Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-12-01 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 - 5:30 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS - CITY CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Trudy Day, Frank Gersh, Mike Gunn, Betty Kelly, Doris Malkmus, Pam Michaud, Marc Mills, Michaelanne Widness MEMBERS ABSENT: Lars Anderson STAFF PRESENT: Scott Kugler, Jeff Davidson OTHERS PRESENT: Kevin Monson, Steve Jacobsen, Jeff Schabillion, Cecile Kuenzli, Ruedi Kuenzli, Eleanor Steele, Pat Keil RECOMMFNDATIONS TO COUNCIL: The Commission recommended approval of the proposed Summit Street Bddge reconstruction plans to the City Council by a vote of 8-0. CAMTO ORDER: Malkmus called the meeting to order at 5:37 p.m. Kugler introduced Mark Mills, who is the new Brown Street representative, and announced that Linda Shope was appointed to be the new Woodlawn representative. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. Kugler noted that the applicant for the Certificate of Appropriateness had not arrived yet. Malkmus said the Commission would discuss the Summit Street Bridge plans first, and then review the Certificate application when the applicant arrived. DISCUSSION OF SUMMIT STRFFT BRIDGF PLANS: Kugler said that the bridge plans are included in the agenda packet. He said in 1995, Davidson came to the Commission and explained that this project was coming up, and the Commission provided some pre-design recommendations. He said that the Commission was concemed about having unnecessarily wide travel lanes on the bridge, that there not be a large incline leading up to the bridge as there is with the Dodge Street bridge, installing a historical marker or plaque explaining the historical significance of the bridge, and about what would happen with the streetscape at the north end of the bridge. Davidson said that this project has been in the works for some time. He said that they have federal funds on an 80~20 basis for up to $850,000, so there is some constraint on the things they can do on the project. He introduced Kevin Munson from Neumann-Monson Architects, who were retained for some of the aesthetic considerations, and Steve Jacobsen from NNW Inc., who are the structural engineers for the project. He said the Council went through a decision making process to determine that they did want to retain the bridge on Summit Street because at one time it was discussed about moving the bridge to another alignment. He said that they have reached some level of satisfaction that Summit Street is an artedal street and the bridge is an important element of that. He said they have tried to make the street as calm and peaceful as possible because of the residential character and historic nature of the street. He Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission September 10, 1998 Page 2 said there is on-street parking, which is atypical for an arterial street, and there is some traffic control to try to keep the speeds down. He noted that it is intended that this is the final review before they go to Council and ask for approval on the bridge. Munson said one feature of the bridge that they have tried to maintain is calmness. He said they tried to give as much arch to the bridge as they could within the federal safety guidelines. He said they also thought it was important for travelers to have the sense that they are going over a bridge instead of being on another part of the street. He said that they met with the Summit Street Neighborhood Association, and noted that some of the ideas came from those discussions. He said they did not want this bridge to be a modern, interstate highway bridge. He went over the plans, noting the protrusion areas that could serve as balconies or rest areas over the railroad, the benches and the areas for proposed plaques giving historical information about the bridge and the railroad that will be located in those areas. He said they have lined the approaches with one another, downplayed the barder rail so it does not look like an interstate barrier rail, toned down the colors, selected stain concrete with a special form liner to replicate stone because they feel that stone is the appropriate sense of the bridge, matched federal guidelines requiring auto resistance to avoid snagging problems with cars, customized the railings with a strong picket feel and coloring them deep green and used light posts at a scale that can be appreciated by the pedestrian and that are the same deep green color as the railings. He noted that the bridge has a nice arch shape, which helps give greater clearance for the railroad and decreases the height for the approaches. He said they changed the rail pattern at the arch/center of the span to give a better vantage point. He said the concrete is poured in place and stained to certain depth, so it will not be rubbed out. Kelly asked if there were lampposts on the cement rail. Monson said the lampposts were only on the pedestrian side of the bridge. Michaud asked how high each of the railings was. Mortson said one is 4'6" and the concrete is 32" from the roadway to the top of the concrete. Kelly asked how wide the sidewalk was. Jacobsen said 8'. Davidson said that they will be reconstructing a portion of the street on either side of the bridge, and it is only on the bridge that the sidewalk is 8' wide. He said the sidewalks leading up to the bridge are 4' wide, even though the City's design standard is 8'. Monson noted that if a bicyclist is traveling one direction on a 4' wide sidewalk on a bridge and meets someone else they do not have anywhere to go. The wider sidewalk would alleviate that problem. Gersh asked if the street would be narrower than it is now. Jacobsen said it will vary somewhat. He said the nominal width of the street is 30', and they are going to keep that. He said right now the bridge narrows up to 24'. He said the plan is to narrow the roadway up to the bridge on either side to 24' like the existing bridge, but when they get to the actual bridge at the barrier rails it will be 28' which allows for extra snow storage in the winter and to allow automobiles and bicyclists to coexist on the street. He showed a detailed plan and explained it again. Michaud asked if there could be a 6' sidewalk on the bridge. Davidson said the 8' wide sidewalk on a bridge is a City design standard that is intended to have a two-way mix of pedestrian and bicycle traffic. He the City actually uses 10' wide sidewalks in some areas, and 8' is considered the minimum requirement. Kugler asked if parking would be restricted close to the bridge. Jacobsen said yes. Day asked about the lighting color from the streetlights. Monson said they have not selected a light source. Davidson said the Commission could make a recommendation about a specific color of lighting. Michaud suggested doing a survey for lumens necessary for this area. Monson said they are not trying to light the street; they are just trying to light the sidewalk for the pedestrians and bicyclists using the bridge. Gunn said that some people in the neighborhood have expressed concern on the number and amount of lights. Monson said they have a very narrow need for light, so the wattage on each lamp will be very low. He said the lamp fixture does not have an up component, so the light is cast downward. He said they are looking in the range of 4-6 foot- candles on the surface of the sidewalk. He said the lighting of the meeting room was probably Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission September 10, 1998 Page 3 40-50 foot-candles, Michaud asked if the street lamps were supposed to simulate gas lamps, and if they were a yellowish light color might be more appropriate than white light. Monson said the yellow color changes the color of things underneath it dramatically, but is provides a warmer, softer feeling. He said that they need more fixtures if they are going to have low wattage otherwise the light will pool and pedestrians will be going from dark to light areas along the bridge. He said he did not think the amount of light would be an issue, and that they did not think that they would receive any complaints. Michaud asked what kinds of benches were being proposed. Mortson said that they are 4' or 5' long benches that are a simple metal with fluid lines, similar to the lines of the railings. Malkmus asked when bumping out areas on bridges became a facet of design. Davidson said the 16th Avenue bridge in Cedar Rapids is patterned after a medieval bridge in Prague. Gunn asked if the coloration would be put on after the concrete was poured. Monson said yes, the concrete is handpainted and stained, and the stain penetrates the concrete. Mills asked how the color would hold up to auto exhaust. Monson said it would hold up as well as other material does. Malkmus asked if the colors would fade. Monson said it would probably lighten over time due to the salts and sprays, and it could be restained. Kelly asked where the plaques would be positioned in the bump out section. Monson said they envisioned them on the pedestrian side in the medallion spaces toward the center span of the bridge. Malkmus noted that the spaces are low. Monson said the pedestrians would be looking down at them. Public hearing opened. Jeff Schabillion, said that he applauded the work on the bridge. He said they showed extraordinary good faith effort in incorporating most of the comments made at the neighborhood meeting. Cecile Kuenzli. 705 South Summit Street, thanked the City for bringing Monson aboard on the project. She asked if the weight of the massive interior barricade could be equalized by inserting some of the iron work panels between the stone work. She said that way the motorists could see more of the lovely outer ironwork, and could lighten the massiveness of the stone barricade. Jacobsen said that they have strength considerations to watch for on the barrier rails, and they also need to consider the snag factor, which means that if they have anything that is more than 3,/.,, inset or outset it could snag a vehicle. C. Kuenzli said she was also concerned about the number of light fixtures, and asked why there were 12 of them. She said there are no other streetlights currently on the street, and she was concerned about having too much light. Monson said that by adding more fixtures they have been able to reduce the brightness of each fixture, and they thought that was the bigger issue. He said they liked the idea of breaking up the bridge with vertical elements, and it is very typical to have bridges lit. He said the minimum they could go with on each side was four fixtures, and they would have to be 3-5 times brighter. C. Kuenzli noted that there are only four lampposts on the Melrose Avenue bridge. Eleanor Steele. 710 South Summit Street, said that she said she was happy with the way the City chose to deal with this project. She said she was concerned about the form concrete and how natural the dyes looked, and the lighting, but she said she felt her concerns were addressed. She asked Mortson about the energy available to the lighting and if that would limit the amount of light that could come out of those sources. Monson said that they did not want to add a lot of power to the fixtures, and they would be ordered with a certain wattage. He said they want to provide minimal light. Steele suggested being careful about getting a fixture that Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission September 10. 1998 Page 4 allowed for maximum wattage because a miscommunication could result in bright lights in the neighborhood. Public hearing closed. Malkmus noted that the Commission did not have any elevations that show the proposed bridge in comparison with the old one. She said that the neighbors were concerned with the approach being too high compared to the grade of the surrounding lots. Jacobsen said the grade from 100 feet north of the bridge will be about 6" higher than it is now. He said from that same distance south of the bridge, it was 6-9" higher, and the bridge itself would be close to a foot higher. Widness said she thought the design was very handsome. Michaud asked how wide the concrete wall was. Jacobsen said it was 15" wide. MOTION: Day moved to recommend the Summit Street bridge plan proposal to the City Council. Kelly seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 8-0. CERTIFICATF OF APPROPRIATENF:SS: 127 E. College Street (College Block Building) Keil said that he was representing the building owners. He said there is a 20-24" brick wall that at one time served as a separation wall between a Theater, which later burned, and the existing building. He said that the area is tight to work with. He said the wall is not going to fall down, but the brick was soft to begin with and he thought that had something to do with the deterioration of the first layer of bricks on the wall. He said there has been a lot of patchwork done on the wall, and the last time any work was done on it was 22 years ago. He said in the last year or two there have been some occurrences of some mortar falling off the wall. He said the surface is 36- 40' wide running north and south and it is 25' tall. He said they had two options because it is not cost effective to completely replace the wall. He said they can apply some patchwork or cover the entire wall. He said that something applied on a lower part of the wall was a mortar mix with a latex-based additive. He said there is a new product that includes vinyl particles in this mix, which adds bonding and strength to the area. He said they could skim coat over the damaged areas. He said putting a layer of this mix on in two %" stages over the entire wall would prevent moisture from getting in and freezing during the winter. He noted that the layer would result in a stucco-like appearance, so the brick would be hidden. Malkmus asked how Keil would cover the differences in depth due to erosion of some of the bricks. Keil said they would patch those areas with the same product first, and then apply the layer over the entire wall. He said a trowel pattern would be the best to completely seal the wall from the elements. (Day left at 6:20 p.m.) Malkmus said she was concerned that putting the product deep in the areas that were eroded would cause more cracking. Keil said that they will make sure that every surface the product is applied to is bonded well, and he thought that this was a safe fix. Kelly asked Keil if he knew anyone who had used the proposed product on soft brick, and what the results were. Keil said no. Kelly said she was not worried about the appearance, she was worried about the deterioration of the wall. Keil said the City suggested a softer product mix that uses some portland, lime, mortar and sand. He said the latex product would give an extra bonding to the surface and the vinyl components would make it stronger. Kugler asked if Keil's reference to mortar was really lime. Keil said yes, they will experiment with the product until they get what they want. Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission September 10, 1998 Page 5 Kelly noted that the digging of the Holiday Inn foundation also caused some severe problems to wall. Keil said someone has used the product that he has mentioned on the bottom part of the wall, and it seems to be holding up well. Kelly said she was concerned about what the product would do to the soft bricks underneath. Keil said he was concerned if they could get anything to stick to the soft brick, but he thought the two-layer method would work. He said water could break this down if it gets behind the layers. Kelly asked if the setting of this product would be affected by temperature change. Keil said he thought that with this product they would be fine for the next couple of months, but once they got into November and December they may not be able to work throughout the day. Kelly asked how long it took the product to set. Keil said this product dries faster because of the latex component, so it would take between 10-15 hours. Kelly asked if he had discussed this with anyone that deals with historic buildings. Keil said no, he has been asked to look into the options, and he feels small patching or doing the whole wall are their only options. He said the patchwork might allow moisture to get in and the work will be a waste of time. Malkmus said she was concerned about interior vapor trying to get through the wall, and not being able to because of the vinyl in the layered coating. Keil said he thought there was a space between the wall that allows the moisture to pass through the wall and travel upward because there is a cap on the top. Malkmus said in the past the moisture could move completely through the wall because of the soft brick, and if a vapor barrier is placed over that brick on the exterior of the wall the vapor and the brick will freeze. Keil said he did not think the "breathing" would be a problem. Malkmus said she would like to see more information about a solid covedng on a brick wall because she was concerned that it may change the way moisture moves through the building. Michaud asked if a vented cap on top of the wall would work. Keil said putting a vent on top of the wall would be something that he could do. Malkmus said she thought the Commission could get some more information about this product and what kind of vapor barrier, if any, it would be putting on the building. Kugler said he tried to find more information about this product. He said Judy McClure and Sue Licht were not familiar with the product. Kelly asked how long this product has been used. Keil said it has been out in the last 2-3 years. He said he would send for some more information on the product. Michaud said she thought the cap should be extended or a new one should be put on so the mortar does not cover it. She asked if this product was scrubbable or paintable if the surface was vandalized. Keil said it would be paintable with a gray spray paint, which is the same color as the product. He reminded the committee that the layers would cover the brick, so it would be a gray wall with a stucco appearance. He said that they could put dye into the mix to add to the color tone. Malkmus said she wanted to make sure that this product would not endanger the wall any further. Kelly asked how much preparation Keil would need before putting this on. Keil said they would take all the loose debris off, and he would like to have this project totally completed by the Commission's next monthly meeting. MOTION: Kelly moved to defer the Certificate of Appropriateness for 127 E. College Street (College Block Building) until the Commission has more information on the proposed product. Malkmus asked how Commission members felt about this decision being contingent upon Kelly, Kugler and herself or another Commission member reviewing the information. Members all said that was fine. Widness said that Keil could apply mortar, which could last for five or so years, and in that time this product could have developed a track record and one would have a better idea as to how it would work. Michaud requested some tinting to achieve warm tones. Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission September 10, 1998 Page 6 Kelly amended her motion to "approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for 127 E. College Street (College Block Building) subject to further review of the proposed product's vapor barrier effect and reaction to old bricks, and the addition of a warm, terra cotta/reddish tint to the product." Keil said it would be no problem to tint this mix, and it is virtually the same product that the City used for the curb ramp project. Malkmus said the Commission would like the color to be softer than that. Keil said they would play with the mix to find the right color. (Michaud left at 6:48 p.m.) Gunn seconded the motion. Malkmus asked Gunn and Kelly to talk with Kugler about the effect of the mortar mix on brick and the moisture barrier information, and to make the decision regarding the Certificate. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. (Michaud returned at 6:50 p.m.) Kelly said she needed to leave early, and asked if they could discuss the October 17 workshop next. DICUSSION OF OCTOBER 17 WORKSHOP: Kelly said the Old House Seminar is scheduled for October 17 from 9 a.m.