Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-03-01 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND Z. ONING COMMISSION JANUARY 6, 2005 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Freerks, Jerry Hansen, Bob Brooks, Don Anciaux, Benjamin Chait, Dean Shannon MEMBERS EXCUSED: Beth Koppes STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Mitch Behr OTHERS PRESENT: Bill Frantz, Robert Croush, Klm Kirchner, Ted Halm, Regina Alatalo, John Arthur, Victoria Concha, Larry Schnitjer, John Arthur, Mary Ott, Jeff Jansenins RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:. Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, .SUB04-00031., a final plat of Saddlebrook Meadows Part 1, an 8.95-acre, 47-1ot residential subdivision located south of Whispering Meadows Drive and west of Pinto Lane subject to Staff approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to consideration by City Council. Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, CZ04-00002, a rezoning from County Resort District (A-2) to Suburban Residential (RS) for 3.25 acres of property located east of Sand Road and south of Sycamore Street SE, subject to the unpaved driveway to Sand Road being closed and that subdivision of the property be limited to two lots until such time that the property is annexed into the City. Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, 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 Highway One, West of Highway 218 and east of Kitty Lee Road. CALL TO ORDER: Anciaux called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. REZONING/SUBDIVlSlON ITEMS: REZ004-00017/SUB04-0001~, 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 Overlay - Low Density Single-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 Staff had received a revised plan that addressed some of the concerns raised by the public, the Commission and the Staff at the 12/13/04 meeting. One of the major changes made was a revision to the proposed alley system in the center of the block. The alley had been revised to remove a leg of it which allowed more open space in the outlot for the private park. Staff feel this was a real improvement which addressed the concern about the amount of open space. Additional items of concern or questions raised at the previous meeting were: 5-foot setbacks: The Commission had requested an evaluation to determine if this would be compatible with the rest of the neighborhood. Normally a setback in an RS-5 zone is required to be 20-feet. The applicant was requesting that the setback be reduced to 5 feet. Staff had suggested to the applicant to use a 7-foot setback which would still allow room in the alley for cars to park behind the garages but provide more of a setback. The applicant had proposed to landscape the 5-feet, which Staff felt would help to buffer the housing units from the street. Miklo said one of the reasons for having a 20-foot setback Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes January 6, 2005 Page 2 was to provide privacy to the dwelling unit and a buffer from the sidewalk/street. A principle that had been successfully used in other communities and planned developments in Iowa City was the use of a front porch in lieu of a yard to provide a buffer. Small entry porches had been proposed for some of the units. Another technique that could be used was to increase the grade of the dwelling to approximately 3-feet above the sidewalk so the residents inside the dwelling units would actually be above pedestrians on the sidewalk which would help to provide privacy as well. The applicant had agreed to place the floor grade 30-inches above the sidewalk. Staff continue to suggest that the building be moved back two more feet to allow slightly more of a buffer. Compatibility with zero-lot lines across the street. Staff were concerned that as submitted the plan didn't address this design concern. Staff have suggested that the applicant look at alternative designs to make the two sides of the street more compatible. Landscaping for the larger development. When the initial part of Village Green South had been approved there had been a landscape plan for the stormwater detention area which had not been installed by the previous developer. Staff have suggested that as part of the planned development process, the landscaping be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any of the new buildings. This would allow construction to begin but the units could not be occupied until the landscaping is completed. Landscaping for individual lots wouldn't have to be installed until the units were built and occupied, but for the common open spaces it was within the City's preview to require the landscaping upfront before the buildings are occupied. Traffic When Sterling Drive is extended to the east to connect to the existing Wintergreen Drive there may be more traffic in the neighborhood. Transportation Planning had looked at the street and street network in this area. Sterling Drive and Dover Street are both 28-feet wide streets with parking allowed on both sides of the street. The Transportation Planners recommended parking on the street as it would serve to slow traffic down in a situation like this. Because this would be a circuitous route to points further east, to go through this neighborhood would require several turns on curvy streets which could serve as a disincentive to use these local streets versus staying on Scott Boulevard and using Muscatine Avenue. Wellington Drive, a collector street to the north would also pick up some of the potential new traffic. As far as Staff could tell currently this area was not being used as a cut-through, Staff project Sterling Drive and Wintergreen Drive would not be used as cut-through streets. Existinq speedinq on Sterlinq Drive The neighborhood could apply for the City's traffic calming program and look at techniques to slow traffic if it was found to be a problem. The City would first do a study to measure traffic volumes and speeds to see if they were unusual in that area. Staff's recommendation on the circulation pattern was that the plan before the Commission was a good design. It had been planned that Sterling Drive would extend to the east and eventually provide a secondary outlet to Scott Boulevard. It would be a benefit for emergency vehicles by providing a second way into the neighborhood. Staff wouId not recommend any changes in the street pattern. Existing Draina,qe City Engineering had reviewed the concept for the drainage system. The grade of the farm field was actually higher than the subdivision to the west so there had been some pooling and ponding of water. With the proposed development and Sterling Drive being extended to the east, the grade would be changed. The proposed streets and storm sewers would be designed to draw the water to the detention basin. Two storm sewers which would improve the drainage situation for existing properties on Sterling Court had also been proposed. City Engineers feel the situation would improve and not become worse with the proposed development. Miklo showed an illustration of the planned development that was approved in 1993 and detailed proposed changes. He said Staff feel it would be possible to increase the density through innovative designs such as the alley but there needed to be more work in terms of increasing the compatibility of the development on the east side with what was proposed in the center of the development. Staff recommended deferral of the application to allow the applicant more time to address the design issue. PubIic discussion was opened. Bill Frantz, partner in Third Street Partners, applicant for proposed plat. Frantz said they had developed the Wellington Condos to the north, both he and his partner lived in the area so they were neighbors to this development. They'd purchased the land in 2001 so they would have a say in how the remainder of Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes January 6, 2005 Page 3 the land in Village Green South developed. They were very concerned about it because of the project to the north and wanted it to be developed in a way that they felt was a proper design. City Staff and the developers had worked on the list of concerns previously discussed by Miklo over the past couple of months. The final issue was the duplex lots on the east side and on the south side which would back up to the railroad tracks. Frantz said it was their intention to market and sell the duplex lots to builders and/or to private individuals. The market was currently in need of duplex lots. They'd like to have the ability to allow the purchaser to come in with the design of their choice and build on their lots. That would be similar to what had already occurred in the developed area to the east. Robed Craush., 42 Pond View Court, said at the last meeting he'd asked about the issue of noise from the buildings located across the railroad tracks. He was not sure if that issue had been addressed. Had a buffer or noise barrier been planned for this issue? Miklo said the plan showed a row of white pines along the railroad tracks which would be planted as part of the landscaping development. Frantz said the minimum size of planting for those pine trees would be six-foot in height. Kim Kirchner, 2906 Sterling Drive, asked how many units would be in the center area - had it increased or decreased. Miklo said in that particular area it had not changed. One of the single family lots had been removed to allow the remaining lots to meet the required minimum 60-foot lot width and 8,000-square foot lot area. Overall compared to what had been approved in 1993, there would be 17 more units. Kirchner asked if the open space at the south end had increased. Miklo said it had increased slightly, it was proposed to be 17,000-square feet. There would be grass, trees and a playground area which would be privately owned. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Chair made a motion to approve REZ004-00017/SUB04-00017, a rezoning from Low Density Single Family Residential (RS-5) zone to Planned Development Housing Overlay - Low Density Single- 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 without any design restrictions. Shannon seconded the motion. Freerks said she felt that would not be a good course of action. This was an OPDH, 17-lots were being gained and more thought should be put into the way the two sides of the street be put together. She felt that was what an OPDH was for. If it were just a rezoning to an RS-8 she might feel differently. The two sides as they currently were were not compatible. She felt it was up to the Commission to try to make this a unified neighborhood. The developer himself had expressed his concern regarding the design of the neighborhood. Freerks said she felt another couple of weeks would have a better end result. Chait said he couldn't think of other places in the City that were similarly developed where lots were sold other than the Peninsula where there was a design standard on a lot. Miklo said that was not correct. The only place in an OPDH where designs were generally not seen was RS-5, single family lots. These were not single-family lots, they were attached zero-lot lines on fairly small lots. In planned developments the building elevations were always seen by the Commission except for single-family homes. It was a requirement of the zone that the Commission approve a specific plan. Chait asked how were the concerns and issues resolved in Sand Hill in terms of higher design requirements. Miklo said those were single family lots. Staff's proposal had been to put some regulations on some of the narrower lots. City Council had chosen to require a 25-foot setback in lieu of the standard 20-foot setback. Chait said if a set of duplex lots were for sale, the builder or future homeowner would have to choose from a pre-determined design in order to get it approved. Freerks said there could be a group of designs or certain standards that would need to be adhered to. As it was now she didn't think it was a cohesive neighborhood, it needed more work. Chait said his question had to do with property rights and free Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes January 6,2005 Page 4 market. If a person wanted to buy a lot and build a home there, the Commission was trying to put design standards on what could go on to that particular lot. Freerks said 17-additional units were being allowed in an RS-5 zone. Chait said he was looking for a context in which that criteria existed in. Miklo said in an RS-8 zone a duplex or zero-lot line could be built without any parameters other than the setbacks. Because this was an RS-5 zone, the planned development process called for some parameters and design considerations so that there were assurances that the neighborhood would be compatible with itself and the larger RS-5 zone., which included the properties on Sterling Drive and Sterling Court. Chait said he was trying to understand where a builder now in the City did not did have the choice to do anything except something that was already approved. Miklo said in any RS-5 or RS-8 zone, but there would be set-back and height standards. This was not a new precedent that was being set, there were several PDH's on the west side of town. Hansen asked if Sand Hill had been one. Miklo said for the narrow lots 30- and 35-foot lots there had been very specific plans that the Commission had approved. For the other lots there had been parameters. Shannon Drive, Irving Avenue, Mackinaw Village located off Foster Road were all examples of when there had been very specific plans that the Commission had approved. Also much of the west side of town off of Mormon Trek Boulevard had been developed as an OPDH in this very same manner. Miklo said once the zoning was in place, it was not a concern of the City whether the developer or an individual built the dwelling unit. Chait said then his question for the developer would be, "What's the problem." Miklo said Staff had suggested that the developer chose a menu of designs. Staff's concern wasn't the style of the fa(;ade of the buildings but the placement of the building on the lot, that the developers try to make it more compatible with what was on the other side of the street. With a planned development, style and architecture could be dictated which was not necessarily what Staff was trying to do. They were requesting the developers make an effort to make the two sides of the street compatible. The plans that Staff and the Commission had seen so far didn't necessarily do that. Anciaux asked for a clarification of which were the duplex lots. Miklo said lots 65-84 and 131-134 were zero lot lines, the houses would basically straddle the lot line. Lots 85-102 and 111-130 were zero lot lines except they were much smaller lots for which the developer had requested the 5-foot setback and the alley and driveways would be located in the rear. Miklo said for the original plan there had been a lot of negotiation and discussion about this. There had been an attempt to make both sides of the street the same. A principal of zoning was that you strived to have things on both sides of the street compatible or comparable. That was what was changing in the area of increased density. Shannon said he was really confused. As long as he'd been on the Commission, they'd talked about having different types of housing thrown together and not cookie cutter. He didn't understand having everything the same on both sides of the street all over town. He could think of streets all over town where things were hugely different on both sides of the street. One place that came to mind was north of Rochester Avenue on First Avenue. There were three and four story buildings located across from condominiums, it made for nice diversity. He thought they tried to plan for diversity. Shannon said he absolutely was not in favor of the City having a set of plans and presenting that to a builder who'd purchased the lot. He was not comfortable with it. If he purchased a lot, he didn't want to have only three, four or ten sets of plans that he could chose from. Builders had successfully built very nice neighborhoods north of downtown, he knew residents who lived there and were very happy with what they had. Miklo said that to allow that to occur, the area would require RS-8 zoning and not an RS-5 zone with an OPDH. Freerks said a five- or seven-foot setback had been proposed. She didn't see that as a continuation of the previous neighborhood, it was a very big difference and drastic change from one side of the street to the other. It was their job to make sure that it was a neighborhood that worked. Freerks said she didn't think they needed to set too specific of sets of plans but what the Commission did need a few more outlines in terms of what they were expecting. A seven-foot setback and the addition of 17 lots was a big thing. If the Commission wanted the developer to be able to build what they wanted without restriction then they might need to consider zoning to RS-8. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes January 6, 2005 Page 5 Chair said if the City and the Commission had already "done this" then his concern about setting a precedent was not valid. He understood the tradeoffs for a PDH development. If the Commission voted this down, then the developer would be back to square one' and that wouldn't work either. Chait said to withdraw his motion would allow for time to resolve whatever needed to be resolved as long as it was not precedent setting, which was what he was being told. His concern was with micromanaging and telling a private owner what they had to do. Miklo said the applicant had the choice of building what was previously approved in 1993 or building single family homes according to the RS-5 zone or submitting plans as required by the OPDH zone. There were options available. Chair said he'd like to withdraw the motion for the sake of not having this thing die. Freerks said she'd prefer that as well, she didn't want to have to go back to square one. Shannon withdrew his second to the motion. Motion: Freerks made a motion to defer REZ004-00017/SUB04-00017. Hansen seconded the motion. Brooks said if they were deferring, he felt it should be part of the motion what would be expected to be resolved by the next meeting. Chait said the issue that needed to be addressed was the design standards on the lots. Brooks asked if the 5-foot versus 7-foot setback was still an issue. Freerks said the developer had had plenty of conversations with Staff about that already but it was still an issue. Miklo said the set- back and the design of the zero-lot line duplex units were still unresolved. Other items on the 'laundry list' of concerns from the previous meeting had been addressed. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. Miklo said for members of the audience, the next meeting would be January 20, 2005. Letters of Notice were not sent again after an item had been on the Commission's agenda the first time. SUB04-00031, discussion of an application submitted by Saddlebrook Meadows LLC for a final plat of Sadd~ebrook Meadows Part 1, an 8.95-acre, 47-1ot residential subdivision located south of Whispering Meadows Drive and west of Pinto Lane. Miklo said this was the final plat. It was a planned development and the Commission had seen very specific designs. The Commission had approved the rezoning and the OPDH plan on this last year. This made it official by final platting the lots and the configuration of the lots shown in the preliminary plat. There were also legal papers and construction drawings. The plat had been revised and the technical deficiencies noted had been corrected. Further work was needed on the legal papers and construction drawings. Staff recommended approval of SUB04-00031 subject to Staff approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to consideration by City Council. Public discussion was opened. There was none. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Brooks made a motion to approve SUB04-00031 a final plat of Saddlebrook Meadows Part 1, an 8.95-acre, 47-1ot residential subdivision located south of Whispering Meadows Drive and west of Pinto Lane subject to Staff approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to consideration by City Council. Freerks seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. CZ-04-0000~, discussion of an application submitted by Annetta Hull for a rezoning from County Resort District (A-2) to Suburban Residential (RS) for 3.25-acres of property located east of Sand Road and south of Sycamore Street. Miklo said an existing house was located on the northern part of the property and another house on the southern portion of the property. Two houses located on one lot was not allowed by either City or County zoning in most circumstances. The property was located in the Iowa City growth area and was a candidate for annexation in the future. The fringe area agreement indicated that the City should look at those areas very closely. In this particular case the rezoning would allow the owner to split the property in Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes January 6, 2005 Page 6 two so that each existing house could be sold separately. The actual rezoning would not create any additional building lots. The City had a concern about an existing driveway on to Sand Road which it would like to see closed as a condition of this rezoning because Sand Road was an arterial street. Staff also recommended that this be subject to being limited to the two proposed lots at this time. If this property were annexed into the City, there could be further development under City standards. Staff recommended approval subject to the closure of the unpaved driveway to Sand Road and that subdivision of the property be limited to two lots until such time that the property is annexed into the City. Hansen asked how many units could be built on Suburban Residential. Miklo said he thought one acre lots. The A-2 Resort Zone in the county had often been used near the river, the idea had been for use for summer cottages or dwellings of that type. Hansen asked if the South District Plan called for that area to be multi-family housing. Miklo said it showed the potential for neighborhood commercial at this location, perhaps a convenience store. Otherwise it was a Iow density housing area. (The plan does indicate the potential for townhouses on Sycamore Street.) Public discussion was opened. There was none. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Hansen made a motion to approve CZ-04-00002 a rezoning from County Resort District (A-2) to Suburban Residential (RS) for 3.25-acres of property located east of Sand Road and south of Sycamore Street, SE subject to the unpaved driveway to Sand Road being closed and that the subdivision of the property be limited to two lots until such time that the property is annexed into the City. Freerks seconded the motion The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM: Discussion of 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. Miklo said a full staff report which had been provided at the previous Commission meeting was available for any members of the audience who wished a copy of it. The current Comprehensive Plan showed that this area was appropriate for Iow density residential, the same as for the areas to the north and to the west. The reason for that designation was because at the time the Southwest District Plan was drawn up, there had been an inability of the City to provide sanitary sewer to this area. The larger Comprehensive Plan talked about the potential for larger commercial development at this interchange rather than at the Melrose Avenue interchange. The applicant had worked with City Engineering staff and had devised a way to provide sanitary sewer to this area. They had requested that the City change the Comprehensive Plan to show commercial at this intersection. Miklo said Staff feel now that this area can be provided sewer service at no great expense to the City and there were logical reasons consistent with the larger vision of the Comprehensive Plan that would make this appropriate for commercial, i.e. its location at a highly visible highway interchange and the location at the highway made it conducive for commercial development and possibly less conducive for residential development due to the noise at the interchange. Staff were cognizant of the residential area to the north and the potential residential area to the west. The proposed plan showed an office commercial buffer between the commercial at the interchange and the existing residential properties. Miklo said with the buffer being shown, this would be an appropriate change to the land use map of the Comprehensive Plan and Staff recommend approval of the proposed change. Brooks asked in the area directly west of the commercial why didn't the City look at it being something more of an intensively used office commercial area or the use of duplexes or town-houses as a buffer or transition zone between the residential and commercial zones. Miklo said that was something the City would probably look at in the future. There is only limited sewer capacity available and not sufficient capacity to serve the area to the west. It might be a number of years before sewer capacity was available so that is why it was still being shown as iow density. It would require a major improvement to the sanitary sewer system and Staff had identified it as a desirable to do in the Comprehensive Plan. Staff did not anticipate more intensive traffic on Kitty Lee Road. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes January 6, 2005 Page 7 Public discussion was opened. Ted Halm, 4090 Kitty Lee Road, resided at this address for 30 years. He said in terms of the long range Comprehensive Plan for the Southwest District, it called for large lot rural residential. In Item E of the annexation, there was no long range rural residential in the Plan. Since they were looking at buffers he wondered why the City didn't have more rural residential than all commercial. Further down Kitty Lee Road, there were a lot of long established rural residential residences that had at least an acre of property each. The long range plan drawn up for south west Iowa City included a lot of rural residential but it was not included on the annexation of the 60+ acres. To him it woutd be a logical buffer to have some residential in the plan. Instead of having soft commercial as a buffer behind their properties, why couldn't it become some type of rural area for houses instead of all commercial. Halm said he'd had conversations with John Yapp and Rick Dvorak, they'd recommended he attend the Commission meeting. He'd been out of town or would have attended the previous Commission meeting. Halm said he had no qualms about commercial developing on the south side of Hwy 1. If a lift station were going to be built to support all commercial development, Halm felt there should be some way to build a lift station to support rural residential if that was what the long range plan called for. The long range plan showed the extension of Kitty Lee Road and rural residential built all around that area, so why wasn't it a part of the City's plan at this time. Miklo said when the developer had initially approached Staff about annexation into the City, Staff had responded that if the area were to become some sort of commercial there needed to be some type of buffer. An Office Commercial zone was often used as a buffer from intensive commercial to residential. It was an ideal buffer in that it had Iow key uses in most locations, was well landscaped and there was not the same level of signage or lighting seen with retail or intensive commercial developments. There were many places in the City where single family homes were located next to an office zone and had tended to be compatible. Miklo said if the proposed buffer area were to become rural residential, then there would be no buffer for people who purchased those lots. Another consideration was the topography and how the property would be accessed. There was a concept plan that might or might not come to fruition that showed the access, based on topography, coming from the south from the more intensive commercial area. It would be wider, more conducive to commercial property and would not have residential traffic traveling through an intense commemial area. That is one reason why Staff felt the commercial office was more appropriate there and a better buffer than rural residential would be. Regardless of what it would be zoned, there would also be a large vacant open-space area for storm water which Staff felt would also provide a good buffer on Outlot A. Miklo said as an example, the proposed Commercial Office area could be similar to the one on Mormon Trek Boulevard where there was commercial development, the car lots and then the Farm Bureau insurance agency beside the residential area. Miklo distributed copies of the landscape plan that had been received from the developer. Regina Alatalo, 3671 Olde Oak Lane, said the way Item D in the copy of the Comprehensive Plan read, reading it exactly, it would include the residential area and all the houses would be changed to general office commemial. Any homeowner could sell their property and it would general office commercial. She requested Staff to review the wording. Miklo said if approved, the colored map would be included in the Comprehensive Plan. The language she was reading from would not appear in the Comprehensive Plan. Alatalo stated she had concerns about the: Fence: if this were rezoned to office commercial, what type of fence would the developer be required to install. Currently it was a rickety old wire fence with barbed wire at the top which was not a good barrier from residential to commercial. When there had been cows behind her property, they'd had cows in their yard all the time. She asked Staff to look into this and see what the requirements would be. Buffer/Tree size: at the previous Commission meeting, persons from a different development had had starter trees used for a buffer and had to wait 10- to 15-years for the trees to mature. She requested something larger than a starter tree be used for the buffer as the commercial development and its occupation would begin very soon. She didn't want to wait 10- to 15-years for the buffer to grow, they Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes January 6, 2005 Page 8 deserved privacy now. She requested that the buffer trees be planted before construction actually started. Traffic: it was already very dangerous to drive on the highway now. There were two lanes of traffic exiting and entering Iowa City. The lanes exiting town merged into one lane, exactly where Kitty Lee Road was. Alatalo said she had almost been rear-ended numerous times when she was slowing down to turn onto Kitty Lee Road and other vehicles were speeding up to exit Iowa City. Persons also tried to pass on the left-hand side which was not possible because of the median. She'd almost been side-swiped numerous times as well. Pulling off onto the gravel shoulder to turn was not safe either because of the way the shoulder sloped. Something definitely needed to be done. She requested that the traffic study be performed when students were back in town as traffic was considerably heavier when students were in town. Aisc that the study to be done during rush hour between 6:30 - 8:30 am and 4:30-6:30 pm were the most dangerous times. There had been an accident at the corner of Kitty Lee Road and Hwy 1 which had resulted in a fatality. John Arthur, 4104 Kitty Lee Road SW, said with respect to the Comprehensive Plan he wished to reiterate what his neighbors had already said. The Comprehensive Plan showed intensive commercial which in and of itself was intense. Theirs were single family residences, not multi-family residences, condos or duplexes which abutted the soft commercial area in the example given on Mormon Trek Boulevard. He felt there should be more of a residential type buffer rather than commercial type buffer between their properties and the proposed office commercial area. The buffer would have a direct effect on them as property owners because their property would be devalued if it sat right next to a commercial area. One map showed lots behind the houses on Kitty Lee Road next to the pink area. There were no buildings on those lots right now, access was currently from Olde Oak Lane which was a dead end. The map showed the road turning south. Miklo said the road actually was not there. Staff had used a plat map which probably was not the best map to use for illustrative purposes. Arthur asked if were an accurate map of what would be approved with the new Comprehensive Plan because it didn't conform with the next rezoning item on the agenda. Miklo said Comprehensive Plan maps were generally conceptual maps which generally didn't follow property lines. The map was very conceptual, it was meant to convey an idea instead of a specific plan. He referred to the Carson Lake area shown on the plan. In the future the streets wouldn't necessarily be laid out as shown but the drawing did show the idea of a stormwater facility and park around it. The plat and the rezoning pattern would be much more specific. The community commercial and intensive commercial were both shown in red. Brooks asked if it would be possible to revise the Comprehensive Plan map so it would more accurately show the lots as they were proposed to be, readjust the border along the pink area and expand the area where the community commercial would be so it reflected what the Commission was actually rezoning. Miklo said Staff could update the map, take off the lots that were platted but not actually built and convert the area in yellow so it more accurately reflected where the change in zoning would take place. Victoria Concha, 4086 Kitty Lee Road, requested that the pink area not be revised and be left as a buffer zone which would keep the commercial development to the east further away from their homes. Freerks said the Comprehensive Plan map was a 'blob' map that showed approximations. Miklo said the difficulty with Concha's suggestion was that it would require the extension of the private street and Harpin Street to develop those lots residentially. That street wasn't anything Staff would want to put more traffic on so it was Staff's feeling that it was better to leave that area independent and have the development feed to the south rather than back through. Halm asked if there was other soft commercial in the Comprehensive Plan. Was that part of the City's long range Southwest District plan? Miklo said they would become part of it if this amendment to the Comprehensive Plan was adopted. The next item on the agenda was to consider a request to rezone this area to Office Commercial. If it was zoned such, it would require a rezoning and a hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council before it could be some other type of commercial. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes January 6, 2005 Page 9 Halm said there was a major pipeline that ran through that property that would have to be moved. He'd been told there was projection for a road to connect to Kitty Lee Road coming over the top of the pipeline. Did Staff have more information on that? Miklo said the property owner was looking at moving the pipeline along Kitty Lee Road so it would become part of the buffer between Kitty Lee Road and the development. The developer's concept plan showed the potential for a road intersecting with Kitty Lee Road. Depending upon the particular easement for a pipeline, a road could generally run across the pipeline but not run perpendicular over the top of the pipes in most cases. Halm said there was an approximate 2.5-acre lake located 'back there'. Would the lake stay where it was at or would it be moved? Miklo said he'd ask the applicant's consultant to address that particular question as he didn't have the information for it. Halm said surveyors had been working back there for quite some time, were they surveying for the buffer? Miklo said he'd defer to the applicant's consultant for that answer. Halm asked how big would the buffer be, how much space between the property, the commercial and the residential? Brooks said the plan said 15-feet on center, so two rows of white pines, 15-feet on center, eventually looking at two rows 40-50 feet in width of plant material. Shannon asked Halm if he felt his whole neighborhood was totally against the Office Commercial. Halm said he couldn't speak for everyone but most of them knew something was going to happen off Hwy 1 and they were fine with that. Their concern was, most of them had resided in their rural residential for over 30-years and what was going to happen immediately behind them. What type of traffic patterns would develop, there were children who played out back, they just didn't know what was going to happen to their road. They were a small knit group and had always seemed to get along. At one time he'd tried to purchase the lot behind him. He'd been told that Olde Oak Lane couldn't go any further because it was too ctose to Hwy 218 to make a turn there, so that lane would be dead-ended where it was now forever. No one had addressed the fact as to why a buffer couldn't be rural residential as opposed to commercial. Freerks said that if it was rural residential someone would live there and then they would want a buffer. It might be a buffer for Halm and existing residents, but it wouldn't be a buffer for the new lots. The City was talking about a true buffer, the rows of white pines. Halm said originally the lots behind him had been rural residential but now approximately four had been made into commercial. That was his biggest concern and the only thing he was not comfortable with yet. Larry Schnittier, MMS Consultants, said he was not an engineer he was a landscape architect and land planner. Outlot A was approximately 5.8 acres which was considerably more than the 3 or 4 single family lots that had not been developed. Extendibility of Olde Oak Lane to serve the lots. Schnittjer said he believed the information relayed by Halm had come from the County to Mr. Davis subsequent to the construction of Hwy 218. Schnittjer had not investigated whether or not if Olde Oak Lane could be developed. There would be some topographic constraints which would make it tough to do. Pond would not stay as it was. There were a certain amount of wetlands in those areas which needed to be accommodated. Part of that would be a modification of the pond. There would be some pond in that area but it would be recreated to be more of a wetland type facility. It probably would not be as deep but the total area around the pond that was allocated as green space would be much greater than what the lots which were being removed would be. The developer was in the process of obtaining the Corps of Engineers approval. The Corps didn't like to give final approval until the City had given approval and the City wouldn't give approval until the Corps had, so there was a work-through process to make everyone happy at once. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes January 6, 2005 Page 10 Pipeline could be crossed perpendicular in most situations. In some situations where there was an existing pipeline, the pipe had to be excavated and reinforced. There were three pipelines that went through there, it was not such a problem with them. Tree Buffer- Minimum size of planting for evergreen material in Iowa City was 6-foot. Depending on what type of materials were available from nurseries they might be able to possibly do more. On a particular project, Mr. Frantz had been able to put in larger stock because it had been available from the nursery. Schnittjer said they'd look for the larger stock but didn't know if they could find it. Buffer timinq - No particular information available on that. At this point in time it could be included in the Commission's zoning agreement. Width of Buffer - trees would actually cover more of the ground area than what had been allocated. A 25- foot wide strip had been allocated. The trees could be planted up to that 25-foot but they would spread out a lot more than that. Fence - No discussion with Davis yet, Schnittjer will discuss it with him. Halm said John Yapp had said that the buffer possibly could be expanded from 25-feet to 40- or 50-feet to the east so there would be more buffer to the east. Would that be possible? Schnittjer said at this point in time he was not authorized to give any more information. Alatalo said she was not representing their neighborhood. From her perspective they were not trying to be difficult, she just wanted it done right from the git-go. Many of her neighbors had lived there for a long time and had put a lot of money into their homes. They wanted to know that they were going to have adequate buffers and to protect the value of their property so if and when they decided to sell their properties that they'd get the money out of it they put into it. John Arthur., 4104 Kitty Lee Road, said at the last meeting he'd inquired about how Outlot A was going to be developed and landscaped. Both he and Ken Moss had indicated at the last meeting that they'd prefer to see the landscape buffer brought down behind their properties, but that was not how it was designed on the landscape plan. He had questions about the ownership of Outlot A and the long-term management of it and enforcement of it being maintained. The deep water pond was proposed to become a shallow pond and wetland area. Arthur's concern was that it wouldn't just become a mosquito haven and that the run-off be managed properly so that it wouldn't flood the area and kill whatever was there. Anciaux said Arthur's concerns would be more appropriate to the annexation discussion. Public discussion was closed. Miklo said there had been interest shown in having the Comprehensive Plan corrected to show certain lots as pink and removal of the street. The map was conceptual. The Commission could choose to direct Staff to do so or leave it as it was. Motion: Freerks made a motion to approve 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 subject to Staff's correction of the map by removing the street and with the understanding that the map was conceptual, not specific. Brooks seconded the motion. Shannon said the reason he asked about the possible transitions was often times when transitioning from single-family housing to a different zoning, a different type of housing would be used to facilitate the transition. He wondered if anyone else had given that consideration. He'd been trying to visualize what it would be like to have soft commercial against single-family homes. In fairness to the current residents, they should have some type of idea what was going to happen. Hansen said he usually was very reluctant to change a Comprehensive Plan but this intersection was a natural for commercial. If handled properly, this piece of property could make a good addition to the commercial base of Iowa City. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes January 6, 2005 Page 11 Freerks said she agreed with Hansen. The reasons why it was not outlined as commercial initially had to do with sewers. This was probably what would best serve the larger community at that padicular intersection. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. ANNEXATION ITEMS: ANN04-00001/REZ04-00030, discussion of an application submitted by James Davis for a Comprehensive Plan amendment, voluntary annexation of approximately 62.03 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 (10.92 acres) and RR-1, Rural Residential (2.83 acres) for property east of Kitty Lee Road including Highway 1 and west of Highway 218. Miklo said a full report had been provided at the previous meeting, copies were available. Staff was waiting on the traffic study that would address the traffic implications of this development. They would be a major part this proposal, Staff recommended that this be deferred until the traffic study was completed. There had been a question about Outlot A in terms of maintenance and responsibility. Outlot A was shown on the concept plan but it really was not a part of the annexation or rezoning. That would come at a later time when this was platted. Similar to a homeowners association, there would need to be a business owners or property owners association that would be responsible for the maintenance of the pond to make sure that it drained and functioned properly as a detention faciIity. The wetlands improvements associated with that would also be a part of that requirement. Those details would be contained in the legal papers at the time ©utlot A was final platted. Anciaux asked Miklo to review the traffic circulation. Miklo said with a commercial development of this size there was a proposal to have the extension of Naples Avenue to the north which would serve the commercial development including the commercial office, retail, intensive commercial and another street that would go back to Kitty Lee Road. At a minimum, Kitty Lee Road would need to be improved to provide access to the commercial development and there should be an escrow fund for a portion of the eventual long-term improvement of Kitty Lee Road. The City was looking at the possibility of a traffic signal being required at Naples Avenue. Traffic studies would also examine the implications of traffic from the exit ramp from the Highway, the long-term implications for this intersection and the general design of Highway I in this area. The Iowa DOT would be involved in this analysis and review. Part of the traffic study would assign a cost to the development, who would pay their fare share for what they were generating in terms of the need. Anciaux asked what was the distance from the first residential lot to the intensive commercial? Miklo said 120-feet. Anciaux said if the Commission recommended approval of this annexation, could they recommend that the buffer be carried down and around? Miklo said as part of the CZA they could require that the white pine buffer be extended. Staff had received mixed indications from the property owners as to the buffer. At one time there had been an indication that they wanted views of the pond and didn't want the buffer, now there seemed to be different opinions. The Commission could make that a condition of the rezoning. Staff would try to communicate with the property owners and the applicant to find out exactly what everyone's desires were. Chait said with respect to the buffer issue (view or no view), he'd like to comment specifically with regard to the persons who didn't want it or felt they didn't need it. To him it didn't matter if they wanted a buffer or didn't want a buffer. For planning purposes, if Staff and the Commission felt there should be a buffer, that was the issue, not if someone did or didn't want it, because the lack of a buffer could affect future property owners. Brooks said part of the issue was that the Commission had felt Outlot A was somewhat functioning as a wide buffer between some of the residential properties and the adjoining. The buffer behind the first two lots had been disbursed out over Outlot A because there had been room to do it there. In the northern portion the developer had been trying to develop those lots but there had still been the need to screen and buffer between them. If the homeowners had a strong preference, buffer or no buffer, he'd support them. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes January 6, 2005 Page 12 Chait said to have a white pine buffer or the pond as the buffer would be reasonable to him. However to not have a buffer because the person living there didn't want one or think a buffer was needed was a mistake. Brooks asked if it was realistic that the traffic study would be ready for the January 20 meeting. Miklo said Staff had indications that it would not be ready until the end of January. A deferral to the February 3 meeting would be acceptable if the applicant didn't have a preference one way or the other. Schnittjer said he didn't have control of the traffic study, he too wished he had more information about it. Mr. Davis had been in his office earlier in the week questioning whether they should defer. Schnittjer had counseled him that he didn't see reason to push any further with the project until the City had the traffic study, had had ample time to review it and assess their position. Schnittjer said they'd all felt that early February would be the soonest the developer could get back to the Commission with the information they wanted. Miklo said since this was an annexation a written deferral would not be required. The Commission could defer this item indefinitely and Staff would send out letters once this item would be back on the agenda. Hansen asked if they were waiting on a Corps of Engineers approval for the wetland. Schnittjer said they'd not received final approval yet. The Corps had reviewed the concept plans and were in general agreement. They had to develop the plans further to get a permit from the Corps. Miklo said that would come with the subdivision. Public discussion was opened. John Arthur, 4104 Kitty Lee Road, said some of his questions regarding Outlot A had been answered. His concern was that as an adjoining property owner he probably would not be included in the group that had responsibility for maintaining the outlot/pond/wetland area. Whoever did manage it, it would have a direct effect on him. He didn't want it to turn into an un-maintained swamp area. If the commercial area to the south had a lot of run-off it would have a tremendous effect on Outlot A and how the wetland functioned. He requested that during the rezoning process something be added to assure that the outlot was maintained in a proper manner and that there would be repercussion from the homeowners if it was not maintained properly. Miklo said generally issues of drainage and stormwater management were handled with a subdivision plat so there would be opportunities for the City to put controls on that. Behr said often times the provision that was included stated that if the homeowners association didn't maintain it the City gained the right to go in and do the work and the cost of it became a lean on all the lots. Brooks asked if the provision of a general management plan was a requirement or could that be a stipulation of approval of the subdivision. To say something was 'maintained' was an interpretative statement. Behr said he'd have to defer to public works on that question. Brooks said he was looking for a way to not put the residents in a position where they finally got fed up and called the City. Was there a way to build into the plat a plan for normal routine maintenance and define normal routine maintenance. Schnittjer said that normal routine maintenance would be a part of the plan that would be approved by the Corps of Engineers. The Corps required monitoring for 5-years and anything that was going haywire would have to be restored during that period of time. After that point in time, everything should be pretty well established. Schnittjer said during the break he'd told the members of the audience that the reason the surveyors were on the property was that they were gathering information to work up the engineering plans for the property, i.e. property lines, topographic lines, utilities, etc. Mary Ott, 4056 Kitty Lee Road, said her lot was the original lot #2 of the Richard Davis subdivision. She and her husband had moved in there in 1970. Ott said she'd noted that there were a lot of maps and they were all a little different. In 1984 she and her husband had entered into a long term lease agreement with Richard Davis with option to purchase. The little triangle of land behind lots 1 & 2 was where they'd planted a lot of trees when the highway had been built. They were exercising their right to purchase that lot. They didn't wish to annex. That information was not indicated on many maps. Ott requested if it would be possible to get one map so everyone would know what they were talking about. Ott asked if Kitty Lee Road were annexed would th9 City be in charge of it or would it still be a county road. Currently the County did a good job of plowing and maintaining the road. Miklo said generally the Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes January 6, 2005 Page 13 City entered into an agreement with the County, and then they decided who would maintain it. Miklo said because of the unknown on the west side of Kitty Lee Road, Staff had suggested that rather than improve Kitty Lee Road, a fee be paid toward the improvement of it. Ott said there is a visual problem with how the widened Highway had been poured at the Kitty Lee Road intersection. The illusion was that it appeared that there were two lanes but a0tually it was only one lane and a median. All of a sudden the highway went down to one lane. One of their neighbors had been sideswiped and another person killed in an accident at that intersection. It was a very dangerous intersection for anyone trying to turn onto Kitty Lee Road. Ott said she could only foresee traffic out there getting worse. Ott said Kitty Lee Road was a proving ground for all the car dealerships in that area. They all came and test drove their cars to see how well the brakes worked and how well the cars took the hills. The majority of cars going down Kitty Lee Road had dealers license plates. Concha asked with respect to the 5-year Corp of Engineers watch over period on the wetlands, was that 5-years form the date of application or 5-years from when it was developed (when all the improvements were done and when all the land had been developed.) Schnittjer said it would be 5-years form when the developments were completed. Concha said with respect to the annexation, the map that had been mailed to the homeowners after the last Commission meeting had shown the point that Ott was purchasing as not part of the annexation. It didn't mention any other part of the triangle. At the last meeting they'd discussed whether Olde Oak Lane and north of it would be annexed or not. Miklo said the application had been amended to remove that piece, the remaining would be annexed and zoned RR-1 Rural Residential which was similar to the zoning they had in the county. Concha said it had been discussed that they should request that the annexation run on the south side of Olde Oak Lane. Brooks said the Commission had moved the RR-1 zoning but the annexation had not changed. Concha asked if there would be discussion with respect to grading and things for the proposed Office Commercial development that was proposed to go right behind their homes. Right now it was a nice hill and then it dropped off. If the development began on the other side of the hill it would not impact her the same as if they started wiping out the hill and grading it down so she'd begin seeing two-story buildings. Could it be required that the topographical flow be maintained and it would also help with the transition from residential homes to commercial development. Jeff Jansenins, 3663 Olde Oak Lane, asked what would be the parameters for the DOT study for the traffic. Miklo said they would look at existing traffic, projected traffic based on the proposed development, other potential developments in the area, speeds, it would be comprehensive. Anciaux said there was a traffic model which was actually a moving model which took into account how a property was zoned, types of expected developments; the models projected how much traffic would be generated by each type of zoning. Brooks said they'd probably work off of existing vehicle counts on Hwy I and build on to that what might be generated by developments in that area. The study would look at turning and different time periods of the day. Jansenins said as mentioned multiple times earlier, their concern was the need for turning lanes, etc. Also the height of the buildings that would be behind them. If the buildings could be built into the hill as part of the buffer it could make the transition flow easier. Brooks said the Commission could look at those types of issue to see what could be done to mitigate them. Alatalo asked if this area was annexed into Iowa City, would the City's noise ordinance apply to this area and how would it protect the homeowners. It was a well known fact that a Menards would go into this area. She'd been at Menards and they'd blared into their loud speaker, "Save big money, Shop at Menards." She didn't want to hear announcements when she was in her backyard. Alatalo said on her property there was a little hill behind it and then it dropped off considerably. They'd have to have 50-foot trees there to do any good as a buffer. Since they would be moving lots of dirt it would be nice if they could put dirt in for Alatalo so she could have a buffer and the trees would appear to be taller than what they were. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes January 6, 2005 Page 14 Miklo said he was not familiar with the noise ordinance. Staff would look into that and report back to the Commission. Hansen and Brooks said they'd like to hear a detailed Staff report. Behr said the City ordinances would apply, but he was not familiar with them either. Arthur asked after the 5-year window for Corps monitoring had expired, were there City ordinances that would dictate how a wetland would be maintained. Something to serve as a reference for the homeowners as to how a wetland should be maintained and if a problem was developing. Were there ordinances so that the homeowners would have a recourse if something went wrong. Schnittjer and Brooks said the Corps monitored very closely for the 5-year period and after that they had the responsibility for making sure that the wetland area stayed viable. Schnittjer said the developer's plan would be approved by the Corps and it would become a public record at the time the Corps completed their review of it. Notice would be given that the plan was available for review. Arthur suggested that consideration be given to transferring ownership of the outlot to the City or to a non-profit organization which would actually maintain the property and not rely on the commercial property owners to do so. Hansen asked Arthur if he felt they wouldn't. Arthur said his fear was that it would be used as a retention pond instead of a wetland. The water table would rise and lower so much it would kill the wetland instead of maintain it. Schnittjer said the Corps would reprimand the developer if that were happening. Arthur said if that area were to become a Menards, there would be a huge parking lot with a lot of runoff that if not managed correctly would infiltrate the wetlands. Allen said with respect to the intensive commercial area, would the lights and their design be regulated by City ordinances as well? Lights and noise would be an issue. Hansen and Miklo said they were fully regulated. Concha said she'd brought this issue up at the last meeting. She asked for some type of assurance that appropriate signage would be placed so traffic would not attempt to use Kitty Lee Road to get to Rohret Road and find out it was a dead end. Public discussion was closed. Miklo said the Commission had several options. They could defer indefinitely until the traffic study was received and then Staff would send letters to the residents to let them know that this item would be placed on the next Commission meeting agenda. Motion: Hansen made a motion to indefinitely defer ANN04-00001/REZ04-00030, a 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 until the DOT Traffic Study had bee received and reviewed by Staff. Brooks seconded the motion. Hansen said receipt and analysis of the traffic study was a very big issue. The Commission had received a lot of comment regarding the traffic situation out there with the entrance and exit ramps to Hwy 218, the lanes on Hwy 1, turning traffic and Kitty Lee Road traffic itself.. He was comfortable with the buffering being suggested for use between the commercial and the residential. Office commercial was a lower intensity of commercial use, typically had traffic only during daytime business hours and was not 24/7 as was intensive commercial. He personally would rather have the office commercial adjacent to his property. With respect to the Comprehensive Plan, Hansen said he felt this was a natural area for this type of development. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. OTHER ITEMS: Anciaux requested that the 45-day Dates of Limitation date be placed on the agenda again. Chair said it was his understanding that they served and made recommendations to City Council. City Council could do what ever they wanted such as ignoring the Commission's recommendation(s), having Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes January 6, 2005 Page 15 joint meetings with them, etc. They as a Commission simply made recommendations. He'd served on the Commission for 7-years or more. His concern was that it seemed more and more that there was a contentious relationship between Staff and the Commission. In his observations it also seemed to be directed to the constituency, the lack of respect. His objective was to have everyone be treated fairly and respectfully, he felt that the Commission worked really hard for that. It seemed like it was an us 'Commission' and them 'Staff' situation. He asked if the other Commissioners felt this way. Anciaux said if this was a concern for other Commissioners, perhaps they should meet in a smaller group with staff to resolve the concern. Shannon said he didn't think Chait was the only one who felt that way. He didn't think having a talk with three people would solve anything, he couldn't see this magically being fixed. His feedback was from developers and people on the street. He'd not been personally beaten down but he was hearing this all the time. He never heard anyone say they were really happy, that they'd had a swell interaction with Staff. He felt this was affecting the City. Chait said that was not what he was referring to. His concern was an "us vs. them" attitude between staff and Commission. He wanted to know if other Commissioners felt this way or shared this concern. Freerks said she personally didn't have that feeling and she'd never felt Staff were contentious with the public. If there were problems they should fix them. She'd heard the opposite, developers and people who spoke honestly that there was give and take and they felt staff treated them professionally. Miklo asked if there were specific cases or instances that the Commissioners could provide. Shannon said no specific cases come to mind. Anciaux said he'd requested specific flow charts be created to show City Council the process of and how much time it took for an annexation to occur, from annexation to final plat, documentation of how long it took to get from Point A to Point B. There was a lot that went on before items even reached the Commission. He said if there was a flow chart of how a case progressed, it would be possible to determine if the delays were on the part of the City or the applicant because they had not submitted complete applications. Brooks said being new, perhaps he only got glimpses of what was happening. If the Commissioners were sensing something then perhaps Staff was sensing something as well. There might be frustrations on both sides that needed to be put on the table and ways looked for to get through them. His concern was that they had a monumental task in front of them to finalize the Code rewrite and there would be a lot of contentious debate/discussion that would go on between the Commission and Staff and the Commission and the public. He didn't want to waylay Chait's concern but to get the Code rewrite finished up they were all going to be working very hard. Chait said he didn't feel his concerns were timely to the point that they had to be addressed before the Code rewrite. They might to look at better understanding their roles, their duties and responsibilities and the relationships to more eliminate the us and them. Staff were the support for the Commission and the support for the applicants and the mediators for everyone. Miklo said it was a concern to him if the Commission felt Staff wasn't serving them well or that they were doing something untoward. He felt it might be wise to have the Commission Chair and individual commissioners meet with Staff to say what were the issues, put them on the table and come to some agreement. He would rather do it sooner than later, to be more productive for the City. Anciaux said was willing to meet any time. He'd like to have at least Chait present and anyone else who wished to attend. Miklo said they should try to put the first meeting together for next week. Through phone calls they'd arrange the meetings. Miklo said Staff would like to set up a special meeting to begin going over the Code rewrite now that the Commission had it as a whole package. Staff had begun reviewing it and had identified some minor Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes January 6, 2005 Page 16 things that didn't quite work together that would need further study. An informal Code review meeting was scheduled for 5:30 pm on Tuesday, January 18. Hansen said at some point he was probably going to make the motion that a sunset clause be included in the Code rewrite. If a person applied for a rezoning, the rezoning was approved, it had to be acted on within a certain amount of time or it would revert back to what it had been. Freerks requested that Hansen's suggestion be listed as an agenda item so the public would know about it. Miklo said the current PDH said that it expired after two years and the City had the right to go back and rezone it. The City had never acted upon it. Behr said they could make a Plan Expirer but they couldn't say it would revert from one zone to another. CONSIDERATION OF THE DECEMBER 16, 2004 MEETING MINUTES: Motion: Brooks made a motion to approve the minutes as typed and corrected. Hansen seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. ADJOURNMENT: Motion: Brooks made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:29 pm. Freerks seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. Elizabeth Koppes, Secretary Minutes submitted by Candy Barnhill s:/pcdlminutes/p&zl2OOSlOl-O6-OS.doc Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission Attendance Record 2005 FORMAL MEETING Term Name Expires 1/6 1/20 2/3 2/17 3/3 3/17 4/7 4/21 5/5 5/19 6/2 6/16 7/7 7/21 8/4 8/18 9/1 9/15 10/6 10/20 11/3 11/17 12/1 12/1.