space landscaping requirement was removed. That was not on the table. The landscaping would consist of some trees being planted in that vicinity. In 1993 there had been some discussion that the City might accept that area as open space, but Parks and Recreation Commission had since indicated that they did not wish to accept it as a public park because they didn't want to take on the maintenance responsibilities for the detention basin. Anciaux asked if the retention basin would alleviate some of the drainage problems from the area. Miklo said he'd spoken with Denny Gannon who had a general sense that development of this site should improve drainage conditions with the continuation of Sterling Drive which would direct water down to the basin area but he'd not reviewed detailed stormwater management plans yet. Currently the field was higher than the land to the west so it would be brought down to a lower grade which in and of itself should improve the drainage. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes December 16, 2004 Page 5 Hansen asked where was the closest park? Miklo said Mercer Park. It was one of the parts of the City that didn't have a great deficit in terms of neighborhood park land. Hansen asked if there would be connections to the park for pedestrians. Miklo said the sidewalk on Sterling Drive would be the only public connection. Linda Huff, 1856 Sterling Court, said when they'd purchased their land over 20-years ago it had still been a water detention area. She asked about the water in her backyard and if that would be taken care? Every time it rained, a pond formed in her backyard. Originally it had been planned to be the water detention area, she wanted to be assured that she would not continue to have a pond in her backyard. She was also concerned about the traffic. Mercer Park would create a lot of cut-through traffic from Scott Blvd to Mercer Park. Their neighborhood had smaller streets so the neighborhood had concerns about traffic in their area. Anciaux asked Miklo to have Public Works review the drainage in that area. Miklo suggested that the applicant's engineer might want to address that in more detail as well. Brad McDowell, 1721 Dover Street, said he'd like to echo what had been said about the traffic. Not only was traffic going to Mercer Park, there were additional developments to the west and along First Avenue as well. Persons would travel on Sterling Drive to Bradford to First Avenue which would become a major through-fare. Currently cars parked on the street and he felt the street could not handle the additional traffic flow. For his family, it would be a major safety concern. Robert Craush, 42 Pondview Court, asked who would be responsible for maintaining the pond area since the City was not interested in it. Miklo said it would be the homeowners association for the development that was being proposed. Craush asked when would the Association be created? Miklo said it would occur at the time final plat was approved for this development. Craush asked what would the Association include as far as boundaries? Miklo said the applicant would need to address that question. He didn't know if there had been a Homeowners Association with the first few phases of Village Green South or not. Miklo said he felt at a minimum it would have to include the new housing development and the stormwater area. Craush said when he'd purchased his property the documentation had indicated that there would be an Association in the area where he was living. He wondered if his home would be included or not. He felt that was an issue that needed to be addressed. Craush also had a concern regarding the large commercial building that had been constructed south of the railroad track near the water retention area. The building had several very noisy roof-top units, he felt the noise would be a concern. Craush asked if a noise barrier could be constructed along the railroad track or some type of noise barrier constructed on the roof around the units to dived the noise. Rich Oberfeld, 63 Pondview Court, said he was also concerned about the noise in that area from the factory. It was very loud. The streets including Sterling Drive were very narrow. He knew for a fact that when the trains came through three or four times a day, people cut through that area. He felt there would need to be no on-street parking allowed. Currently when a car was parked on the street, two cars could not pass without one waiting for the other. He was also concerned about water draining into the pond area. He wanted to be sure the homes on Pondview would not be flooded when the level of the land was lowered. Ed Pierson, said currently at some of the heavier rain times the basin became full and took the normal underflow under the railroad tracks but it raised the water level in the residential area. Their sump pumps were still running. He was concerned about re-grading for the people on Sterling Drive and in the south Village Green area as that would affect their water tables and potentially create more problems for them. Pierson said they'd waited many years expecting to get some landscaping around the pond area. Could there be a timeframe set for the developer to accomplish that task. Miklo said that could be done as part of the approval process. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Chait made a motion to defer REZ004-00017/SUB04-00017, a rezoning from Low Density Single Family Residential (RS-5) zone to Planned Development Housing Overlay - Low Density Multi-Family Residential (OPDH-5) zone and a preliminary plat of Village Green, Part XXIII and XXIV, an 83-1ot residential subdivision on 25.67-acres of property located on Wintergreen Drive. Hansen seconded the motion. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes December 16, 2004 Page 6 Shannon said he'd heard a concern about the density, was this development going to be built to be owner occupied? Miklo said it could be either owner occupied or rental, the City did not have control of that. Miklo said from Staff's discussion with the Developer, he thought it was the developer's intent to sell units for owner occupants. Freerks said she'd like to see more work done on the compatibility from across the street to make the two merge better. Also, address the landscaping issue and make sure that it got done. Ten years was a long time to wait. Parking and traffic should be looked at and Staff should assess whether no on-street parking should be considered based on the traffic potential. The corner lot could be problematic. The open space issue should be addressed. Chair said in terms of what he'd like to see from Staff, Kirchner's letter had mentioned a lot of boiler plate concerns that the Commission always considered and certain standards that were always met. He felt it would be helpful to the neighborhood if Staff could respond to them in a more articulate way that explained in a way that a lay person could understand more clearly what was being done. The increase in density would have some impact on those kinds of issues, even though the standards might be exceeded for addressing those concerns, Staff should provide an answer as to "by how much." Koppes requested to see the actual 1993 approved plat and the stormwater management plan. Shannon said mention had been made about the water conditions. He'd like to have someone address that issue and talk to them about what was going to happen with the water. He'd hate to see things get worse than what they currently were. Anciaux said a couple times they had also seen where a drainage problem was actually in the old subdivision such as the broken tile by the APE house. He requested Staff to have City Engineering look at that area to make sure everything was flowing the way it was supposed to. Brooks said he agreed with all the requests that had been made. He was still wrestling with the 5-foot setback and the examples of the building facades that they'd been presented with. They were pretty weak from a design standpoint in his opinion. He'd like more evaluation and discussion of the 5-foot setback and clarification as to how it would relate to the surrounding neighborhoods and what kind of character it would create for the neighborhood. Hansen said he was conflicted on this proposal on a lot of points. He agreed with all the things that had been requested to be looked at. He was struggling more with the question of how many times did a neighborhood have to fight for something to be done. It had been 10- or 11-years since the initial development, it had had several owners in the process, people had bought houses with certain expectations. It was a buyer beware which should apply not only to the people who were buying the lots but it should also to the people who bought the property to subdivide. Hansen said he was not saying he would not go along with the proposal, but it was going to take a lot of work in his opinion, otherwise he would rather stick with the original plat. Chait said the neighborhood wasn't built yet. His contention was that the Commission dealt with issues of change and development and redevelopment. There would be situations where already developed neighborhoods were bought out and redeveloped. For the whole Village Green Area which was being developed over a period of years to change before it was even completed based on a billion reasons seemed reasonable to him. Just because something was etched in stone or was built didn't mean that it was over, things were always changing. The location of the alley and the location of the 5-foot setback were in the middle of something that didn't exist now. They were not imposing it on someone who already lived there. As long as the alley and the 5-foot setback met the terms and conditions of the standards that they were employing in other pads of town, he found those things to be very exciting. It created a very different type of community and neighborhood as opposed to the homogeneity of all the same. He thought that was a big part of the Comprehensive Plan and the goal that they were looking for. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes December 16, 2004 Page 7 ANNEXATION ITEMS: ANN04-00001/REZ04-00030, discussion of an application submitted by James Davis for a Comprehensive Plan amendment, voluntary annexation of approximately 62.39 acres and a rezoning of approximately 50.4 acres from County Al, Rural, to CC-2 (18.18 acres), C1-1, Intensive Commercial (18.1 acres), Commercial Office (11.12 acres) and RR-1, Rural Residential (2.98 acres) for property east of Kitty Lee Road including Highway 1, and west of Highway 218. Yapp said the application had been for an annexation of 50.4 acres. Highway 1 had been added so the annexation would be for 62.39 acres to include Highway 1. There would be three steps involved in the process 1) A Comprehensive Plan amendment, 2) the Annexation itself and 3) a zoning designation for the property. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT The Southwest District Plan land use map showed this land as large-lot/rural residential. This designation had been given to the area due to the lack of sewer capacity for anything more intensive than rural residential, i.e. lots on their own sewer systems. Recently the City had completed a sewer upgrade which had capacity for further development. The applicant had proposed a sewer lift station on this property to provide sewer capacity. The 1997 Iowa City Comprehensive Plan identified this interchange and the abutting properties to the interchange as appropriate for commercial development once utilities were made available. The applicant had provided five points as justification for amending the Comprehensive Plan and the Southwest District Plan to show this as commercial; · The property abutted the Highway 1 and U.S. Hwy 218 interchange · All the other quadrants of this interchange were commercial · The land on the south side of Hwy 1 and on the east side of Naples Avenue were annexed into the City as Commercial · The applicant would work with the City to provide a buffer for the residential to the west and to the north · The Large Lot Rural Residential is less than desirable in the vicinity of the Hwy 218/Hwy 1 intersection Provided that sanitary sewer could be brought to this property and that there was a transition and buffering to the residential areas, Staff would agree with the points made by the applicant. ANNEXATION · The annexation policy of the City was that annexations were to occur primarily through voluntary annexations under three criteria · The property must fall within the adopted growth area of the City. This