-12 p.m. at the Masonic Temple. She said the idea is to have some experts come in to help people that have old houses. She said the topics will focus mainly on the exterior of the house. She said that Marlys Svendsen will talk about colors appropriate for certain historic periods, Judy McClure will give information about how to know what period a house is from, John Shaw will talk about how an architect goes about giving assistance in designing additions and remodeling, and Steve van der Woude will talk about different types of materials that are on the market to help the homeowner. Kugler said that Kerry McGrath will be getting a mailing list to Kelly. He said she suggested having some sort of registration or RSVP so they know how many are coming. Kelly said from 9-9:30 she thought about having coffee and a registration period. She said that each speaker will talk for 15-30 minutes and spend the rest of the time answering questions. Malkmus noted that this is open to the public and the Commission is inviting people from around the state. Kelly asked what other advertising methods should be used. Kugler said that they could probably get the mailing list for Friends of Historic Preservation, and send notices to everyone in Historic Districts. Kelly said this announcement is on the Chamber of Commerce docket for September and October, and it was in the Advertiser. C. Kuenzli suggested putting a notice in the neighborhood association newsletters. Kelly asked if she could find out the deadlines for the Longfellow Neighborhood Association newsletter. Kugler said they could prepare something and post it in the building. He said the easiest thing to do would be to prepare something on an 8 1/2" by 11" piece of paper that can be posted or folded and mailed. Kelly said she would be on the Dottie Ray Show on September 24. Kugler said he would send a press release out to the newspapers. Malkmus asked if the Dottie Ray Show extended to Cedar Rapids. Kelly said no, but she would be going up to the Questers State Northeast Section on October 1, and she would make the iowa City Historic Preservation Commission September 10, 1998 Page 7 announcement then. Kugler said that he would send the press release to the Cedar Rapids Gazette. Kelly asked if anybody would like to volunteer to be the M.C., to make sure coffee is there, etc. Malkmus said that volunteers could be assigned at the next monthly meeting. She suggested that the Commission make a committee for projects like this at the annual planning meeting. C. Kuenzli suggested putting up a poster up in Gilpin's because a lot of people go there for paint for old houses. UPDATE ON APPEAL OF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPROVED FOR LOTS 1 AND 2. M & W ADDITION (803 SOUTH SUMMIT STREET): Kelly thanked Widness for writing the letter to Council, and said she did a very good job. Widness said if the letter goes longer than three pages, they would lose their audience's interest, so she tried to hit on the highlights. She said Gersh called her with two suggested paragraphs. She said his first paragraph replaces the third paragraph on page 1 that begins, "As evidence", and the second and third paragraph proposed by Gersh replaces one paragraph at the bottom of page 2 that begins, "Since its inception." Kelly noted that Houser accepted the terms of the Certificate of Appropriateness by picking up the Certificate and starting his project and now he wants to go back on it, and asked if there was any legal contention that he can do that. Kugler said he thought it was pretty clear that Houser was opposed to wood. Kelly asked if by picking up the Certificate was Houser accepting a contract. Kugler said he thought Houser picked up the building permit after he filed his appeal on this issue, but he would check with the City Attorney's Office. Kugler said the public hearing for this item was set for September 22. He said the Council will hold the hearing, and if they feel they have enough information they can make a decision at that time they will do so; if they don't they have the right to defer that to get more information within a reasonable amount of time. He said he has been asked to put together basically everything that has gone in Commission member's packets about this issue and any other information that was handed out, and put it into a package for Council. He said they would have the same information that the Commission had. Michaud asked if the technical specifications she sent from Nagle's would be included. Kugler said that was not presented to the Commission, and the Commission chose to require wood. He said he had most of that information already, and he did not receive that information before the meeting where the Commission made the recommendation. He said he did not know whether that was appropriate to send to Council or not. He said if the Council decides not to go with wood and starts looking at the fiber cement board that might be a good time to present that information. Widness said that the Commission never actually required wood. They disallowed vinyl and split on the fiber cement board, so the motion to allow that did not carry. She said that Houser should have sent in a new application requesting a different siding material at that point, and she was not sure why the Commission moved to vote on whether Houser could do this with wood. She was not sure that was up to the Commission at that point. She said the Commission said he could not use vinyl or fiber cement board, but the Commission did not say that wood was the only thing that he could use. She said he just did not present anything except those three alternatives. She said she was not comfortable on how he was able to get this Certificate to begin work because if the Commission had stopped the process after the tie vote he could not have done anything. Malkmus said that Houser's application requested vinyl, but it also said horizontal siding, and it was known from the beginning that would be the issue the Commission would discuss. Kugler said the Commission's procedures and guidelines reference the possibility of an application being modified during the Commission's review, and there are provisions in the ordinance which specify approve, disapprove or approve with modifications. He said he thought it was clear to everyone what the Commission was approving, and if they would iowa City Historic Preservation Commission September 10.1998 Page 8 have deferred the item for two weeks to have Houser revise and resubmit his application it may have been seen as a stalling tactic. Malkmus said she thought that Widness' ideas carry themselves well in the letter, and said she liked Gersh's additions. She said in the fourth paragraph of the first page, she wanted the second sentence to read, "While there was agreement that vinyl siding is appropriate in some instances and should not be dismissed out of hand, many objections were raised." Kugler said that he would get Widness the correct titles of the people mentioned in the letter. Michaud said on the second page the last sentence of the fifth paragraph should read, "The Commission is required to employ a case-by-case approach to decision-making." Malkmus said the first sentence of the first full paragraph on the third page should read, "Additionally, it is important to remember that we are talking here about the first infill project in the oldest and arguably the most symbolic historic district in the city, if not the state." Malkmus said that made a strong point for the Summit Street integrity. Gunn said he thought this was a nice letter. Malkmus said she would attend the work session on September 21st, but she would be out of town on the 22"d. Widness said she would attend both meetings, and Gunn said he could attend the 22nd meeting. Kugler said he would be at both meetings to answer questions. Kugler said to bring the letter to his office by next Wednesday (September 16) afternoon to be signed and copied. DISCUSSION OF AMFNDMENTS OF PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES. BY-LAWS. AND HISTORIC PRESFRVATION ORDINANCE: Kugler said he could go through the minor changes and the Commission could discuss them, but the Commission would not be making any decisions because they need to have public hearings before the Commission and the Council before any decisions are made. He said that he and Anderson went through the document and cleaned some things up. He said that everywhere there is a reference to an application being filed with the building department, it was changed to filing it with the planning department because that is what is done now. He said they clarified that an applicant could come in for review and approval prior to applying for a building permit because that is an option available. He said they eliminated the application for the Certificate of No Material Effect because there is not an application for that. He said that applicants apply for a Certificate of Appropriateness and if the staff person and the Commission Chair feel that there would be no effect on the building's appearance they could issue the Certificate of No Material Effect. He said that for the Certificate of Appropriateness, they eliminated the requirement for the Commission's weekly meeting, and are proposing instead to set another time aside in the month to review certificates that are filed. He said the Commission would still have their regular monthly meeting, but this other proposed time could prevent all the special meetings the Commission has had to set up lately. He said that no other agenda items would be considered at this proposed extra meeting. He said that if applications were filed five working days prior to that meeting, staff would call members and tell them that there will be a meeting. If nothing had been filed, the meeting would be cancelled. He said they kept the language that says the Commission could defer an item to the next regular monthly meeting if they feel they do not have enough information at that Certificate Review Meeting. Malkmus said she wanted to make sure that Commission members would get the information and have enough time to go look at the properties applying. Kugler said the five working days would provide the same amount of review time that the Commission currently has before regular monthly meetings. Kugler said this could eliminate the need for the Certificate Review Subcommittee to look at all the applications ahead of time. He said if problems are identified at the special meeting, they could defer the item for two weeks to their next regular monthly meeting. Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission September 10, 1998 Page 9 Widness said she thought this was a good idea because she thought the Commission was getting into trouble having the subcommittee review the certificates first. She said in Houser's situation, the subcommittee looked at his plans, came up with their ideas on what they wanted changed, he made those changes, and when he came before the entire Commission there were a whole new set of things that people wanted changed. She said it would be fairer to the applicant to go through that process once even if it takes longer. She said the two-step process did not expedite the entire process. Gersh said Houser's case was a little different because he was in a hurry, so he wanted the subcommittee's suggestions put into his plans right away. He said the applicant in a normal situation would wait until they went before the entire Commission to make any changes. Kugler said the idea of the subcommittee is that some of the issues would be addressed ahead of time and could be changed before the meeting so meeting time is not wasted going over everything. Widness said that should be made clear that the applicants' obligations would not be limited to what the subcommittee comes up with. Kugler said Houser was clearly told that. Malkmus said as the ordinance reads a lot of people come to the Commission and do not have a clue to what the Commission is looking for. She said the intent of the subcommittee was to provide a forum in which a small number of the Commissioners could work with the applicants in the design process. She said she felt there was still a role for that. Gunn said that when the subcommittee met with Houser, it was said numerous times that they were not sure what the full Commission would agree to, so there was no room for misunderstanding there. Malkmus said members needed to think about this in terms of how they can provide the most education to applicants. Kugler said he thought there was still a role for the subcommittee's review when an application is filed before the regular monthly meeting. Gunn said the Commission should regard the applicants like clients and try to help them get through this process as easily as possible. He said the more input from the Commission sooner would be better. Malkmus noted that with 10 Commission members it will more difficult for every member to have a project turn out how they thought it should. Kelly said that she thought the application form might be part of the problem because not everything that is requested is always submitted. Malkmus said that should be discussed, but maybe not in this context. Kugler said in the case of the certificate the Commission reviewed earlier tonight, an elevation drawing would not do the Commission any good. Kelly said the applicant did have some photographs, but he did not have a manufacturer's catalog, which she would have appreciated. Kugler noted that those items are optional for the applicant to present. Kelly said she did not think that those should be optional. (Kelly left at 7:27 p.m.) Kugler said they requested no changes to the Commission meeting format section. Malkmus asked if that was where they would have to talk about Kugler in terms of staff. Kugler said for most other Commissions there is nothing specific in the ordinance or by-laws that says staff will not make a recommendation. He said in the past his role was questioned by a member of the public, and it has never been clear to him if the Commission expects a recommendation on design issues or not. He said he is there to provide information and to make sure that the Commission is making decisions within the context of their authority and standards. He said he could make a recommendation on ,many issues, but on the more technical issues he would not feel comfortable doing so. He asked Commission members how far they wanted him or a future staff member to go. Malkmus said that in the past when the Commission would get into ticklish points, other staff members would make pointed recommendations to her, and there is no place for her to pass those along to other Commission members. She said there is also no place for her to say that staff thinks this or that. She said that if those comments were written down in the agenda packets, all members would be on the same playing field and it would be open to the public. She said she would like members to think about how that could be appropriately Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission September 10, 1998 Page 10 handled. She said she was not sure that needed to be included in the by-laws, but she thought it needed to be discussed. Kugler noted that staff provides a recommendation with the Planning and Zoning Commission, and for the Board of Adjustment they outline issues as they see them and how they satisfy or do not satisfy standards, but staff does not make a recommendation. He said he would not be able to provide a detailed staff report in the Commission's packet because of his limited time available for this Commission. Kugler said the individual raised the concern that the staff person is not a professional in historic preservation. He said his training is in urban planning and urban design, and he has picked up what he has learned about historic preservation mainly on the job, and this person was concerned about him not having enough knowledge and experience to provide a good recommendation and that he could be misleading the Commission by doing so. Kugler said that there were no changes to the last two sections of the document. He said the issues about providing notice to neighboring property owners when applications are filed and the fact that the current ordinance does not grant them any appeal rights are outlined in Anderson's memo, and could be considered. He said that the City Attorney's office feels that with the formal notice provisions given to neighboring property owners, or property owners within 200 feet would make them a party to what is going on. He said the ordinance says the applicant may appeal, and refers later to the applicant or aggrieved party. He said the state statute refers to any aggrieved party making an appeal, so the City ordinance will probably have to be changed to be consistent with that. He said the question is who is an aggrieved party. He said mailing letters out to adjacent property owners or property owners within 200 feet, would be essentially make them parties to this issue, and then they could file an appeal as an aggrieved party. He said providing notice, such as a sign, would probably not do that because it would get information out to the neighboring property owners, but it'would not make them a party to the issue. He said when the recent districts were established, there was a lot of public relations work done by the Commission emphasizing the fact that they made a concerted effort to not delay projects more than a couple of weeks, and would hold special meetings if necessary so that historic preservation was not a excessive burden on the property owner. He said a concern on staff level was that by allowing an appeal by neighbors, the possibility of substantial delays would enter into the picture. He said that needs to be considered because while there is some value to having an appeal from the neighbors, the people in the newer districts have been told something different. He said the City Attorney's office likens the Historic Preservation review somewhat to the Building Permit review, in that there are standards in place, a review procedure to determine whether those standards are met or not, and the Commission has been appointed to make that decision. He said they allow for public input and can consider that, but there is a question about whether the decision itself should be opened up to the political process versus the review of the standards. Gersh noted that the appeal would be to the Council, not to the Commission. Malkmus said the ability for neighbors to appeal might slow people down in their projects and in their sense of security in moving forward. Kugler said that the neighbors would have 10 days to appeal, so if the applicant to any action in moving forward with their project during that time they would be doing it at their own risk. Malkmus said the people in the neighborhood have been very vocal in that they see it is a matter of justice that only one side can appeal the decision and not the other side. She said she thought it was really an issue of narrowing the group of people who could be aggrieved parties. Kugler said if a notice is mailed to adjacent property owners, they would be "parties". Malkmus said she did not think that they wanted to mail the letter out, that a sign would be the most effective way to inform the neighbors. Michaud said signs in the past did not stay up. Malkmus said that building permits have the large signs in the windows, and she thought they could do something like that. Kugler said they post signs for subdivision reviews, but they do find that Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission September 10, 1998 Page 11 sometimes the signs do not last long. Gersh said he thought a letter should be mailed out. Malkmus asked to whom the letters should be mailed. Kugler said that would have to be defined, whether it is the adjacent property owners or property owners within a certain distance. He noted with that the Commission would be asking for more information, it would require the applicant to do some research at the Assessor's Office to collect and submit that information, and it would require more staff time so that the letters am mailed out on time, the sign is posted on the property and to answer questions from neighboring property owners. He said there could be substantially less staff time available to put toward some of the other projects going on. He said there are provisions in the site plan review ordinance for an appeal to the Planning and Zoning Commission, and in that case there is no filing fee for the appeal, but there are situations on occasion where a property owner will appeal a decision for the sole purpose to slowing down their neighbor's project for whatever reason. Malkmus said she thought the people who would be most in favor of inclusiveness in terms of including as many people as possible in this decision making process would be the kind of civic-minded people who would show up at a public hearing. Public hearing opened. Eleanor Steele, said she reviewed the memo from Anderson and one of her biggest concems was the sort of information gathering that was going on. She said she was surprised about the City Attorney's remark because in fact the attorneys who work for the National Trust advise that mailings be done. She quoted, "Property owners, neighbors and interested members of the general public must be provided a reasonable opportunity to be heard on any matter considered by a Preservation Commission that affects their interests. Generally the closer the distance is from a property under consideration by a Commission, the more appropriate it is to use individually mailed notice." She said her biggest concern is that this is something the public and the Commission will be involved in, and there will be an obvious need for legal assistance. She said she was concerned about the lack of expertise everyone has in making these kinds of decisions, and she felt that there were some additional things in the procedures that were overlooked because there is not an appeals process and it is not outlined how the Council is supposed to handle that appeal. She encouraged the Commission to get some professional assistance, and the National Trust would be a good place to go for advisement. She said they have an excellent journal, Preservation Law Reporter, that covers these issues, and booklets that are available and a wonderful legal staff that could be employed. She said she felt this issue was important enough to obtain or set aside funds to hire that legal staff for professional, specialized assistance. She said that what went on this summer was very negative for all parties involved, and it was in part due to the procedures and guidelines that the community has to operate under. She said she had seen a few things come from staff, including this recent advice from the City Attorney, that suggest to her that is not who can ultimately provide the best information for this very specialized, professional field. Ruedi Kuenzli. 