~ D. Anciaux 05/06 X B. Brooks 05/05 X B. Chair 05/06 X A. Freerks 05/08 X J. Hansen 05/05 X E. Koppes 05/07 O/E D. Shannon 05/08 X INFORMAL MEETING Term Name Expires 1/3 1/31 2/14 2/28 3/14 4/1 4/18 5/2 5/16 5/30 6/13 7/4 7/18 8/1 8/15 8/29 9/12 10/3 10/17 10/31 11/14 11/28 12/12 D. Anciaux 05/06 CW B. Brooks 05/05 CW B. Chair 05/06 CW A. Freerks 05/08 CW J. Hansen 05/05 CW E. Koppes 05/07 CW D. Shannon 05/08 CW Key: X - Present O = Absent O/E - AbsenffExcused N/M= No Meeting ..... Not a Member CW - Cancelled due to Weather MINUTES APPROVED HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION January 8, 2005-2:00 P.M. McCollister Farmstead 2460 S. Gilbert Street MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Maharry, Jim Enloe, Mark McCallum, and Jim Ponto MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Gunn, Justin Pardekooper, Amy Smothers, Jann Weismiller and Tim Weitzel STAFF PRESENT: Shelley McCafferty OTHERS PRESENT: Don Cochran CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Maharry called the meeting to order at 2:03 p.m. Site Visit Commission members met at the McCollister Farmstead, a local historic landmark, to review preliminary plans for future site development. McCafferty said she had been in communication with Don Cochran and his landscape architect, Steve Ford regarding this proposal. Doug Steinmetz, AIA, a preservation architect who is a consultant to the State Historical Society of Iowa has also reviewed the pIans and site. McCafferty said that Steinmetz felt it would not be feasible to rehabilitate the barn, but it should be thoroughly documented before demolition. Don Cochran showed McCafferty and Commission members through the barn. He said he intends to reuse as many of the beams and columns as possible in a new barn-like structure that he proposed to build in the same location. He said the new building will be used for condominiums and he does not have plans yet from the architect. It may be oriented differently so it may be designed like a bank barn. The group also walked the eastern portion of the site where Cochran proposes to develop single family homes. He pointed out where the road, lots and trail will be located. They discussed preserving the existing mature trees. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 2:25 p.m. Minutes submitted by Shelley McCafferty. s:/pcd/minutes/h pc/2005H PCmin utes/hpc1-8-05.doc Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 8, 2005 Page 2 Historic Preservation Commission Attendance Record 2005 TeFra Name Expires 1/08 A. Smothers 3/29/05 O/E J. Enloe 3/29/06 X M. Gunn 3/29/07 O/E M. Maharry 3/29/05 X M. McCallum 3/29/06 X J Pardekooper 3/29/06 O/E J. Ponto 3/29/07 X J Weismiller 3/29/06 O/E T. Weitzel 3/29/05 O/E Key: X = Present O - Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM - No Meeting .... - Not a Member MINUTES APPROVED IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 12, 2005 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL-IOWA CITY, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Karen Leigh, Vincent Maurer, Michael Wright MEMBERS ABSENT: NONE STAFF PRESENT: Robert Miklo, Sarah Holecek OTHERS PRESENT: William 'Gorman, James Clark, Tim Holman, Glenn Siders CALL TO ORDER: Vice chairperson Maurer called the meeting to order at 5:07 PM. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Alexander nominated Maurer as the chairperson. Wright seconded the nomination. All in favor. Wright nominated Alexander as the vice chairperson. Leigh seconded the nomination. All in favor. CONSIDERATION OF THE DECEMBER 8, 2004 BOARD MINUTES MOTION: Alexander moved to approve the minutes from December 8, 2004. Wright seconded the motion. Motion passed 4:0. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: EXC04-00028 Discussion of an application submitted by Systems Unlimited, INC. for a special exception to permit a school of specialized private instruction on property in the General Industrial (I-1) Zone at 2433 South Scott Boulevard. Miklo said that the proposed use is a school of specialized private instruction which is noted as a special exception in the I-1 Zone. He said that the special exception must be in accordance to the general standards. Miklo said that the specific proposed exception should not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. He added that the proposed exception should 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. Miklo mentioned that operations at the Systems Unlimited facility consist of a combination of administrative office functions, staff training and vocational and life skills training for persons with disabilities, including some training for light industrial work. He added that such operations provide beneficial services to the community and pose no danger to the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Miklo continued by saying that the establishment of the specific proposed exception should not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located. He said that the proposed school Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes January 12, 2005 Page 2 would not affect the industrial uses in the zone. He added that the opposite might be a concern, but the applicant is aware that going into an industrial zone, those conditions are present. Miklo stated that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. He said that the existing facilities are enough to provide service to the new building. Miklo said that adequate measures should be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. Miklo said that staff recommends a condition that driveway location be approved by the City at the time of site plan review to ensure adequate site distance and safe turning movements onto Scott Boulevard, an arterial street. He added that only one access point will be allowed for this lot. Miklo said that except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is located. He mentioned that it will be required to conform to all requirements when they seek the building permit, so it would be in conformance with the I-1 requirements. Next, Miklo said that the proposed use should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. He said that the General Industrial Zone is specifically written to allow for schools of specialized instruction as long as the proposed use does not interfere with the primary uses intended for this zone. He added that as stated above, the impact of the proposed use, traffic, and congestion anticipated for the proposed facility is unlikely to negatively affect other uses permitted in the zone. Miklo said that staff recommends that EXC04-00028, a special exception to permit a school of specialized private instruction on property in the General Industrial (I-1) Zone at 2433 South Scott Boulevard, be approved, provided that the following conditions are met: 1. only one access point to the subject lot from Scott Boulevard is allowed 2. unless the existing direct street access to the US West facility will be used as an access drive for the proposed use, this existing access must be closed 3. to ensure adequate site distance and safe turning movements to and from Scott Boulevard, the location of any new access drive must be approved by the City. Public Hearinq Opened Bill Gorman, 1556 South 1st Avenue, Suite 1, Iowa City, said that they are comfortable with the conditions set forth by staff. He added that they had a similar exception approved in July 2001 in the same zoning classification. He said that the new site at 2433 South Scott Boulevard came available and would provide a better match for the type of use they have. He added that there would be fewer industrial neighbors around, so the noise would be less. Public Hearinq Closed MOTION: Wright moved to approve the special exception EXC04-00028, a special exception to permit a school of specialized private instruction on property in the General Industrial (I-1) Zone at 2433 South Scott Boulevard, be approved, provided that the following conditions are met: 1. only one access point to the subject lot from Scott Boulevard is allows Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes January 12, 2005 Page 3 2. unless the existing direct street access to the US West facility will be used as an access drive for the proposed use, this existing access must be closed 3. to ensure adequate site distance and safe turning movements to and from Scott Boulevard, the location of any new access drive must be approved by the City. Alexander seconded the motion. Alexander said that she would vote in favor of the application. She said that that it will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, the proposed exception 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. The establishment of the specific proposed exception would not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Adequate measures would be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. She mentioned that adequate utilities, drainage and access are in place, and it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Maurer said that he would vote in favor of the application. He said that all general standards have been met and have been indicated in the motion. Leigh said that she would vote in favor for the reasons already stated. She said that Systems provides a great service for the community. She said that the general standards are met. Wright said that he would vote in favor. He said that it meets the general and specific standards. Motion passed 4:0. EXC04-00029 Discussion of an application submitted by James Clark for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-20) zone at 932 East Washington Street. Miklo suggested that since this and the next item on the agenda is similar that the board will deal with them at the same time rather than independently. EXC04-00030 Discussion of an application submitted by James Clark for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-20) zone at 924 East Washington Street. Miklo said that the applicant is seeking a special exception to allow balconies and entrance porches to be applied to these two buildings. He presented illustrations with the location of the buildings, and the proposed plan. He said that the buildings are currently fairly close to the property line, and the applicant is seeking a reduction of the front yard to allow the additions. He said that for a special exception such as these, the Board needs to find that there is a peculiar situation, and a practical difficulty to comply with the ordinance as written. Miklo mentioned that staff does believe that there are two peculiar situations associated with these properties. He said that they are both very large building comparing with most of the surrounding properties. He added that the large scale of the buildings make them somehow peculiar in that neighborhood. He added that the right of way is much wider than usually found, Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes January 12, 2005 Page 4 and this ads to the peculiar situation. He said that with these two peculiarities the staff believes that the proposed exception do meet the specific standards. He said that these buildings could be left as they are, but the Comprehensive Plan supports modifying these buildings to make them more compatible with the smaller buildings in the neighborhood. Miklo said these two properties are located in a Conservation District Overlay zone that requires the Historic Preservation Commission to approve exterior alterations. Miklo continued by saying that the establishment of the specific proposed exception should not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located. He said that the surrounding properties are currently developed. He added that many buildings in that block are located closer to the sidewalk than the proposed additions to these buildings, and staff found that neighboring properties should not be negatively affected. He added that most importantly it meets the test of complying with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Miklo said that staff recommends that EXC04-00029 and EXC04~00030, applications for special exceptions to reduce the required front yard from 10 feet to 6 feet 4 inches in the areas indicated on the site plans for additions to the existing buildings in the Neighborhood Conservation (RNC-20) zone located at 924 and 932 Washington, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plans submitted with the application and subject to approval of the elevation drawings by the Historic Preservation Commission. Public Hearinq Opened James Clark, 414 East Market Street, said that they are trying to get rid of the stereotype of the apartments' mansard roofs. He said that by having the additional 3 foot they could put porch, and balconies. He said that the new look would open the apartments for people. The patios are small, and they can not have parties out there. He added that they are more for design than for being functional. Public Hearinq Closed MOTION: Alexander moved that EXC04-00029 and EXC04-00030, applications for special exceptions to reduce the required front yard from '10 feet to 6 feet 4 inches in the areas indicated on the site plans for additions to the existing buildings in the Neighborhood Conservation (RNC-20) zone located at 924 and 932 Washington, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plans submitted with the application and subject to approval of the evaluation drawings by the Historic Preservation Commission. Leigh seconded the motion. Wright would vote in favor of the applications. He said that it does meet the general standards, He said that that specifically, he does not believe that it will be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, the proposed exception 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. The establishment of the specific proposed exception would not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Adequate measures would be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. He mentioned that adequate utilities, drainage and access are in place, and it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Iowa City Board of A~ustment Minutes Janua~ 12,2005 Page 5 Alexander would vote in favor. She said that it is a unique situation in the fact that these are big buildings surrounded by smaller size buildings and that there is a large right-of-way so that the buildings are currently set back further from the street than usual. Maurer would also vote in favor. He said that the general standards have been met, and these changes would enhance the value of these properties. Leigh said that she would vote in favor for the reasons already stated. Motion passed 4:0. EXC04-00051 Discussion of an application submitted by James Clark for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-12)zone at 517 Fairchild Street. Miklo said that it is similar to the previous application to install porches and balconies. He presented photos with the area, the location of the building, and the proposed changes. He said that the building is located 10 feet from the front property line. He added that there is a peculiar situation in the sense that it is a fairly large apartment building located within an area of smaller single-family homes. He added that the applicant's proposed remodeling would help provide more architectural articulation and thus break up the mass of the building to make it more compatible in appearance with the existing buildings in the neighborhood. Miklo said that the property did not conform to all of the requirements of the zoning code as required for special exceptions. He said the property lacked screening of the parking lot and a public sidewalk. Miklo recommended that this be required as a condition for approval. Staff recommended that EXC04-00051, an application submitted by James Clark for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-12) zone at 517 Fairchild Street, be approved, subject to general conformance with the elevation drawings and site plans submitted with the application and installation of a hedge along the east side of the parking lot and a sidewalk adjacent to North Market Square. Public Hearinq Opened Clark, said that the properties to the north are almost to the sidewalk. He said that when the project would be done these buildings would look wonderful in comparance with how they are now. Leigh asked if the new additions would give all the apartments access to one balcony. Clark answered that all apartments would have a balcony attached. Tim Holman, 420 Fairchild Street,_said that he has concerns about nine balconies being only about 6 feet from the sidewalk. He said that he lived in the neighborhood for 10 years, and he spent a lot of time walking in the neighborhood. He said that with 9 balconies on a warm evening there would be a lot of parties in the balconies. He said that it would be possible to have parties on most of the balconies, which represents a detriment to the neighborhood because there would be noise and litter. He added that he is also concerned about stuff falling down from those balconies. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes January 12, 2005 Page 6 Clark said that they have a clean-up crew that goes everyday and cleans the buildings. He said that there are already balconies on the back of the building, so it should be a similar situation. He said that they control the balconies. He added that there could be at most 3 persons on the balconies at the same time. He said that if there would be a problem, neighbors should call and complain, and measures would be taken. Holman said that Clark might not always own the building, and be in control of it, and being so close to the sidewalk might be a danger for people. He said that he would prefer to have the litter and the noise inside the apartment rather than on the outside. Public Hearing Closed MOTION: Leigh moved that EXC04-00031, an application submitted by James Clark for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-12) zone at 517 Fairchild Street, be approved, subject to general conformance with the elevation drawings and site plans submitted with the application and installation of a hedge along the east side of the parking lot and a sidewalk adjacent to North Market Square. Alexander seconded the motion. Wright would vote in favor of the application. He said that in terms of the specific standards, these would be small balconies, and would not endanger the public health, safety, comfort and general welfare. He said that he appreciates the concerns raised. The balconies are small and should not increase the noise. He said that the proposed exception 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. The establishment of the specific proposed exception would not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Adequate measures would be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. She mentioned that adequate utilities, drainage and access are in place, and it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Alexander would also vote in favor. She said that it is weighing the improvements versus the potential concerns about increased noise and party level. She said that she agrees that it would not have a particular effect. Maurer said that he would vote in favor. He said that this would enhance the value of the property, and the addition of the sidewalk would be a plus. Leigh would also vote in favor. She said that she truly appreciates the concerns. She said that she also had a concern about things falling from the balconies. However the balconies would be very small and would improve the appearance of the building. Motion passed 4:0. EXC04-00032 Discussion of an application submitted by James Clark for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-12) zone at 333 East Church Street. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes January 12, 2005 Page 7 Miklo said that the application is similar to the previous in the sense that the property is 10 feet from sidewalk. The applicant would like a reduction, and the resulting front yard would be 8 feet 8 inches if the setback reduction is allowed. He added that there is a peculiar situation in the sense that it is a fairly large apartment building located within an area of smaller single-family homes. He said that this building could not be remodeled with balconies if the special exception is not approved, and the Comprehensive Plan supports remodeling of these types of buildings to try to get them to fit into the surrounding neighborhood. Staff recommends that EXC04-00032., an application for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-12) zone at 333 East Church Street, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plans submitted with the revised elevations drawings. Public Hearinq Opened Clark said that he would like to improve that building. He said that these four building were the last four that would need improvement. Public Hearinq Closed MOTION: Alexander moved that EXC04-00032., an application for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard to allow the erection of balconies for property located in the Neighborhood Residential Conservation (RNC-12) zone at 333 East Church Street, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plans submitted with the revised elevations drawings. Leigh seconded the motion. Alexander would vote in favor of the application. She said that it is a peculiar situation, a big building in a neighborhood with small buildings. There is a practical difficulty in trying to meet the needs of the City's Comprehensive Plan by trying to make the buildings fit better in the character of the neighborhood. She said that that it will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, the proposed exception 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. The establishment of the specific proposed exception would not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Adequate measures would be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. She mentioned that adequate utilities, drainage and access are in place, and it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Maurer said that he would vote in favor for the reasons already stated. Leigh would vote in favor. She said that she believes that there is a peculiar situation and a practical difficulty. Wright would vote in favor for the reasons already stated. It is a peculiar situation, it meets the general and specific standards, and it would be beneficial for the neighborhood. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes January 12, 2005 Page 8 Motion passed 4:0. .EXC04-00033 Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard setback from 20 feet to 9.5 feet to allow an addition to an existing building located in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 1905 Broadway Street. Miklo said that this application is somehow similar to the others in the sense that it is also done for aesthetic reasons as the shopping center is being remodeled. He said that it is a peculiar situation there is an extra wide right of way, and even with the reduction of the yard this building would set back at considerable distance from the Highway 6 pavement, as well as the trail which is located in front of the property. Staff recommends that EXC04-00033 an application for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard setback from 20 feet to 9.5 feet to allow an addition to an existing building located in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 1905 Broadway Street, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plan dated December 16, 2004. Public Hearing Opened Glen Siders, PO Box 1907, said that he would be available if there are any questions from the board. Public Hearinq Closed MOTION: Wright moved that EXC04-00033 an application for a special exception to allow the reduction of the front yard setback from 20 feet to 9.5 feet to allow an addition to an existing building located in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 1905 Broadway Street, be approved, subject to general conformance with the site plan dated December 16, 2004. Leigh seconded the motion. Leigh would vote in favor of the application. She said that it meets the general standards. She said that that it will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, the proposed exception 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. The establishment of the specific proposed exception would not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Adequate measures would be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. She mentioned that adequate utilities, drainage and access are in place, and it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Maurer would also vote in favor for the reasons already stated. Alexander would also vote in favor for the reasons already stated. Wright would vote in favor of the application. He said that it is a peculiar situation, and it meets the specific and general standards. Motion passed 4:0. Iowa City Board of A~ustment Minutes Januaw 12,2005 Page 9 OTHER: NONE ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 6:17 PM. Board Chairperson Board Secretary Minutes submitted by Bogdana Rus. s:/pcd/minutes/boa/2005/01-12-05.doc Board of Adjustment Attendance Record 2005 Ternl Name Expires 01/12 02/09 03/09 04/13 05/11 06/08 07/13 08/10 09/14 10/12 11/09 12/14 Carol Alexander 01/01/08 X Ned Wood 01/01/10 Karen Leigh 01/01/07 Vincent Maurer 01/01/06 Michael Wright 01/01/09 Key: X = Present O - Absent O/E - Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting ..... Not a Member Minutes Iowa City Airport Commission APPROVED January 13, 2005 Iowa City Airport Terminal Members Present: Randy Hartwig, John Staley, Carl Williams, Michelle Robnett Members Absent: Dan Clay Staff Present: Sue Dulek, Jeff Davidson Other Present: Rick Mascari, Jack Young Jr., John Yeomans, David Hughes, Ron Duffe, Harry Wolf Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 5:45 p.m. Recommendations to Council: Accept the Airport Strategic Plan. Approval of Minutes: Mr. Staley moved and Mr. Williams seconded motion to accept minutes from December 9, 2004 meeting. Motion carried. Public Discussion - Items not on the Agenda: John Yeomans and Jack Young of the United Methodist Men's Club addressed the Commission. Their purpose at the meeting is to request permission to hold a Fly In-Drive In Pancake/Sausage Breakfast on May 21, 2005. Estimated time of event will be 6:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Ron Duffe has already given the Men's Club permission to use his hangar. The event will be advertised to the public and other airports and churches. Mr. Yeomans is not sure of the size of the crowd, but it should be no larger than Sertoma. Commission discussed insurance concerns, and tabled event request until next meeting. Unfinished Items tbr Discussion / Action: None Items for Discussion / Action: A. Runway 7/25 Project - David Hughes brought the Commission up to date on progress of the extension project. Field surveys were completed mid December. Geotechnical Engineers will get back out in the field when the weather is better. Started hydraulic model and preliminary designs. Mr. Hughes talked with the State Historic Preservation Officer and the FAA regarding the Memorandum of Agreement on the United Hangar, as to what requirements had to be in place as documentation for that hangar. The final draft of the MOA is at the SHPO, and should be approved this week. The later part of December, Mr. Hartwig received a "go" letter from FAA State Engineer, Ed Hyatt. The letter says they anticipate funding of the next phase of the project and to go ahead and start moving forward with the design. The next phase of the project wilt be the grading package for the runway extension and parallel taxiway. Airport not currently under contract for this phase of the project with Earth Tech, although it is in Earth Tech's Master Engineering agreement. Started discussions with Mr. Hartwig on what steps to take to get a supplemental agreement in place. Project looks very good, and we are moving forward. B. Aviation Commerce Park - Mr. Wolf brought Commission up to date on activity of the project. Mr. Wolf is optimistic things are going well. Ms. Robnett questioned the status of land parcels if the park deal fell through. Mr. Wolf is keeping a list of interested parties. Mr. Staley moved to approve resolution to extend of the agreement with Iowa Realty Commercial to sell and/or lease property in the Aviation Commerce Park. Seconded by Ms. Robnett. Resolution passed 3-0 on a roil call vote with Mr. Williams recusing himself. Airport Commission January 13, 2005 Page 2 C. Strategic Plan -JeffDavidson presented the Strategic Plan with all requested modifications requested at last meeting. Subject to further modifications by the Commission, the only difference to the final version will be to insert the executed resolution, and take off the final pending approval. Final plan will be on blue paper, and stapled as a booklet. Cost per booklet is about 50 cents. In lieu of February 1 council meeting, the City Clerk and City Attorney decided to have the minutes of this meeting presented to council with the Commission's recommendation, prior to their consideration. Mr. Hartwig and Mr. Davidson will attend the work session meeting on January 3 1st, and Mr. Hartwig will present it for their acceptance. The council will accept it on February 1st. The Commission thanked Mr. Davidson for his assistance and guidance on this project. The report communicates well, in a non-technical way, but also sets forth where the Airport would like to be several years from now. Mr. Staley moved to recommend approval of the strategic plan. Mr. Williams seconded. Resolution passed 4-0 on a roll call vote. D. Airport Budget- Mr. Hartwig represented the Commission at last Monday's city council meeting where City Boards and Commissions go over their budgets. Mr. Hartwig pointed out the biggest decrease was in personnel expense; the budget did include salary for an airport manager however. There is a request for money towards a park area. Commission discussed many areas at the airport that could use the maintenance and repair monies. E. Airport Management- Mr. Staley requested an update on the interns. Mr. Hartwig thinks they have 2 good candidates. There was discussion on the prospect of having an office in the terminal building. Snow removed efficiently from the runway with the new snowplow. Airport tractor broke, and is being repaired. F. Obstruction Mitigation Project - Mr. Hartwig provided an update on the project. Resolution to accept the hangar lighting project was moved by Ms. Robnett and seconded by Mr. Staley. Passed on 4-0 roll call vote. A group from Gerard Electric showed up to start the project, but the Airport was never notified of the work date. There was no way to alert all of the tenants. Commission needs to make sure a notification policy is in place for future issues. G. Airport Viewing Area- Mr. Hartwig stated the FAA wrote back, as to what they needed for the viewing area. Howard R. Green did the last ALP. Discussed grant possibilities. H. Iowa Dept. of Transportation Grant - Mr. Hartwig explained that the Airport Commission needs to tel1 DOT they will accept their grant for FY05 for hangar/floor repairs. Resolution to accept the grant was moved by Mr. Williams and seconded by Mr. Staley. Resolution passed on a 4-0 roll call vote. I. Hanger Repair - Resolution to award a contract repair for hangers B & C to CBS L.L.C. Moved by Mr. Staley. Seconded by Ms. Robnett. Resolution passed 4-0 on a roi1 call vote. The Commission instructed Ms. Dulek to provide for notification to tenants in the contract so that would know when their hangar was being prepared. Chairperson's Report: Mr. Hartwig reported the cleaning from the first snow fall went well with good reports from users. Commission Members Reports: Discussion on public use of the terminal meeting room. It was mentioned that our Airport was represented well in an aviation calendar. Administrative Reports: None. Set Next Meeting: Next meeting set for February 10, 2005. Adjournment: Meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Airport Commission January 13, 2005 Airport Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2005 TERM 01/13 NAME EXP. Daniel Clay 3/1/08 O/E Randy 3/1/09 Hartwig Michelle 3/1/07 X Robnett John 3/1/06 X Staley Carl 3/1/10 X Williams KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting .... Not a Member MINUTES APPROVED HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JANUARY 13, 2005-7:00 P.M. RECREATION CENTER - MEETING ROOM B MEMBERS PRESENT: James Enloe, Michael Gunn, Michael Maharry, Michael McCallum, Justin Pardekooper, Jim Ponto MEMBERS ABSENT: Amy Smothers, Jann Weismiller, Tim Weitzel STAFF PRESENT: Shelley McCafferty OTHERS PRESENT: Michael Brennan, Helen Burford, Ben Hofmann, Joyce Hofmann, Their son-in- law CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Maharry called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION: Certificate of Appropriateness: 604 Grant Street. McCafferty said this application was made by Ben and Joyce Hofmann, who were present at the meeting. She said their home is a contributing structure in the Longfellow Historic District. McCafferty said the Hofmanns want to replace their windows with vinyl sash replacement windows. She stated that some of the Windows were already installed on the lower level before Housing Inspection Services put a stop work order on the activities. McCafferty stated that vinyl sashes do not comply with the guidelines, nor do the windows have divided lights, as required by the guidelines. The Hofmann's son-in-law stated that the Hofmanns did not know their property was in a historic district. He said the windows to be installed are Iow E energy efficient windows, not the typical vinyl windows with wide-based trim. The Hofmann's son-in-law said the house badly needed new windows, and the Hofmanns are looking for a variance for the new windows, which have already been purchased. McCafferty pointed out that the Hofmanns have not yet paid their contractor for the new windows or for any services. Joyce Hofmann said the downstairs of the house is much warmer than it used to be. She said she did not understand why they couldn't do what they want to with their house. Joyce Hofmann said the new windows are efficient and give a nice look to an old house. The Hofmann's son-in-law said that the house already has aluminum siding and pointed out that there are already a lot of vinyl windows in the neighborhood, including on the house next door. He said the contractor for the project is Liberty Windows out of Des Moines. Maharry asked the Hofmanns if they recalled the neighborhood discussions and meetings that were held when Longfellow was considered for historic district nomination four to six years ago. Joyce Hofmann said she was not aware that Grant Street was included in the district. She said they do not want to paint their house fuchsia or mauve; they just want efficient windows. Maharry said this is an error on the part of the contractor. Gunn asked if the old sashes were still on site. Joyce Hofmann said they could not be reused. Pardekooper stated that it would not be possible to put the existing sashes back. Maharry asked if the economic hardship clause would apply in this case. McCafferty responded that this situation did not meet the test. Maharry asked Pardekooper if there were other options. Pardekooper replied that there are sash kits that would comply. He said his overall concern is with the contractor. Pardekooper said that if the contractor had applied for a building permit before work was begun appropriate replacement windows Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 13, 2005 Page 2 could have been chosen. He stated that the owners' intentions were good. Pardekooper said that the contractor needs to make the windows comply with the guidelines by using a style of window that would work. McCafferty said the guidelines call for wood or metal clad wood windows with muntin bars on the exterior. Pardekooper said that the solution here should come from the contractor. He said the responsibility lies with the general contractor to follow through as a licensed contractor in the State of Iowa doing work in the City of Iowa City. Enloe agreed that it is the contractor's fault that there was no permit. Gunn said that in the normal procedure, the Commission would have denied this application if it were applied for before any work was done. He said that in some cases, work is started and money is invested before the City and Commission are aware of the situation. Gunn said that in those cases, the Commission tries to come to some kind of compromise with the homeowner because the resident is out money. He said that in this case, the owners are not yet out any money and are not hurt significantly. Gunn said the contractor is at fault, and the contractor should assume responsibility for not obtaining a permit. He said he appreciated that the homeowners just want new windows but said that as a Commission member, he could not approve this, as it is against the guidelines. The Hofmann's son-in-law pointed out that some neighbors installed vinyl windows before the area was a historic district. Gunn responded that the Commission has an obligation to comply with the guidelines. He said it is important for the Commission to be consistent. Gunn said that if the Commission made an exception for one homeowner, then the guidelines would be meaningless, because the Commission could not then require adherence to the guidelines for any application in the future. The Hofmann's son-in-law asked what constitutes the making of a historic district. McCafferty said it is a long process beginning with a survey by an architectural historian and ending with a City Council vote. She said that every property owner in the district is notified by mail of district consideration. McCafferty said she checked the mailing list for the Longfellow District and confirmed that the Hofmanns' name and address are on the list. She said that they would have been notified at least once regarding National Register nomination, informed again about the public hearing at the Historic Preservation Commission, and notified a third time about the public hearing at. the Planning and Zoning Commission. Maharry said that ignorance is not an excuse. He pointed out that there are signs going into the Longfellow Neighborhood that describe it as the Longfellow Historic District. Brennan asked if the letters from the City go into detail to point out the potential guidelines and requirements for properties in historic districts. Maharry said that the Historic Preservation Overlay is a zoning district that comes with regulations which property owners should be aware of. The letters for local historic districts inform property owners of the requirements and guidelines. MOTION: Enloe moved to approve the application for a certificate of appropriateness for the replacement of windows at 604 Grant Street. Ponto seconded the motion. Ponto agreed that this is a tough situation for the homeowners but added that they will have to resolve this with their contractor. McCallum commented that the applicants have the right to appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council. McCafferty said that the standard for the City Council to overturn the Commission's decision would be a finding that the Commission acted in an arbitrary or capricious manner. She said that if an appeal is submitted, the City Council will consider whether or not the Commission complied with the guidelines. Gunn told the homeowners that if the application is denied, they should tell their contractor that he wile have to speak with the Historic Preservation Commission. Enloe said that the contractor will have to get a building permit, and then the Building Department will tell the contractor what to expect from there. McCafferty said that since she is leaving City employment, she has informed her supervisor about this situation with this application. The motion to approve failed on a vote of 0-6. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 13, 2005 Page 3 Maharry said the Commission will be able to give the contractor recommendations for the type of windows that will comply with the guidelines. McCafferty also gave the homeowners a report that contains the guidelines. Consideration of Minutes: December 9, 2004. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve the minutes of the December 9, 2004 meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. Enloe seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. DISCUSSION AND INFORMATION: McCollister Homestead. McCafferty said that some Commission members met for discussion at the property of the McCollister Homestead. She said the owner ptans to redevelop the property and build houses on some of the ten acres. McCafferty said the property is designated a historic landmark and said that the developer will have to submit preliminary drawings for approval. She stated that there is also a structurally unstable barn on the property that the owner plans to demolish. McCafferty said she expected the developer to have submitted a site plan by the time of the February meeting. She said that the Commission will have to approve the houses, and she has discussed with the developer what would be acceptable. Enloe asked if the new houses would be expected to be compatible with the existing house. McCafferty said that the guidelines require new construction to continue in the same vein as the rest of the streetscape. She said that because the Iowa City guidelines are not applicable here, the project would fall back to the purview of the Secretary of the Interior Standards. McCafferty said she has discussed the possibility of using simple vernacular forms for the new houses. Historic Preservation Myths and Frequently Asked Questions. Maharry said these information sheets are drafts for the Commission to review for corrections or additions. Ponto said he thought the drafts were very good and asked what the intent is for the final version. McCafferty said they would be used as educational tools. She said they would be distributed to homeowners in potential future districts and would be posted on the website. Brennan suggested that number eleven also contain a reference to what the Commission has achieved regarding the number of reviews that are approved as the result of a collaborative effort between the homeowner and the Commission. He also said that, under the third "Frequently Asked Question," the 60% figure comes from a City ordinance and not from State law. Brennan also said "something about...this doesn't say anything about opting out." McCafferty said that letters will be sent out to all homeowners of landmarks and properties in conservation and historic districts regarding the guidelines for these properties before summer project season gets under way. OTHER: McCafferty said that she mailed the grant application for an HRDP grant to update the City's Preservation Plan. She said the previous plan was intended to last ten years, and it was prepared in 1992. McCafferty said the City would have to supply matching funds if the grant is approved. She stated that if the grant is denied, the grant request could be resubmitted as a CLG grant. Maharry and the other Commission members thanked McCafferty for all the work she had done while in her tenure as the Commission's planner. Enloe said that McCafferty had made the Commission really an effective body. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 13, 2005 Page 4 Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte. s:lpcd/minuteslhpc12005/hpcO1-13-O5, doc Historic Preservation Commission Attendance Record 2005 Telm Name Expires 1/8 1/13 2/10 3/10 4/14 4/28 5/12 5/26 6/9 6/23 7/14 7/28 8/11 8/25 9/8 10/13 11/10 12/8 R. Carlson 3/29/07 ........ J. Enloe 3/29/06 X X M. Gunn 3/29/07 O/E X M. Maharry 3/29/05 X X M. MeCallum 3/29/06 X X J. Pardekooper 3/29/06 O/E X J. Ponto 3/29/07 X X A. Smothers 3/29/05 O/E O/E J. Weissmiller 3/29/06 O/E O/E T. Weitzel 3/29/05 O/E O/E Key: X - Present O Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting ..... Not a Member MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3, 2005 EMMA J. HAP, VAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Beth Koppes, Dean Shannon, Ann Freerks, Don Anciaux, Jerry Hansen, Bob Brooks, Benjamin Chait STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Karen Howard, Jan Ream, Mitch Behr OTHERS PRESENT: Dan Black, Marly Maiers, Steve Alsap, Andy Meuer, Sam Hanna RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: - Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, an amendment to the Zoninq Code, Section 14-6-O Sign Regulations, to permit electronic changeable copy signs in the Community Commercial (CC-2), Highway Commercial (CH-l) and Intensive Commercial (C1-1) zones. CALL TO ORDER: Anciaux called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Motion: Chait made a motion to defer this item until the 2/17/05 meeting. Shannon seconded. Chait said a deferral would give the Commission time to discuss the election of new officers at an informal meeting before voting on it. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. AMENDMENT ITEM: Discussion of amendments to the Zoning Code, Section 14-6-O Sign Regulations to permit electronic changeable copy signs in the Community Commercial (CC-2), Highway Commercial (CH-l) and Intensive Commercial (C1-1) zones. Howard said that in response to a request by Iowa State Bank and Trust Company, the Commission had asked Staff to research and draft an amendment to the sign regulations in the current Code to permit electronically changeable copy signs but not "animated" signs. Subsequent to that request, the City had also received a letter from SIGN Production, Inc., written on behalf of Conoco/Phillips gas stations who were updating their signs for fueling stations and would like to have electronically changeable gas price signs. Howard said electronic changeable copy signs provide greater flexibility and convenience for the property owner. Many interfaced with a computer so the text could be changed remotely. Howard said many cities prohibited or restricted the use of "animated" signs for reasons of traffic safety. Cities also restrict them for aesthetic reasons to minimize sign clutter. Due to advances in technology, light emitting diode displays could also be several magnitudes brighter than other types of illuminated signs and produce a glare that would be distracting to drivers. Staff had drafted an amendment to the current sign regulations that would allow electronic changeable copy signs with the following restrictions. Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2005 Page 2 of 8 · Such signs would be limited to the Community Commercial (CC-2), Intensive Commercial (C1-1) and Highway Commercial (CH-l) zones. · Electronic changeable copy would only be allowed on freestanding and freestanding wide-base signs. The changeable copy portion of the sign could not exceed 40 percent of the area of the sign face. The maximum size of these types of signs would be 125-square feet per sign face. A 40% limit would allow 50 square feet of electronic signage per sign face (100-square feet on a double-faced sign.) The allowance would be greater for properties close to the interstate highway and for properties that had "common signs" for more than one business. · Only one electronic changeable copy sign would be allowed per lot to help prevent sign clutter. · Iowa City currently allowed electronic time and temperature signs on buildings. The proposed amendments to the Zoning Code would allow a property owner to add electronic copy to a freestanding sign on the property without having to eliminate an existing time and temperature sign that was attached to a building. · The copy can be changed no more than once per hour and cannot be animated. · To address concerns about excessive brightness, the proposed regulations contained language to prevent signage that might interfere with, obstruct the view of, or confuse drivers and must meet certain illumination standards. Signs should have automatic adjustment based on the ambient light, which would turn the brightness level down at night and up during the day. Howard said if the Commission believed that a more far-reaching amendment should be considered, Staff suggested that this item be deferred until the pros and cons of LED video image signs could be more fully researched and discussed. A deferral would also allow additional time to find out which options local businesses wished to pursue and identify any potential problems with regard to animated signs. Howard said Staff felt the proposed amendments to the Zoning Code would provide flexibility and ease of use to the sign owner, but not open the door to animated signs or video-image signs that might change the character of Iowa City's commercial streets and districts. Jann Ream, the City's Code Enforcement Assistant, was also in attendance to address any technical questions that the Commission might have. Chait said the Code was currently under review, this amendment to the sign ordinance would be apart from that. Without making major changes to current standards and the Sign Ordinance, how could they make manually changeable copy applicable to electronic copy changeable signs. Howard said that since manually changeable copy are currently allowed as any sign without any restrictions on size, Staff would advise against making a simple word change in the ordinance. A simple word change in this case would result in a rather drastic change in the regulations. Chait said he'd prefer not to make big changes now. What zones would changeable copy signs be allowed in with the proposed ordinance amendments? Ream said currently manually changeable signs were allowed in any zone. This would not be changed. With regard to electronic changeable copy signs, it made sense to limit the electronically changeable copy signs to just three commercial zones on freestanding and freestanding wide base signs. Currently in the downtown freestanding signs are not allowed, so the regulations would not change with this amendment. Freerks said at the last meeting the Commission had requested text from Staff that included limitations with regard to location, brightness, and animation. She did not feel they were over stepping their bounds. Chait said he felt they were not going for enough. This was a measure just to bring the Ordinance into the current century. Businesses could have manual copy signs anywhere but only three zones for electronic changeable signs. Howard said Staff felt that more research would be needed for larger changes to the Ordinance. Electronic changeable copy signs are much different than manually changed reader brands, particularly if the signs are allowed to flash, scroll, or project video images. Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2005 Page 3 of 8 Koppes asked if the photos submitted by Conoco were in compliance with the new proposal. Howard said they were, the signs could actually be much than what was shown. The Iowa State Bank sign would be allowed as well. Hansen asked if limiting electronically changeable signs to just three zones would support an unfair advantage to any business. Howard said Staff felt it would not. The proposal was meant to keep electronic changeable signs away from residential zones. Mikio said that the sign ordinance currently treats businesses differently depending on where they are located. For example the CN-1 zone currently prohibits changeable copy signs. Ream said CO-1, CN-1 and RO zones were located next to residential zones. For example, no freestanding signs are allowed in the CN-1 zone, monument base signs were allowed. Hansen said safety issues had been mentioned numerous times. Did the DOT have standards? Were there traffic studies to show that what Staff was saying with respect to driver distraction with scrolling signs / traffic flow issues was true or were they limiting the ordinance to restrictions which were not true. Howard said she'd read studies regarding LED lights. The LED light magnitude was brighter. There was a big difference between watching animated signs white sitting in a stadium versus driving 40 mph and your eyes were not on the road. She said Staff could do more research if needed and/or by Commission directive. Staff had tried to do what the Commission had asked, which was to allow static electronically changeable copy signs in areas that would not impact residential areas. Miklo said that in addition to traffic safety concerns this was an issue of community appearance. In 1983 when the current sign regulations were adopted, there was considerable discussion about animated signs. Those being signs that include some sort of movement, such as flashing or moving lights, flags and mechanical signs that turned or made some sort of motion. It was a conscious decision on the part of the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council at that time to prohibit all animated signs. He said that "time and temperature" signs commonly seen at banks, were the one exception. Anciaux pointed out that barber pole signs were also an exception. Chait said the Commission had discussed amending the Sign ©rdinance from manually changeable text signs to electronically changeable text signs, but not as in-depth as what Staff had written the proposed amendment to the Code. They were simply trying to accommodate the banks' request but he didn't feel they were addressing Iowa State Bank's request. Miklo said that initially the Commission requested that staff draft amendments to change the current changeable copy signs to electronic changeable copy signs rather than do a wholesale amendment to the sign code. After initial research and draft amendment staff reported back to the Commission that this would result in some rather large electronic changeable copy signs, because there were very few size restrictions on changeable copy signs. The Commission concurred that staff should research the issue more. At a subsequent meeting Staff presented draft changes to the Commission for electronic changeable copy signs with size and other restrictions for the new zoning code. The Commission then asked staff to make these same changes to the current CC-2 and C1-1 zone sign regulations. He said that the ordincance revisions before the Commission allowed the signs that Iowa State Bank had requested. It also will allow the sign requested by SIGN Productions on behalf of Conoco/Phillips. Public discussion was opened. Dan Black, Iowa State Bank and Trust, said he felt the proposed amendment would address Iowa State Bank's requested sign. Staff had kept him very informed. Black said he wished to encourage the Commission to approve the amendment. Approving the amendment would not limit the Commission's ability to go further in the future to address issues such as scrolling and animated signs. Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2005 Page 4 of 8 Hansen asked Black if Iowa State Bank was solid on their sign design. What if the later decided to approve broader parameters? Black said 50-square feet per side as proposed in the amendment would cover what they'd looked at. He was comfortable with it now and down the road. Marty Maiers, Hills Bank and Trust, encouraged the Commission to approve the amendment as written by Staff. Hills Bank and Trust continued to explore options to expand. They had electronic signs in three other communities [North Liberty on HWY 965; Cedar Rapids on Williams Blvd, Marion at the corner of 8th and 11th] and looked forward to working with Staff for Iowa City signs. In some cities they used electronic signs with scrolling messages, no pictures or flashes. The message interchanged with the time and temperature. One sign was an LED, the other was a bulb system. Hansen asked Maiers how they determined the length of the message and how long it would take someone to read it. Maiers said he didn't know for sure, but they wanted to get a message across as quickly as possible. Steve Alsap, co-owner of SIGN Productions, Inc. urged the Commission to pass the proposed amendment to the Code. He said his company had some concerns and they wanted to be a part of future ordinance and Code changes. He appreciated StafFs attempt to bring the current Sign Ordinance in line with modern technology. AIsap said he felt there needed to be greater definition of paragraph #5, 14-60-7D, Illuminated Signs. Most manufacturers gave "cell" levels as most signs had photocell dimming capabilities. That meant they dimmed at night to create an easily readable level and on a sunny day would increase their brightness level. Paragraphs #5 and #6. It would not be possible to define the manufacturer's recommended brightness level as the signs came already calibrated. He'd like to see the definitions reworked so they could educate their clients when assisting them to purchase a sign. Alsap talked at length about pixels being used to create color; "Color Technology" using software to create many colors; the longevity of LEDs and energy efficiency of electronic changeable copy signs. Howard said after speaking with Alsap on the telephone, she had revised the text the section of the proposed ordinance amendment to say monochromatic, utilizing a dark background with only the message or image lit in a single color. She felt this addressed some of her concerns about color. Paragragh #6. Alsap said he attended trade shows across the country and had never found in any manufacturer's operating manual the recommended standards for brightness. What they should be regulating was intensity. Paragraph #7. Alsap said there were only four ways to program electronically changeable signs. One way to do so was at the base of the sign via a cable with a key-pad or by computer at a remote location using a direct cable from the sign to the building using a RF signal or modem. He asked why Staff proposed to have a Building Official has access to this interface. Howard stated that this was just a measure to allow access if a problem was reported. Alsap encouraged the Commission to approve the proposed amendment to the Sign Ordinance. He wanted and welcomed the opportunity to be involved in further regulation development. Hansen asked if the word monochromatic was correct in paragraph #5. Alsap said it was very good wording. Outside of the colors Amber, Red, Green and Blue, it became very expensive to use colors. Monochromatic was a good interim step. Hansen asked what volume of business was represented in Iowa City by SIGN Productions, Inc. At future informal work sessions he'd like to have them present as well as Iowa City business leaders to advise the Commission of what they felt they wanted and/or needed. Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2005 Page 5 of 8 Alsap said their company employed roughly 100 employees. Their signs were about 30% of those in Iowa City and Coralville. They had done work all over the country and he had a good understanding of sign ordinances all over the nation. He'd seen what worked well where and where it did not. There were studies by Penn State University with respect to motion and animation causing traffic problems. He could provide those and other information that would be invaluable to the Commission. Hansen said he felt that information would be very valuable. Ream said she had a report regarding sign contractors in Iowa City which she would give to the Commission. Alsap said the software that controlled signs was pretty standard. There was a very small number of manufacturers across the country for a very large market. Research and Development monies had shown that the small number of features and functions was 95% the same type of thing regardless of manufacturer. Software control for duration, time sequence and time of day. "Small, limited software developed for a large market." Andy Meuer, SIGN Productions, Inc., asked the Commission how they had arrived at the decision for text changing only once an hour and why did they feel it was a safety concern. Howard said they had discussed it among the Commissioners and had arrived at the one-hour figure. Miklo said it was what had been requested by Iowa State Bank. Freerks said text signs were informational such as giving gasoline prices, etc. Ream said with respect to enforcement, one hour was easier. A staff person could check on a sign, go check on another one and come back to check on the original sign in an hours time. Meuer said 10 minutes or l-hour, it was al~ the same. Ream said it was part safety issue, part enforcement issue. Staff did not recommend a~lowing scrolling signs to be permitted. Meuer said there were studies available that he could provide to the Commission which he felt would be very helpful in deciding upon a timing sequence. Meuer said Staff had ta~ked about LED signs. He asked what research had been done. Howard said Staff had done some research regarding LEDs; they'd compared LEDs to other ambient type of lights. The article, "Bring Out the Sunglasses", had indicated that LEDs could be magnitudes brighter than other types of electronic signage. She'd also received a letter from a manufacturer and had looked at other cities sign ordinances which referenced LED regulations. Anciaux said the DOT had specifications for Lumen numbers, he requested Staff to research that further. Meuer said there was a difference between visibility and light being emitted. Ream asked Meuer to talk about measurement in NITS, how were they measured and was there any way to measure NITS. Meuer said they didn't want to control the light emitted, they wanted to control light pollution without restricting visibility. Anciaux asked about methods to avoid confusion with a stoplight, when an electronic sign with amber, green or red colors was located near a stoplight. Meuer said he'd never heard of any issues with confusion between electronic signs and stoplights. He could look for such studies if the Commission wished. Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2005 Page 6 of 8 Meuer said the proposed amendment to the Sign Ordinance could cause some disadvantages to some businesses and should be looked at in more depth in the future. There were studies by the International Sign Association that had to do with 1st Amendment rights and not violating a person's / business' constitutional rights. Hansen asked if a business purchased a sign that would change once an hour, would it be easy to change it to changing every 5-minutes? Meuer said it was done with software, it would be easy to change the timing sequence. Sam Hanna, SIGN Productions, Inc., said he had put together two packets of information for the Commission. There were many benefits to businesses for being able to have electronically changeable copy signs. Level 1 was a static message, Level 4 was a full motion video. Chait said that type of information was not appropriate for tonight's meeting. Would he please forward that information to Staff. Hanna said he supported the proposed amendment to the Sign Ordinance. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Hansen made a motion to approve an amendment to the Zoning Code, Section 14-6-0 Sign Regulations, to permit electronic changeable copy signs in the Community Commercial (CC-2), Highway Commercial (CH-l) and Intensive Commercial (C1-1) zones as written by Staff. Koppes seconded the motion. Shannon asked for a clarification as to what monochromatic meant. Howard said it meant one color. Shannon said in Paragraph #5, Staff had written 'must' be monochromatic, why did they feel so strongly? Howard said with more than one color, colors could be combined into video-type images. Iowa State Bank and Conoco had requested approval for monochromatic electronic changeable copy. Iowa State Bank had requested text changing once an hour, Staff was responding to their request and the direction of the Commission. Hansen said he was comfortable with the proposed amendment as a stop gap measure. He was eager to get into the larger discussion as there was a lot they didn't know about yet. Chair said he was going to support the motion because the community had requested this change six months ago. He said that it is often said that Iowa City is a special place, but if these types of electronic signs are good enough for 80% of the cities in America they should be good enough for Iowa City. There was a big difference between the current sign ordinance and technology available. His issue was with the process, context and the bureaucracy that they dealt with which did not address technology in a timely manner. He felt it was silly to try to regulate something as complex as what SIGN Productions, Inc. was telling them about. Technology changed. When they'd get the standards figured out, technology would have changed again. Freerks said she would support the motion. She did not feel it was silly to regulate signs. The City had light ordinances to regulate lighting, which was also a complex issue. She felt the proposed amendment would be a good change. Koppes said she would support the amendment to the Sign Ordinance. It matched the needs of Iowa State Bank and Conoco. She felt they needed to look further at technology. Shannon said they should go forward, he'd look forward to hearing back from the sign company. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2005 Page 7 of 8 OTHER ITEMS: There were none CONSIDERATION OF THE JANUARY 20, 2005 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 7-0. ADJOURNMENT: Motion: Brooks made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:35 pm. Hansen seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. Elizabeth Koppes, Secretary Minutes submitted by Candy Barnhill Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2005 Page 8 of 8 Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission Attendance Record 2005 FORMAL MEETING Term Name Expires 1/6 1/20 2/3 2/17 3/3 3/17 4/7 4/21 5/5 5/19 6/2 6/16 7/7 7/21 8/4 8/18 9/1 9/15 10/6 10/20 11/3 11/17 12/1 12/15 D. Anciaux 05/06 X X X B. Brooks 05/05 X X X B. Chait 05/06 X O X A. Freerks 05/08 X X X J. Hansen 05/05 X X X E. Koppes 05/07 O/E X X D. Shannon 05/08 X X X INFORMAL MEETING Term Name Expires 1/3 2/14 2/28 3/14 4/1 4/18 5/2 5/16 5/30 6/13 7/4 7/18 8/1 8/15 8/29 9/12 10/3 10/17 10/31 11/14 11/28 12/12 D. Anciaux 05/06 CW B. Brooks 05/05 CW B. Chair 05/06 CW A. Freerks 05/08 CW J. Hansen 05/05 CW E. Koppes 05/07 CW D. Shannon 05/08 CW Key: X - Present 0 - Absent O/E Absent/Excused N/M- No Meeting ..... Not a Member CW Cancelled due to Weather MINUTES FINAL/APPROVED HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 20, 2005 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL Members Present: Jerry Anthony (arrived at 6:55), Erin Barnes, Lori Bears, Mark Edwards, Matthew Hayek, Brian Richman Members Absent: William Greazel, Rita Marcus, Jayne Sandier Staff Present: Tracy Hightshoe, Steve Long Public Present: NONE CALL MEETING TO ORDER Chairperson Hayek called the meeting to order at 6:47 APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM NOVEMBER 18, 2004 Motion: Richman moved to approve the November 18, 2004 minutes as submitted. Barnes seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0. PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA NONE OLD BUSINESS Unsuccessful or Delayed Proiects Policy Discussion regarding United Action for Youth. Hightshoe stated UAY has not entered an agreement yet due to historical considerations that prevent the City entering an agreement. The State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO) must review possible effects to historic properties as part of the Section 106 process for each proposed project. The SHPO cited concerns regarding the window replacements proposed by UAY. UAY will work with a Dubuque company to replace the existing windows. UAY will submit the new information to the SHPO and request SHPO's concurrence with the proposed windows so that they may proceed with the project. The discussion was tabled for the February meeting. Discussion regarding Blooming Garden. Hightshoe stated Blooming Garden had not entered an Agreement with the City as sites have not been identified. Hightshoe stated staff will also need to confirm if the applicant applied for Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTCs) as the policy requires the applicant to apply for other funds (as cited in applicant HOME/CDBG application) in the first available application period. Long passed out a letter submitted by Robert Burns addressed to the Commission. Upon review of the letter, Hayek proposed that staff get an opinion from the legal department to determine how to proceed. REVIEW OF THE FY06 ALLOCATION PROCESS Long said that there were two applicant workshops. He said that over 30 people attended the workshops. He added that there was discussion, constructive criticism, and that some good suggestions were made. He said that it would be helpful to have the input of persons who have applied in the past when reviewing next year's applications. Long said that in the past the Commission has taken tours of projects that interested them. He mentioned that there are usually around eight project sites (four sites each day for two days) that would be visited if there was sufficient interest. Feb. 17 is the question/answer session with applicants. This will be an important meeting because it would be the time to ask questions or express concerns to applicants before submitting their ranking sheets and allocation recommendations. Ranking sheets will be mailed with the applications. Ranking Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes January 20, 2005 Page 2 forms will be due to staff on March 4th. Members are encouraged to have the ranking sheets out during the applicant Q/A session. After staff receives the ranking/allocation preliminary recommendations, staff will put together various spreadsheets to summarize the data. Long stated their names would be on the data next to their recommendations, and these sheets will be public information. Sample spreadsheets from last year were reviewed. Included were the ranking worksheet (with high, Iow and average score), average allocation worksheet, and the consensus worksheet. The consensus worksheet presents whether the project was fully funded, partially funded, or no funding. Hightshoe said that the staff would go through the applications and provide a 2 page staff report for each application. She said that a copy of this report is also sent to the applicant so that everyone is informed of staff concerns. The staff reports will be mailed to HCDC members with the Feb.17 HCDC packet. March 10 the commission will meet to review the groupings, spreadsheets and discuss differences in recommended scoring, allocations, etc. The commission may ask agency representatives questions if they are in attendance. Commission members are free to change their scores or allocations and return to staff for revised scores and allocations to be handed out at the March 17 meeting. At the March 17 meeting, the final allocation recommendation will be made that is forwarded to the Council for review and approval. Long said that here would be a sub-commission formed which would write a memo to the Council to justify the recommendations. The justifications are due to Council March 24. He added that on May 3rd everything goes to the City Council for approval. PROFORMA BASICS Hightshoe said that each year all rental housing applicants are required to provide a proforma with their application. A proforma is used to evaluate rental housing projects. She said that it compares each rental housing project and reviews operating expenses, fees, rent revenues, etc. Hightshoe stated that the City reviews each project to determine if the amount of public subsidy is appropriate for the project. Staff will review if expenses are reasonable, if the rents comply with HOME provisions, etc. Staff will look at the debt coverage ratio, DCR, (net operating income/debt service). If under 1.0, the project does not generate enough income to service its debt. Strong debt coverage is over 1.15. Hightshoe stated if the project receives private financing a lender may require a higher debt coverage ratio before the lender will provide financing. Local institutions may require a 1.2 or 1.25 DCR. The Bank-Ability Guide was a~so in this packet to help provide an estimate of general housing project expenses. Member asked if staff would assist members with the project proforma. Hightshoe mentioned that the staff would go over the Proforma and if expenses, or developer's fees, for example, are too high, that staff would express their concern. Hightshoe stated that applicants are required to complete the proformas so that staff/commission members can determine if based on their proiections, which should be reasonable, that the project is viable and will not need future subsidy for replacement reserves, repairs, etc. HOME rules do not allow additional allocations after the first year during the project's HUD required period of affordability, which could be up to 20 years. She added that the second part of the Proforma concerns taxes. Hightshoe mentioned that non-profit organizations usually do not pay taxes, thus the second page is mostly for for-profit entities. Staff will a~so review the return on investment. MONITORING REPORTS Hightshoe said that Sandier had emailed her monitoring reports. Goodwill Industries Hightshoe said that they were allocated $8,000, and they have spent $4,000 to date. Upon their last report, cars have been provided to 15 households. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes January 20, 2005 Page 3 DVIP- Security camera Hightshoe said that the camera is currently in the process of installation, and is expected to be finished by the following week. She said that the contractors that installed the camera would donate half of the labor. Old Brick Barnes said that they did not make much progress on the bathroom because they depend a lot on volunteer hours. She said that they put a bid on materials and are focused on the wheelchair lift currently. She said that they do need to follow the Historic Preservation guidelines, and that also slows the process. Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship Barnes said that the persons that are eligible for buying houses are those that qualify to get a mortgage, and have incomes below 80% of the AMI. She added that the Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship Community Land Trust program (owner-occupied housing) currently serves mostly white families. As far as ethnic minorities, she said that they serve one Bosnian, one Asian, and one African American family. They have one household with a person with disabilities as the head of the household. She added that buyers are selected on a first come first served basis. Shelter House Richman said that the outreach coordinator position is more concerned with the STAR services. He said that they provide resume building, online job search, referrals, and employment services. Shelter House administers the STAR program in Iowa City. Adiournment Anthony moved to adjourn. Barnes seconded. The meeting adjourned at 7:45 PM. s:lpcd/minuteslhcdc~2005101-20-05.doc Housing & Community Development Commission Attendance Record 2005 reiTn Name Expires 01/20 02/17 03/17 04/21 05/19 06/16 07/21 08/18 09/15 10/20 11/17 12/15 Jerry Anthony 09/01/05 X Erin Barnes 09/01/06 X Lori Bears 09/01/07 X Mark Edwards 09/01/05 X William Greazel 09/01/06 O/E Matthew Hayek 09/01/07 X Rita Marcus 09/01/06 O/E Brian Richman 09/01/07 X Jayne Sandier 09/01/05 O/E Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting ..... Not a Member MINUTES APPROVED PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 8, 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, Ann Burnside FORMAL ACTION TAKEN Moved by Pacha, seconded by Westefeld, to approve the November 10, 2004 minutes as written. Unanimous. Moved by Gustaveson~ seconded by O'Lear¥, to recommend that the Parks and Recreation Commission endorse the concept of naming the dog park in recognition of a maior contributor if such is a condition of their gift. Unanimous. Moved by Walz~ seconded by Westefeld to recommend denial of the developer's request for the City to accept ownership of proposed parkland in the Village Green South Subdivision at this time, given the fact that the Parks and Recreation Department does not have a sufficient amount of personnel to appropriately maintain the space. Passed 7-0 with one abstention. (O'Lear¥) Moved by Walz, seconded by Westefeld~ to elect Craig Gustaveson as Chair and Margaret Loomer as Vice Chair for 2005. Unanimous. DOG PARK NAMING Anne Burnside, DogPAC Board member, was present and reviewed the concept plan for the proposed Dog Park with the commission. In a letter to Steve Atkins, City Manager, Beth Shields suggested that DogPAC would proceed with its planned fundraising for the construction of the off-leash park with the understanding that a major contributor could possibly have naming privileges. It was suggested that this distinction could be considered, but that $25,000 probably is not a sufficient contribution for such. Pacha inquired about plans for obstacle courses for dogs etc. Burnside stated that the architect plan includes log piles, culverts, and a trail for the dogs and their owners, but not a specific obstacle course at this time. Pacha asked for a motion from the Commission to endorse the concept that if a large donor comes forward that they have the option to have their name as part of the parks name. O'Leary stated that he likes the idea of giving a donor this privilege, but indicated he did not agree with stating an actual dollar amount within the guidelines. Nancy Ostrognai asked that they keep Parks and Recreation Commission November 10, 2004 Page 2 of 5 "Dog Park" as part of the name. Trueblood suggested that sections of the park could be named after donors, or that rather than actually naming the park after a specific donor, recognition could be given with signage such as "This park made possible through the generous donations of...". Moved by Gustaveson, seconded by O'Leary~ to recommend that the Parks and Recreation Commission endorse the concept of naming the dog park in recognition of a maior contributor if such is a condition of their gift. Unanimous. VILLAGE GREEN SOUTH Trueblood reviewed the subdivision and its history. In 1993 the Commission recommended to conditionally accept approximately 12 acres of' parkland, which is largely a storm water management area. There is now a new owner who would like to initiate a process for turning over the ownership to the City. Trueblood recommended to the Commission that they do not accept this proposal mainly due to the lack of personnel to maintain this property. Walz stated that neighborhoods need to understand what denying this request entails for them as homeowners. Gustaveson asked if we receive funds in lieu of accepting ownership. Trueblood stated this is uncertain at this time. If the City were to accept ownership of this property, the Commission agreed that the developer should be required to construct a hard surface trail to the City's specifications. Moved by Walz~ seconded by Westefeld to recommend denial of the developer's request for the City to accept ownership of proposed parkland in the Village Green South Subdivision at this time~ given the fact that the Parks and Recreation Department does not have a sufficient amount of personnel to appropriately maintain the space. Passed 7-0 with one abstention. (O'Leary) ELECTION OF OFFICERS FOR 2005 It was proposed by O'Leary to elect Craig Gustaveson as Chair and Judith Klink as Vice Chair for 2005. Klink declined the nomination and suggested that Margaret Loomer serve as Vice Chair for 2005. Moved by Walz~ seconded by Westefeld, to elect Craig Gustaveson as Chair and Margaret Loomer as Vice Chair for 2005. Unanimous. RECOGNITION OF OUTGOING MEMBER - NANCY OSTROGNAI Trueblood expressed gratitude to Ostrognai for her four years of service on the commission and noted her knowledge and experience of accessibility issues in regard to parks and buildings. Pacha presented her with a "Certificate of Appreciation", and Trueblood presented her with a few small gifts from the staff. COMMISSION TIME Ostrognai expressed her gratitude to the Commission for their work and inspiration over her four years of service. O'Leary stated that he is looking forward to the new year and the capital improvement projects that are proposed. He also stated that he hopes for more public Parks and Recreation Commission November 10, 2004 Page 3 of 5 participation. Walz thanked Nancy and Matt both for their contributions to the Commission over the years. She reiterated O'Leary's hope for more public input; also hopes that the Commission's denial of accepting ownership of the Village Green South property will make a statement to the public. Klink expressed her gratitude, as well, to Ostrognai and Pacha for their service and commitment to the Commission. She also expressed how impressed she is with John Yapp's Trail Projects Update. Gustaveson also expressed gratitude for Ostrognai's and Pacha's contributions to the Commission and indicated he is looking forward to a productive year ahead. Loomer wished everyone Happy Holidays and her best wishes to Ostrognai. Westefeld stated that he has learned a lot from Nancy and will miss her and recognized Pacha for his longevity as chair. Also praised Parks and Recreation staff for the great party that was given to Marilyn Kriz at her retirement. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Trueblood reported on the following: Capital Improvement Proiects Trueblood reviewed City Manager's tentative proposed budget and how it effects Parks & Recreation CIP projects. He presented a modified list to the Commission that was adopted at the November meeting. Items asterisked are the items City Manager is recommending to City Council. Trueblood reviewed those items and the changes are as follows: Peninsula Parkland Entry Road & Parking Lot Project: Approved for this year. Trueblood reminded the Commission that we are currently in FY '05 and that FY '06 begins July 1, 2005. Grant Wood Community Gymnasium Project: Recommended for FY '06. Mercer Park Ballfield Upgrade: City Manager is proposing $300,000 over a three-year period rather than $280,000 requested in one year. Iowa River Trail Bridge: This project is not recommended for funding by the City Manager at this time for budgeting reasons, but Trueblood noted that City Manager does like this proposal. Sand Lake Recreation Acquisition: City Managers budget includes $200,000 per year over three years instead of the $750,000 in one year. Idea is to start setting aside funds for something if it does come to fruition. Soccer Park Improvements: Recommended $100,000 for FY '06. Waterworks Prairie Park Development: Recommended for FY '06. Replace 10 Park Shelters: Recommended for FY '06. Trueblood added some items. The City Park Riverbank Stabilization will be recommended if federal funding can be obtained. Annual park maintenance projects proposed for $200,000. Annual Intra-City Bike Trail Project, $30,000 still in. Missing Link Trail in current budget. Parks and Recreation Commission November 10, 2004 Page 4 of 5 The Recreation Center window replacement project that was approved last year to be done over a three-year period has not begun. This is due to the resignation of an engineer. There has recently been a new engineer assigned to this project so should be moving ahead with this in 2005. Gustaveson asked if we could recommend a change in prioritization of this list to the City Manager. Trueblood reminded Commission that they approved this list at the November meeting. Trueblood stated that having six of top seven projects approved (either in whole or part) is quite good. Public Art Trueblood reviewed memo that was sent to Public Art Committee regarding the placement of art in city parks and which parks would be considered as most appropriate for this. The top five parks listed are City Park (upper portion), Hunters Run Park, Iowa City Kickers Soccer Park, South Sycamore Greenway, and Willow Creek Park. Also listed were several other parks that may be considered. United Action for Youth "Drag Show" Reviewed printed materials with Commission regarding the GLBTQ&A Youth Drag Talent Show sponsored by the United Action for Youth. No comments or discussion. Board & Commission Meeting The tentative date is January 10 for Boards and Commissions to meet with City Council. Aquatics Supervisor Position Update Offered position to candidate from Maine. This candidate rejected the offer. Will be offering position to second candidate on Thursday, December 9. CHAIR'S REPORT Pacha reminded Commission that new member, Philip Reisetter, will begin his term in January. Pacha thanked Nancy for her comments, contribution and her efforts to attend the meetings and park tours. Pacha also thanked the incoming officers, and wished all present Happy Holidays. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 6:10 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 O/E OE Craig Gustaveson 1/1/07 X X X LQ X X NM X X NM X X Judith Klink 1/1/07 X O/E X LQ X X NM X X NM X X Margaret Loomer 1/1/08 X X X LQ X O/E NM X X NM X X Ryan O'Leary 1/1/06 ......... LQ X X NM X X NM X X Nancy Ostrognai 1/1/05 X X X LQ X X NM X X NM X X Matt Pacha 1/I/05 X X X LQ X O/E NM O/E X NM X X Sarah Walz 1/1/07 X X X LQ X X NM O/E X NM X X John Westefeld 1/1/06 X X X LQ X X NM X X NM X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E= Absent/Excused NM = No meeting LQ = No meeting due to lack of quorum .... Not a Member APPROVED BY WRITTEN CONSENT MINUTES CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION - PUBLIC HEARING THURSDAY, JANUARY 13, 2005 - 7:00 PM HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL Members Present: Kevin Werner, Andy Chappell, Karen Kubby, Nate Green, Naomi Novick, Vicki Lensing, Lynn Rowat, and William Sueppel, Chair Members Absent: Penny Davidsen Staff Present: Marian Karr, Eleanor Dilkes OPENiNG REMARKS BY CHAIR: Chair Sueppel called the meeting to order, and then proceeded to give some background on what the Charter Review Commission has been doing. To date, the Commission has met 22 times; has had two previous public hearings; and has reviewed the Charter in detail. As a result of these meetings, and especially the meeting of January 6, 2005, in which some final decisions were made, the Commission is preparing to present a Charter recommendation to the City Council at their Tuesday, January 18, 2005, meeting. Sueppel further stated that there is a red-lined version of the Charter available, either at this evening's public hearing, or people can stop by the City Clerk's office for a copy, or people can go the City's website at www.icgov.org/council/charterreview.htm. Next Sueppel stated that at the last public hearing, in December 2004, four issues were identified as being significant. The first issue concerns the election of the mayor. Currently, the mayor is elected/appointed by the other members of the council. Considerable discussion by the Charter Review Commission has taken place regarding whether or not the voters of the city should elect the mayor, instead. Sueppel noted that it was not a unanimous vote, but the Commission has decided not to change the mayoral process. Another issue that arose, concerning the mayoral seat, is the number of terms that a mayor may have. After in-depth discussions, the Commission decided that term limits would not be appropriate, and that the Council and voters can determine this. The third issue concerns how many people should be on the council, and what should be the composition of the council, in terms of district seats and at-large seats. The Commission decided to continue with seven (7) council members, four (4) of whom are elected at- large; and three (3) of whom are elected from districts, with each of them serving a term of four (4) years. The final issue concerns whether or not district council members should continue to be elected as they currently are, or if the process should change to a "pure district" vote. Sueppel noted that again, this was not a unanimous vote, but it was decided to keep this system as it currently is. Sueppel stated that the Charter Review Commission is currently preparing a report to present to the City Council at their January 18 meeting, which will give a "line by line" discussion of why changes were made, and what the significance of these changes may be. Sueppel then introduced the members of the Charter Review Commission to those in attendance, before opening the public heating. Charter Review Commission January 13, 2005 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING: The following individuals appeared: John Balmer, 10 Princeton Court, thanked the Commission members for their thorough and comprehensive review of the Charter. Balmer gave a brief history of the City Council, stating that he was one of the first seven members of the first council, voted in 30 years ago. He stated that he agrees with the mayoral issue and the Commission's decision to keep this as it currently is. Derek Maurer, 1405 Oaklawn Avenue, stated that he is present tonight because he is disappointed to hear that the Commission is not going to make any significant changes to the Charter. He stated that he feels the community has grown sufficiently to warrant making changes. He feels that with the population growth, economic growth, and the reality of the "Corridor" point towards change. Kubby asked him if he could make one change to the Charter to help local government maintain participation by its citizens, what would it be. Maurer stated that a colleague of his, Becky Soglin, is also present, and that the two of them "brainstormed" one day and they came up with some ideas for an "ideal city government." He stated that she would give further details. Melvin Dvorsky stated that he would like to see one change in the current form of city government, and that is allowing all voters to have a voice in who the mayor is going to be. Other than this, he feels everyone is doing a good job. Becky Soglin, Longfellow Neighborhood, thanked the Commission for their hard work, but stated that she is also disappointed that recommendations aren't being made to change the Charter. She stated that it would be ideal if the mayor were elected directly by the people. On the district issue, she feels each district should elect their representatives, and she gave some examples of having four (4) districts and three (3) at- large seats. Caroline Dieterle, 727 Walnut St., stated she had been at the last public hearing and agreed with both Derek Maurer and Becky Soglin on the issues. She spoke of the changes that have taken place in Iowa City, and how the growth calls for change. She feels that local activism is needed, and more direct representation of districts. Dieterle also stated that she feels the Charter Review Commission should have had more members, perhaps including people from the neighborhood groups, in order to give more input. Novick asked ifDieterle was directly proposing that they change the Charter to require a larger number of Commission members in the future. Dieterle stated that yes, that is what she would like to see, with perhaps fifteen members and representation from the neighborhood groups, as well. Shelton Stromquist, 316 Myrtle Avenue, stated that he has been active in the Melrose Avenue Neighborhood Association over the years. He referenced the changes in city governments over the years, and what he has noticed in his work in labor history at the Charter Review Commission January 13, 2005 Page 3 University of Iowa. He feels that the review of the Charter is an opportunity to help "restore a healthy democracy" in a very progressive city, and he urged the Commission members to consider making recommendations for change, especially with the mayoral issue and the city manager position. Sueppel noted that in 1985, the issue of direct election from each district was sent to the voters and it was voted down. Melvin Dvorsky asked how many years Iowa City has had a city manager. Sueppel noted since approximately 1952 or 1954. Garry Klein, 628 2nd Ave., congratulated the members on their task, and voiced his disappointment that no significant changes were going to take place with the Charter. He feels that people in the community most likely feel "left out" of the process, and that what is being recommended to the City Council is not necessarily what the citizens feel is best. Green thanked Klein for his previous recommendations, and noted how this helped the Commission make decisions along the way. Sueppel followed up by noting that at the December 1st "community type" public hearing, the consensus was that the city is divided and there is no one particular stance. He further stated that citizens can always petition to change the Charter, and do not have to wait another ten years before the next review occurs. Caroline Dieterle returned to comment about citizen activism, and that the Charter could be changed via petition. She feels there needs to be a clarification of the authority of the Objections Committee. She feels they should only be able to make objection to whether or not there were sufficient signatures, and not the substance of the amendment that is proposed. She stated that this question is currently waiting for an answer from the Court, but this could take some time. She stated that if there could be an internal way to clarify that for everybody, she feels it would be a good thing to do. Sueppel asked if anyone had any closing remarks. He thanked everyone for attending and participating. APPROVED BY WRITTEN CONSENT MINUTES CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION FRIDAY, JANUARY 14, 2005 -7:30 AM HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL Members Present: Kevin Wemer, Andy Chappell, Karen Kubby, Penny Davidsen (on speakerphone), Lynn Rowat, and William Sueppel, Chair; Nate Green arrived at 8:20am Members Absent: Naomi Novick, Vicki Lensing Staff Present: Marian Karr, Eleanor Dilkes CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Sueppel called the meeting to order at 7:33 AM. He noted that this is the 23rd meeting for the Charter Review Commission. APPROVE MINUTES: MOTION: Chappell moved to accept the minutes of January 6, 2005, as written; seconded by Rowat. Motion carried 6 to 0. (Green, Novick, Lensing absent) PUBLIC COMMENT: None. REVIEW PUBLIC HEARING INPUT FROM PREVIOUS EVENING: Sueppel stated that he thought the input was "excellent" and he wished that those present at last night's public hearing had been present at the first public hearing, as he welcomed their comments and more participation in this process. Kubby stated that she felt that Becky Soglin and Derek Maurer's suggestions for a 4 district/3 at-large, with the top "vote getter" being the mayor, were a new approach. She also noted that Caroline Dieterle's observation about the number of members on the Charter Review Commission was good, and Sueppel agreed, stating that he feels this warrants further discussion. Rowat stated that his understanding is that the number of members is not set at nine, but rather it's a minimum of nine. Chappell stated that he feels that adding too many people can also make the process more difficult and cumbersome. Questions arose over the diversity of those picked for the Charter Review Commission, and which areas of the City are covered by those chosen. Sueppel recommended to Karr and Dilkes that in the future, when other Charter Review Commissions are formed, that they receive all of the past Commissions' final reports so they can see any recommendations for the future. The members asked Karr how many applications had been received. Karr retrieved the information, stating they had received twenty applications, and nine appointed. Due to a conflict of interest John Balmer resigned and Nate Green was appointed. Therefore, of the original 20 applicants ten people were appointed. The conversation turned to the neighborhood associations and having more input from these groups in the future. The members discussed the need for diversity, a topic that was raised at the previous evening's public hearing. Kubby stated that the question for her, now that they are at the Charter Review Commission January 14, 2005 Page 2 end of their review process, is what have they done here to aid more participation by the citizens, in regards to their work on the Charter. Davidsen noted that several decades ago, there was a participation of the citizens, but that there is an "ebb and flow" to the whole process, and right now it could be on a low end of participation. Karr noted that in her office they have noted how difficult it is currently to get people involved in boards and commissions, and the members agreed that perhaps it is a sign of the times. The Commission directed Chappell to add a paragraph to the report to Council encouraging City Council to consider diversity when making appointments to the Commission in the future. Kubby turned the discussion to asking the members if they wanted to review the number of districts, in light of last night's comments. Sueppel stated that he spoke with Lensing after last night's meeting, and her comment was that she was ready to pass their recommendations on to the Council. He noted that she is interested in more "diversity," as well. Chappell stated that he has given further thought to the number of districts, but he doesn't feel a change is warranted yet. Members continued their discussion while reviewing a district map that Kubby brought in, which has some ideas that colleagues of Kubby's came up with. Rowat stated that his feeling, as well as those he has heard in discussions, is to stay with the 4/3 split, which gives the at-large more seats. (TAPE ENDS) Chappell brought up the topic of participation by the citizens and low voter turnout, and asked the Commission members just how much they can do about this issue, noting that this is a national problem ~nd not just a local one. Rowat picked up this topic by asking if perhaps there doesn't need to be some "grass roots" efforts within districts to spark more participation. Kubby stated that by having more districts, she feels this grass roots effort would be easier to implement, and she pushed for a more "down home and close to home" participation. Sueppel noted that if they were to recommend a change to 4 or 5 district seats, he does not feel the City Council would accept this, and it would force an election on the citizens in this issue. He feels there has not been a "ground swell" by the citizens to make this type of change. Davidsen stated that she feels that if the neighborhood groups continue to grow and become more involved, then a change would be warranted, but at this point she is reluctant to make a change. Werner stated that he also favors keeping the 4 at-large/3 district seats, as is. Green stated that he agrees with Kubby that it would increase representation, but at the same time, he believes having the 4 at-large/3 district seats keeps the majority at-large, and he feels they should not make a change at this time. MOTION: Kubby moved that there be four (4) district seats and three (3) at-large seats on the City Council; seconded by Chappell. Motion did not carry 1 to 6; Kubby voted in the positive; Werner, Chappell, Davidsen (on speakerphone), Rowat, Sueppel, and Green voting in the negative. (Novick, Lensing absent) Charter Review Commission January 14, 2005 Page 3 REVIEW CHARTER: Sueppel stated that as there are no new issues to consider, he would like to have a motion to approve the non-redlined version for presentation to the City Council at their January 18, 2005, meeting. At this meeting he would like the Council to receive both the redlined version, and the non-redlined version, of the Charter. MOTION: Chappell moved the motion to approve the current non-redlined version of the Charter, for presentation to the City Council at its January 18, 2005, meeting. Motion seconded by Rowat. Motion carried 7 to 0. (Novick, Lensing absent) PRESENTATION TO COUNCIL: Sueppel stated that he felt Chappell had done a fantastic job putting together the presentation for the City Council. Chappell noted that Dilkes had reviewed his report, as well, and she had some additional items to add. Kubby noted that Item 12, on page 3, she questions the sentence, "From a policy standpoint, the Commission also determined it would be more appropriate for such amendments to go through the public hearing process than simply through a petition and voting process." She questions the word "simply" in here. Discussion ensued on how to best re-word this sentence, as well as what the initial discussion had been on this issue. MOTION: Kubby moved to remove the word "simply" only; seconded by Chappell. Motion carried 7 to 0. (Novick, Lensing absent) Green noted that on the first page, his name should be changed from Nathan to Nate. Chappell noted that under the "Conclusion" paragraph, the last two sentences make reference to "leaving the decision in the hands of the City Council," and he wanted to get the members' thoughts on this. Kubby stated that she feels that since there were no significant changes made to the Charter, there would be no need for these changes to be on a ballot. She feels the Commission should go ahead and recommend that the Council do this by ordinance. After a brief discussion, the wording; "The Commission recommends the City Council adopt the proposed Charter amendments by ordinance," was decided upon. All members present agreed to this change in the last paragraph of the Commission's report. Chappell stated that he would make the changes, as discussed, and he will then have Rowat review the final draft. After this, he will get the final draft to Dilkes for her final review. It was then decided to have all of the Commission member's names on the report. MOTION: Kubby moved to adopt the redlined version as amended, giving Chappell and Rowat authority to complete this document; seconded by Davidsen. Motion carried 7 to 0. (Novick, Lensing absent) Charter Review Commission January 14, 2005 Page 4 MEETiNG SCHEDULE: Sueppel noted that other than the City Council meeting on January 18, when they present their report to the Council, he sees no need to schedule any further meetings at this time. Karr asked for a clarification on what the members want to have available for the Council meeting on January 18: the redlined version, the non-redlined version - both to be presented that evening. Kubby then brought up the issue of the citizen's guide to the Charter, and how they could guarantee this process getting started. Dilkes stated that once she has a draft prepared she will get copies to the Commission members, and they in turn can get copies to those they know have an interest in the guide. OLD BUSiNESS: None. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Green moved to adjourn; seconded by Werner. Meeting adjourned at 9:08 AM.