property is within that growth area. · The development will fulfill an identified need without imposing an undue burden on the City. Part of the City's economic policy was to support developments that would build the City's tax base. The developer would provide the infrastructure to this property, there would be minimal cost to the City in extending fire and police protection and street maintenance services.] · Control of the development was within the City's best interest. Given that this property was within the City's growth area and is a high volume interchange, Staff felt control was within the City's best interest. Yapp said the property owner owned approximately the first 15-feet of Kitty Lee Road. The State of Iowa would need to approve this annexation but was comfortable with the City just annexing the first 15-feet of the road provided the City entered into an agreement with Johnson County regarding maintenance of Kitty Lee Road. Staff had met with the Board of Supervisors earlier and it was apparent that an agreement could be reached. The City had jurisdiction over subdivisions within two miles of City limits. A decision would need to be made whether to extend that limit, it was Staff's recommendation not to extend the two mile area with the requested annexation. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes December 16, 2004 Page 8 REZONING The applicant had requested a commercial designation for the majority of the property. Staff had received a revised zoning exhibit which would include Community Commercial zoning, a general retail zone, for the properties abutting Hwy 1 and Hwy 218; Intensive Commercial zoning; Office Commercial zoning for the northern part of the property; and Rural Residential for the very northern triangle. The northern most lots would not be included with the annexation, the property owners intended to purchase that property. Staff was concerned with how commercial development would impact the existing residences and to make sure that there was a transition and buffering to those properties. One way to transition to those properties was through lower intensity zoning in the northern parts. The applicant had shown Office Commercial zoning, a lower intensity use, in that area. Landscaping methods to screen the view of the development had also been proposed by the applicant on a concept plan. A row of trees abutting the northern commercial lots had been shown and the stormwater pond was to become an outlot as part of the transition area. A request for more detail on the landscaping plan to the south had been received. Staff had also indicated to the applicant that they would recommend a landscaping plan for the west side of the commercial development abutting Kitty Lee Road. It would be an abrupt change from the commercial to the agricultural use. To date Staff had not received any more detail on this. Staff recommended that a condition of the zoning be that a comfort level be achieved with the landscaping and buffering. A new road into the property had been proposed opposite Naples Avenue which would become a 4-lane intersection with Hwy 1. Staff had requested a traffic study of the impact of this development to the Naples Avenue / Hwy 1 and Kitty Lee Road / Hwy 1 intersections including the need for a traffic signal, turn lanes on Hwy 1 and on Kitty Lee Road and other potential controls. It was Staff's understanding that the study was underway, Staff would report to the Commission when they received a copy of the study. The DOT would also need to review and approve the study. They might place conditions on the new access point. The study would also indicate the percentage of the cost of traffic-related improvements needed to be made to Hwy 1 based on the traffic generated from this development. A commercial intersection was proposed approximately 500-feet north of Kitty Lee Road. Staff would recommend that Kitty Lee Road be required to be reconstructed to City collector street standards to the commercial intersection, the cost to be borne by the developer. Because Kitty Lee Road was an existing road, Staff recommended that the developer be required to pay one-half the re-construction cost for Kitty Lee Road, should it need to happen in the medium- to long-term. A sewer lift station, sized to serve the larger watershed, would need to be constructed. The capacity constraint of the area was with the sewer line that went under Hwy 218. North of Hwy 1 there would be capacity for approximately 200-acres of additional development to be on that sewer line. As the area grew, the City would need to determine whether properties along Hwy 1 could use that sewer line as there was a limited amount of capacity. Staff recommended approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment provided there was a buffer/transition between the commercial development and the residential properties and recommended approval of ANN04-00001. Staff recommended REZ04-00030 be approved subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement which addressed: 1. Funding responsibilities for installation of a traffic signal and turn lane improvements at the intersection of Naples Avenue and Hwy I and Kitty Lee Road and Hwy 1. 2. Improvements and funding requirements for Kitty Lee Road. 3. Requirements for landscaping and buffering where the commercial development abuts residential properties and Kitty Lee Road. 4. Access control i.e., no direct driveway access to Hwy 1. 5. Requirements for the sewer lift station to be sized to serve the proposed development with potential to be upgraded to serve the watershed. Chait asked if the term of the lift station was finite. Yapp said the lift station would not be finite. A wet well would be sized to serve the larger development. The pumps that would initially be installed would only serve this development, more pumps could be added later. The main constraint was the size of the sewer line itself. There potentially could be a gravity sewer line in the future that would go under Hwy 218 and near the church on Mormon Trek. It would be a project that would need to be bid by the City. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes December 16, 2004 Page 9 Chair said Kitty Lee Road was a county road so why was the City escrowing funds for a county road. Yapp said 15-feet of Kitty Lee Road would come into the City. The escrow money would be toward future reconstruction costs of the road. Staff was recommending that so the general public would not have to fund that. Miklo said it was likely that at the time the road would need to be improved it would be entirely within the City. Behr said it was reasonable to expect that even if the road were not within the City, the City would participate in funding improvement of the road. Staff was using the term escrow which was normally used for these purposes. However for this particular case it would actually be a payment to the City. The funds would technically not be held in escrow but would become City money to be used for that future purpose. Brooks asked if there would be any access allowed from Lots 1 and 2 onto Kitty Lee Road. Yapp said there would not, Staff would write that condition into the legal papers. Brooks asked if the landscape buffer could also be considered at least on the north side as it related to Outlot A. It would provide more additional visual screening from what would be developed in the intense commercial area to the residential properties along Kitty Lee Road. He'd like to see a buffer between the intense commercial and the residential / office area along the north side of lot 2. He felt there needed to be more detail on the landscape buffer such as width, variety, a commitment to schedule for installation. Public discussion was opened. David Alatalo, 3671 Olde Oak Lane SW, spoke on behalf of himself and his wife Regina who was in the audience. They had lived in their home for 12 years and the Davis' had been 'great' neighbors. Concerns he wished to bring to the Commission's attention for consideration included: Use of Olde Oak Lane in general. They lived at the end of Olde Oak Lane. When they'd received the initial letter and map it was not clear if the lane would be extended to connect through to the back half- of the property. It was basically a single lane with gravel and a little black top on it. During construction phases they would have feelings about heavy equipment traveling on the one-lane private drive. Barrier between residential and commercial properties. Some additional information had just been provided in terms of the definition of a barrier between residential and commercial properties. What exactly was being proposed to provide a barrier between the two properties? They wished to see more definition and detail along those lines. Traffic on Hwy 1 was already an issue for residents in that neighborhood. The road narrowed down and when persons were trying to turn right, vehicles went onto the shoulder to pass the stopped car. With a commercial development they had a lot of concerns about getting on to and off of Hwy 1. He was glad to hear a traffic study was going to be done. Sewer lift station and its location. Hopefully not too close to the back fence. Alatalo asked what would be logical expectations for a property owner to have in terms of additional annexation. They would be surrounded by the City. What should they expect to happen in terms of county vs. city on a long-term basis? He understood it was the American way to have property, to sell it, buy it and do things to it, but all of the current residents had purchased homes when it had been zoned residential. To have high intensity right at your back fence deserved some opportunity to address. Chait asked how the Good Neighbor Policy which had just been written into the City Code revision played into this situation of an annexation. Miklo said Staff always encouraged persons to meet with their neighbors before bringing a proposal to the City. John Arthur, 4104 Kitty Lee Road, said he'd like to express the same sentiments as Alatalo had about the neighborhood and the Davis' but they had concerns as well. A major concern was the transition between residential and intensive commercial which included noise, light, and the visual effect. Outlot A - who would own it; who would maintain it; who would enforce the maintenance of the Outlot as far as the plantings and the landscaping that would be done on the buffer. He felt a landscape buffer was the bare minimum when placing intensive commercial next to a residential area that had been in existence for at least 25-years. Anciaux asked what types of uses could go into the lots at the 'top' at the north end? Yapp showed the zoning proposal. In office commercial, typical uses were lawyers or doctors offices. Offices were considered a commercial use but they were a lesser intensity that didn't generate as much traffic and typically didn't have the evening activity. Community Commercial was proposed for the properties fronting the highway, those would be more retail oriented. It could include convenience stores or restaurants. Intensive Commercial was a more intensive use that made use of outdoor storage and there might be more outdoor activity with that type of use, i.e. lumber yard. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes December 16, 2004 Page 10 Koppes asked if office buildings could have apadments in a CO zone? Miklo said it was permissible by special exception. Victoria Concha, 4086 Kitty Lee Road, agreed with what the other neighborhood residents had already said. The Davis' had been wonderful neighbors. Buffer She requested that the buffer be constructed before construction began. It would prevent the same 10- or 1 l-year wait that the Village Green residents had been dealing with. It would also help to cut down on construction dust and noise. Recently in preparation for rezoning when dirt had been moved across Hwy 1, Hwy 1 had become a danger to cross because of the dust. Access People would not know that there would not be direct access to Kitty Lee Road from the commercial developments. Persons would assume that they could use the 15-foot road extension to travel Kitty Lee Road to Rohret Road. It currently was a dead end road and people flew up and down the hills fast. It was fun to do so. However, there were no sidewalks and it was a danger for the children who lived there. Si.qna.qe There needed to be adequate sized signage posted that it was not a through access. The tiny 'dead-end road' sign would not be sufficient. Kenneth Mos~, 4110 Kitty Lee Road SW, asked what would be done about the water flow. He'd