705 South Summit Street, said that they should remember that this summer the Commission had to deal with two of the largest problems, the addition project at 621 South Summit Street and the infill project at located at 803 South Summit Street, they have ever dealt with. He said the notion of the appeal arose from these two applications, and he said that nuisance could be created anytime. He said he did not think policies should be created with that basis, and that probably 98% of the issues coming before the Commission will be routine and nothing will be questioned. He said that there may be one or two projects a year that are extraordinary and demand more time. He said that five days to consider such a huge project was not long enough for the Commission because it was too complex. He said it will not work if each project is treated the same way because there are complexities coming out of projects that the Commission needs more time to consider. Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission September 10, 1998 Page 12 Cecile Kuen71i, said she was concerned about Anderson's memo that refers to legal staff's opinion, and that the right of appeal should be limited to the applicant. She said that none of the Commission members attended the Council meeting in July when the Summit Street neighborhood brought their appeal before the Council and asked them to hear it. She said the Council felt very uncomfortable with the fact that there was not avenue of appeal for anyone other than the applicant, and they made it very clear that they wanted the neighbors who would be affected by the decision to have the possibility to appeal. She said through the course of this process, the neighbors consulted a lawyer who said the Iowa code .guarantees the right of appeal in any matter like this, and they would have pursued it if things had not happen the way they did. She noted that the City Attorney's interpretation of this matter seems to conflict with what the Iowa code guarantees citizens. Kugler said the City Attorney's office has not issued a formal opinion to the Commission; the information provided was what they had informally passed along. He said they were aware of the Council discussions, but if the issue came up before the Council they indicated would likely recommend this. He said the difference between the City ordinance and the state statute is that the ordinance says that the applicant may appeal, and under the statute it says that any aggrieved party can appeal. He said the reason the City Attorney's office recommended to the Council that they not consider the appeal from the neighbors was because they would not be able to establish themselves as aggrieved parties under the current ordinance. Michaud asked if the neighbors' grievance would be dependent on the Commission's mailing list instead of their proximity to the project. Kugler said the City Attorney's office felt that the adjoining property owners or neighbors in the district did not constitute an aggrieved party because they were not given the right of notice. He said the neighbors were given a right to speak at the meetings and see the item posted on the agenda. He said they were not given any special notice of this item, so there was nothing that they could use to establish themselves as aggrieved parties. Kuenzli said the project in question would have affected the property values and the future of the district. Kugler said the City Attomey's office felt those were all subjective things. Gersh said the attorney the Summit Street neighbors consulted felt differently, and that they could be considered aggrieved parties. Steele said that as she understands some of the issues involved in the right for public notice and public appeal, she understands where the City Attorney is coming from because it is a standings and consent issue. She said once someone is identified as an interested party they can in effect develop police power and control what happens to a house. She said something in histodc preservation is not the same as a planning decision; it is like planning in that preservation is done for the public good and so special interests are in a certain way diminished. She said that nonetheless, she found it interesting that those that specialize in preservation law understand the issue differently. She said there is a problem of giving authority to interested parties other than the applicant, and whether that power should be allowed, but there are some other issues under consideration and she is not sure how much time staff has put into that. She said the preservation lawyers feel very differently about the neighbors' role in the process. She said she thought it was sort of silly to be having this conversation without looking to their authority on this. Public hearing closed. Malkmus said the Commission will probably discuss these issues at their planning meeting on September 24 in order to figure where it will fit on the Commission's priority list. Kugler said that the planning meeting is a public meeting, but it is for setting priorities to determine where the Commission wants to focus their time and efforts over the next year. Malkmus said there would be more opportunities for the public to bring more information to the Commission's attention. Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission September 10, 1998 Page 13 Kugler said that one idea mentioned was having an ex-officio Commission member, which they could specify be an architect or architectural historian. The member would not vote, but could provide the kind of technical expertise the Commission is looking for. He said that person could provide a recommendation to the Commission but not be involved in the actual decision, so there would not be a conflict of interest issue with that member because they would not be an officer of the City. He said the only conflict that there could be in that situation would be if someone like Sue Licht was appointed to the ex-officio position and she designs an addition for someone in a historic district, she would not be able to give a recommendation on that item and she would have to be totally excluded from the discussion. Malkmus asked if there was any money in the budget being proposed for consultants. Kugler said there is money in the planning budget for that, but it would be difficult to tap into that every month. He noted that is something the Commission could request when budget time comes around. RFMINDER OF ANNUAL PLANNING SFSSION (SFPTEMBFR 24 - 5:30 P.M.): Malkmus handed out a list of items that probably will come before the Commission in 1999. She said a more fully expressed list is in the annual report in the Plans for Fiscal 99. Malkmus suggested brainstorming before the session for any other items the Commission should consider. in developing their annual objectives. Kugler noted that members should look at the agenda as to where the meeting room for the session will be. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FROM THE AUGUST 13 & 17.1998 MEETINGS: August 13, 1998 Widness said the last word on the bottom of page 5 should be "recommendation". Michaud said she did attend the meeting. Malkmus said in the fourth sentence of the last paragraph on the bottom of page 2, the word "conforming" should be "contributing" and the word "nonconforming" should be "noncontributing". Gersh said that in the second sentence of the third paragraph on the third page, the word "have" should be replaced by "show". Malkmus said the last sentence of the first paragraph on page 8 should read, "Malkmus said that would mean that the sill of the house had to be 12 inches or higher above grade in the front when seen from the street." MOTION: Gunn moved to approve the August 13, 1998, minutes as amended. Michaud seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. Gunn asked who would get all of this information when the Council tries to decide about the appeal. Kugler said they have already received these two sets of minutes, and he was told by the City Attorney to send everything so there was no question about anything being left out. He said that there would likely be a staff memo explaining the situation and the information they have. August 17, 1998 Widness said in the second line of the second paragraph on page 13, the word "plain" should be "plane". Malkmus said on page 10 in the second to last sentence of the second full paragraph, the word "wrought' should be "rot". Malkmus said that in the last sentence of the second paragraph on page 3 the word "bead" should be "v". Malkmus said in the middle of the second full paragraph on page 5, "nailing nails" should be "pounding nails". MOTION: Gunn moved to approve the August 17, 1998, meeting minutes as amended. Widness seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission September 10, 1998 Page 14 COMMISSION INFORMATION DISCUSSION: Information on Internet Training Opportunity Kugler said that if any Commission members are interested in this, they should let him know soon because the deadline is September 15. Mills noted that anyone participating in the training session would have had to attend a workshop/seminar in the last 18 months to try to evaluate its effectiveness. Malkmus said that one place to get information from the National Trust is on a web site. Commission Time Kugler said that he would be on vacation during the week of the Commission's scheduled October 8 meeting. Members decided to move the meeting to October 1. Widness asked what they would be doing during the Council meeting on the 22nd. Malkmus said the Commission would need to speak on behalf of their decision making process. Kugler said that on the 21't, the Council may want Malkmus or Widness to could give a short review of what happened and answer questions. He said it is up to the Commission as to what kind of case they want to make at the public meeting on the 22"d. He said they could go through a presentation on what happened, why wood siding should be required or just be available to answer questions. Malkmus said she thought it was a good idea to make the Commission's case, to say they thought it through, give their reasons for the decision and why it fits with the ordinance and the guidelines. Kugler said he thought that was a good idea. Widness noted that the Park House Hotel looks fabulous, and that she thought the idea for the ex-officio Commission member who had architectural expertise was a great idea. She said the Commission will be dealing with all these new products on a regular basis, and it would be a good idea to find someone with expertise on them or get more information on them. Gunn asked what it meant to be a district representative on this Commission because it was not clearly defined. Kugler said the representative is there to provide information and answer questions on reviews or possible projects. He said a neighbor should be able to come to the representative and express any concerns they may have about the Commission and its actions, and the representative would then relay those concerns to the entire Commission. Gersh said it could mean that if everyone in the district wants the representative to vote a certain way, the representative should vote that way. Malkmus, Widness and Kugler disagreed with that. Malkmus said the representative is not an elected official, they are appointed. Kugler said the representative should take neighbor's concerns and comments under consideration, but that should not be the sole thing that guides a vote on an issue. Malkmus said she thought the representative should relay any strong feeling from their neighborhood. Gunn asked if the representative is supposed to represent an applicant in their district. Kugler said no, the applicants represent themselves and the applicant has to convince their representative as well as the rest of the Commission that their plans are acceptable and meet the necessary standards. Widness said the problem with trying to represent a district is that the representative always hear from the vocal group, and to get an idea for the true sentiment of the district the representative would have to go door-to-door and talk to everyone in the district. Kugler said the item in Anderson's memo about the representative notifying the property owners about an application means that the representative would notify the adjacent property owners about the review. Malkmus asked if that would make those adjacent property owners aggrieved parties. Kugler said probably not. Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission September 10, 1998 Page 15 ADJOURNMFNT: MOTION: Gersh moved to adjourn the meeting. Gunn seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0, and the meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Minutes submitted by Traci Wagner. ppdadmin\min\hpcg- 10.doc MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 1, 1998 - 5:30 P.M. CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Lars Anderson, Trudy Day, Frank Gersh, Mike Gunn, Betty Kelly, Pam Michaud, Michaelanne Widness, Linda Shope MEMBERS ABSENT: Doris Malkmus, Marc Mills STAFFPRESENT: Scott Kugler OTHERS PRESENT: Richard Carlson, Kim Glenn, Kevin Glenn, Will Walpole, Mark Blumberg, Jo McCarty, Drew Davis CALL TO ORDER: Vice-chairperson Kelly called the meeting to order at 5:40 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: Kugler said Richard Carlson was at the meeting to give the Commission information about the Eastlawn and Harmon buildings. Carlson said he put together a National Register nomination for the Harmon Building. He said he looked at the Eastlawn building, but it seems that would be a harder case to make because of some exterior and interior integrity problems. Carlson said that could probably still be done, but he did not yet have time to do it. Carlson said he based the National Register nomination for the Harmon Building on criteria C of the National Register for its architectural significance as one of the premier examples of 1920s commercial architecture in downtown Iowa City. He said that among the buildings in downtown Iowa City, there is really no other building that captures as well the 1920s flavor in its use of multi-colored brick, green tiles, a decorative parapet, limestone trim, staggered brickwork and a number of decorative elements that just are not seen in any other building of that period. Carlson said he was actually nominating the building under the National Register criteria for the multiple property listing, which the Commission might be familiar with as Appendix Q of the 1992 Preservation Plan for the City. Carlson said he included a copy of an editorial that he had published in the ICON. Widness asked which building was the Harmon Building, and Carlson responded that it is the Planned Parenthood Building. Widness said Malkmus was going to write a letter to City Council notifying them about this. Kugler said she gave him a draft of a memo that raised several issues. He said he spoke with Jeff Davidson, the Assistant Director of the Planning Department, to tell him that this issue was raised and that the Commission may have some comments to make or a recommendation to the City Council. Gersh asked Carlson if he was going to work on the Eastlawn Building also. Carlson said he put together some work on it, but the interior is almost completely gutted, except for one staircase. He said that on the outside, a recessed front porch with a lot of stone and columns has been filled in. Carlson said there are some fairly serious integrity issues with the building so that unless it can be shown that the remaining facade is distinctive in some way, there might be a case to be made but it will be a much harder case. Gersh asked Carlson if he would try to make the case, and Carlson said that at this point, he would probably not. Kugler said the City Council has already made the decision to go ahead with the parking garage, although demolition is not scheduled until next May. Historic Preservation Commission October 1. 