Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-12-05 Bd Comm minutesil \: MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING SEPTEMBER 18, 1995 - 4:00 PM IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER - LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Laura Hawks, Gary Nagle, Gilda Six, Nancy Foother, Clara Swan, Marty Haynes, Karyl Larson MEMBERS ABSENT: Bill Nowysz STAFF PRESENT: David Schoon, Bradley Chamberlain CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Laura Hawks called the meeting to order at 4:12 p.m. DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY (ODR) ZONE Hawks discussed how the project schedule was proceeding, The slide show materials were primarily finished. The slides were pictures of "undesirable conditions" of design and signage. The design review brochures were almost finished, Wendy Ford had helped edit the brochures, and a final review ahd printing was being scheduled. A date was set for early October to hold role playing workshops. Haynes stated to the Committee that the Committee was scheduled to be at the Homebuilders Meeting on October 5th to give a brief presentation concerning the ODR Zone Proposal. The Committee discussed the progress of contacting different community orgamzations around the city. Additions of community organizations were also made to the current contact list and others were deleted that were not considered to be appropriate organizations for the Design Review presentation. Nagleasked if a script had been written yet for the presentations. Hawks stated that the one had not been written, but that anyone on the Committee would be able to help prepare the presentation. Nagle wondered if the Committee would be ready for the October 5th presentation since the presentation had not even been written. Hawks was confident that the presentation would be ready by then. Schoon asked the Committee if the awards format was acceptable or not. Discussion focused on the award categories and the different categories that could be changed or added. Nagle asked what type of award would be given out and what type of publicity the winners would receive. Schoon stated that the winners would receive a certificate and maybe a mention in the newspaper. Discussion then focused on whether the Committee felt that the Downtown Association November meeting was an appropriate place to give out the awards. The Committee further discussed what type of panel rewew committee would be needed to critique the nominees in each design category. Possible members were discussed for the panel review committee. Haynes stated that the Committee should not limit the panel committee to architects but to other lay persons. Possible suggestions included people from Design Review Committee September 18, 1995 Page 2 the University of Iowa and the Des Moines Design Review Committee, The number of members suggested for the panel committee was three with a chairperson. Hawks stated that she preferred to have the awards presented at a city council meeting. Schoon stated that the Committee would have to ask the City Council for permission to hand out awards during its meeting time. Nagle stated that it would be preferable to have a block of time during the City Council meeting where the Design Review Committee uses that time to present awards. Other possible forums for presenting the design awards included the Historic Preservation Committee. However, it was noted that the meeting was not scheduled until May. Discussion focused on whether the awards should be strictly for the downtown business area, or if the nominations should be taken from around the entire community. Nagle and Larson commented that they would prefer the nominations be only for the downtown business area since that was the area that the Design Review Committee had jurisdiction over. Swan stated that the nominations should concern designs from around the community since the Committee is needing the recognition from the entire community to help pass the ordinance and not just the downtown business district. Nagle stated that the nominations should stay within the downtown area because it would confuse people concerning the scope of the Design Review Committee. Hawks and Footner disagreed with Nagle and felt that the nominations should come from around the community. The majority of the Committee members favored having nominations of projects from throughout the community and not just downtown. Hawks asked if the Committee needed to meet more than once a month. The consensus from the Committee members suggested that once a month was appropriate. Nagle left the meeting at 5:10 p.m. UPDATE REGARDING THE TIME/TEMPERATURE SIGN AND PROJECTING SIGN ISSUE Hawks stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission members would like to have the time/temperature sign loophole closed and possibly review the whole projecting sign issue. Specifically, the Commission would look at the definition for time/temp signs and later look at the projecting sign issue. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 21, 1995, MEETING, AND THE AUGUST 30, 1995, SPECIAL MEETING Swan moved and Foother seconded to approve the minutes of the August 21, 1995, meeting and the August 30, 1995, special meeting. The motion carried 6-0 with Nagle absent. PUBLIC DISCUSSION There was none. Design Review Committee September 18, 1995 Page 3 COMMITTEE DISCUSSION The Committee accepted the resignation of Gilda Six from the Design Review Committee. ADJOURNMENT Hawks adjourned the meeting at 5:33 p.m. Minutes submitted by Brad Chamberlain. MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1995- 4:00 P.M. CIVIC CENTER - LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Nancy Footner, Laura Hawks, Martin Haynes, Karyl Larson, Clara Swan, Gary Nagle MEMBERS ABSENT: Bill Nowysz STAFF PRESENT: Schoon, Chamberlain OTHERS PRESENT: Jeff McClure A. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Laura Hawks called the meeting to order at 4:16 p.m. DISCUSSION OF THE BURLINGTON AND GILBERT STREET INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS Jeff McClure, from City Engineering, was invited by the committee to discuss the Burlington/Gilbert Street project. McClure stated that the City was anxious to start the project which is slated for next calendar year The engineering design for the project has been completed, all that remains is the aesthetics of the project, which were to incorporate ~deas from the Near Southside design plan. McClure stated that the project involves putting in a left turning lane to increase capacity of the intersection and help prevent further accidents from happening. In the process of completing the project, sidewalks and other items will be tom up and this gives the planners an opportunity to change the aesthetics of the intersecbon. General terms concerning the design element include putting special treatment on the crosswalks. McClure stated that the Planning Department staff had recommended putting in bdck pavers Schoon stated that the Planning staff had also recommended that the intersection possibly resemble the Clinton & Washington Street intersection crosswalks. Gary Nagle arrived at 4:22 p.m. Schoon then presented slides of the Clinton and Washington Streets intersecbon and reviewed the October 12 memo to Jeff McClure. The other recommendation for the intersection was to have pedestrian lighting located be~een back of the curb and the sidewalk. Schoon stated that no specific lighbng was recommended at this brae, but when the intersection is reconstructed, that the necessary electncal infrastructure be added so that pedestrian scale lighting could be added later. Swan questioned the differences between bdck and pavers. McClure stated that putting in brick w~th concrete between itwas more stable. Pavers were pre-manufactured shapes of concrete made to resemble bdck. McClure stated that what would be put in is what the DOT would allow with safety in mind. The possibility also existed to use concrete that was dyed like brick, or just use concrete if the other was not acceptable. McClure stated that the, comments made by the Design Review Committee today would then be discussed by the Engineering Department and then the Department of Transportation. Nagle asked what was the time frame for the Design Review Committee October 19, 1995 Page 2 Committee. McClure stated that the City Council would act upon the matter in December and that complete plans should be finished by January in time to take bids for the project. Hawks stated the Committee had two options. One option was to accept the design with a recommendation to clarify brick or pre-cast concrete and clarify the parkway treatment. Did the Committee want aggregate in the parl~vays or bdck in the parkways. Hawks stated that the other option was to defer the decision until the Committee could obtain more concrete plans for the intersection. The consensus of the Committee was that bdck pavers would be preferred to concrete pavers. Furthermore, the Committee felt that the general layout of the intersection was acceptable. Nagle questioned whether the concrete would be scored like it is ~n the slide. McClure stated that it would not be. Schoon stated that the design presented to the Committee was just a sample of the type of treatment that could be done to the intersection, but it wasn't the exact one that would be implemented. McClure stated that due to the widening, that some trees would be lost. However, the trees that could be saved would be saved. Swan moved and Larson seconded to recommend tothe Engineering Division that bdck pavers be used for the crosswalks and all parkways that are part of the Burlington and Gilbert Streets intersection improvement. The motion carded 6-0. Footnet left at 4:48 p.m. and returned at 4:50 p.m. Chairperson Laura Hawks thanked Jeff McClure for his presentation. McClure requested that a memo would be drafted summarizing the Committee's recommendation. Swan stated that the shops in the area would have a challenge to keep a pedestrian feeling with the loss of the trees. McClure stated that the space wouldn't allow saving the trees due to buildings being in the right-of-way. DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY (ODR) ZONE ACTIVITIES A status report of the Slide Committee was discussed Hawks stated that Haynes would present the new slide show on Friday to Project GREEN. Hawks stated that the design principles booklet was still being worked on. Swan stated that the Homebuilders Association (HBA) presentation was well received. Swan stated that the question and answer session lasted for nearly an hour and was very constructive. A Coralville resident at the HBA meeting had expressed the possibility of setting up a design review committee for Coralville's urban renewal. Swan asked if there was any more information concerning the Main Street program for building facade renovations. Schoon stated that he had obtained information concerning the program. The program is called Linked Investment for Tomorrow and it provides a low interest loan through a bank for facade renovations for buildings on the National Register. Swan stated that the process to get a building on the National Register sounds complicated Nagle stated that it was a very detailed process. Haynes asked how Committee members should end their presentations. Nagle stated that Committee members should ask for the organization's support concerning the Design Review Overlay Zone and the Design Review Committee. Schoon stated that possibly a letter and a thank you card would be appropriate to send. Hawks stated that at a future date, those people Design Review Committee October 19, 1995 Page 3 ~n support of the Overlay Zone could then write a letter of support. Hawks stated that the follow-up letter was a good idea. Nagle stated that the Chair of the Campus Planning Committee would like to have the Design Rewew Committee make a presentation on November 10th. The chairperson for that committee is Mary Belgam. Nagle stated that Belgam is interested in forming an alliance between the Design Review Committee and their committee for projects that may affect both the university and the city. Further discussion focused on other organizations the Cqmmittee could give presentations to. Gary Nagle left the meeting at 5:19 p.m. Hawks asked if the revisions were done on the Design Awards process. Schoon stated that the revisions were complete and that the actual program was being put into place. D DISCUSSION OF FISCAL YEAR 1997 BUDGET REQUESTS Hawks asked Committee