heard the flow of the creek would be changed and the pond would be moved. Yapp said the developer could speak to this better than he could as no plans for this had been submitted yet. Outlot A, where the pond was currently located, would be utilized for stormwater management. It was Staff's understanding that there were wetlands located in that area. Before the development could be subdivided, a wetland determination, a stormwater management plan and a grading and erosion control plan would all have to be developed. Larry Schnittier, MMS Consultants, said he'd been working with Jim and Dave on this project. Schnittjer said they didn't have all the answers but they had some ideas. Landscaping - discussions to date were that it will probably be white pine trees which grow fast and provide a relatively dense screen. In the southern area of the proposed screen area they will withstand moisture. It would be a double row with the trees off set to one another. Traffic on Hwy 1 - the developers hadn't seen a report from Stanley Consultants yet so they didn't know what the answer will be yet. Sewer lift station - no final determination made yet, will probably be in the northern corner of lot 4 as illustrated. Future Annexation - at the current time Iowa City is not requiring any involuntary annexations. It was his understanding that if a property owner wanted to be annexed it was their responsibility to propose that they be annexed. Noise, Light, Vision, - not all the answers yet. Outlot A - owned & maintained by a development organization similar to a homeowner association with the maintenance related on a lot area basis. Enforcement of the maintenance - no answer yet. It had been his experience that it was a lot easier to control in a commercial rather than a residential situation because commercial property owners wanted their area to look nice. Early Planninq of the Buffer had already been discussed, no final determination when. They had considered providing a few smaller plants which would catch-up and grow faster than the larger ones. Kitty Lee Road - no answer yet, more of a traffic issue. Creek and pond - both will be modified as part of the wetlands mitigation plans. No exact detail on modification yet. Hope to have pond be similar to what it is today, but won't be exactly the same. Can't accommodate both stormwater management and a large body of water at the same time. A smaller body of water would accommodate the wetlands requirement better because Corps standards didn't allow deep water, just 'wet and mucky'. Schnittjer said all the above issues would need to be addressed with the Cops of Engineers, Department of Natural Resources and the City. Public discussion was closed. Brooks said Lot 7 seemed to come south into the commercial zone at the end of Olde Oak Lane. He wanted to be sure that there would be no access to Lot 8 off of Olde Oak Lane. If it were zoned residential it would lock out the possibility of Olde Oak Lane being a secondary entrance/exit into Lot 8. Yapp said there was a difference between the zoning and the concept plan. Schnittjer said they'd address that. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes December 16, 2004 Page 11 Chair inquired as to the timeline for completion of all the phases of approval and voting on this project. Miklo said Staff would work with the applicant to resolve as many of the unresolved issues as possible, hopefully resolving all before the Commission's January 6, 2005 meeting. Brooks asked Schnittjer about the traffic study timeline and when did he expect to receive it from Stanley Consultants. Schnittjer said he thought they were working on it right now. Brooks said it would be nice to have the study and an evaluation of it from the Public Works Staff to understand exactly how it would work. That was one of his serious concerns. Motion: Brooks made a motion to defer ANN04-00001/REZ04-00030, a Comprehensive Plan amendment, voluntary annexation of approximately 62.39 acres and a rezoning of approximately 50.4 acres from County Al, Rural, to CC-2 (18.18 acres), C1-1, Intensive Commercial (18.1 acres), Commercial Office (11.12 acres) and RR-1, Rural Residential (2.98 acres) for property east of Kitty Lee Road including Highway 1, and west of Highway 218. Hansen seconded the motion. Anciaux said he was concerned with the intensity of Lot 2. What would be the possibility of it becoming something such as a lumber yard with all the noise from trucks backing up. He'd like to have addressed what could be done to mitigate that noise and/or to make sure it was not a problem when it was developed since it backed up to a residential lot. Chait said since this issue seemed to be a potential concern there was a new super Menards in the south end of Marion which they could look at in terms of the scale and the context of how a development like that happened. Driving by, it seemed to him to that it integrated pretty well into the topography and the neighborhood. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. ANN04-00002, discussion of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a proposed severance of approximately 194-acres of land from the Iowa City corporate limits, to allow these properties to be annexed to the City of Coralville. This property is adjacent to Camp Cardinal Road. Yapp said this was a City initiated application to sever this land from the corporate limits of Iowa City to allow it to be annexed to the City of Coralville. Iowa City would have difficulty providing sanitary sewer service to this property which was located within the Clear Creek watershed. By gravity, sewer would flow into Coralville. In May 2002, the Iowa City City Council had adopted the Clear Creek Master Plan which was a master development plan for this area. The 1997 Iowa City Comprehensive Plan stated "At some point this area would need to be severed from Iowa City because of the difficulty to provide municipal sanitary sewer." In 1994 the cities of Iowa City and Coralville had executed an agreement that eventually this area would be severed to allow it to be served by Coralville. Five property owners controlled property within the proposed severance area including Clear Creek Development and the City of Coralville. The effect on those properties would be that they would become under the political