1998 Page 2 Widness asked what effect this National Register nomination would have, as a practical matter. Kugler said that National Register nominations would have no impact in terms of the City being required to save or document the building, since there are no federal funds or State funds being used. Carlson said that although he has made a National Register nomination, he would like the City to consider local landmark designation. Gersh said the Commission could vote to request that this building not be demolished. Kugler said the Commission could not vote on the landmark designation at this meeting, but it could be put on the next agenda. He said the current property owner would be notified of the pending meeting, the Commission would have to hold a public hearing, the nomination would be sent on to the Planning and Zoning Commission, and it would go from there to the City Council before a decision is made. Anderson asked who owns the Harmon Building. Carlson said it is owned by Dick Pattschull. Anderson asked if Pattschull has a contract to sell the building to the City. Kugler confirmed that negotiations were underway, but said he did not think that transaction has taken place. Anderson said that Pattschull may be opposed because it will affect the sale. Kugler said he was not sure whether or not the City could back out at this point. He said it may be difficult to convince the City Council at this point to designate the building. MOTION: Widness moved to schedule a public hearing on a proposed Iowa City historic landmark nomination for the Harmon Building (2-6 S. Linn Street) on the November 12, 1998 agenda of the Historic Preservation Commission. Gersh seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS REVIEWS: 632 Brown Street. Kim Glenn, one of the owners of 632 Brown Street, said her application stated the reasons she and her husband had for wanting a garage addition and a one-story rear yard addition on their home. She said they wanted two garage stalls so that they could accommodate both of their vehicles and park them off of the street. Glenn said they want the driveway to enhance their own and public safety, as cam on Dodge Street will be better able to identify this as a driveway. Glenn said they would like to build an addition to have some space to enlarge the existing kitchen. She said it is currently a small, dark, cramped space. Glenn said they would like to add on a small family room as well as a bathroom on the first floor that would not be located directly off the kitchen, as is presently the case. Glenn said she and her husband believe the design and material for the plans will be more in line with the existing structure, as opposed to the bathroom that does not match the house either in design or in materials used. Kelly asked if the garage would be underground, and Glenn confirmed this. Kugler said the guidelines generally discourage having garage doors of double-stall garages face the street like this, although on this property there really is no other option, and there is already one garage door there. He said staff has been reviewing these plans in preparation for a Board of Adjustment meeting because a special exception will be needed for encroachmerits into the rear yard and slightly into the front yard. Kugler said one suggestion was the possibility of switching the proposed pedestrian and new garage doors, in an effort to try to reduce the amount of paving. He said this is more of a site design issue but would also have an impact on the historic character of the property. Kugler added that if the width of the drive can be minimized, it would have a positive effect and would also perhaps help to preserve a tree in the parkway area to the north of the driveway. Kugler said he understood some of the concerns about visibility to the north and suggested, rather than bringing the retaining wall straight out, to Historic Preservation Commission October 1.1998 Page 3 perhaps step it back in some way, maybe terracing it, to give more visibility but not have the appearance of a large retaining wall there. He said that may also allow a narrower driveway while still increasing visibility. Will Walpole, Glenn's father, said another option would be to step this back about three feet and put in a retaining wall to hold the dirt back and then put a little service door into the garage from the side. He said that the garage door could then be moved back toward the south. Kugler said if this could be resolved, the applicants would not have to return to amend these plans as a result of what happens at the Board of Adjustment.meeting. Kelly asked the Glenns where they would prefer to have the service door. Kevin Glenn said he had no preference and asked which way would be more appropriate. Kelly said she was concerned about the width of the driveway and the amount of paving and would like to see that cut back a little bit. Glenn said it would be fine with him to move the service door to the north. Kelly asked how far the addition comes out. Walpole said it comes out 14 feet. Gersh asked about windows on the west side. Walpole said the only window that would be on the west side is just a small window in the bathroom. Kugler said another option would be to put a window in the stairwell to provide some light. Gersh asked about the chimney. Walpole said it would be a prefabricated fireplace and on the outside it would be the same wood-clad siding. Gersh said there was some discussion about that with another project recently, and Commission members felt it would look more appropriate with a stucco finish. Kugler said there is a material called drive-it that gives the stucco appearance. Walpole said another option would be veneer stone or brick on the chimney. Gersh said those would be more expensive, and Kim Glenn said the drive-it is very expensive. Kelly asked what kind of chimney is there now. Glenn said there is a brick chimney through the center of the house, not on the exterior. Gunn said that if the chimney ends up with a stucco finish or masonry look, it could be stepped-in partway up so as not to be so wide all the way up, and would then look much less massive and more historic in nature. Walpole said that would save money on the veneer that was put on the chimney. Kugler asked if the materials would consist of wood siding with the same lap and wood windows. Glenn confirmed this. Gunn said the garage overhang in one drawing looks like it comes up about a third of the way from the floor level, but in the elevation it is quite small. He said that if it has the kind of pitch drawn in the other elevation, it will be quite high up. Walpole said where it sits now is about eight feet up, coming up to the sill of the window and is pitched like the roof. He said there is one there now, and the Glenns propose to just continue it over. He said they would be matching what is there. Gunn said that would be acceptable to him and would be less intrusive than as shown on the one drawing. Gunn said the amount of setback on the addition looks to be only about six inches. He said that if that could be a little bit more, it would help to separate the historic, original home from the addition. Glenn said they put the setback on there because it would be easier to make the siding match. He said he would be willing to reduce the width six more inches. Gunn said he was not too concerned about the west side, but would like to see more of a setback on the east side. He said that six inches is so little that it will not appear as a setback, and even one foot would be better. Michaud said the eave would stick out more than the six inches. Gunn agreed that it would, but he did not know how to get around the overhead issue. Kelly said this would make the room 12 x 11, instead of 12 x 11 1/2, and Glenn said that would be acceptable. Gunn said it is an unusual house in that the siding runs clear over the front porch, and just setting the addition back enough will preserve that as an elevation. Historic Preservation Commission October 1.1998 Page 4 Widness asked what the garage doors will look like. Glenn said the garage door will be a pressed wood door with windows. He said the present garage door is not original. Glenn said he wanted something that does not look modern but something light enough for an automatic garage door to open. Glenn discussed some garage doors she had seen with arched glass. She said they could possibly echo the archways found on the front porch and throughout the house. Kugler said that in the past, with regard to visible garages, the Commission has required fiat garages in two cases and in another case, required wood for replacement of a wood door. Gunn said he did not know why a smooth finish on garage doors is considered preferable. Kugler said the Commission took the approach of not wanting to call attention to the garage doors and avoiding the aluminum pressed panel door that tries to give the appearance of a wood paneled door but fails to really do so. Gunn said the position is that it is better to be simple than to be fake. Gersh asked when the house was built. Kelly said she believed it was built between 1912 and 1920. Anderson said he had no preference regarding the garage doors. Kelly said they should be very plain and not call attention to themselves. Gunn asked if the glass window would be allowed. Kelly said she would not have half-moon windows but said the garage door should have something similar to what is there now, just straight across. She said fiberglass should be avoided. MOTION: Anderson moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for 632 Brown Street subject to the following conditions: wood siding; wood windows; stone, brick, or stucco finish on the chimney; the chimney stepped in or corbeled; switching the new pedestrian and vehicular doors and reducing the driveway pavement width; a six-inch larger setback for the addition along its east wall; and the windows on the east wall will match those existing on that elevation. The Commission recommended that the garage door be wood, matching what is there if possible. Gersh seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. Kugler said he would get the certificate of appropriateness to the building department, listing these conditions. 536 South Summit Street. Mark Blumberg and Jo McCarty discussed the proposed work to be done on their home and introduced their contractor Drew Davis. Blumberg said they would like to put a four-season sunroom on the back of their house. He said it would not be visible at all from Summit Street itself and would be somewhat visible from Bowery Street to someone driving west on Bowery toward Summit. Blumberg said that currently there is a fiat-roofed mudroom on the house with many broken windows, a leaky roof, and a door that doesn't shut. He said they would like to add a 14 x 16 foot four-season room. Blumberg said the room would be made out of cedar shake siding, which will coincide with the way the house looks now. He said it will be painted the same and they would try to make the windows look as similar to the windows that are currently on the house, a type of bronze storm window, by matching at least the color of the bronze. Blumberg said the foundation here is uneven and somewhat dilapidated concrete, so that it will all have to be torn up to put in the new room. Gersh asked if there will be panes in the windows, as there are on the house. McCarty said there would not be, but the windows would have the same shape. She said the house is very dark, and they are proposing this sunroom to get Historic Preservation Commission October 1.1998 Page 5 additional light to the back of the house, as well as to get additional floor space on the first floor. Blumberg said they would like to put a pitched roof on the addition because of the leaking and because it will fit in so much better with the house. Gunn asked about the upstairs door. McCarty said they would like to take the door out and put in a window to match the other one that is up there. She said she would like to have mission-style art glass in that window. Gunn asked if all the proposed windows are fixed glass. Davis said they am casement windows. He said there is a sliding patio door to the north. Gersh asked if the pitch of the roof would match the pitch of the house. Davis said it would match as much as possible, but is limited somewhat by a window up above. Kugler said this application was received on Monday, and more time is generally required to get this out to the review committee. He said that because there is an extra week between meetings and the October meeting was moved up a week, he wanted to get it on the agenda. Kugler said if the Commission members do not feel they have enough information. they can ask for extra time to deal with this. Day asked for the size of the existing mudroom. Davis said it is 6 x 11 feet. Day asked if the patio would be lost, and McCarty said most of it would be lost. Michaud asked if there would still be grass beyond the patio. McCarty said there would be. She said they plan to put a small wooden deck off the patio door with a hot tub. Blumberg said it would be completely hidden, as it will be between the fence and the room. Kugler said that in terms of the standards, the Commission may want to consider the type of window, as the rest of the house appears to have double hung windows. He said the applicants are planning to match the siding materials. Kugler added that the design of the windows up above appears to be quite modern for this style of house. Michaud said something centered would look less modern than the two triangles. Gunn said an option would be to have a window centered with two shorter windows on each side, which goes a long way toward filling the peak, without looking so modern. Davis said there is nothing on the house that resembles that at all, so this would contradict anything on the house to begin with. Gunn said the house has centered windows in every peak in every gable end. Michaud added that they are rectangular and not triangular. Blumberg said the only place you would see those windows would be from the inside looking out. Gunn said it would be visible to someone walking on Bowery street, as the gable end faces due east. Blumberg said there are huge oak trees from that view, and Michaud said the oaks will not be there forever. She added that the Commission typically requests that the applicant repeats the shape of the windows. Gunn said he thought this was quite visible from Bowery Street, and he believes the windows to be an extremely modern detail. He said that if the light can be let in in a way that is more common to an earlier period, he would like to see that. Blumberg asked if there were a way to maximize the light without having a modern look. Anderson asked if the primary concern is with the windows. Gunn said he thought it was and said he did not have a concern with any of the other features. Widness said she felt the rectangular windows were also very modern and she would prefer to see something more like double-hung windows, as are seen on the rest of the house. She asked if a fiat skylight would work there. Blumberg said that if one walks into a room with a cathedral ceiling, to see solid wall instead of windows defeats the purpose of having that kind of a view coming into that room. He said they will have skylights but want to maximize the amount of light here. Blumberg said there may be some kind of compromise in the form of some kind of window that would be more fitting to the style of that period, and he would be open to that. McCarty showed photographs of Hurd Historic Preservation Commission October 1.1998 Page 6 windows. She said they are the kind of windows that are in the house. Widness said she liked them much better. Gunn said he thought the Hurd windows look attractive and give the impression of a window wall, which is what the applicants want. Davis said he would have to shorten the windows with this. He said he has to stay within the eight-foot wall in order to get the maximum amount of gable to it to get the pitch. Davis said that to jump up to a nine-foot ceiling and try to put top transoms in above the windows, he will not even come close to a matching pitch on the roof. He said he has to stay within an eight-foot ceiling height or either will have to chop the window down to put a transom above it or raise the ceiling. Gunn said that some of that can go up above the ceiling line, for example, if there are three across, one could be taller in the center. Davis asked Gunn if he were talking about the gable end, and Gunn said he was. Davis said something like that could be done across the gable end. Kelly asked if everyone was opposed to the triangular shaped windows proposed in the gable, and that was the consensus. She said that some options have been proposed, one of which is a series of windows replacing the triangular windows and the other is for the window shown in the catalogue. Gersh asked what would be on the other side if those windows were on the gable end. Davis said there is not enough height to get them on the other side. Blumberg said they could match the windows for style but not for height. Kugler said the Commission could defer this and perhaps set up a special meeting before the next one to re-examine the application. He said another option would be to approve the rest of the addition, except for the windows, so that the applicants could get started on the framing and foundation and come back with a window plan for the south wall. Kugler added that in the past the Commission has designated one or two people to look at and approve the plan so that the Commission would not have to call a special meeting. MOTION: Anderson moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for 536 South Summit Street subject to the following conditions: the structure shall be constructed as proposed, providing that the siding is contemporaneous with the existing siding, and the certificate review committee must approve the plans for windows for the east wall. Day seconded the motion. Gunn said the motion did not include the south elevation and he would like to see that included. AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION: Anderson amended the motion to include certificate review committee approval of window details for all sides of the addition. Day seconded the amendment. The main motion, as amended, carried on a vote of 7-0. Kugler told the applicants he would send a copy of the certificate to the building department. He added that when the applicants have their window plans ready, they should submit them and we would get the plans to the review committee for review. 127 East College Street: Kugler said Pat Keil found information regarding this material that suggests that it is somewhat porous and would not create a vapor barrier. Kugler said the issues are the terra cotta color approved by the Commission, while the applicant would rather use gray, and the hardness of the material. Kugler said the owner found that this material is holding better on the wall than other softer materials. He added that if the Commission approves this, there should be some qualification that the Commission is not necessarily endorsing this material so that if it leads to some deterioration of the wall, it is a result of the owner's choice. Kugler said the contractor is convinced that this vinyl/latex material needs to be mixed in there to create a good bond with the existing wall and supposedly has information saying that it won't create a vapor barrier. Historic Preservation Commission October 1.1998 Page 7 Gersh said he thinks gray is actually a better color, and there is already a lot of gray on it. Michaud said if the owner is trying to avoid the graffiti, it is legitimate to stick with that color. Kugler said the owner thinks he can cover up gray with paint more easily. Gunn said one of the problems here is that he had no idea what could be done if this proposal does not work. Kelly agreed that this could make it worse by pulling out mortar and some of the bricks that are deteriorating. Kugler said the general rule is that soft mortar should be used with soft brick, although no one is really familiar with this material. He said this material has been used on a couple of patches on the wall, and the patches that are falling off are of another material, while this material is bonding to the wall. Gersh said he had faith in Ed Zastrow, partly because of how nicely he fixed up and maintained the building. Anderson said that by approving this, the Commission is not really backing the product but is trusting the judgment of the contractor. Kugler said that on the other hand, the Commission should be concerned about preservation. Day said there really is no alternative, except for the building to crumble and fall. Widness said there is an alternative in that the soft material could be used but it has to be continuously maintained. Gunn said there is not a mix for sure for this product. Kugler said it was listed on the certificate. Gunn said that was a very hard mix, that was thought to be a mistake. Kugler said there was lime in the mix, that the applicant indicated it was a mistake. Gunn said that if it was Portland, sand, and lime, it was at least fairly well in line with the historic standards. Kugler said that was what it was, in addition to the latex additive. Gunn stated that he would be inclined to go with it if it definitely had to mix with lime and not mason cement, mostly because he didn't know of anything else to suggest. Anderson asked what would happen if this material does not work. Kelly replied that if it is too heavy, it will pull loose bricks and mortar out. Kugler said if it is harder than the material that is under it, water will likely get in there and as things freeze and thaw, the bricks will give before the harder material. He said the bricks are already in very bad shape there. Michaud said that if this is porous, water should not get in there and back up. Kugler said this is almost to the point where the wall needs to be replaced. He said they may see this as a 10 to 15 year solution to help put off dealing With major problems on the wall. Michaud said the wall is several bricks thick, so that if this doesn't work, they might have to replace one layer of the bricks. Day said this is a temporary solution, although she was not opposed to it. Kelly agreed it was a temporary fix. Kugler said the contractor thinks it will be less temporary than the soft mix. MOTION: Gunn moved to approve this plan for 127 East College Street, assuming that the originally stated mason cement is actually lime in composition, and that the color gray be accepted. Day seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. SECTION 106 REVIEWS: 913 N. Gilbert Street. Kugler said the 106 reviews refer to cases where the City is proposing to use federal money to assist with the rehabilitation of these buildings. He said the first decision is whether the building is eligible for the National Register, and the second is, if so, is the work being proposed consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. Kugler said the building at 913 North Gilbert Street was included in the Brown Street survey but was not included in the historic district, as the buildings in the 900 block were all moved in, and the consultant felt they did not have the integrity necessary to be included in the historic district. Historic Preservation Commission October 1, 1998 Page 8 He said that would indicate that the building is not eligible, based on the consultant's assessment, but the Commission still has to go through this process. MOTION: Gersh moved that the Historic Preservation Commission find the building at 913 North Gilbert Street to be ineligible for the National Register. Anderson seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. 