members if any particular projects needed funding for the 1997 budget requests. Footnet stated that an annual design award event would need money. Footnet suggested that money be requested to do a certificate and possibly have a speaker discuss vadous aspects related to the Design Review field. Schoon stated that the City did not typically pay people to speak. Hawks stated that in the long run maybe a speaker could come to an award presentation or ceremony given by the Design Review Committee. Schoon stated that he would refer to the Historic Preservation Award Ceremony budget and prepare a budget based on that. In addition, funding was requested for library reference books that cited planning and design review. Schoon stated that there is a library in the City Planning Department that the Committee has access to it. Hawks stated when the Committee is further along with the Oreday Zone project, that a consultant could be hired to help establish districts. Schoon stated that nothing was recommended in the budget for that yet. but a future special request could be made once the authority existed to establish design review districts. E. OTHER BUSINESS The Committee discussed the need to recruit members to serve on the Design Review Committee. The City Council will appoint people on November 7, 1995. However, no applications have been submitted as of the meeting date. It was recommended that the Committee send a letter to Bill Nowysz regarding his future role on the Design Review Committee. Hawks stated that her term as chairperson was ending ~n December. Hawks stated that she would not continue after that time as chairperson and that someone else should be nominated. Swan stated that she had met with the City Plaza Task Force. She stated that there was not much that the task force liked concerning the current downtown pedestrian mall. The Task Force stated that the plan was now dated and was not a viable master plan. The Task Force also stated that some of the timbers were deteriorating around the planters. Furthermore, the fountain was a point of discontent among the members at that meeting. A revised master plan would possibly try to lighten up the area. The pavers around the fountain may be removed and the checkerboard should come out. There was also a possibility of the playground safety area being enlarged Swan said she would keep the Committee informed of the task force's progress. Design Review Committee October 19, 1995 Page 4 Swan lef~ the meeting at 6:01 p.m. Schoon stated that a site plan for a Hy-Vee store at First Avenue and Muscatine Avenue has been submitted. Schoon stated that a neighborhood meeting was scheduled for November 1st and that Design Review Committee members could attend that meeting. F. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 19, 1995, MEETING A vote on the minutes was delayed until the next Design Review Meeting due to the lack of a quorum. G. PUBLIC DISCUSSION There was none. H. Committee Discussion There was none. I. ADJOURNMENT Haynes moved and Larson seconded to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 6:05 p.m. Minutes submitted by Brad Chamberlain MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MONDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 1995 CIVIC CENTER - PUBLIC WORKS CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Bill Nowysz, Clara Swan, Marty Haynes, Nancy Foother, Karyl Larson, Phil Reisetter Randy Rohovit, Laura Hawks Schoon None RECOMMENDATIONS Recommended, by a vote of 7-0, approval of the amendments to the Zoning Chapter cladlying the definition of time and temperature signs, as proposed in the November 2, 1995, staff memo. CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Clara Swan called the meeting to order at 4:09 p.m. AMENDMENTS TO CITY CODE CHAPTER 6, ENTITLED ZONING, ARTICLE O, ENTITLED "SIGN REGULATIONS," SECTION 2, TO CLARIFY THE DEFINITION OF TIM E/TEMPERATURE SIGNS Schoon bdefly reviewed the memos dated November 2, 1995 and November 15, 1995, regarding the proposed amendments. He stated that the proposed amendment would only clarify the definition of time and temperature signs. The Planning and Zoning Commission will consider amendments regarding projecting signs at a future time. Phil Riesetter arrived at 4:12 p.m. Swan stated that she has the concern that the proposed ordinance may not necessarily prevent more projecting signs going up as time and temperature signs. Larson stated that she found the Uncommon Grounds sign more aesthetically pleasing than the sketch in the proposed ordinance. Swan stated that her concern is that whatever the sign, that the sign be of good design and relate to the building's character and materials. Gary Nagle arrived at 4:16 p.m. Nowysz relayed to the Committee his experience as a member of the committee that rewrote the sign regulations during urban renewal. He stated that upon the advice from other communities, the committee decided not to allow projecting signs, because they negatively impact the facade of buildings. Nowysz stated that his concern is that projecting signs would start out small and then would become bigger as businesses try to attract attention to their stores. He stated that projecting signs then begin to take away from the buildings by drawing attention to only the signs. Facia signs help identify businesses, are much more attractive, and do not visually clutter the streetscape. Nagle asked how will this ordinance prevent others from having projecting s~gns in the form of time/temperature signs. Schoon stated that a business would be less likely to use a time and temperature sign if 40% of sign must display the time and temperature. Nowysz & Haynes stated that the expense of this type of sign would also discourage people from having one. MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DECEMBER 20, 1995 PAGE 2 Footner and Swan both stated that they have reservations regarding the time adn temperature regulations, since they do not find the sign in the ordinance as very attractive. Foother stated that she would support not allowing time/temperature signs, projecting signs, and awnings/canopies with signs. Nagle agreed that he could support prohibiting time/temperature signs and projecting signs. Swan stated that there must be some middle ground between allowing or not allowing projecting and time/temperature signs. The Committee discussed the possibility of limiting the nuhtber of time/temperature signs per block. Schoon advised that it would not be possible since all property owners within a zoning district should'have the same rights as all property owners within a district; if a time/temperature sign is permissible on one building in a zone, than it should be permissible on a similar buildings in the zone. As Nowysz pointed out, there may be exceptions for historic buildings. Schoon agreed with Reisetter, he could not advise the Committee to recommend regulations that would approve or not approve the use of a projecting sign on a case by case basis. Nowysz stated that when he worked on the committee which revised the sign regulations, that committee left time/temperature signs in the regulations because the banks had them then, though the committee did not favor any type of projecting sign. Nowysz stated that he wished that the City would not have allowed the Uncommon Grounds sign; he does not believe it meets the intent of the ordinance. Swan stated that she is aware of another downtown business owner who would like to have a small projecting sign. She hopes that the Planning and Zoning Commission will still consider an amendment allowing some types of projecting signs. Footner and Larson each find canopy and awning signs as offensive as projecting signs. A number of Committee members questioned the requirement for the electronic digital format; they thought a very attractive sign could be designed by using a thermometer and/or a clock with hands. Schoon reiterated the intent of time/temperature signs; that is that these type of signs should serve an area. A person should be able to look a block away and be able to read the temperature; a thermometer does not allow that to happen. Swan believes the only business that will install a time and temperature sign under the proposed ordinance will be a bank because of the expense. Larson moved to approve the amendments to the Zoning Ch~.pter clarifying the definition of time and temperature signs, as proposed in the November 2, 1995, staff memo. Nowysz seconded. The motion carried 7-0. Nagle asked if they should send some sort of comment to the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding projecting signs. The Committee decided not to send a comment at this time. DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY ZONE ACTIVITIES The Committee briefly went over the list of activities. It was noted that the Committee has given six presentations regarding design review to community organizations. Committee members reported that the response in general t~as been favorable toward design review. Nagle complimented Haynes on hispresentation to the Campus Planning Committee. Nagle stated that the Campus Planning Committee is interested-in cooperatively working on projects that impact both the University campus and of interest to the Committee. MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DECEMBER 20, 1995 PAGE 3 The Committee agreed to hold a forum at which downtown property owners and business owners would be invited to attend. The forum would include the slide show and a brief overview cf the proposed design review overlay zone ordinar~e. Footner volunteered to work on this subcommittee with the presentation. Footnet and Nagle agreed to serve on the design award subcommittee. UPDATE ON THE NEAR SOUTHSIDE DESIGN PLAN Nancy Foother left at 5:15. Schoon briefly reviewed the content of the Near Southside Design Plan. He focused on the three area wide cohesive features and the five districts of the design plan. The Committee discussed the pros and cons of the Burlington Street boulevard, in particular its impacts on turning traffic, Given that the Committee had a representative on the Near Southside Design Plan Advisory Committee, Schoon stated that the Design Review Committee did not need to forward a formal recommendation to the City Council, but could if it wanted to. No formal recommendation was forwarded. Nagle left at 5:25. JANUARY AND FEBRUARY 1996 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETINGS Due to the holidays in January and February, the Committee agreed to hold the January meeting on Tuesday, January 16 and the February meeting on Tuesday, February 20, 1995, The Committee also-tentatively set the date for the public forum with downtown business owners and property owners for Wednesday, January 24, 1995. MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 18, 1995, MEETING AND THE OCTOBER 19, 1995, MEETING Nowysz moved and Reisetter seconded to approve the minutes of the September 18, 1995, meeting and the minutes of the October 19, 1995, meeting. The motion carded by a vote of 5-0, PUBLIC DISCUSSION There was none. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION There was none. ADJOURNMENT Swan adjourned the meeting at 5:35 p.m. Minutes submitted bv David Schoon DRAFT MINUTES BROADBAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 30, 1995 - 6:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Roger Christian, Cordell Jeppsen, Eric Rothenbuhler, Steve Hoch MEMBERS ABSENT: Betty McKray STAFF PRESENT: Shaffer, Brau, Helling, Hardy OTHERS PRESENT: Trey Stevens, Steve Wurtzler, Doug Aliaire, Mark Welles, Derek Mauer, Rene Paine, Beth Fisher, Aaron Wolf RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: The BTC voted unanimously to recommend to City Council the approval of the cable TV franchise agreement and enabling ordinance as proposed with the four changes proposed by staff as outlined below. LIST OF MATTERS PENDING COMMISSION/COUNCIL DISPOSITION Approval of franchise and ordinance. Negotiations with PATV, all access channels, and the Senior Center, SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION The Commission unanimously voted to recommend to the City Council that they approve the franchise and ordinance, Four nonsubstantive changes were incorporated. They include making franchise fee payments language uniform between the franchise and ordinance; inclusion of the City Forester in sections dealing with the rebuild to protect communitv trees; language protecting gender identity added to sections regarding TCI's services and hiring practices and clarifying language to make clear that the access channels are primarily responsible for the development of their own guidefines. Alternative language was offered by PATV to the Access Services section of the franchise which would accommodate their concern that the current language would enable the City to siphon off funds from their operation budget for community programming purposes, if the City were to become so inclined. Commissioners said the City needs to have maximum flexibility in the franchise language in order to eqsure pavment of the funding mechanisms involved from TCI while attempting to cover as manv of the future contingencies and scenarios as possible. The broad language in this section is intended to give the company no cause to renig on their franchise' commitment. The Commissioners agreed that discussion of allocations of funding for public access and communitv programming is not appropriate yet in terms of the franchise documents as the franchise is an agreement only between TCI and the City. Such discussions should be taken up at a later date when the negotiations with PATV and all the access channels are resumed. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 6:40 p,m. Broadband Telecommunications Commission October 30, 1995 Page 2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Hoch, seconded by Rothenbuhler, to approve the September 29, 1995, BTC minutes. The minutes were unanimously approved. ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMISSIONERS Christian said the range of comments at the public hearing was both interesting and informative. RECOMMENDATION ON THE PROPOSED FRANCHISE AND ORDINANCE Brau reported he had several conversations with McKray regarding her concerns about the franchise and ordinance as she needed to be out of the state during the meeting. As McKra¥ expressed at the public hearing, she has reservations that the franchise is granted to Cablevision VII Inc. rather than the ultimate parent company, TCI. McKray did state that she would not refuse to support recommending that the Council approve the franchise based on this concern. McKray also wanted to make sure that the relationship between public access and the BTC in terms of the development of the public access guidelines is clear. References to the access channels and the BTC will be flipped in the section dealing with "Channels to be Provided" in the ordinance and added to the section dealing with the duties of the BTC to make clear that the access channels are primary developers of their guidelines. Shaffer said this language was agreed to at a meeting with the access channel providers. In regard to TCI not being identified as the grantee, Shaffer said that Cablevision VII has alwavs been the franchise holder of record. Cablevision VII was a subsidiary of Heritage prior to TCI buying them out. Christian asked if Cablevision VII was an Iowa corporation. Shaffer said Cablevision VII is incorporated in Iowa and has hundreds, maybe thousands, of stockholders. Rothenbuhler noted the memo from Helling, Shaffer and Burnside regarding the comments at the public hearing addressed issues not mentioned at the public hearing. Helling said some written comments were received and incorporated into the record. The memo addresses those concerns as well. Christian said a number of issues addressed at the public hearing were beyond the control of the City and thev are controlled by the FCC. Helling said the City could hold out for some items, but ultimately could not denv renewal if the company would not budge. Aliaire said it was incumbent upon PATV to look out for the well being of public access and reiterate the points made at the public hearing. In addition, PATV has developed alternative language for the "Access Services" section of the franchise. Christian said he believes the concerns PATV has about guarantees for continued support for public access has been met to the satisfaction of the BTC. Aliaire said the current language would permit the City to divert funds from public access to a Citv department which does community programming. Jeppsen said that issue is not relevant to this discussion of the franchise. The franchise deals only with the City's relationship to TCI and not with the City's relationship with public access. Wurtzler said the BTC could pass a resolution separate from the franchise which could affirm the intent that the funds mentioned in the access services section are to be used for public access. Hoch said the franchise already affirms support for public access and a special resolution to reaffirm support for one section is not needed. Aliaire read PATV's the proposed alternative language to the Access Services section: Broadband Telecommunications Commission October 30, 1995 Page 3 "Franchisee agrees to continue to provide to the non-profit corporation designated by the City annual payments based on $149,554.66 annual payment in year one of the Franchise term to carry out the day-to-day operations of~public access. In the event that the non-profit corporation designated by the CiW to operate public access should dissolve, disband, or cease to function, Franchisee agrees to continue to provide to other entities designated by the City, including the City itself, an equal amount for the continued operation of public access." Aliaire said this language limits funding to public access. Rothenbuhler said this language also adds the contingency of the dissolution of public access and that doesn't belong here. Aliaire said PATV didn't have a chance to have input in the development of the language dealing with public access. Hoch said the language in the franchise is a separate issue from the concerns expressed by PATV. Hoch asked Helling if the City had met the requirements for public input. Helling said the City had met and exceeded those requirements. Hoch read a modified version of the PATV proposed language change. "Franchisae agrees to continue to provide to the non-profit corporation designated by the City annual payments based on $149,554.66 annual payment in year one of the Franchise term to carry out the day-to-day operations of public access. In the event that the non-profit corporation designated by the City to operate public access is unable to carry out this function, Franchisee agrees to continue to provide to other entities designated by the City, including the City itself, an equal amount for the continued operation of public access." Rothenbuhler said this language is different in two ways. It eliminates the City's options and any reference to community programming. Rothenbuhler asked how funds were provided for public access in the current franchise. Helling said originally the cable company provided public access. As part of a settlement agreement, Heritage promised to enter into an agreement in the future for the funding of public access. In 1 989, the City established PATV, PATV was incorporated, and entered into a three-way agreement with the City and Heritage. A non-profit corporation was set up in part because the City, at that time, had a legal concern with such funding coming to the City. Fisher said the words "and community programming" is problematic and the cause of PATV's concern. Fisher asked if the removal of that language would have any effect. Jeppsen said the City believes the effect of this language is to broaden and protect the City's options, The City also believes that now is not the proper vehicle for that discussion. Hoch said the funds derived from TCI belong to the City and th[~ City will determine how they are spent. It is important the franchise language allows maximum flexibility. Helling said removing the words "and community programming" would make a difference. The concept of community programming was discussed during negotiations; the company agreed to the pass-through funds because more community programming is expected as a result. The company has a clear concept of community programming. While public access and community programming are not necessarily black and white, they are conceived as something different by the company. If PATV dec~ded at some point they want To provide community programming, the company could refuse to fund public access. The broad language is intended to give the company no cause to renege on their commitment. Broadband Telecommunications Commission October 30, 1995 Page 4 Aliaire said PATV did submit a proposal to provide community programming as did the City's Media Unit, In February 1995 the BTC decided the City should provide community programming. Jeppsen said there no final decision was made. Aliaire read from the summary section of the February 1995 BTC minutes: "There was consensus that the City is better suited to coordinate communiW programming given PATV's mission and the additional strain on their administrative responsibilities and resources." Shaffer said all proposals for access and community programming would be looked at when the BTC takes up that issue, once the funding mechanisms are secured. Helling said the franchise is for a ten-year period and all eventualities need to be accounted for. Aliaire said PATV is concerned that their funding does not get reduced. Rothenbuhler said he could understand how the language could be seen as creating an opportunity to siphon off funds for community programming, but this is the wrong time to debate the issue or insert language. The City has the right to make decisions how to disburse the funds. There is more support for public access than PATV's worried interpretation, Shaffer said four non-substantive changes are being proosed by staff to the franchise and ordinance, Language regarding gender identity protection needs to be added to the section of the franchise agreement dealing with TCI's services and hiring practices. Language regarding franchise fee payments need to be modified so they are the same in the franchise and ordinance. The City Forester needs to be included in the language regarding the rebuild to minimize damage to the community's trees. Language regarding development of access channels' guidelines should flip references to the channel providers and BTC to reflect that access channels are the primary developers of their guidelines. That language will also be added to the section dealing with the BTC's powers and duties. It was moved by Hoch to recommend to the City Council to approve the proposed franchise and ordinance, incorporating the four changes as proposed by staff. It was seconded by Rothenbuhler. The motion carried unanimously. Hoch suggested the Chair of the BTC write a letter to the City Council thanking the City staff for their work and efforts on the refranchising process. Jeppsen agreed to write such a letter. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Christian, seconded by Rothenbuhler, to adjourn. Unanimously approved. Adjournment at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cable Television Administrator MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 1995 - 6:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER - LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Donovan, Charlie Eastham, John Falb, Jim Harris, Linda Murray, Christina Randall, Tim Ruxton, Gretchen Schmuch, Elizabeth Swenson (6:43 p.m.) MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: None Steve Long, Marianne Milkman, Steve Nasby, Linda Severson, Jeff Hating OTHERS PRESENT: Bob Burns, Lori Higgins RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: The Commission recommends the allocation of $398,441 in FY95 and FY96 CDBG and HOIVIE funds to the GICHF~Burns affordable rental housing project on Old Dubuque Road. The Commission recommends the reallocation of FY95 CDBG and HOME funds to the Housing for Working Singles Project if the GICHF\Bums project does not receive favorable Council action on the rezoning. CALL TO ORDER AND CONSIDERATION OF THE OCTOBER 12, 1995, MINUTES: Chairperson Murray called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. iViOTION: Randall moved to approve the minutes of the October 12, 1995, meeting as amended. Eastham seconded. In the header, under Members Present, change Linda Swenson, Elizabeth Swenson. Donoran clarified that her intent is to abstain from votes on the GICHF/Burns Project, as she is a resident of the Dubuque Road area, but this is not a conflict of interest issue. Donovan said she would like to continue taking part in Commission discussions. Donovan asked that the minutes reflect this consideration. Staff requested that the comments made by the Commissioners regarding the CDBG flood Grantee Performance Reports also be added to the minutes. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0, with Swenson absent. PUBLIC/MEMBER DISCUSSION OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: Murray said the time line for the review of CITY STEPS and the FY97 CDBG/HOME allocation process is very t~ght. Murray asked that Commission members be prepared to discuss scheduling at the December meeting. Housing & Community Development Commission November 9, 1995 Page 2 COUNCIL UPDATE: Murray said the GICHF~Burns rezoning is about to go to Council for its consideration and a public hearing, There was no further discussion. PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF ASSISTANCE TO A CITY EMPLOYEE: Milkman said that when a City employee applies for any federal assistance under the Housing Rehabilitation program, the City will disclose this to the public. Milkman said there is no conflict since State and Federal Law permits public employees to receive assistance if they meet all eligibility requirements and are not given preferential treatment. The City employee involved is Sandy Parrott. No objections were noted from the Commission. MONITORING CDBG/HOME PROJECTS: Milkman explained the procedures for monitoring CDBG and/or HOME projects. Milkman said that the monitoring is a voluntary activity. Milkman asked that members make an effort to become familiar with the projects they have been assigned, because most of the Commission is familiar with projects only in theory, not in practice. She emphasized that the knowledge gained bV monitoring comes in handy during the allocation process. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION ON THE GICHF/BURNS OLD DUBUQUE ROAD PROJECT: Eastham said he will be abstaining from consideration and discussion on this matter as he serves as President of the Board for the Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship (GICHF). Donovan said she will be abstaining from votes on this matter as she is a resident of the neighborhood in which the project is proposed to be located, but she would like to participate in the discussion. Milkman and Bob Burns briefed the Commission on the history of the project. Milkman said that due to the limited time-frame and the number of issues involved, she feels the Commission should phrase its motions to state its general opinion on the issue in one motion, and consider funding amounts, etc., in further motions. Burns said consideration of this project may be on its last leg, as the Planning and Zoning Commission had rejected the most recent rezoning proposal. Burns said he is asking the Commission for a favorable vote which he can take before the City Council. The City Council will hold a public hearing at its November 21, 1995, meeting and will have the first vote on rezoning at its November 27, 1995, meeting. If successful, the Council would vote on the final rezoning on November 28, 1995. Burns also noted that the purchase agreement for the site expires on January 9, 1996. Falb questioned what appears to be a vast difference in the amount of subsidy per unit between the original proposal (for 133 unrts) and the most recent proposal of 21 subsidized units. In response to a question, Nasby said the per unit cost of the multi-family units under the current proposal would be $123,174 or approximately $92.50 per square foot using the Housing & Community Development Commission November 9, 1995 Page 3 figures Bob Burns had provided. Additionally, the 9123,174 would include approximately 919,000 in City CDBG\HOME funds per unit (based on the 21 unit plan). Swenson asked what the rents would have been under previous proposals and whether the rent is still "affordable" under the current proposal. Burns did not have information on hand regarding the rent structure of previous proposals, but said the rents would be 9639 per unit for the four townhouses and 9528 per unit for the eight apartments, plus $75 for the utility allowance. Swenson wished to state that the rent is on the brink of no longer being affordable and said that until the Planning and Zoning Commission is willing to give some ground on zoning issues the price per unit is going to remain relatively high and investors, the City included, are not going to invest in these kinds of projects. Swenson said that until the price per unit becomes more reasonable she feels the figures should be published in local newspapers to depict how much the Commission is forced to accept as a price per unit. The Commission felt an additional effort should be made to meet with the Planning and Zoning Commission to discuss these matters. Donovan said, in fairness to the Planning and Zoning Commission, as she was present at the last meeting, the Commission appeared to favor the 33 unit proposal. She noted it appeared to be the Council that wanted even fewer units. Swenson asked how much, as a private investor, Burns intends to contribute to the project. Burns said various private investors will contribute upwards of 9540,599 (through the federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit program), of which he will contribute 1 percent. Burns said he does intend to receive a tax credit for the investment. Falb asked if the loans for additional funding have been approved by the State. Burns said these have not yet been approved and he would be sending the loan applications in the following afternoon. In regards to the nine single-family units, Donovan said she feels the neighborhood would prefer owner-occupied units. Milkman noted that should the single-family units be rentals, there is no intent on the part of Burns to apply for additional City funds, but additional federal funds and state funds may be an option. Burns wished to clarify that neither the financing structure nor the occupancy status of these nine units has been decided. MOTION: Harris moved to endorse the project as an appropriate use of the $300,000 in FY9§ CDBG and HONIE funding, for the Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship/Bob Burns Affordable Housing Project. Randall seconded. Milkman told the Commission that she had recently discussed the project with Karin Franklin, Director of the Planning Department, and that they had come to the conclusion that the City can not support the proposal in its current format. Milkman said the per unit costs are too high and the City feels the funds could be invested in a more cost effective manner. Murray said she is no longer really attracted to the project, but said this must be the price of doing business in Iowa City. Harris reiterated sentiments stated earlier regarding apparent political barriers to producing affordable housing units. Swenson said that at this price level she would have preferred that the units would be single-family. Housing & Community Development Commission November 9, 1995 Page 4 Burns emphasized that the project still falls within most recognized guidelines for costs, and that the ratio of subsidy to private investment (federal Low Income Housing Tax Credits) is approximately 60140. Burns said that according to the figures supplied by Mary Ant. Dennis, the total cost of the Whispering Meadows project (duplexes), including land, was $739,845 or $92,481 per unit in 1 992 dollars, The motion carried on a vote of 6-1-2, with Falb voting no, and Eastham and Donovan abstaining. Burns said the site development and land acquisition cost would be $ 520,441; with $122,000 for land acquisition coming from the Limited Partnership and the balance of $398,441 being paid by City CDBG\HOME funds. The Commission then discussed the additional funds that would be needed. In response to a question, Burns stated that t~98,441 were in addition to the 9300,000 in FY95 CDBG\HOME funds originally allocated. MOTION: Randall moved to recommend, that should the GICHF/Burns Affordable Rental ~1ousing Project (21 unit proposal) pass Council, that an additional 898,441 in FY96 CDBG/HONIE funds be allocated for site acquisition and site development. Ruxton seconded. Falb asked about the implications of not approving the additional $100,000, Burns said this would make the affordable rental project financially infeasible as rents would be increased. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Eastham not voting). DISCUSSION ON THE RE-ALLOCATION OF FY95 HOME/CDBG FUNDS. PROJECT OPTIONS: Milkman said it is necessary for staff to pursue other options for reallocating the $300,000 in FY95 funds that have been allocated to the Burns\GICHF project for several reasons. First, the purchase option Burns\GICHF has on the land (Old Dubuque Road) terminates on January 9, 1996. Second, there is no certainty that the proposed project will successfully pass all other hurdles. Milkman said staff would like to begin planning for an alternate use of the CDBG and HOME funds as soon as possible because the HOME funds would have to be committed by May 1996 or given back to HUD. Commissioners were referred to the memorandum from Nasby for a more detailed explanation of the three proposed projects. Milkman asked the Commission to provide direction to staff on which project to pursue. Milkman said that depending upon the outcome of the Burns\GICHF project, there would be a balance of between $195,000 and $260,000 that need to be reallocated. Staff presented three options to the Commission for possible uses of these funds (1. Acquisition of undeveloped, scatted site residential lots; 2. Acquisition of public housing units; or 3. Acquisition and rehab of a structure for Housing for Working Singles). Swenson noted that of the three options, only the rooming house for working singles ranked as a "high" priority under CITY STEPS. This priority determination was discussed for the three projects and the Commission felt it was important to fund the highest priority project. Housing & Community Development Commission November 9, 1995 Page 5 IVIOTION: Eastham moved to recommend, that should the GICHF/Burns Affordable Rental Housing Project not pass, that $260,000 in FY95 CDBG/HOME funds be reallocated for the acquisition of a residential structure to be used as a rooming house for working single persons. Falb seconded. The motion carried on 8 vote of 9-0. CITY STEPS PRIORITIES: DISCUSSION FOR FY97 ACTION PLAN: Milkman reminded the Commission that last year the Committee on Community Needs and the Housing Commission developed a five-year Consolidated Plan (CITY STEPS) that would help determine Iowa City's needs for housing, jobs and services for low income residents. This document also included a list of priorities, strategies and five-year goals. These priorities, strategies and five-year goals would direct how the City plans to meet the deficiencies identified in the plan and allocate funding. Milkman said that a public meeting on the priorities, strategies and goals of CITY STEPS is scheduled for November 15, 1995. She said that staff would like the Housing and Community Development Commission to review the CITY STEPS plan for any changes that may be needed. Milkman noted that the HCDC would meet after the public meeting and any changes proposed by the Commission or the public can be reviewed and recommended then. The Commission will then meet with Council on November 20, 1995, to review any changes. In Milkman's memorandum, dated October 13, 1995, there was a summary of CITY STEPS, a table showing FY96 funding allocations and a table showing what percentage of the five- year goals were met by the first year (FY96) allocations. (Donovan said she will not be present for the November 15 and 20, 1995, meetings.) The Commission briefly discussed changing the housing priority level for households between · 31-80% median income from medium to a high priority, but decided the priorities should not be changed. They also agreed that it would seem reasonable to allocate some of the unprogrammed funds in the five year goals to Economic Development. In discussing the fire hydrant needs of mobile home courts, the Commission felt that this should be the City's responsibility. DISCUSSION ON FY97 ALLOCATIONS TO MEET FIVE YEAR GOALS OF CITY STEPS: Milkman said that HUD will be using the five-year goals in CITY STEPS to determine the City's performance in meeting the identified needs. One way of directing allocations to the needs established in the five~year goals was to separate CDBG\HOME funds into blocks. She noted that this is done in several other Iowa cities. Milkman said that by doing this, percentages of the CDBG\HOME funds could be allocated to activities such as