and taxing jurisdiction of the City of Coralville. Coralville would become responsible for providing municipal services to those properties. Yapp said Staff recommended that the severance be approved subject to the severance resolution not being effective until and unless said properties were annexed to the City of Coralville so that there would be no period of time when they were not in either City. Brooks asked if the 5 property owners were supportive. Yapp said Staff had heard from four who were supportive but had not had a response from one property owner. All property owners had been aware of it for several years. Public discussion was opened. Jim Bee.qhly, 1725 Camp Cardinal Road, asked what type of zoning would result for them; did Coralville have the same zoning classifications; would their zoning would change and their taxes change as a result of the zoning change; would their school district change - they currently were in the Clear Creek school district. Yapp said there was a Clear Creek Master Plan that had been adopted by both Iowa City and Coralville. Beeghly said he only had information from the web site, he'd not spoken with the City of Coralville yet. Yapp said the zoning designation would change to a City of Coralville zoning designation but he didn't know to which one. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes December 16, 2004 Page 12 Beeghly asked if there was an anticipated time frame for this. Yapp said the City of Iowa City was further along than the City of Coralville was, but it was his understanding that they would like it to happen within the next 6-months or so. Yapp said he didn't think the school district would change. Miklo suggested Beeghly make an appointment and visit with staff at Coralville City Hall. Brooks asked when a transfer like this occurred would the Coralville zoning be something comparable to Iowa City zoning, it couldn't become industrial or commercial. Miklo said it would be up to Coralville. City staff couldn't guarantee that it would mimic current Iowa City zoning structure. Glenn Siders, representing Clear Creek Development, said he had a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding and would be happy to visit with Beeghly yet that evening to address his questions. The projected zoning in the Master Plan was residential; the school district would remain in the Clear Creek - Amana school district; their anticipated schedule for road construction was to let the bid around 4/1/05 so construction could begin 'this' year with an opening around October, 2005. Construction work on this project would begin Monday 12/20/04. Approximately two weeks ago both municipalities had approved a clearing contract to clear the timber for the right of way and the grading work to begin next spring. The City of Coralville was beginning the process of annexation and hoped to have the process completed within a 2-3 month timeframe. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Hansen made a motion to approve ANN04-0000~, a proposed severance of approximately 194- acres of land from the Iowa City corporate limits to allow these properties to be annexed to the City of Coralville. This property is adjacent to Camp Cardinal Road. Brooks seconded the motion. Hansen said this had been documented for a long time, it would be a good move for both cities. Anciaux said it was good to see cooperation between the two cities. It had been stated that the sanitary sewer service would be much easier through Coralville, the Master Plans were already in place. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM: Consider setting a public hearing for January 6, 2005 on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to amend the Southwest District Plan to change the land use designation from Large Lot/Rural Residential to General and Office Commercial for property located north of Hwy 1, west of Hwy 218 and east of Kitty Lee Road. Motion: Freerks made a motion to set the public hearing for 1/6/05. Hansen seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. OTHER ITEMS: There were none CONSIDERATION OF THE DECEMBER 2, 2004 MEETING MINUTES: Motion: Brooks made a motion to approve the minutes as typed and corrected. Anciaux seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. ADJOURNMENT: Motion: Koppes made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:29 pm. Shannon seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. Elizabeth Koppes, Secretary Minutes submitted by Candy Barnhill s:lpcdlrninutes/p&z12004/2004*12-16-O4p&z, doc Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission Attendance Record 2004 FORMAL MEETING Term Name Expires 01/15 02/19 03~04 04/01 04/15 05/06 05/20 06~03 06/17 07/01 07/15 08/05 08/24 09/02 09/16 10/07 10/21 11/04 12/02 12/16 D. Anciaux 05/06 X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X X B. Brooks 05/05 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B. Chait 05/06 X X X X X O X X X O O X O/E X X X X X X X A. Freerks 05/08 X O/E O/E X X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X J. Hansen 05/05 X X X X X X X X X O/E X X O O X X X X X X E. Koppes 05/07 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X D. Shannon 05/08 X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X X O/E X O/E X INFORMAL MEETING Term Name Expires 01/12 03/01 05/17 06/14 06/28 08/02 10/04 10/18 11101 11/18 12/13 D. Anciaux 05/06 X X X X X X O/E X X X X B. Brooks 05/05 O/E X X X X X X X O/E O/E X B. Chait 05/06 X O X O O O O O X O X A. Freerks 05/08 X O/E O/E X O/E X O/E X X X X J. Hansen 05/05 X X X O/E O/E X X X X X X E. Koppes 05/07 X X X X X X X X X X O/E D. Shannon 05/08 X X X X X X X O/E X O/E X Key: X = Present 0 Absent 0/E = AbsenffExcused N/M- No Meeting .... - Not a Member MINUTES FINAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION NOVEMBER 10, 2004-7:00 P.M. EMMA HARVAT HALL - CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Gunn, Michael Maharry, Mark McCallum, Jim Ponto, Amy Smothers, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: James Enloe, Jann Weismiller STAFF PRESENT: Shelley McCafferty OTHERS PRESENT: Mike Brennan, Terry Stumpf CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Maharry called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION: Certificate of Appropriateness: 721 N. Van Buren