1315 Lukirk Street. Kugler stated that he did not have a lot of information on this house, and the Commission has never surveyed this area. He added that Liz Osborne has found the approximate construction date to be 1942. Kugler said that because the building is over 50 years old, the Commission is required to go through the review process. He said the Commission has always intended to survey the area south of Kirkwood because not only are there some possible pockets of historical homes, but there are also a lot of Moffitt homes in that area. Anderson said there is not much going on with this house, even if the Commission should find it eligible. Gunn said this project was really only for work on a couple of doors. Kelly said this is a typical 1940s house that has not had a great deal done to it, so that there is the possibility that it could be contributing at some later date. Kugler said a possible motion could be based on the information the Commission has at this time. He stated that if the Commission finds it to not be eligible, given what is being proposed, it will not have a big impact and will shorten up the City's time frame for getting this project done by a few months. Kugler said the property is probably not eligible individually, unless there is some major piece of information that is missing, but perhaps is eligible as part of a district. MOTION: Anderson moved that based on the information available at this time, the Historic Preservation Commission find the property at 1315 Lukirk Street to be ineligible for the National Register. Gersh seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. DISCUSSION OF OLD HOUSE SEMINAR OCTOBER 17 Kugler said he sent out 2,200 of the information sheets regarding the seminar. Kelly asked for help at the seminar, specifically someone to have refreshments at the registration. She asked if the Commission could get money for refreshments from the Planning Department. Anderson said he could get the refreshments and would call Bob Miklo to check to see if there is money available. Widness said she would help Anderson with refreshments. Kugler said he sent the information sheets to residents of the Longfellow Neighborhood, the North Side, Goosetown, Manville Heights, portions of the Kirkwood Area, the Melrose Area, portions of the Historic Districts that were not covered within those areas, owners of historic landmarks, Commission contacts throughout the State, and actual Commission members for the eastern portion of the State. He said he was also sending them out in the packets of other boards and commissions. Kelly gave out more sheets for the other Commission members to distribute. Kugler said there would be a press release regarding the seminar. Kelly asked for a volunteer to emcee the seminar, specifically someone to introduce the speakers. She said the speakers would be talking for about 20 minutes and would then take questions. Day said she would emcee the program and asked for the biographies of the speakers for the introductions. Kelly said she would discuss the seminar at the October 6 meeting of the City Council. She asked if Public Access Television would broadcast the seminar. Kugler said he would check. Historic Preservation Commission October 1.1998 Page 9 ORIGINAL TOWN PLAT SURVEY, PHASE III UPDATE Kugler said the City did not receive a grant for this project, and it was ranked number 23. He said he believed ten or eleven projects in the historic preservation category were funded. Kugler said the Commission has to decide whether it will reapply for this or look at other possibilities. He said there are now two grants that have not been funded, and one grant the Commission spent only about $200 on because funds were received from the Longfellow Neighborhood Association, so that there is some matching money building up. Kugler said he was checking with Miklo to see if it might be possible to use that money to fund the survey, rather than relying on grant money. Kelly said the Commission should decide what to do about the grant by the November meeting. Kelly said, regarding the Butler House, that she was told by the people in Des Moines that there was a possibility of getting another grant next year like there was this year, and that if the Commission were interested in it, they should get started. She said they also wanted to know if the Commission applied for ISTEA funds. Kugler said the Commission missed that deadline some time ago. The Commission discussed meeting in the Civic Center and touring the Butler House at 4:00 on November 12 before the next regular meeting. COMMISSION INFORMATIONIDISCUSSION: Day said she was approached about collecting and doing an oral history of the transfer of Old Brick from the Presbyterian Church through the University to its current Board of Trust. She said she was offering this as an independent study for a couple of high school students but was not certain that Old Brick would be enough for an entire trimester's coursework. Day asked if anyone had another site in mind for collection of an oral history, as she had people to do it. Gersh suggested she talk to Doris Malkmus. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:20 p.m. ppdadmin~rnins~hpcl 0-1 ,doc City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Re: November 23, 1998 City Council Scott Kug~,Associate Planner 1999 Preservation Plan Implementation Report Attached please find the Historic Preservation Commission's Preservation Plan Implementation report for 1999. The report details the Commission's discussion of its priorities for the upcoming calendar year. It is intended to serve as the Commission's report to Council from its September 24 planning.session (in lieu of minutes), and makes public the items the Commission intends to pursue in 1999. As recommended in the Historic Preservation Plan, each year the Commission meets to review its progress in implementing the policies and recommendations of the Preservation Plan, and to set priorities for the coming year. This year's planning session was held on September 24. The attached report will be utilized by the Commission throughout the year as a reminder of its planning session discussion, and makes public its intended work items for next year. If you have any questions or would like more information regarding the report, please call me at 356-5243. IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Preservation Plan Iml;)lementation ( 19991 The lowa City Historic Preservation Commission held its annual planning session on Thursday, September 24, 1998, at 5:30 p.m. in the City Manager's Conference Room, at which time it discussed and prioritized its activities and projects for the 1999 calendar year. Each year the Commission holds a planning session to review its progress in implementing the goals and objectives of the Historic Preservation Plan, and to set objectives for the upcoming year. This report details the results of that planning session, and is intended to serve as a guide for the Commission's activities for the upcoming calendar year. PRIORITY ISSUES FOR 1999: Review & Update Procedures, Guidelines, and Ordinance: The Commission feels that it is important to address deficiencies and inconsistencies that have been identified in the Historic Preservation Ordinance, and its procedures & guidelines. It is also an opportunity to address items identified in the Historic Preservation Plan as shortcomings of the current ordinance. This items includes issues such as public notice, appeal rights, economic hardship provisions, demolition by neglect regulations, and an update of the Commission's guidelines, which may include drafting guidelines for each individual historic district. (Anderson, Mills) Longfellow Historic District: The Longfellow neighborhood survey has been completed and recommends the designation of a Longfellow Historic District. Members of the neighborhood have also expressed interest in the designation of their area as a historic district. The Commission intends to initiate the designation process in 1999. (Kelly, Widness, Shope) Governor Street Conservation District: Legislation authorizing the designation of conservation districts was adopted by City Council in 1995. As a result of neighborhood survey projects within the Longfellow Neighborhood and the Dubuque/Clinton Street area, a number of potential conservation districts have been identified. The Commission has chosen the proposed Governor Street district as the first Iowa City conservation district to be nominated. However, preliminary work regarding design guidelines and organization of the designation process needs to be completed. A task group has been created to deal with this issue. (Gersh, Michaud, Gunn) Staffing Issues: The Commission intends to begin investigating the possibility 0f increasing its City staffing time from the current ~A-time to ~/2-time. (Malkmus, Anderson) Montgomery-Butler House: Stabilization of this structure has been completed. The Commission intends to take the lead in organizing the planning for a future use of the building and seeking funds to assist in its rehabilitation. (Day, Malkmus) Survey and Evaluation of Original Town Plat, Phases I, II & IIh Phase I of this project, including properties south of the Brown Street Historic District, north of Davenport Street, and lying between Linn Street and Governor Street, has been completed. Phase II, located roughly between Linn and Governor Streets, north of Jefferson Street and south of Fairchild Street, is underway. Grant applications for the completion of Phase III have not yet been successful. The Commission will decide whether to continue to pursue grant funding or whether to attempt to complete this project with local funds. This phased survey project will provide an updated inventory for all properties contained within the Northside and Goosetown Neighborhoods, as well as recommendations for preservation initiatives within these neighborhoods. Historic Landmark Designations: The first series of Historic Landmarks has been designated by the City Council, and plaques have been purchased and installed on 28 of the 36 properties, with financial assistance from Friends of Historic Preservation. Additional historic landmark nominations will be considered by the Commission. (Malkmus) Education/Outreach: This includes efforts to update the Commission's brochures and maps, schedule and organize special events, and assist in the planning for the annual awards program in May. Many of the maps, brochures, and other publications produced by the Commission in the past are in need of an update, and the Commission has expressed an interest in providing more preservation related events and workshops. (Michaud, Widness, Kelly) OTHER ISSUES FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION BEYOND 1999: Additional Survey and Evaluation Work: Additional survey areas for the Commission to consider in future years includes Kirkwood Avenue, Iowa Avenue, Downtown, and Manville Heights, as well as a survey and possible nomination of fraternities and sororities associated with the University of Iowa. Archaeology: The Commission should consider whether to conduct archaeological surveys of undeveloped properties to help identify potential sites prior to development proposals being submitted for those areas. Other items: · Develop scrapbook of past projects. · Continue welcome/notification letters to new residents of historic districts. · Continue annual reminder letter to historic district residents. · Continue to work with other Iowa City and Johnson County preservation organizations. HPC\hpcimpl.doc November, 1998 2 MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION THURSDAY, OCTOBER 15, 1998 - 6:00 P.M. CRISIS CENTER ? lgg8 MEMBERS PRESENT: Dan Coleman, Bob Elliott, Denita Gadson, Rick House, Jayne Moraski, Lucia Page, Kathleen Renquist, Gretchen Schmuch, William Stewart MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Maurice Head, Steve Long CALL MEETING TO ORDER AND APPROVAL OF THE SEPTEMBER 17, 1998, MEETING MINUTES: Chairperson Schmuch called the meeting to order at 6 p.m. MOTION: Stewart moved to approve the September 17, 1998, meeting minutes as submitted. Moraski seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 8-0. Page and Elliott introduced themselves as new members, and the rest of the Commission introduced themselves. PUBLIC/MEMBER DISCUSSION OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: Long said that after the agenda packet was mailed out, Maggie Grosvenor of the Iowa City Housing Authority asked to be on the agenda to discuss the modification of existing Housing Authority eligibility criteria. He referred to the memo from Grosvenor and said that the bolded sentence at the bottom of the page, "If such eviction, termination or drug-related activity occurs, the applicant will not be able to reapply for housing assistance for a period of one year from the date of the incident," is what the Housing Authority would like to add. Schmuch asked if this would only affect the applicant or another member of the household. Head said the person whose name was on the lease would be probably responsible. (Renquist arrived at 6:05 p.m.) Long said that Grosvenor wanted this item to go into the Council's packet on Friday, Oct. 16, so she would like it to be discussed and recommended to Council tonight. He said that parts "a" and "b" were standard HUD language that already appeared, and the Authority was wanting to add that last sentence. He said Grosvenor told him it was approved by City Attorney's office. Elliott asked what constituted criminal activity, and if a conviction was required for this to go into effect. Head and Long said they were not sure. Schmuch said that she had concerns, and she wished the Grosvenor was there to answer their questions. Coleman suggested adding the word "criminal" to form the phrase "drug related criminal activity" so the proposed sentence would be consistent with part "a". Moraski said at the Housing Authority she worked at, eviction was enforced if the applicant or head of household was directly involved. She said if another adult member of the household was involved, the applicant would not be evicted if they could prove that the offending adult did not stay at the house after the incident occurred. Renquist asked if this would apply if the applicant's children or their children's friends brought drugs into the house. She said if the applicant would be responsible, she did not think that was fair. Coleman said the proposed language would be irrelevant because part "a" says three years and Housing & Community Development Commission October 15, 1998 Page 2 the proposed sentence says one year. Page said that they would probably be evicted from the time of the incident. Renquist said she did not think that this was ready for the City Council. Stewart said the three years in part "a" would be if the family was applying for housing, and the one year in the proposed sentence would be after they had already received housing. Schmuch asked why the proposed sentence had a deadline. Long said that Grosvenor told him it had to be approved in November. The Commission discussed the fact that the Council will hold a meeting after the Commission's November meeting, so this item could be considered then and still be reviewed by the Council in November. Stewart said that he could not make an informed decision with this information. The Commission decided to defer the item until their November meeting, and to talk to Grosvenor about their questions regarding clarification of the applicant's responsibility, connection of the two time frames and what the definition of criminal activity was. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR FY99 CDBG/HOME BUDGET AMENDMENTS: Schmuch opened the public hearing. Long said that these budget amendments were already approved by the Commission individually and they have to be sent to HUD to formalize the budget. MOTION: Renquist moved to accept the amended FY99 CDBG/HOME budget. Moraski seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 9-0. Schmuch closed the public hearing. Stewart asked about the status of the Riverview project. Long said that the Riverview senior housing project has another piece of land, and they are working on zoning and annexation issues. He said the new property is on the east edge of town. MONITORING REPORTS: HACAP House said that HACAP's new director, Gloria Witzberger, just started Monday and asked him if they could do the monitoring report at the end of the month so she could give him more information. He said he would present the report at the next monthly meeting. Torus Precision Optics Renquist said that Torus just moved into a new building behind Miller Monument on Highway 1 West past the 21 8 intersection. She said that they had about six or seven computers in the front office, and they have moved in most of the major equipment. She said the Commission gave them $75,000 and they were able to purchase two milling machines and some tooling with that money. She said she saw the .room where they do all the mirrors and the room where they cut the metal. She said James Mulherin is pretty excited because they recently hired two people and are planning to hire three more. She said one of the questions the Commission asked Mulherin was how many employees they could hire. With the money Torus received Mulherin told her that they have 12 employees and should have 17 by the end of the year. She said she told Mulherin that they had a funding recipient who got into trouble by placing their eggs in one basket by only having one major buyer. Mulherin showed her the sales lists and contracts that guarantee that they will be paid when the telescope is built. Housing & Community Development Commission October 15, 1998 Page 3 Head asked if Mulherin mentioned anything about an open house. Renquist said she did not think that they were quite ready for that because they do not have all their equipment there and there is no sign in front of the building. Gadson asked about the background of the employees. Renquist said she did not ask, but of the people she saw there two were women and the rest were men. She noted that there were no minority employees present while she was there, and she wondered how they could talk to Torus about getting more minority applicants. Page said she works a Manpower Temporary Services, and she knows that they are trying to place people with Torus. Long said Torus has to provide employee information to staff as a requirement of the CDBG Agreement. Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship Stewart said they received $286,333 in HOME funds and $30,887 in CDBG funds, of which $66,439 is left in HOME funds and $0 is left in CDBG funds. He passed out a sheet with the information and addresses of the 15 properties that GICHF has acquired. Ten of those are currently occupied, and he said they have to purchase three two-bedroom homes to complete the project. He said that MaryAnn Dennis of GICHF has a map of Iowa City on the wall in her office and has pushpins where they have acquired and rehabilitated houses. He said that the pins were located all over the City and not in any one particular area. OLD BUSINESS: Affordable Housing Funding Pool Update Head said that this program is used for gap financing. He said that they took it to Council and the $150,000 of HOME match funds was approved. He said they have sent the applications out to developers and the deadline is October 30. He said they have heard from three developers who are interested in applying, and they will bring any applications to the Commission's November meeting for a recommendation. Schmuch asked if a project that had already been funded by the Commission could come back for more funding through this program. Head said yes, only if they did not get fully funded the first time. He said that they would like to have some initial flexibility, but that they will look for ways to prevent people from "double-dipping" in the future. Federal Home Loan Bank Update Long said that they helped the Housing Authority write an application for an FHLB grant. He said that the funding would provide downpayment assistance for people to purchase 6 homes, including three new homes. Stewart asked how the average percentage is reached. Long said the first mortgage would be in the $61,000 range based on an average downpayment assistance of 40-45% of the purchase price. Stewart said the loan money would be paid back eventually. Head noted that the downpayment assistance funding would come in the form of a grant. Stewart said he had a problem with helping one family with such a deep subsidy when the money used could be used to help a number of other families and be more cost effective. Long said that the grant money would be used for the downpayment, and a loan would be given for the rest. NEW BUSINESS: First Home Program Status Long said that staff recently discovered that the program does not meet the lending requirements for the secondary market. He said that the program provides a silent second mortgage if the individual is below 60% of median income, which would sit there until the house is sold. House noted a variety of programs, such as the Community Homebuyer, which would allow for 2% of the downpayment or a HUD loan, which would allow for 100%. Long said that they may also have to adjust the amount of interest charged. House said he would get together Housing & Community Development Commission October 15, 1998 Page 4 with staff to discuss this issue and some possible solutions. Long said the item would be brought back before the Commission during their November monthly meeting. Bond Financing Update Long noted Nasby's memo regarding the bond update. He said that the item would be reviewed by Council on November 2. Renquist asked if this could be tagged onto another bond issue. Head said there are a couple of options, one of which is to piggyback onto an existing bond for up to 10%. Renquist asked if the public knew about this option. Head said that it is legal and up to the City's discretion. He said the bond would be a secured loan to a developer, who would create multi-family low-income housing. Coleman asked if the City could use the second option of issuing General Obligation bonds as often as they wanted. Head said yes. Moraski asked if the City took a position on priority. Head said they would find out when the Council reviewed this matter. He said that the City would be in the first position for the permanent financing of a project. Long said staff received a positive response from the City Finance Director about the project. Long noted the letters from Torus, Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship and Emergency Housing Project included in the packet. He also passed out the new Commission member list. Gadson asked about the October 5 memo to Council regarding HCDC applicants. She said she thought it was a good idea to know everyone's expertise and asked why everyone's was not included. Long said that the City Clerk asked for this information and they pulled it off everyone's application. He said that the request from the Clerk was limited to those categories. Renquist said she thought it would be difficult to get representatives from human service organizations to join the Commission because most of them apply for funding. She said it is unfortunate that the Commission does not have the benefit of their input. She asked why applicants that were not named to the Commission were included. Schmuch said because they put that information down on their application. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Gadson moved to adjourn the meeting. Renquist seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 9-0, and the meeting was adjourned at 6:35 p.m. ppdcdbgVrins~hcdcl O- 15,doc MINUTES IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION THURSDAY OCTOBER 8, 1998 - 5:45 P.M. IOWA CITY TRANSIT FACILITY MEMBERS PRESENT: STAFF PRESENT: CALL TO ORDER: Pat Foster, Rick Ivlascari, Howard Horan, Mark Anderson, Tom Bender Dennis Mitchell, Ron O'Neil Chairperson Horan called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The mutes of the September 10th, 1998, Commission meeting were approved as submitted. AUTHORIZATION OF EXPENDITURES: Mascari made a motion to approve the bills. Anderson seconded the motion and the bills were approved 5-0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION - ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA: No items were discussed. PUBLIC HEARING - IOWA JET SERVICES FBO APPLICATION AND LAND LEASE: Horan opened the public hearing at 5:50 p.m. O'Neil said the public hearing was for the FBO application and the land lease. Gordon Peterson read from the 1989 FAA Compliance Standards. He said the standards do not require the Commission to allow additional commercial activity on the Airport if they think the additional activity cotrid be detrimental to the future of the Airport A single FBO operation . would not necessarily be considered an exclusive right ff the Commission determined the volume of business would only sustain one FBO. The question is whether the Commission exercises "due diligence" when waking their decision. E.K. Jones asked who would be responsible for doing a feasibility study to determine if there was enough business for more than one FBO at the Iowa City Airport ? He said he contacted the FAA in Washington, D.C., to get answers to this question. Peterson said he thinks the regulations allow anyone to apply to be an FBO, but do not require the Commission to approve every application. Dennis Mitchell said he thought a feasibffity study would have to be completed which showed the Airport could not support another FBO before an FBO application could be denied by the Commission on that basis. Horan closed the hearing at 6:02 p.m. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: ACSG Project: Greg Bridger circulated a revised schedule for completing the land acquisition project. He said the relocation of the Terrace Hill Park should be completed by the first week in November. The first notice for auction will be sent out soon. The land and easement offers will be completed by the end of October, except for the Dane and Meardon properties. Bridger explained the auction program and how long he thought it would take to dispose of the mobile homes. Mitchell said the Commission would need to discuss the ACSG contract as it relates to attorney's fees. He said that the original contract did not include the cost of condemnation proceedings. This will be addressed at a future Commission meeting. Minimum Standards: Hotart said the next three issues are all related. At the last meeting the Commission discussed amending the Minimum Standards to accommodate Iowa Jet Services. Horan said a lot of work was done to develop the standards and he thought the standards should not be changed. Foster agreed with Horan. Mitchell said that if the standards were not changed, the agenda item for Iowa Jet would have to be deferred until a business plan is received. Mascari said that when he was working on the minimum standards, he did not envision that a private developer would build his own building on the Airport. He said he thought this gives the Commission an extra measure of protection because they get the building immediately ff IJS were to go out of business. Anderson said that there is a sense of fairness in leaving the business plan requirement in the standards. He would like to see some type of a plan from anyone that plans to have a lease with the Airport Commission. Robert Staib, from Iowa Jet Services, said he writes several business plans a year and he could supply a plan, but it would not be very revealing He said he thought that since he is investing his own money in the project and is not asking for a large investment by the City, the Airport would be protected in the event the business was not successful. O'Neil said ff the Commission wants to change the Minimum Standards, they should still require a business plan, which would include a market analysis to show why the applicant thinks the new business is beneficial to the Airport. O'Neil asked ff the Commission thought they should pay for a market analysis or ff that should be the responsibility of the applicant ? Anderson said the Commission should not confuse a market analysis with a feasibility study. He thought the applicant should be responsible for the market analysis and the Commission should be responsible for a feasibility study. Anderson said he would like to see IJS provide a chaffer jet service and ICFS provide full service FBO service. Staib said he would like to provide full services. He said building a place that provided full FBO services and reasonably price fuel was his goal. He did not want to be half of an FBO. His jet sendee repair would be here for all his aircraft. The bulk of his jobs and service will be in Iowa City, with the larger aircraft being based in Cedar Rapids. Gordon Peterson, from PS Air, commented that even if the Airport were to be given a building if IJS defaulted, there would be costs involved with the building. Peterson cited several airports in Iowa that had corporations abandon hangars and it resulted in costs to the cities that owned the Horan said the Commission has a dilemma in trying to balance a new oppammity that may be in competition with an established business at the Airport. Staib said his primary goal was to develop a successful business that would benefit the Airport and the community. Mascari said he is in favor of the HS proposal and he thought the decision should be based on free enterprise. He didn't think the Commission should base their decision on whether or not two FBOs can be successful at the Airport. Bender agreed with Mascari. Peterson said that because this is a government entity, regulated by the state and federal goventments, it is limited because of the nature of the business and the normal rules of free enterprise might not apply. Horan said a feasibility study would take several months and could cost about $18,000. Jones said he knows of someone that would do a decent study for the Commission, not take six months, and not cost $18,000. Horan asked Jones to have that person call O'Neil. Mascari asked the Commission what would happen if a feasibility study indicated that only one FBO could make it at Iowa City ? Would they base their decision on the study and not allow IJS to build it's business ? Staib said the idea is not to split the current traffic among two FBOs, but to increase the amount of business at the Iowa City Airport. Horan said he would like to see both FBOs at the Airport. He would be reluctant to spend money on a feasibility study that would not necessarily answer the main question of having one or two FBOs. Mascari said he agreed with Horan and would like to see both companies operating at the Staib asked if the present contract with ICFS grants them any exclusive rights? Mascari said the Commission is not allowed to grant any exclusive rights. Staib asked ff the Commission has done a study that would determine if an exclusive right could be granted? Horan said no study has been done. Southwest FBO hangar: O'Neil said the deadline for ICFS to make a decision is October 15, 1998. Bencl~r said the Commission could contract the low bidder and ask for an extension. O'Neil said that if the remaining issues can not be resolved in the next few days, he did not think an extension would do any good. A meeting will be scheduled for Wednesday, October 14, if there is a contract to approve. Staib said ff the Commission can not come to terms with ICFS, he would be willing to sign a lease for the proposed hane~ar. Iowa Jet Services: Horan said a business plan is still required and could be discussed at the October 14~ meeting Staib said he would have the business plan to O'Neil by October 12*. Budget-FY2000: O'Neil presented a prelimhmty budget to the Commission. He asked the Commission if there were any line items the Commission would like to discuss. The budget is due to the Finance Department by October 21 a. O'Neil said he made the adjustments needed in most of the line items. There were no changes except cost of living adjustments to most of the budget. O'Neil said he needed Commission input on at least two items. He recommended increasing the part-time maintenance worker from ¼ to 3/~ time. He said the workload has increased and with some of the projects anticipated in the near future, additional maintenance time would be needed. The Commission discussed the issue and decided that in order to adequately serve the Airport, the position would be increased from ¼ time to full time. O'Neil asked the Commission to prioritize their capital project li~ The Commission needed to decide which capital projects they wanted to schedule for the next three years. O'Neil provided a list of several capital projects. The Commission decided to budget the Terminal Building renovation in FY 2000, a new fuel tank site in FY 2001, and additional T-hangar space in FY 2002. Anderson and O'Neil will work with HLM to design the Terminal renovation and have that project ready for construction by next summer. The design should be ready for Commission and Council review by January or February. Foster made a motion to approve the budget as amended. Mascari seconded the motion and it was approved 5 -0. CHAIRPERSON'S REPORT: Horan said he thought there was some very productive discussion on the items covered at the meeting and was encouraged that the projects were on traclc COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: There was some additional discussion about Iowa Jet Services. The Commission will continue to work with IJS and ICFS to provide for both companies. Bender said he would like to see some of the projects they discussed earlier m the meeting actually get started to show the public there are some positive and exciting thing going on at the Airport. Mascari said he went to the Iowa Aviation Conference in Ames and had an opportunity to discuss the Iowa City Airport with several IDOT and FAA officials. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: O'Neil commented that Anderson did an excellent job explaining the Terminal renovation to the Council during their facilities tour on September 15th. The Council was positive about the project and the Commission needs to go on to the second phase of the design. Ballot proposition information for the 1% sales tax increase was included in the information packet. Horan sent 'thank you' letters to those that helped with the fly-in breakfast. O'Neil said a letter fxom the Science Center was included in the packet. O'Neil said he contacted Jim Larew and suggested the Science Center give the Commission a proposal if they wanted to locate in the North Conunercial area. O'Neil said MMS suggested reusing some of the abandon concrete on the end of RW 17 as base material for the road in the North Commercial area. This may require the taxi way to be relocatecL The Commission thought this was a good idea. SET NEXT MEETING: The next regular Airport Commission meeting is scheduled for November 12, 1998, at 5:45 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The meetin was djoumed 8:0 he m/~asjodurn~ Howard Horan, Chairperson IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION MINUTES October 19, 1998 Meeting COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Tom Dickerson, Pat Harvey, Joan Jehle, Charles Major, Diane Martin, Jan Warren COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Mettie Thomopulos, Art Vincent, Ann Shires STAFF PRESENT: Heather Shank GUESTS PRESENT: Dorothy Paul; Chris Taylor; Lazara Pittman CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Harvey called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Warren moved to approve the September minutes; Jehle seconded. All in favor; no opposed. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None. GUEST PRESENTATION: 1~ Guest: Dorothy Paul from the United Nations Association (Iowa Division) stated that she was interested in having as many sponsors as possible for Human Rights Day on December 10, 1998. The day represents the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. A proclamation regarding this anniversary has been sent to the Mayor and he has agreed to sign it. Amnesty Intemational, the Iowa City Foreign Relations Counsel and the Iowa City Federation of Labor have agreed to co-sponsor. Ms. Paul is trying to get a wide variety of groups to sponsor the program. The December 10, celebration will be kicked off with a speech by Bums Weston at the Foreign Relations Counsel. Then there will be a downlink in the ICN room at North Hall. The program at North Hall will be sponsored by the Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute. The institute is doing 50 town meetings in 50 different cities that day. Only 20 people will be able to attend the North Hall meeting due to seating limitations. A musical and reading celebration for the public will be held on the evening of December 10 in meeting room A, B, & C of the Iowa City Public Library. Ms. Paul asked the Commission to co-sponsor this event. Ms. Harvey expressed her gratitude for bringing this event to the Commission's attention. Motion made by Diane Martin to endorse and co-sponsor and Joan Jehle seconded. All in favor; no opposed. Ms. Paul indicated the Commission could have a table for information at the event. 2nd Guest: Chris Taylor Chris Taylor, an employee of the Johnson County Department of Public Health, provides HIV prevention programs for targeted populations in Iowa City. Mr. Taylor came to the Commission in response to the beating death of Matthew Shepherd and the harassment of an individual in one of his programs. Both men were subject to the adverse behavior because of their sexual orientation. Human Rights Commission October, 1998 Minutes Page 2 Mr. Taylor indicated the issue of hate crimes has been brought to his attention before and after Matthew Shepherd. Mr. Taylor called Heather Shank and asked if the Commission would be interested in working on a project involving hate crimes. Mr. Taylor was invited to address the Commission regarding a hate crime forum. Mr. Taylor suggested having professionals who could discuss the law and perhaps members of the police force who can advise people on how to protect themselves. Mr. Taylor envisions having many groups/agencies sponsoring this program. Shank mentioned she spoke with the Prosecutor's office regarding having someone instruct the public on the elements of a hate crime. Pat White was mentioned as a possible speaker. Shank also mentioned that at the recent Diverse-Cities Team Meeting a small group determined its goal would be to develop a Hate Crime Response Team. The team leader of this group is Faith Wilmot. Other members of this group included Chief Winkelhake and Chief Barry Bedford of the Coralville Police Department. Ms. Harvey expressed her delight that the Diverse-Cities Team could be involved in a project this quickly after the teams set their goals. Mr. Taylor indicated there were many agencies that were interested in this topic. Hate crimes also affect people other than gays and lesbians. Mr. Taylor was interested in setting the program up for November 17 in the library. Ms. Harvey indicated the program could be taped if it was held in the library. Mr. Taylor has not checked the library to see if it is available for the 17m but he will do so soon. Ms. Warren asked Shank whether the Commission had any responsibility under the law after a hate crime was charged. Shank indicated the Commission could respond by writing letters of support to the individuals who were victims of a hate crime or letters to the editor but beyond that, the Commission did not have an enforcement role. The Iowa Civil Rights Commission also does not have a role in hate crimes beyond supporting the victims and denouncing the acts. Ms. Warren advised that the hate crime panel should include persons other than "official" people so it will be more accessible to the general public. Mr. Taylor provided his card to all of the Commission members. Ms. Harvey indicated the program would be something the Commission could endorse and work on with Mr. Taylor. Mr. Taylor reported that an event was happening at the same time as the Commission meeting that was organized in response to the death of Matthew Shepherd. An informal panel was planning on discussing Mr. Shepherd's death and how to prevent similar incidents. The Iowa City Human Rights Commission co-sponsored the event. 