housing, services, economic development, etc. She asked the Commission to think about this and said they would be discussing it at the December meeting. Several Commissioners thought this method of allocation could make the allocation process easier. Housing & Community Development Commission November 9, 1995 Page 6 OTHER BUSINESS: PHA Monthly Update. Nasby noted that the PHA monthly statistics were included in the packet. DisPosition of Broadway Street Public Housin~ Units Update. Nasby said that the disposition plan had been approved by HUD and the Council would be holding a public hearing on the disposition on November 21, 1995. Eastham asked if staff knew when the rehabilitation had been completed at'Broadway. Nasb¥ said that he did not know for sure and suggested Eastham call Doug Boothroy, Director of Housing and Inspection Services. Movino January 1996 Meetin¢~. Staff suggested moving the meeting date from January 11 to January 4 in order to provide sufficient time for the funding allocation process. The Commissioners did not think this would be a problem and approved the meeting change. Schmuch said she will be absent frcm the January 4, 1996, meeting. Revised HOME/CDBG application. Milkman said that staff had been working on a new "joint" application form for both CDBG and HOME. Last year there were separate applications and this caused some duplication of efforts by the applicants and staff. Milkman said that a draft the new application would be ready for the December meeting. ADJOURNMENT: IVlOTION.: Randall moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:07 p.m. Schmuch seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0, with Donovan, Ruxton and Swenson absent. Minutes submitted by Jeff Haring. IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS JUlY 10, 1995-4:30 PM LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Cadson, Werdedtsch, Maas, Buss, Roffman, Hagedom MEMBERS ABSENT: Staska STAFF PRESENT: Boose, Rocca OTHERS PRESENT: Jeff Clark; H.D. Hoover, Don Crum 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Carlson called the meeting to order at 4:43 pm. Carlson notes the Board is to operate informally with open discussion. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JUNE 26, 1995 MEETING Roffman moved and Maas seconded the approval of the minutes. The motion carded unanimously. APPEAL FOR MODIFICATION OF STAIR CONFIGURATION AT 612 N. DUBUQUE ST. UNDER SECTION 106 OF THE U.B.C. The focus of this appeal is to permit the existence of a stair configuration that does not meet City Building Code requirements. Around 1990 or 1991, H.D. Hoover, the current owner of 612 N. Dubuque St., neglected to get a building permit before finishing off the third level of this house into a habitable space. The building permit would have unveiled the fact that the finished product of Hoover's construction does not conform to Iowa City's Building Codes on two accounts: the stair width, and the winding stair design. The property is in the process of being sold to an individual that wants to use it as a rental property. When the individual applied for a permit to do so, he was informed that the City was unaware that some alterations had been made to the property. Hoover attends the appeal because he wants to insure that his property will not have to be altered to meet City specifications for fear that the home will lose its histodc appeal. Boose reminded Hoover of the Code requirement which states that storage areas changed into habitable areas must have proper stair exits and headroom. Headroom, in this case, was not a problem. Boose notes for Hoover that the two points of nonconformity the Board has with the house is the stairway width is only 32" wide instead of 36" and the winder at the bottom of the stairs does not meet standards for a winder. Boose noted that he hasn't seen the extent of the nonconformity himself. Hoover believes the structure is safe enough as it currently stands without the unsightly addition of external fire escapes. Boose explained that the point of the stair configuration specification is not just about safety but also functionality as it's difficult to get furniture up stairs that are as narrow as these. According to Hoover, there have been no problems getting furniture up these stairs. IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 10, 1995 Page 2 H.D. Hoover noted that in 1980, he purchased the house for $56,000 and since has spent over $100,000 to totally reestore the house. Hoover has added new and complete widng and plumbing, and notes that the house is listed as a potential histodc building, and that the building has been reinspected for approval as a duplex. Hoover, notes for the Board, that the structure does have two exits; two sets of stairs from the second floor, smoke detectors that go off on all floors if one is activated anywhere, and circuit breakers on every floor, as well as egress windows on the third floor. Hoover states that before building he had carefully drawn out all the measurements in order to conform to City requirements and believed he was doing everything by the book. Carlson concluded the fact that the house is 100 years old, has no egress problems and has smoke detectors on every floor are good reasons the modification should be approved. It was noted that there are a number of similar old homes around town and the stainNell problem is one that has come up several times. It is preferred that these questions be dealt with by the Board of Appeals on a case-by-case basis rather than attempting to amend the stair requirements in the Building Code. Boose reminds Hoover that he should have consulted the Board before and not after the construction project. Hagedom called the question. Roffman moved to accept and Buss seconded the approval of the stair configuration's modification at 612 N. Dubuque Street. The motion carried unanimously. Boose solicited discussion, closing statements and comments. Staff had no objections but commented that the Hoover property was an exceptional residence. Items referenced: H.D. Hoover's request to appear before the Board of Appeals to discuss Section 106 of the 1991 Building Code and its effect on granting modification on his 612 N. Dubuque Street property; Jeffrey Clark's request for a waiver that the stairway alterations on the third floor of 612 N. Dubuque Street; and a copy of the 1991 Uniform Building Code. DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE AMENDMENT OF WINDBRACING AND WALKOUT BASEMENT CONSTRUC. TION STANDARDS. The following discussions pertain to the Board's consideration of amending the current windbracing and walkout basement construc'[ion standards to make them safer. The Board's goal is to adopt a set of standards that are less restrictive than those contained in the 1994 U.BC., but which still address the concerns of wind damage to irregular shaped building and failure of walkout basement foundation walls. The discussion concluded that any plans for a walkout basement will be subject to a foundation inspection by the City before foundation walls can be poured. There has been a problem in homes two or three years old developing huge cracks dght down the middle of the wall opposite of the walkout side. Hagedom wondered if this has been IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS JUlY 10, 1995 PAGE 3 a problem in the past or if the City is just trying to avoid problems. According to Boose, Jim Jacob, a local structural engineer, has investigated several foundation problems due to construction of walkout basements. Jacob recommends the chart on the Van Winkle- Jacob handout for proper walkout basement specifications. Hagedom expressed concern that the new code might be too restrictive and might discourage builders wanting to build new types of structures in Iowa City. Boose responded that there is no discou~:agement; they will simply need to comply with the code or hire an engineer to insure the walkout will be safe. The discussion then moved to options to the new windbracing requirements. Jim Jacob has offered to assist the City and the Homebuilders' Association in developing an acceptable alternative to the new raquirements. Jacob was not able to attend this meeting but had provided some suggested guidelines for discussion. Boose said that the only difficulty he saw with Jacob's suggestions were the limited atdum opening size and the prohibition of vertical offsets to extedor walls. There are a lot of homes currently with 8 feet or more atriums. it is also very rare that two-story homes have no vertical offsets. Hagedom recommended that the Board defer this issue until Mr. Jacob is present. She doesn't understand what the issue is with vertical offsets. Boose agreed with this suggestion, but just wanted the members to be exposed to the proposal so they may secure feedback from the Homebuilders' Association and others potentially affected by these amendments. Further discussion is to occur at future meetings where Jim Jacob can be present. Item referenced: Van Winkle Jacob Engineering Inc., suggested walkout basement specifications. OTHER BUSINESS A draft of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance was handed out to each member. Members were encouraged to make comments on it and turn them in to Carlson before July 25, 1995, in order for them to be incorporated in the proposal that goes to City Council. Adioumment Carlson moved to adjourn and Hagedom seconded at 5:23 p.m. Minutes submitted by Azalia Owen Approved by Robert Carlson, Chair MINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS AUGUST 10, 1995-4:30 PM LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM- IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Carlson, Werderitsch, Maas, Staska, Roffmad, Hagedom MEMBERS ABSENT: Buss STAFF PRESENT: Boose, Rocca OTHERS PRESENT: Mike Hodge, Jim Jacobs, Gary Fink, Sue Licht 1. CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Carlson called the meeting to order at 4:34 p.m. No minutes to approve. Carlson notes the board is to operate informally with open discussion. REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION OF THE LIGHT AND VENTILATION REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 1205 OF THE 1991 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE FOR PROPERTY LOCAT- ED AT 114-116 E. WASHINGTON Boose notes that since the property is changing from a commercial back to a residen- tial use, it must meet all the building code requirements, This structure has a natural light problem. Carlson asked Gary Fink, the property owner, to explain. Fink described the residence and referenced his letter to the board which indicated that although there are windows at the front and the rear, there is no way to get sky lights in there and even after enlarging the windows they'd still be short of meeting the requirements. It does meet egress and life safety requirements. Boose has not seen any proposed floor plans, but right now the area is one big room. Boose's only concern would be that the room be separated into three rooms, with a middle room having no light at all. Fink noted that the room has always been open and that there are no plans for division. Boose noted that the requested window measurements weren't included in Fink's letter but as close as Boose's judgment can tell the windows meet egress and life safety requirements while they are short for light and ventilation. Carlson made a motion to accept the structure on the conditions that the third floor has a prior variance, the rest of the requirements be brought up to date, the windows meet egress requirements and that the front area stays as one large open room. Hagedom suggested voting on the issue with a stipulation that the board is not ex- ceeding the past variance. It was also suggested that a floor plan be attached so the variance will be granted on the floor plan as is. Carlson made an amendment to the motion that staff review the existing v.ariance and if this variance is contrary to what was previously accepted, the issue must be brought back to the board. Roffman seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Boose can look through property file as requested by Carlson. Fink inquired of the time frame for review. Boose said by tomorrow. A copy of the minutes would be sent to Fink later. Fink was given the option of coming in for a building permit before receiving the minutes since the infor- mation needed was already on file. BOARD OF APPEALS AUGUST 10, 1995 PAGE 2 3. HEAR REQUEST OF MODIFICATION OF THE STAIRWAY SPECIFICATIONS OF SEC- TION 3306 OF THE 