Street. McCafferty said the Commission approved a previous application for stoop work and a hand railing on this property. She said the owners of this house have a three-foot high limestone retaining wall along the alley. McCafferty said the owners would like to create a parking space there by removing a portion of the existing limestone wall and constructing a six-foot retaining wall using concrete keystone blocks. She said the wall should be high enough so that the parking space would not be easily visible from the street. McCafferty said the owners want to excavate a six foot section of the basement wall and install a service door to the basement. McCafferty said the foundation wall above grade has decorative brick veneer, but below grade it is clay tile. She said the applicant is proposing to stucco the clay tile with concrete plaster. McCafferty recommended that the stucco be of a similar color as the brick. McCafferty showed examples of similar situations at houses on Washington Street, Jefferson Street, and Oakland Avenue. Stumpf said that the door will be 36 inches with glass. He said the only place to park currently is inside the garage. McCallum asked if the keystone wall requires a building permit. McCafferty stated that a retaining wall over four feet high requires a permit. Stumpf added that the door would be centered under the window. McCafferty said this property is located in the Brown Street Historic District. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for a project at 721 North Van Buren Street subject to having a 36 inch door with a half light, a keystone retaining wall, and back plastering painted or stained a dark color similar to the color of the foundation brick. Gunn seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. Minutes: September 23, 2004. MOTION: Weitzel moved to approve the September 23, 2004 minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission, as written. McCallum seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. October 14, 2004. MOTION: Weitzel moved to approve the October 14, 2004 minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission, as written. McCallum seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. DISCUSSION: Insurance Claims: McCafferty said there are two cases pending from the spring hailstorm. She stated that one owner is using the damage to her advantage, in that the insurance company has agreed to pay for fiber cement board, because the aluminum siding that was on the house will be very difficult to find and to match with the rest of the siding. McCafferty said the other case involves a house that the owner would like to make the noncontributing house look better, but it is less clear what the insurance company will pay for and how much the insurance will cover once the existing siding is removed. She said that it is her opinion that if the owner makes a good faith effort to obtain an insurance claim that provides for compliance with the preservation regulations, that the commission should allow for some flexibility if there are unanticipated expenses once the siding is removed. Smothers stated that underinsurance of a property is not the Commission's problem, and there is still the burden of proof with regard to property damage. McCafferty said that insurance generally covers replacement value. She stated that if the owner wants to restore the house but doesn't know what is under the siding, then the cost cannot be estimated, and so the owner does not know if he can afford the restoration until the siding is removed. Weitzel said that if there is damage under the siding that may have come from years ago, it would be unrelated to any storm damage, and the owner of the property would be responsible for paying for any structural damage in such a case. He said the Commission can't accommodate allowing the cheapest thing to be used if the issue is to fix structural damage that would not be covered by insurance anyway. Smothers said these issues may have to be considered on a case by case basis. Weitzel said the Commission would not want to be in the position of allowing whatever the insurance company wants to pay for. The Commission agreed this will require addition discussion once an application is received. Northside Historic Districts. Maharry said that the City Council will hold its first public hearing on the Ronalds Street extension of the Brown Street District on Tuesday and will set a public hearing for the Gilbert/Linn Street Historic District. Maharry referred to Karin Franklin's note to the City Council summarizing the history and authority of the Historic Preservation Commission. McCafferty said this came about because there have been a changes in membership on the City Council, and they requested review of the Commission's purview. 2005 Annual Plannin,q Meeting. The Commission's annual planning meeting was rescheduled to 7 p.m. on Thursday, November 18th. OTHER: McCafferty stated that Justin Pardekooper has been appointed the newest member of the Commission. McCafferty said that Pardekooper is a contractor with experience in preservation work. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:42 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte s :lpcdlminutes/hpc120041hpc11- l O-O4.doc Historic Preservation Commission Attendance Record 2004 Ternl Name Expires 2/12 2/26 3/11 4/8 4/22 5/13 5/27 6/10 6/14 7/8 7/22 8/10 8/26 9/2 9/9 9/23 10/14 11/10 11/18 12/09 A. Smothers 3/29/05 X O/E X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X X J. Enloe 3/29/06 O/E X X × O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M. Gunn 3/29/07 O/E O/E X O/E O/E X X X X O X X X X X O X X M. Maharry 3/29/05 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X M. McCallum 3/29/06 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X J. Ponto 3/29/07 X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X O/E O/E X P. Sueppel 3/29/06 O/E O/E X X X X X X O X O ............................ J. Weissmiller 3/29/06 ........................................................ O X O/E O/E T. Weitzel 3/29/05 X X X X O/E X O/E X X X X X X X X X X X J. Zimmer 3/29/07 ............ O/E O/E O/E X O/E X O O X X O O O ........ : Key: X - Present O - Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting ..... Not a Member Iowa Historic Preservation Commission Approved 2005 Work Plan The Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission held its annual planning session Thursday, November 18, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. in the lobby conference room at 410 E. Washington Street, at which time it discussed and prioritized its activities and projects for the 2005 calendar year. The following members were present: Michael Maharry, Chair; Michael Gunn; Mark McCallum; Jim Ponto; Amy Smothers; and Tim Weitzei, Vice-chair. Each year the Commission holds a planning session to review its progress in implementing the goals and objectives of the Historic Preservation Plan, and to set objectives for the upcoming year. This report details the results of that planning session, and is intended to serve as a guide for the Commission's activities for the upcoming calendar year. Projects for 2005 The Commission plans to focus on establishing financial incentives to encourage the rehabilitation of historic homes and commercial buildings, and preservation awareness and education. Having completed most of the suvey and designation recommendation from the 1992 Historic Preservation Plan, the Commission also identified the need to update the Preservation Plan to provide guidance for the next 10 years. Historic Preservation Planning Historic Preservation Plan Apply for HRDP or CLG grant to update the 1992 Historic Preservation Plan. Central District Plan Participate in the Central District planning process. Historic Preservation Ordinance Continue to review and comment on the rewrite of the Uniform Development Code. Financial Incentives The Commission will pursue the establishment of local financial incentives for historic preservation. Potential financial incentives programs identified are: · Establish local tax abatement program for the improvement and rehabilitation of historic properties. · Promote use of existing funding programs such as TARP and State of Iowa Historical Property Tax Exemption Program.. · Partner with private organizations, such as Friends of Historic Preservation and local banks, to establish a grant program. · Establish a revolving loan fund for historic preservation. · Establish conservation easement program to reduce property taxes for historic buildings. The Commission will consider applying for either a CLG or HRDP grant to hire a consultant to assist with establishing incentive programs. Urban Revitalization Work with the City and downtown property owners to encourage fa(;ade improvements through the use of the Central Business District Urban Revitalization Plan. Provide specific design guidelines and assistance for fa(;ade improvements that would support the downtown character. Education/Public Awareness Neighborhood Brochures For 2005, the Commission intends to make education and public awareness one of two primary goals. As such, more focused efforts will be made to complete the design and publication of new neighborhood brochures, which has been on on-going project of the Commission. Website Create a more comprehensive and user-friendly historic preservation website. Provide information regarding historic preservation regulations, technical assistance, National Register nomination and survey documents, historic neighborhood and landmark information, and useful links and publications. Notification Letters The Commission plans to continue their efforts to notify contractors, property owners, and realtors of the location of historic and conservation districts, and the applicable regulations. District Signs Install signs demarcating existing conservation districts and new local and National Register historic districts. Historic Preservation Week Celebration Friends of Historic Preservation and the Historic Preservation Commission will host their 21 st Historic Preservation Recognition. Local historic property owners and contractors who have completed historically sensitive painting, rehabilitating and maintenance will be recognized. The Commission and Friends are also planning to potentially expand the Historic Preservation Week festivities. District and Landmark Designation Downtown Historic District The Survey and Evaluation of the Central Business District was completed in 2001 and it was determined that a portion of the downtown is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. At this time, the Commission does not intend to nominate a downtown historic district, but will work with the downtown community if they decide to pursue historic designation. Goosetown Conservation District The Historic Preservation Commission has received a petition from residents in the Goosetown neighborhood requesting the designation of the neighborhood as a historic or conservation district. Based on one neighborhood meeting, it does not appear that at this time there is sufficient support to designate a conservation district. Onqoin,q Issuse University Relations Work with the University of Iowa as necessary regarding preservation issues in Iowa City. Provide educational and technical expertise to the University. Landmark Identification and Designation Designate all National Register Properties that are not Iowa City Landmarks for local landmark status. Identify additional properties that are historically significant. Historic Preservation Commission Attendance Record 2004 Term Name Expires 2/12 2~26 3/11 4/8 4~22 5/13 5/27 6/10 6/14 7/8 7~22 8/10 8126 9/2 9/9 9/23 10/14 11110 11/18 A. Smothers 3/29/05 X O/E X X × X O/E X X × X X X X X X X X X J. Enloe 3/29/06 O/E X X X O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M. Gunn 3/29/07 O/E O/E X O/E O/E × X X X O X X X X X O X X X M. Maharry 3/29/05 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X M. McCallum 3/29/06 X X X X X X X X X × X X X X X X X X X 5 Pardekooper 3/29/06 ........................................................................ J. Ponto 3/29/07 X X X X × X X O/E X X X X X X X O/E O/E X X P. Sueppel 3/29/06 O/E O/E X X × X X X O X O ........................ J Weissmiller 3/29/06 ........................................................ O X O/E O/E O T. Weitzel 3/29/05 X X X X O/E X O/E X X X X X X X X X X X O J. Zimmer 3/29/07 ............ O/E O/E O/E X O/E X O O X X O O O .... Key: X = Present O -- Absent O/E -- Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting ..... Not a Member