3'a Guest: Lazara Pittman, the new Human Rights Investigator, was introduced to the Commission by Chairperson Harvey. Ms. Pittman informed the Commission that she graduated from the University of Iowa law school in 1987. Prior to that, Ms. Pittman worked with an attomey in the immigration field for seven years. After law school, Ms. Pittman returned to Miami to practice law. Human Rights Commission October, 1998 Minutes Page 3 She worked with legal services and then entered into private practice. In 1997, Ms. Pittman returned to Iowa City and started a position as an auditor at First National Bank. Ms. Pittman indicated that she has always wanted to focus on constitutional and discrimination law. OLD BUSINESS: Human Rights Breakfast update: Shank reported that 183 tickets have been sold so far. 177 were sold last year. The Union has been apprised of the number. The speakers have been delineated and the program is in the printing department. The awards are in Shank's office. Jim Anaya is the only person that will not be present to accept his award. Warren asked that the breakfast be placed back on the agenda for next month so the Commissioners can discuss the concems that were raised by Carolan at the last meeting. Shank indicated that nomination forms will be at everyone's place this year so persons can nominate all year long as opposed to in the last few months of the summer. Martin agreed to take tickets at the door. Jehle indicated the breakfast should be advertised in the fliers that go out with the water bill. Warren asked that pictures be taken of the award winners this year so that it can appear in the paper with notice that the Commission is taking nominations year round. Community Outreach: Warren tried to call Marian Coleman several times to see if anyone is doing an essay contest this year. Warren will continue to pursue this. Harvey asked that Community Outreach also be added to the agenda for next month so the Commission can continue the discussion. Warren said that the Commission' s essay contest could be put on hold until Joyce Carmen' s plans for a similar event are over. Shank said that she would call Carmen and see where she is on her plans. Warren also mentioned that the Commission could walt until next year. Harvey wants to keep abreast of Carmen' s plans. Warren indicated she wanted to talk about the Diverse-Cities Team meeting that was held on October 13, 1998. Prior to the meeting, Shank had asked five different persons to lead five small groups. The groups included (1) Hate Crimes; (2) Town Meetings; (2) Education; (4) Business/Industry; (5) Small groups. At the meeting four instead of five small groups came together. Approximately 20 people attended and worked to identify a future contact person from their group and to develop short term and long term goals. Warren thought the goals were quite good. Charlie Eastham is going to be the team leader for the town meeting group. They are planning to have two town meetings before the 1 ~t of the year. This group also wants to do an annual diversity report card of area businesses. The hate crimes group wants to develop a hate crime response team. The Education group wants to meet with Marian Coleman to find out how the schools are dealing with diversity issues. The business/industry group wants to find out what good things are happening in the community vis-h-vis diversity. Florence Babb is the leader of the education group while Dereck Hall is the leader of the business/industry group. Warren said that she is cautiously optimistic. Martin suggested the hate crime group plus the town meeting group could come together to help with the Hate Crime Public Forum. Warren is interested in engaging in public forums relating to housing issues and race. Warren also indicated that she wanted the Diverse-Cities Team to address within racism. The small groups are suppose to take the initiative to get started on their goals. Shank is going to send a letter to all of the Human Rights Commission October, 1998 Minutes Page 4 p~rsons on the D-Team list regarding the recent meeting so others will get involved. New Business: None Reports of Commissioners: Jehle reported that the next Citizen's Police Academy starts on February 4, 1999 through April 22, Thursday nights from 6:30 to 9:30 p.m. The deadline to register is December 11, at 5:00 p.m. It costs $20.00. This covers refreshments and t-shirts. Jehle reports that the Academy is fun and education. Jehle reported that she artended the candle light vigil for Matthew Shepherd last Monday night. She spoke at the event. The Commission thanked Jehle for attending. Jehle indicated there were several elected officials at the event. Jehle asked the Commission to send a formal note to Karen Kubby and Dee Norton for attending. Minette Doderer and Dick Meyers attended the vigil and spoke of the State law. Joe Bolkeom also artended. Jehle thought the Commission should also thank Janelle Rettig and Robin Butler for pulling the vigil together so quickly. Jehle mentioned at the vigil that for the past three years, the ICHRC has traveled to Des Moines to ask the ICRC to discuss the issue of adding sexual orientation to the Iowa Civil Rights Act during the Commissions' fall retreat. Cedar Rapids recently had a public hearing on the issue in front of the Cedar Rapids Human Rights Commission. Approximately 600 people came to the meeting. Warren and Jehle indicated a letter should come from the ICHRC to the CRHRC indicating the ICHRC's support for adding sexual orientation to their Ordinance. Tom Dickerson is writing an editorial on the Matthew Shepherd hate crime. The editorial will be in the paper on October 28, 1998. Dickerson said that the editorial could be placed in the packet. Harvey indicated Dickerson could add to the editorial the things the ICHRC was trying to do. Major went to see Eli Wiesel. He reported there was a large crowd and people had to sit in the lobby. He believed there were more than 4000 people. Major reported that General Pinochet had surgery in Britain and was arrested by the British at the request of Spain. Major also mentioned that a car was stopped and persons were passing a crucifix in the backseat. A police officer mistook the crucifix for a weapon. Shank reported there will be a PCRB public hearing tomorrow night at the Newman Center. Warren indicated Dith Pran will be here next week. She encouraged everyone to see the movie, The Killing Fields. Rigoberta Menchu is also coming to speak. She will be here on November 12, 1998. Warren also reported there will be a conference on Critical Race Feminism - Legal Thought on November 5-6. On Nov. 4, WRAC is also hosting an event called, Put a gFoman on the Ballot. There are a group of scholars who are trying to fred a viable candidate to be President. This group is putting together a list of the most viable female candidates for these positions. They have narrowed their list to 20. The purpose of the meeting is to pick five from the 20. The list includes Elizabeth Dole and Human Rights Commission October, 1998 Minutes Page 5 Hillary Clinton. It also includes persons who are not political figures. On Nov. 4, a person can go to WRAC to celebrate the passage of the ERA and vote for the five candidates. Tom Dickerson, Pat Harvey and Ann Shires' terms on the Commission will expire on January 1. None of them will reapply. An advertisement has been nmning in the Daily Iowan for two weeks. The posters concerning the vacancies were handed out. Warren said she wanted Shank to report at every meeting whether the Commissioners who do not attend the meeting called in prior to the absence. Warren wondered whether the City Cotmcil planned on doing something with the attendance information. Shank indicated the Council wanted to keep track. Harvey indicated the ICHRC has always stressed the importance of attendance. Jehle indicated that she remembered this was one of the reasons the by-laws were revised. Warren wants to make this a standard part of the meeting. Dickerson indicated that Shank usually does this. Harvey said that the information is written on the minutes. Warren said she wanted Shank to note excused or non-excused. Shank indicated she would do this. Status of Cases Case ~47 - These are two complaints from two different individuals against one respondent. There are six additional complainants against the respondent. The Commission does not have class action cases so each complainant has to file individually. The same Commission team will review all of the cases. One case was closed due to a successful mediation, another was closed because the individual wanted to have it transferred to the ICRC. Adjourn: Motion by Martin, seconded by Jehle. Next Meeting: November 23, 1998 \li\l !I ~ It >~,\ \ ~'1I h' it..i l-~'l ~\l\lt NICAI'I()NS C()MMISSi()N \l~\l)\~.~)('l~{~l~,t.Zl-~2~. 1'-)'-)8 5:30PM t'l\.'lt' ('t.2N'I'I,LR I.~)BI~Y C()NFERENCE R()OM \II.\.II~I.2RS I~RI:LNF(N'I'. \II.:\.II~t~RS ABSENq': % I \t:l: PRf{SF:NT: Cordell Jeppsen. Betty McKray. Steve Hoch. Cathy Weingeist Jim Pusack Drew Shaffi~r. Dale Helling. Bob Hardy, Keri Stokstad. Mike Brau O~FHERS PRESENT: Beth Fisher, Rene Paine, Denis Martel RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL Nolle. St ',MMARY OF DISCUSSION l~.\l'V's annual meeting will be held November 19 at 6:30 in Library Meeting Room A. Several members to the Board of Directors will be elected at that meeting, The cable modern service, ~Home, will likely be launched before the end of the year. Hoch asked if pay-per-view and ~Home are subject to the 5% franchise fee. Shaffer said revenue fi'om both is subject to the franchise fee. Shaffer reported CSPAN2 will be added to the channel lineup. The Community Television Group (CTG) is putting together a set of t'undi ng proposals based on an estimated $17,500 per year, as was the case during the first 3-year thnding arrangement. Those timds will be available at the start of the next fiscal year in July. Shafi~r noted the Commission had previously expressed an interest in playing a role in the ~Felecommunications Ordinance. The more specific and clear the Commission's proposed role is in regards to education and advocacy the better chance the Commission has to be involved, The City is concerned about citizens having the impression the Citv can regulated something they can not. Shaffer said that the City is exploring options regarding the transfer of the franchise from TCI to ATT. One area under exploration is the pending rate refund due subscribers, which has been appealed by 'l'('l ~cveral times. APPROVAL OF MINUTIES It x~as moved by McKray. seconded by Hoch to approve the September 28, 1998 railrates. ~Flne motion passed unanimously. \N ",{ )t 'N{.'I.LM tCN I'.% t )1. C{ )MMISSIONERS I I,,ch .iskcd C'ommissi~mcrs il'a letter to the Press Citizen might be written on behalf of commission exptainin~ the benefits of passing the McLeod cable TV ti'anchise ballot i~suc. l[cl ling said there arc restrictions on using City fiJnds to promote items on the h,. I~roviding intbrmation is permitted but advocating that citizens vote a particular is ran..X. member ol' the Commission may act as an individual. Hoch asked if the ',,~nlnissitm might cxplaii~ ~h'. thev took a particular course of action. Helling said it is ',,, i, rt~x idc inlbrmation. but not promote one side or another. Weingeist said an indi\ idual could ~rite a letter and identify that they are a member of the Commission as a x~a~ to indicate the writer is intbrmed on the issue. SHORT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS l"islacr said the Icon again listed the wrong time and location of the Commission meeting. LIBRARY REPORT Fisher reported the Librarx is busy hosting a series of book talks, including talks by local celebrities and authors. The library has ordered a digital video camera with funds made axailable from the CTG with the pass-through fee and matched by the library. The PoPo Puppet Festival will again be cablecast live. all day. November 21. ti('¢' RF, PORT report. PATVREPORT Paine reported PATV now cablecasts only locally produced programming between 5:30 and 10:30 Monday through Friday. Premier night has moved from Friday night to Wednesday night. Local program guides are available at the Iowa City and Coralville libraries, TCI. and the University of Iowa Memorial Union. The grand opening of f'ATV's new t:acilitv was held last Friday and was quite successful. A video workshop and x idco project xvith the Neighborhood Centers will be offered once a week through February. PATV's annual meeting will be held November 19 at 6:30 in Library Meeting Room A. Several rnembers to the Board of Directors will be elected at that meeting. I.IC¢iAL REPORT 5haflizr reported that Coralville passed an ordinance that would have a portion of Mcl.cod's annual telecommunications support payment of $161.365 to the City of Iowa Cit\' provided to Coralville. Matthews made it clear to McLeod, who had inquired about the issue. that they have an agreement with the City of Iowa City for that payment and \ I:n'~cl rcl',{~rtcd the\ arc disco`,ering a liew subscribers who have not been receiving the ,ldd.,; :,~i:ai channc!s uddcd ,,uhsequer~t to the rebuild. Most are the result of bad splitters ,,r ix. sct~ that arc not tuned tbr those channels. Shaf~r added that the reasons most poq31c are not rccei`.'ing the additional expanded tier channels are: their TV set is too old tprc- 1 ')t)4 } or needs to be rcprogrammed: their VCR is too old (pre- 1994) or needs to be rcpr,~grammed. or the', li~c in Coralville (where the rebuild is not done). The digital tier ha:, had a gt_x~d demand and is Rlnctioning well. Discussions are being held with Mid ..\metlea utilities regarding placement of cable on poles. TCI has not been pleased with rnanner McLeod ',,.'as stringing cable on poles in Cedar Rapids. There is no formal policy in place with Mid America regarding which cable goes where. The cable modem service, ~ lhm~e. ',','ill likely be launched beibre the end of the year. Hoch asked if pay-per-view anj ~z l lonae are subject to tlne 5% thnchise fee. Shaffer said revenue from both is subject to the ~'anchisc t;,:c. CABLE TV DIVISION REPORT Stt,kstad reported the Con~rnunity Television Service (CTS) completed ten programs in the past month. A cop5- o f the CTS Advisory Committee agenda was included in the meeting packet. McKrav asked about playback of CTS programs. Stokstad said that, as much as possible. playback is balanced among all access channels. Program content t.x pically plays a role in determining which channel will cablecast a particular program. \II C"F% programs carrx the CTS logo in the lower right corner. Shat'rbr reported receiving tburteen calls regarding subscribers not receiving the channels added subsequent to the rebuild. About half were from Coralville, which has not been rebui It. Several ',',-ere due to peculiarities with some sets manufactured before 1994 x~ h,,sc tuners could not receive channels above 38 or 46. These sets need a VCR or cable b,,x to function as a tuner. Several other calls will require connecting a newer set to that spcci tic cable drop to determine if there is a problem. Four additional complaints were rcceixed and corrected. ShaFfizr reported CSPAN2 x,, ill be added to the channel lineup. The Community '1 clc\ision (iroup. I(_"l'(i~ is putting together fi. mding proposals based on an estimated 517.5()() per year. as ~as the case during the first 3-year titnding arrangement. Those Funds will be available in July. at the start of the next fiscal year. The proposals will be li~rxx arded to the Cornmission. Shaffier said the Cable TV Division's proposed budget has .just been firfished and a final version will be tbrward it to the Commission. Shaffi~r noted th,: t ',mm~ission had previously expressed an interest in playing a role in the lclcctmmmnications Ordinance. The more specific and clear the Commission's role is dclincd in regards to education and advocacy. the better chance the Commission has to be inv,fi ved. 'Fl'~e City is concerned about citizens getting the impression the City can 7cu':..~tc .lrcas it caI~n¢~t .Icppscn and Hoch said the Commission is still h'~terested in i'/~; '.,:;~,__, d r,~lc Xhal'lL'r t'cl'~n'tcd that the City Cable Division's Avatar Project is c,~l~:dcl'in~ ~ffcring small gifts to viewers as an inducement to call in. Alter c,,~'~idcrabic discussions ~ith the City administration and legal department. there appears t,~ bc n,~ problem ~ith the concept. but detailed guidelines will need to be developed rc,_':,rd{n~ ~l llumbcr of i~sues. including the manner and how often mention is given on it~c :i r ,,,, dt~miting bu.~it~csscs. Initially it was decided to purchase the gifts with f~nds Iv, ,ca ihc Cable I V Di~ isitm budget as many of the details regarding donations have yet to !~c \~ orkcd out. Jeppsen suggested offering some City services as gifts. Hoch said there is a dil'f;erence bet'~,een underwriting. where an underwriter is acknowledged l~r thcl r contribution to~ards the cost of creating a program and giving gifts as part of a pr~,mtqit~l'L \.lcKra~ said she has qualms about buying items with promotional value to gi\ c a~av. but sees no prob[em ifa business donates an item. Hoch said the Commission needs to give thought and consideration to these issues. SYSTEM REBUILD Shaft~r said the City is ~,vaiting on TCI's proof of performance statements before confim~ing that the rebuild is complete. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the City is not collecting any liquidated damages. If the ad placed in the paper informing c it i/c n s o f the add itio hal channels generated a large response from subscribers. there ~ ~mtd be cause to believe the rebuild had not been completed. Rice, Williams will be ~vri t i n g a final. comprehensible report after the proof of performance reports are received. ATT TCI MERGER 5;h~l't'cr said that the Cit\' is exploring options and issues regarding the transfer of the l'ranchise from I'CI to :VI'T. One area under exploration is the pending rate refund due subscribers. ADJOLrRNMENT It x~ as moved by Hoch, seconded by Weingeist to adjoum. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment was at 6:25 P.M. l,~c~l~cctt'ull\ submitted~ MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 5. 