1991 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 505 E, WASHINGTON According to Licht, the building's owner, the structure has been through a lot of modification except for the original stairway. There is no handrail on the wall side. Licht responds to Carlson's question that the 32 inches on the stair is from the wall to the inside. Carlson noted that in a 36 inch standard stair you can take 3 inches for a handrail making the stair about 32.5 inches. Boose notes another area of non-conformity being that the stairway penetrates more than one level and therefore should be a stair tower. Licht explained that it was open to the first floor, and there's a door at the bottom. The modification request is to leave it as an old house entry stair instead of closing it off into a stair tower. Boose noted that there is some separation provided by having the door at the second floor level and that would stop some smoke rise, but it still doesn't meet the specifications of the code- again invoking change in use. Boose notes that a new stair tower will be constructed at the rear of the building and will act as the primary staircase and be the handicapped entrance. Boose also reiterat- ed the point that this may be a second staircase but is not a secondary staircase since if the staircase is needed, it's no Isss important than the first staircase. Licht respond- ed to Carlson that the square footage on the floor was less than 1420, the attic is about 600. Licht responded to Werderitsch that the total anticipated occupancy load was 4 on first floor, 6-8 on second, and 3 in the attic. Boose cited the building code that gave a total occupancy load of around 30. Licht asked if circulation area was used in determining occupancy allowable. Boose said yes, and a first floor with 30 occu- pancy must have two exits. Carlson stated that when you calculate the exit space occupancy is lowered to 22 and you'd have more than enough exit with, and stated that he liked the idea of maintaining the historical parts of this house. Licht added that the entire electrical system of the house was to be replaced and upgraded to allow for a smoke detector system, Maas suggested looking at the vertical extension with the conditional door. Carlson commented that the door would close off the stairs going down to protect that corridor and it would be out of the way for normal function. Carlson moved approval for modification on stair configuration based on its having historical significance, limited occupant load, complying exit stair is being added to the back, and a door will be added to the stairs at the second floor to close off corridor and provide a protected access to the second stairway. Hagedorn seconded. The · motion carried unanimously. DISCUSSION OF AMENDMENT TO SECTION 1002.3 OF THE 1994 UNIFORM FIRE CODE Carlson moved to amend section 1002.3 of the 1994 uniform fire code so that burning must be immediately discontinued, by the burner, if the fire chief finds the smoke emission to be offensive to occupants in surrounding property or as determined by the chief to constitute a hazardous condition. Rocca said the fire department issues BOARD OF APPEALS AUGUST 10, 1995 PAGE 3 temporary burning permits for bor~fires and this language is contained in the unamend- ed uniform fire code. We've inserted an open burning ordinance in lieu of the model code and took the "at the discretion of the chief" wording out. Since smoke doesn't constitute a nuisance we need the ability, if smoke is bothering someone, to ask the individual to put the fire out or we'll put it out for them. The new wording just makes it legal for the fire department to do this to individuals who are burning within the guidelines when they are complained against. An informational sheet is given at the burning site that states the above. Roffman seconded. The motion carried unanimous- ly. DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS TO WIND BRACING AND WALK OUT BASEMENT CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS Jim Jacobs begins explaining that the walk-out basement issue evolved out of his concern over walk out basements with walls moving down slope as a result of inade- quate re-enforcing to take the lateral pressure that's unopposed on the walkout side. Jacobs notes that the wall movement problem is only present in walk-out basements although basement wails in typical construction homes tend to be under-reinforced. Jacobs responded to Carlson that he would suggest the board bump those re-enforce- ment requirements up although that was not a question he was asked about initially. Boose cited the Des Moines ordinance which required 3 horizontal bars in 8 inch foundations that go all the way around on ranch style houses. According to Boose, implementing the additional requirement of steel placement in wails opposite the walk- out will not raise the cost of housing very much since not many affordable houses have walk out basements. These are upper price range homes mostly that will be affected. Boose says that the new guidelines would not affect standard four walled ranch style basements. But, walk out basements will have to comply with the chart to be made by Jacobs or have the option of having the basement engineered. Roffman asked if the staff would end up with the additional work of wall inspection along with the footing inspection. Boose confirmed that when plans for building a walk-out basement comes in we'll just mark them and we will have to do those additional inspections, but that he wasn't sure how the staff would handle the workload. Roffman also noted that to be effective the staff would have to do the inspections before the second panel is set if the concern is for wall size and length. Boose said that it will take some training of the contractors and everything may not be in place but if 90% is there then the inspector can see that it's done right. Roffman asked if the City would now have a uniform ordinance for all foundations in addition to walk- outs. Boose stated that there is an ordinance already in place and that the board should take out what is already required, amend the code and put in what they want instead of just accepting local practice. Roffman requested more information from Jacobs before forwarding the UBC Code amendment. Jacobs was asked to work out a simple table of worst case scenario adjustments before the board accepts the amendment. Boose said he would prepare the language and the issue doesn't require a motion at this time. The discussion then turned to the new wind bracing require- ments of the 1994 U.B.C. BOARD OF APPEALS AUGUST 10, 1995 PAGE 4 Boose reminded staff that contractors wanted someway to avoid having to comply with the new requirements. Many contractors felt it was overkill and that some of our other local building practices offset these concerns as far as solid sheeting on exterior wall and truss construction instead of conventional roof construction. Jacobs was to create some guidelines that if met, the builder would be in compliance with conven- tional construction practice. Roffman suggested an amendment to allow stairway openings of no greater than 8 feet instead of 6. Werderitsch asserted that the alternative to limiting the si~e of the atrium opening would be to place steel in the walls as was done at Cornell's library to keep it skinny. Carlson wants a standard that will not end up dictating a grid fit on the back of the wall. The discussion was continued pending additional input from Jacobs. 6. OTHER BUSINESS Carlson indicated adoption of the National Homebuilders Association's standards for the installation of shallow frost protected footings would require unheated buildings to have 2 inches of polystyrene under the entire building. The board will look at the Iowa Energy Code next meeting to ensure conformity. Boose related a problem with demolition permit procedure. The city sends an individu- al a notice that they must tear a structure down, but when they come in for a permit they are told to wait another week. He is proposing to eliminate the waiting period for accessory structures. 7. ADJOURNMENT Carlson moved to adjourn and Roffman seconded at 6:00 p,m. Minutes submitted by Azalia Owen. Approved Date Robert Carlson, Chair IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS AUGUST 28, 1995- 4:30 P.M. LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Roffman, Carlson, Werderitsch, Maas, Buss MEMBERS ABSENT: Hagedorn, Staska STAFF PRESENT: Boose, Hansen, Goerdt OTHERS PRESENT: Ben Moore, Mary Rhineheart 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Carlson called the meeting to order at 4:42 p.m. Carlson notes that the Board is to operate informally with open discussion. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JULY 10, 1995 MEETING Werderitsch moved and Buss seconded the approval of the minutes. The motion carried unanimously. HEAR APPEAL OF STAFF INTERPRETATION OF "HABITABLE ROOM" AS DEFINED IN SECTION 409 OF THE 1991 UBC Boose explained that the issue came to the staff's attention during a final inspection on a building. The building was cited for habitable area without natural light. The area in question was designated as an unfinished area when the permit was issued but should provide at least 8% natural light now that it is finished. The discrepancy for the appeal is what constitutes a habitable area. Moore introduced Rhineheart as the owner and asserts that initially Moore construction did not intend the basement room for habitation. There are already four bedrooms in this house. There is no window in this area which is used just for exercise and storage. There are no closets (as in a ~3edroom). There are finished walls; a suspended ceiling; insulation for sound; carpeted and tiled floor for accurate weight readings and storage for high-class antiques. Rhineheart said she prefers not to have windows for privacy reasons since there is a tanning bed in the exercise room. Boose stated that the issue is that once the city inspects, they have no control over the use of the home by new residents. Rhineheart notes that the whole south of the basement is all windows and has a baseboard heater and electrical sockets. Goerdt noted the only thing that the room doesn't have as a habitable area is the windows and light. Buss wanted to confirm that if Rhineheart had not had the wall put in, there would not currently be a problem since there is at least 8% light in the basement total. Carlson asked about ventilation. Moore said there is air-conditioning. Boose clarified for Moore the distinction that the building code doesn't refer to finished and unfinished but rather habitable and unhabitable. Moore stated that was Boose's contention and asked if Boose goes by his contention. Buss mentioned that New Life Fitness has no windows. Goerdt noted that commercial is different. Buss asserted that more lives are in danger in the commercial building than in the private home. Moore responded, to Werderitsch's concern about staff not re-inspecting the house BOARD OF APPEALS AUGUST 28,1995 PAGE 2 once they've gone in, that the construction company still could have gone in and put in a third wall after the final inspection. Goerdt proposed what if someone's tanning in the room, the lights go out and a fire starts. Moore paralleled the incident to when your lights are out in your bedroom and a fire starts. Reftman asked when do you go from being a storage area to a habitable area. Goerdt said storage needs just one outlet. Boose added that if it looks like it is intended for habitable use- because its potentially habitable, if people invest the money in floor coverings and painting the ceiling. Goerdt suggested taking out 50 % of the wall as opposed to cutting a hole in the exterior wall as a solution to the light problem. Werderitsch suggested adding an accordion door. Boose noted he didn't believe that's what the code intended. Carlson stated the board needs to come up with a reasonable way to define this so we don't encourage deviance i.e. come in and apply for an occupancy permit with no ceiling or carpet, but later finish the desired room. We need to come up with a definition for habitable. The city has guidelines. Moore-gave the example of theater room that must be made sound proof with no light, definition of habitable at question again. Moore said that the intention of this room was not to circumvent the building code. Maas again brought up the issue of subsequent owner's use of the room. Realtors will tell buyers they can use anv room for a habitable area. Buss noted that for insurance purposes realtors must now tell prospective buyers when a room. cannot be used for habitable area. Boose-the theory behind natural light can be debated but under what logic could we not require natural light in the basement. Buss suggested adding a pocket door or window. Boose stated we're not dealing with an egress problem. There's no argu- ment that this room will be used for a bedroom. Werderitsch liked the suggestion of a pocket door since it leaves an area open and unobstructed yet can be closed for privacy. Moore asked what's the boards definition of habitable. Carlson said that habitable is hard to define; primarily "living" is hard to define. We use the level of finish in a room to determine whether its habitable. Werderitsch wondered how kitchens get around natural light requirements. Boose said because of a local amend- ment kitchens need no natural light at all. Moore stated if they put a microwave, a sink and refrigerator the room could be considered a kitchen and thus circumvent the code. Werderitsch asked that the issue be tabled for a month until a definition of habitable is established. Boose agreed and said the board could give a temporary C.O. that would release the water meter. Werderitsch added that as-is, he views the room as a living area. Moore suggested legal attachments to the plan where residents sign contracts saying this room would not be used as a habitable area. Werderitsch said he'd rather come up with a definition for habitable. Boose asked if the board needed a longer list of exempted areas and would get a hold of ICBO and see if other city's determinations of habitable areas would help. Werderitsch added that the board got some time to research the exceptions and ~vrite them in. Carlson suggested a middle ground step where the door opens to more than enough light and a pair of double door would work for a theater room. Werdedtsch moved and Roffman seconded to table issue, until researched, for a maximum of 2 meetings and issue a temporary occupancy permit. The motion carried unanimously. Boose added the board wants a definition it' can apply to situations in general and not just this specific case. BOARD OF APPEALS AUGUST 28, 1995 PAGE 3 CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF AMENDMENTS TO 1994 BUILDING CODE Boose suggested making the language for habitable space more stringent in his amend- ments (contrary to feel of tonight's conversation). Boose said he mostly took the language for shallow frost protected footings out of the handbook- not too difficult. He had questions about what to do with a large unheated attached garage. 5. OTHER BUSINESS Three issues for next meeting- habitable space, shallow frost protected footings and wind braced wails. Scheduled October 2. Carlson asked that the board come up with a function definition instead of a "living" definition, 6. ADJOURNMENT Roffman moved and Mass seconded adjournment at 5:53 p.m. Approved ~d~/3~,~//q~'-by ~ Robert Carlson, Chair Minutes ware submitted by Azalia Owen and are abbreviated due to problems in audio recording. hlsadmJn~eOAa-28.mtn MINUTES IOWA CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 1995 - 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Bovbjerg, Eric Engh, Richard Gibson, Jane Jakobsen, George Starr MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Scott, Lea Supple STAFF PRESENT: Charles Denney, Sarah Holecek, Scott Kugler, Melody Rockwell, James Erwin RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 5-0, of'CZ9543., an application to rezone 66 acres from RS to M1 for property on the east side of Scott Boulevard and north of 420th Street SE. Recommended approval, by a vote of 5-0, of amendments to the Zoning Chapter to allow recycling processing facilities as provisional uses in the I-1 zone, to allow outdoor storage of certain materials as an accessory use by special exception in the I-1 zone, to add definitions of "recyclable materials" and "recycling processing facilities," and to substitute "salvage yard" for "junkyard," as amended. Recommended approval, by a vote of 5-0, of amendments to the Zoning Chapter referencing the Parking Facility Impact Fee Ordinance in the off-street parking regulations section of the Zoning Chapter. CALL TO ORDER: Vice Chairperson Starr called the meeting to order at 7:35. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none, REZONING ITEMS: REZ95-O014. Public discussion of an application submitted by Tom and Mary Sundblad to rezone a .5 acre property located at 840 Cross Park Avenue from CO-1, Office Commercial, to CC-2, Community Commercial. (45-day limitation period~ December 11, 1995) Denney said the applicants intended to develop the site in conjunction with the commercial lot to the north. He said staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission had supported maintaining the CO-1 zone as a buffer between the CC-2 zone to the north and the residential areas to the south. He noted that the requested rezoning would remove that buffer. He restated staff concerns concerning the rezoning and related the staff recommendation for denial. 36/0 Planning & Zoning Commission November 16, 1995 Page 2 Public discussion: There was none. Public discussion closed, MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to defer the application until the December 7, 1995, formal meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Jakobsen seconded. Bovbjerg asked whether the rezoning would be non-conditional. Denney affirmed that it would not be conditional. The motion was carried on a vote of 5-0. REZ95-0015. Public discussion of an application submitted by Community Coordinated Child Care (4Cs), on behalf of property owner Lutheran Social Services, to rezone an approximate .3 acre property located at 1500 Sycamore Drive from RS-5, Low Density Single-Family Residential, to CO-1, Office Commercial. (45-day limitation period: December 11, 1995) Kugler noted that there was an office building in existence on this property, approved in 1967 as a special exception for a religious institution. Because of the RS-5 zoning, Kugler said the building can now be used for a limited number of uses, which has resulted in this request. Kugler noted the CO-1 zone is intended to act as a buffer between more intensive commercial zones and residential areas, and that staff felt this situation exists in this case. He stated that the staff recommendation was for approval, subject to conditions restricting access to DeForest Avenue, restricting parking and drives to the south end of the lot, not allowing building additions or new buildings any closer to DeForest Avenue than the existing building, and requiring the retention of the existing landscaped screening along the east property line. Gibson asked for clarification concerning the east boundary of the property and Kugler pointed out the location on the overhead transparency. Starr noted that prior uses were similar to the uses proposed by the applicant. Jakobsen asked if this would be considered a spot zoning. Kugler said no, the CO-1 zone can serve as a buffer between residential and more intensive commercial uses. Because this transition exists, it would not be considered a spot zoning. Engh asked if traffic along DeForest to the north would be affected. Kugler reiterated that all access to the property was from the south, and that the rezoning w(~uld likely have a minimal impact on traffic along DeForest. Public discussion: Paul Vandorpe, 1802 DeForest, said he lives on the property located immediately north of the area requested for rezoning. He noted the building, when used for Lutheran Social Services offices, had generated traffic on DeForest in the past. He stated his belief that,this rezoning would also affect traffic, which would endanger the children Planning & Zoning Commission November 16, 1995 Page 3 in the area. He said he disapproved of a commercial rezoning, as he feared the effect of a later sale to a solely commercial owner. He said businesses other than offices might be open late at night. He didn't want to see the use change from religious institution to commercial. He thought there had been an agreement when the special exception was approved for Lutheran Social Services that the use of the property would revert to residential when the religious institution use ended. Jakobsen asked if.he intended to file a formal protest. Vandorpe indicated he would. Gibson asked if he had any documents to support his assertions. Vandorpe said he did not, but that a neighbor of his might, as he had been involved in the previous approval for Lutheran Social Services. Gibson asked if the neighbors had considered requesting closing off the east end of DeForest Avenue which would help reduce unwanted traffic. Starr noted that there would be no actual child care on the premises, but only administrative offices. Bovbjerg asked if there would be information on the agreement in the files on the original project. Holecek said that there would be, as the building was constructed following the approval of a special exception. Bovbjerg asked that staff clear up what the terms of the special exception were, or to see if there is anything on the title about an agreement for the property. Vandorpe suggested that the Commission contact his neighbors, Donald McChristy and Eric Hesse, who had lived in the area for a long time and had some knowledge of the history of this property. Sandy Kuhlmann, 1030 Colle(~e Street, introduced herself as the director of 4Cs. She reaffirmed that there would be no walk-in clients, as only 9-15 administrative staff would use the facilities. She said her agency is an advocate for children, and the safety of neighborhood children would be a major concern of 4Cs. She then said that 4Cs has been at its present location for over 25 years, and that the organization would be at this new address for a long period as well. She also noted that McChristy had attended an open house held by 4Cs, and had seemed satisfied with the discussion. She said before tonight's meeting she had heard only positive comments from the neighbors. Public discussion closed. IVIOTION: Bovbjerg moved to defer the application untie the December 7, 1995 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Jakobsen seconded the motion. Bovbjerg asked if other CO-1 zone uses would require increased parking, and if those requirements could be met on the site. Kugler thought sufficient parking would be available. Kugler cited the types of uses permitted in the CO-1 zone. He noted that the more intrusive type of business would only be allowed on the site by special exception. Gibson noted that if the Commission approves this rezoning request, it is also approving any uses allowed in the CO-1 zone, not just the use the applicant is proposing. Planning & Zoning Commission November 16, 1995 Page 4 The motion was carried by a vote of 5-0. CZ9543. Public discussion of an application filed with Johnson County by Alvin and Mary Jo Streb, on behalf of property owners William Phelan, Webster Gelman, John Houghton and Betty Tucker, to rezone approximately 66 acres from RS, Suburban Residential, to M1, Light Industrial, for property located in Fringe Area 5 on the east side of Scott Boulevard, north of 420th Street SE. Kugler noted that the area was just south of a parcel recently zoned M-1. He said there were currently no city utilities in the area, but that service would be extended in the next few years. As the application was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, staff recommended approval, with the condition that annexation be considered after the extension of city services. Jakobsen asked if the City could initiate annexation without the consent of concerned property owners. K~gler replied yes. Jakobsen asked if the applicant had been informed of this. Kugler said the owner was resistant to the idea of annexation, but the issue was moot until services were extended in several years. Holecek noted that the City has a policy of avoiding involuntary annexation. Jakobsen asked if the property would have to comply with city regulations. Kugler replied that if the owners subdivided the lot and built access roads, they would be subject to city standards. Starr noted that the recommendation of annexation carried no weight. Public discussion: There was none. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved that the City approve the request and forward a letter to the Johnson County Board of Supervisors recommending approval. Gibson seconded the motion. Jakobsen said that as long as the motion did not discuss annexation, she approved of it. Gibson said that if annexation had been mentioned, he would have moved to strike the clause. Starr said that he hoped annexation would be seriously considered once the city infrastructure had been extended to the area. Gibson noted that there had been debate over the Fringe Areas Agreement, but that this rezoning fits in with the City's long-term planning, and is undisputedly consistent with the Fringe Area Agreement in this particular instance. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. Planning & Zoning Commission November 16, 1995 Page 5 TEXT 1. AMENDMENT ITEMS: Public discussion of amendments to the Zoning Chapter concerning the number of roomers permitted in duplex units in the RNC-12 zone. Rockwell stated tl~at the RNC-12 zone had been created to promote neighborhood preservation. Due to the inconsistency of what is considered conforming and what is considered illegal, however, enforcement of a one-roomer limit in RNC-12 duplexes has been difficult. This prompted the suggested amendment to raise the limit to two roomers per duplex unit as it had been in the RM-12 zone. She noted that Commission- er Gibson had asked staff to review old Commission minutes to find previous discussion on this item. Rockwell indicated that the minutes from January 21, 1993 had been distributed, In these minutes, Robert Miklo stated that a higher roomer limit for duplexes would create traffic congestion and parking difficulties. Chairman Scott concurred that a higher limit was undesirable. For reasons of easier enforcement, Rockwell stated, the staff recommended approval of the ordinance amendment, Gibson noted that the policy only applied to newly constructed or converted duplexes, and that older duplexes were allowed two roomers. Starr asked how parking regulations would be affected. Rockwell said two roomers would require one more parking space per duplex unit. She also stated that no parking could be installed in a front yard. Bovbjerg asked how this was enforced. Rockwell said enforcement could occur by neighbor complaint or through routine rental permit inspections. Engh asked who would be required to upgrade parking, if it was needed. Rockwell replied that property owners would be responsible. In response to a question from Engh, Rockwell said the parking could be provided only in off-street areas within property boundaries. Public discussion. Nancy Carlson, 1002 East Jefferson Street, introduced herself as a representative of an RNC-12 neighborhood. She asked how raising the rooming limit would ease enforcement problems. She cited a local property owner who was allowed to call two separate buildings a duplex after she nailed a 2x4 board between the buildings, She also noted that the increased density would aggravate the area's open space deficit. She expressed her hope that the Commission would vote to maintain the neig~iborhood's integrity by failing to pass the amendment. Gibson asked if the staff was aware of the cited case. Rockwell affirmed that staff was aware of tl~e case. Gibson stated that the number of roomers per duplex unit was immaterial if such a loophole existed in the current regulations. He requested legal cour~sel to provide information on this case to the Commission. Jakobsen noted the building in question was built after the rezoning to RNC-12. Carlson offered to bring briefs on the definitions of buildings and additions to the attention of the Commission. Melissa Murrav, 931 East Market Street, said she and her neighbors had complained in the past about overcrowded buildings, but the Housing and Inspection Services staff told them that the only recourse was to take non-complying neighbors to cpurt. She Planning & Zoning Commission November 16, 1995 Page 6 sa~d they don't see enforcement now so they oppose increasing the number of roomers permitted in a duplex in the RNC-12 zone. If the number of roomers is increased, the amount of required parking will increase. This is likely to occur in back yards, which will detract from the green space and open space in the neighborhood. She said there are several large lots in the area that could accommodate duplex development. She didn't want to see the intensity of this use increased by any means. Joni Kinsey, 423 Church Street, introduced herself as the individual who had applied to rezone a Church Street area as RNC-12. She asserted that the rezoning has promoted a feeling of security among neighborhood residents, and that they had invested large amounts of money in renovating the area's homes as a result. She noted that the recent attic fire on Church Street was caused by illegal overcrowding. She stated that the area's sense of community was more important than efficiency in housing regulation enforcement. She said in this age of computers, there should not be a problem in being able to handle enforcement of this type. She asked the Commission not to raise the incentive to convert single-family residences to duplexes. Nancy Carlson gave a detailed discussion of the increased construction and the disturbance the new regulations would, in her opinion, cause. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Gibson moved to defer the application to the December 7, 1995 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Bovbjerg seconded the motion, Bovbjerg stated she was concerned over the implications of amending the regulations. Jakobsen said she would prefer that someone from staff talk to HIS about their enforcement methods. Engh asked what exactly the difficulties surrounding enforcement were. Rockwell stated that the inconsistency between what was grandfathered in, and what was considered illegal created enforcement difficulties. Gibson asked where the request for the amendment had originated. Rockwell replied that the request had come from the Department of Housing and Inspection Services (HIS). Bovbjerg asked whether changing the ordinance would change enforcement. Starr noted that he found the complaint of inaction by City staff disturbir~g. Bovbjerg asked that HIS staff be present at the Commission's informal meeting on December 4 to respond to questions and concerns raised at tonight's meeting. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. Public discussion of amendments to the Zoning Chapter to allow recycling processing facdities in tl~e [-1 zone. Kugler reviewed some language changes that had been made in response to concerns raised at the informal meeting. He suggested that existing screening regulations would be inappropriate for recycling collection bins. He also said that suggested mosquito Planning & Zoning Commission November 16, 1995 Page 7 abatement measures would be unnecessary due to the size limitation on outside storage areas. Bovbjerg asked what the definition of "mosquito abatement measures" was. Kugler replied that any measure which would reduce the likelihood of mosquitos was acceptable, but that the Board of Adjustment could make the final decision. Jakobsen suggested that removing the reference to tire storage and setting up a general guideline would solve the problem. Starr asked if there had been a change in staff recommendations regarding screening. Kugler said there had not. Gibson asked if the s(~reening was meant to prevent litter, and not to block the bins from view. Kugler affirmed that was the intent. Gibson expressed his unease with prescriptive rules, saying that property owners should be responsible. Holecek noted that it was difficult to deal with non-complying owners after measures had been instituted, as judicial measures would be needed. Gibson noted that the proposed ordinance language did not control such problems. Public discussion. Tim Wolfe introduced himself as the owner of Iowa City Cleanup and Transfer. He noted that some containers were designed to reduce litter, that they could be required instead of fencing. He said it was important for the public to be able to see and easily access public drop-off recycling containers. Richard Rhodes, 2014 Rochester Avenue, noted that he had originally raised the mosquito question and suggested solutions. He felt public health officials should be consulted, because tire storage areas are notorious as mosquito breeding areas. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to accept the new definitions of "recyclable materials" and "recycling processing facility," and the substitution of "salvage yard" for "junkyard." Engh seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. MOTION.: Gibson moved to amend the Zoning Chapter to allow recycling processing facilities as provisional uses in the I-1 zone, with outside storage of certain materials allowed by special exception. Bovbjerg seconded the motion. Gibson suggested that the screeni0g requirement could be replaced by the insertion of the phrase, "provided the containers are designed to prevent the spread of litter." MOTION: Gibson moved to amend the motion by adding the phrase, "provided the containers are designed to prevent the spread of litter." Engh seconded the motion. The motion to amend carried bv a vote of 5-0. Bovbjerg asked if the mosquito problem had been addressed. Holecek suggested that "'mosquito abatement measures" be added to Section D4d. Planning & Zoning Commission November 16, 1995 Page 8 MOTION: Gibson moved to amend section D4d of the amended motion to add the phrase, "Mosquito abatement measures shall be incorporated into the design of the outdoor storage area." Jakobsen seconded the motion. The motion to amend the amended motion carried by a vote of 5~0. Gibson noted that he was comforted by the need to consult the Board of Adjustment concerning outdoor storage. Engh felt the size restriction might serve as an adequate mosquito abatement measure. The main motion was apProved by a vote of 5-0. 3. Public discussion of amendments to the Zoning Chapter to reference the Parking Facility Impact Fee Ordinance in the off-street parking regulations section of the Zoning Chapter. Rockwell noted that the amendment was intended to specify in the Zoning Chapter where to find the parking facility impact fee requirements in a different section of the City Code, and was therefore a housekeeping measure. Public discussion: There was none. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Gibsoh moved to approve the amendments to the Zoning Chapter to reference the Parking Facility Impact Fee ordinance in the off-street parking regulations section of the Zoning Ordinance. Bovbjerg seconded. Bovbjerg stated her approval of the amendment, as it would improve clarity within the Zoning Chapter. The motion was carried on a vote of 5-0. CONSIDERATION OF THE NOVEMBER 2, 1995 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES: Rockwell noted the addition of some revisions by Chairman Scott, notably the addition of conditions to several motions. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to approve the minutes as revised. Gibson seconded. The motion was carried on a vote of 5-0. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION INFORMATION: Bovbjerg noted that she had attended the recent CITY STEPS revision meeting. She said the plan contained important features of interest to the Planning and Zoning Commission. She Planning & Zoning Commission November 16, 1995 Page 9 said the discussion at the meeting and the comments from the public on the issues and the costs involved were quite interesting, Jakobsen reminded the other Commissioners that a public hearing on the Near Southside Development Plan would be held on November 21. Rockwell noted the Saratoga Springs item would be discussed at the November 20 Council Work Session, She understood that Starr and Bovbjerg were planning to attend the discussion, which would start around 7 p,m, following the Council's meeting in executive session, Holecek reminded the Commission that the City Council's executive session prior to the public hearing on Saratoga Springs would be scheduled for 6:30 p,m, OTHER BUSINESS: Jakobsen asked if the December 1 8 and 21 meetings had been officially cancelled. Starr said no, but this would probably be determined at the next formal meeting and would depend on the number of applications received for that meeting. ADJOURNMENT: IVIOTION: Bovbjerg moved to adjourn at 9:25 p.m, Engh seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0, Minutes submitted by James Erwin, Lea Supple, Secretary IOWA CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 1995- 7:30 P.M. CMC CENTER COUNCIL CH~BEP~ SIGN IN SHEET 10. 11. 12. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19.