1998 - 7:30 P,M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS Subjact to pproval MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Bovbjerg, Benjamin Chait, Pam Ehrhardt, Dick Gibson, Dean Shannon, Lea Supple MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Scott Kugler, John Yapp, Sarah Holecek, Anne Schulte RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 5-0, of SUB98-0026, a final plat of Galway Hills Subdivision, Part Five, a 13.63 acre, 8-lot residential subdivision located on the south side of Metrose Avenue and west of West High School subject to the approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to City Council consideration of the plat. Recommended approval, by a vote of 5-0, of VAC98-0006, an application submitted by the City of Iowa City to vacate street right-of-way located east of North Market Square Park, and south of Horace Mann School subject to the old Johnson Street right-of-way remaining open to public recreational use and not being fenced off or otherwise separated from Market Square Park, the alley right-of-way remaining open to fire and emergency vehicle access, and to the retention of all necessary utility easements. CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Supple called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES ON CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: Supple said a list of vacancies on City boards and commissions is available at the City Clerk's office. She encouraged citizens at the meeting to volunteer to serve on a board or commission of the City of Iowa City. Supple said serving on a board or commission is a responsibility, as well as an opportunity to provide input to City decisions. REZONING ITEM: REZ98-0016. Public discussion of an application submitted by Christian Retirement Services to rezone a 0.2 acre parcel from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) to High Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-44) for property located at 703 Benton Court. (45-day limitation period expires November 6) Yapp said this meeting was the second public hearing on this item. He said that Oaknoll, which owns the property to the east and to the north of this lot, has applied for a rezoning of this property to RM-44, the same zoning as the rest of their property. Yapp said the lot has been a temporary parking lot for two years, while Oaknoll was constructing an addition. He said the addition is nearing completion, and Oaknoll would like to retain the lot as a permanent parking lot. Planning and Zoning Commission November 5, 1998 Page 2 Yapp said staff has done research on whether there is a way for Oaknoll to keep this parking lot as a permanent or semi-permanent use without rezoning the property and feels this does require rezoning. He said temporary uses are permitted for a fixed period of time and for a specific reason. Yapp said that once Oaknoll's addition is complete, there is no clear rationale to keep this going as a temporary use. He said staff also researched whether this could be a Planned Development Housing Overlay Zone, which has some zoning flexibility. Yapp said that because the Planned Development Housing Overlay Zon.e typically applies to housing and structures and the intent is to allow for the preservation of sensitive areas for the clustering of housing for a unique design, the parking lot would not fall into this category, and staff does not want to set a precedent by allowing a parking lot under the Planned Development Housing Overlay Zone. Yapp said it would be possible to do a Code amendment to permit a use to have a parking lot in a separate zone, but staff would also recommend against that because it would set a precedent that could be applied City-wide. Yapp said staff researched a Conditional Zoning Agreement and recommends that a CZA be put in place that requires that any structure constructed on the site in the future must be compatible with the residential neighborhood to the west in terms of the placement, height, and design, and that placement, height, and design must be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. He said that would allow the neighborhood to be notified when the structure is in the planning stages and allow neighborhood input into the design and appearance of that structure. Yapp added that there is no parking permitted within the 20-foot front yard in the residential zone and so the 20-foot setback must be returned to tuff grass or landscaping. Bovbjerg asked for staff's opinion on the letter from Bill Buss about the definition of "temporary" in the ordinance. Holecek said the idea of the temporary use permits is that when allowing something that is not permitted by right in a zone, it is allowed on a temporary basis. She said Buss' letter had stated that there "may" be a condition of time. Holecek said that is from an introductory sentence that then goes through a laundry list. She said that Doug Boothroy, who is the author and administrator of that ordinance, always puts a timeline on a temporary use. Holecek said that if an application were made for this to become a temporary parking lot, Boothroy would deny it at this point in time because it is not temporary in nature. Holecek said that one year is the maximum time for a temporary use under the ordinance. She said that if an applicant goes beyond that time and applies for another permit, the only time it is generally granted is when the applicant is attempting to make the situation permanent, such as through construction, rezoning, etc. With regard to the interpretation of the ordinance and the "may" provision that introduces the list of conditions, Holecek said the first condition itself discusses the term of 180 days to one year. She said that in interpreting the zoning ordinance, the most restrictive term is always used. Holecek said that it would not be a "may" because of course, what is temporary, and the temporal aspect of it, between 180 days and one year, is what makes it a temporary use. Bovbjerg said that in the past, the Commission has allowed something for a particular use, for a year or two, with review after a year or so and possible renewal. She asked what the context of such a situation would be. Holecek responded that there was a County property on Owl Song Lane, where the City had some input as to whether or not to allow a conditional use permit. She stated that that was a County property, and the City does not have that particular legislative scheme. Planrang and Zoning Commission November 5, ! 998 Page 3 Gibson asked Holecek how she would characterize staff's attitude about the probable rezoning of this property in the future, independent of this request. Holecek said staff cannot make any promises as to what will happen in the future. Gibson said they can behave in certain ways and suggest outcomes. Holecek said she could not characterize staffs attitude as being anything other than an analysis of the facts at hand. Gibson asked if there is no presumption that the rest of the street will become RM-44. Holecek said that one would have to go through the process. She said it has been suggested in the staff report, but that is not conclusive in any way. Gibson asked if that might not be the basis for granting temporary use, i.e., the probable inevitability of the rezoning of this property at least based on staffs attitude. He said staff is on one hand behaving as if this side of the street will be rezoned at some point because that is one of the larger reasons for rezoning this, and on the other hand saying this is not a temporary use. Gibson said those two conditions are not at all compatible. Holecek asked if Gibson was saying that if this is inevitable in the future, then of course this parking lot is temporary until the inevitable occurs. Gibson said that was correct. Holecek said it is not temporary under the ordinance for temporary uses as we now see it. Gibson said that was also as Boothroy apparently interprets the ordinance but said that others are permitted to interpret the ordinance as well. Holecek said that any staff interpretation of the zoning ordinance would be appealable to the Board of Adjustment. She said City Council is not generally engaged in interpretation. Gibson stated that Holecek had said that Boothroy interprets the one year temporary time limit. He said the language in the ordinance is not really operative; it doesn't really apply to the one year but applies to the other things that follow. Gibson asked if Boothroy is therefore interpreting anything of more than one year as not temporary and will therefore not grant a temporary variance. Holecek responded that Boothmy would not grant a temporary use beyond one year. Gibson said that was his interpretation of the ordinance. Holecek responded that that was correct and that interpretation is supportable by the language. Gibson said the fact that it may be limited is not really operative; it in fact can't be limited to anything more than a year or less than one year. Gibson said it can't be more than one year and still be temporary according to the ordinance. Holecek confirmed this, Gibson said that is a strict reading of the language. Holecek said that was correct. Gibson asked why the ordinance says how long the time period is may be a consideration. Holecek said that is the introductory paragraph that introduces a laundry list of about nine different conditions. She said the first condition goes to the temporal aspect and talks about timing saying "180 days to one year or less." Bovbjerg said she would be interested to know if the laundry list is connected by "ands" or "ors" or any combination of those and whether there might be some conditions that stand as strongly as a one year period or whether there are some conditions that would either take priority or be just as persuasive. Holecek said she understood the Commission's desire to make this padicular situation work so that all parties are satisfied but said the Commission cannot make administrative interpretations of a zoning ordinance for the sake of convenience or for particular fact patterns. She stated that doing so to make things work will result in undermining the integrity of the ordinance and the ability to enforce it. Yapp said the specific language reads, "The building official may impose conditions deemed reasonable and necessary..." then goes to the time period paragraph. He reads on, "provision for a fixed period of time not to exceed 180 calendar days for a temporary use not occupying a structure," Gibson said the ordinance says that may be imposed as a limitation. Yapp said that was correct and read, "including promotional activities or one year for all other uses or structures or for a shorter period of time as determined by the building official. Gibson said that it still is preceded by "may" and does not say "will." P!annlng and Zoning Commission November 5, ! 998 Page 4 Supple asked if this were a fairly new ordinance, and Yapp confirmed that is three or four months old. Bovbjerg asked how the Commission should behave if it did or did not want this to go to the Board of Adjustment. Holecek said one approach would be that if this rezoning were denied, the applicant could apply for a temporary use permit and should that be denied based on the findings of the building official and the interpretation of the ordinance, then that could go to the Board of Adjustment. Bovbjerg asked how much that would cost, and Kugler responded that it would cost $300. Gibson said the introductory paragraph of the ordinance finishes, "These conditions may involve any pertinent factors affecting the operation of such temporary event or use and may include but are not limited to..." He said it then goes on to recite the uses. Gibson said the two years already granted exceed the one-year provision. Holecek stated that this was not in force at the time the two years was granted. Gibson said staff is saying this is precedent, but asked how it can it be precedent if it was only written four months ago. He said that in fact the precedent is for two years of temporary use. Gibson said that the temporary use could be justified because we don't know what will happen to adjacent properties and therefore should not make an absolute dedication of this assuming that something is going to happen. He said the Commission is taking the broadest step possible under the circumstances and putting the fewest limitations on the private development and as many limitations on the City as can be put on it by going to RM-44. Gibson suggested granting a temporary use instead of doing that, and he believes the temporary use is permitted the way he reads the ordinance. Bovbjerg said one of the fears expressed at previous meetings was that zoning this RM-44 would create a domino effect. Yapp said staff has stated in the staff report that it would be appropriate in the future to fezone the rest of the west side of that block to a higher density zone, as is shown on the Comprehensive Plan landscape map. He said that staff has not stated what zone that property should be. Gibson asked what the options would be, and Yapp responded that there could be any density higher than RS-8. Yapp said that as far as the inevitability of the rest of the block being zoned, he said that staff would support that. He said that whether it is inevitable or not is not up to staff, and staff would not necessarily recommend an RM44 zoning for the rest of the block. Gibson said he understood that but was talking about staff behavior, not the final outcome. He asked what zones parking per se is permitted in as a use. Yapp said a parking lot or a commercial parking lot is considered an auto and truck oriented use if it is the dominant use on a lot. He said they are permitted in the C1-1 zone by right and in the CC-2 and Commercial Highway Zones by special exception. Yapp said that parking lots are explicitly accessory uses in residential zones and therefore cannot be the dominant use. Supple said that at the informal meeting, Bob Downer mentioned that Oaknoll was willing to incorporate this lot into Oaknoll's property, eliminating it as a lot and making it part of the Oaknoll lot. Holecek confirmed this. Supple said her concern was zoning this property for apartments, and whether or not that is the intent of the applicant, that is what the Commission is zoning the property for. She asked what the protection would be if this one lot becomes part of the Oaknoll lot and is therefore no longer a lot of its own. Holecek said the CZA that is being proposed will constrain design for compatibility issues. She said that although it hasn't been discussed or proposed and would be up to the applicant, there is the possibility of putting restrictive covenants on the property as far as development is concerned. Holecek said the fact that the lot becomes part of the rest of the property really does not have any significance. Yapp Ptanning and Zoning Commission November 5, 1998 Page 5 said that, presumably if this is combined with the rest of the Oaknoll lot, that is an assurance that it will be developed by Oaknoll. He said that selling it to another developer would require a subdivision, which would come before the Commission. Supple asked if it could then be developed at 44 units per acre for .2 acres. Yapp confirmed this. He said this lot is about 8,700 square feet. Yapp said that theoretically, the Zoning Code permits one unit per 1,000 square feet at an RM-44 density so that with the setback, parking, and other requirements, there could be eight units, although realistically, the end result would be about four units. Gibson asked, if this were folded into the balance of Oaknoll's property and there was some residual, undeveloped density capability on that parcel, what happens to the development capability on this particular lot. He said it would no longer be segregated as a single lot, and the result would be whatever could be fit on it while still satisfying the setback requirements if there is a residual development capability on the whole balance of the Oaknoll property. Yapp said he had not studied that possibility. Holecek suggested that would require an OPDH. Yapp said it would not if it becomes all part of one lot. He said there would still be the same setback requirements and realistically there could not be that high of a density on such a small lot. Gibson said the lot may not have parking requirements associated with it because those could be satisfied on the main property. Yapp confirmed this. Gibson said we don't really know what the development potential is for this property. He asked if there is a height limitation in an RM- 44 zone. Yapp said it would be limited to 35 feet, as for other zones. Public discussion: Bob Downer. 122 South Linn Street, said there have been various comments made at the meetings that refer to this application with respect to a means of limiting the applicant to those uses the applicant has indicated would be made of the property. He said the applicant is willing to do any of the things that have been suggested by way of a CZA, the folding of this property into the balance of the Oaknoll property, keeping it separate should that be deemed to be more restrictive, or setting forth restrictive covenants with regard to the property indicating that any change in use would require the submission of a plan to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, with a public hearing required. Downer said the applicant will do about anything, at least with regard to the proposals that have been advanced to date, to secure the rezoning of the property so that Oaknoll can continue to use it as a parking lot. Downer said he does not feel, with respect to the concerns that have been expressed relative to a temporary use permit, that this is an acceptable solution to the problem, for a variety of reasons. He stated that the lot has a hard surface, which is not required by the City for a temporary use. Downer said, however, that it was planned at the time that this would be done right in the hopes that the necessary approvals could be obtained. He said this was not just put on the property but was engineered by Shive-Hattery at a cost of $4,000 to make sure the lot was properly landscaped, drained, surfaced, etc. Downer said it is certainly true there was no indication at that time that this would necessarily be permitted but Oaknoll made the attempt to do things right. Downer said he feels the use of this property as a parking lot is in the best interests of the neighborhood as something that will reduce congestion and on-street parking, things that have been a problem in the neighborhood. He admitted that some of this has been caused by on- street parking by Oaknoll employees although he did not think it has been caused by Oaknoll residents. Downer said this lot will permit Oaknoll to take better care of its employees, together with the parking structure that is under construction. Planning and Zoning Commission November 5, 1998 Page 6 Downer said that throughout this process there has been thought given to where parking spaces would be assigned to various residents, employees, visitors and others, and of course this lot is an integral part of that entire process. He said that the problem with respect to parking on this site is not a temporary one and therefore there should be more than a temporary solution to the problem, particularly in view of the fact that there seems to be no opposition to the continuation of the use as a parking lot; it's a matter of how Oaknoll might get there. Downer said, of the four properties that face Benton Court on the west side, although the overhead map shows five lots, each one of those is approximately 11/4 lots. Downer said that the south two and the subject property are owned by Oaknoll, and the other property is not at this time. He said that unless and until the other property is obtained, and there are no agreements in that regard, there will be nothing changed from the status quo. Downer said it is therefore entirely possible that the use of this property will not change in the foreseeable future, and therefore there would be no rezoning application for the balance of that property. He said that is another basis that says that there is no assurance that this is only a temporary problem, depending on one's definition of temporary: Downer said plans have been drawn showing how the site might be used in the event additional properties were acquired, but that is some distance down the road and could not occur in any event without the one property. He said the site plan does indicate a considerably less dense and lower profile use for that area so that it would relate more to the residential, single-family uses on the west as opposed to the apartments on the east. Downer said the applicant is willing to accommodate any sort of reasonable restriction that would assure that the property continue in its present use. Supple asked what sort of covenants the applicant would be willing to place on the property. Downer said they could agree to a covenant that the property would be used strictly for parking purposes in connection with the operation of Oaknoll unless and until there were plans for a change in that use filed with the City and acted upon by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council following a public hearing. Gibson said that with regard to the temporary use, he did not mean to imply with his line of questioning that he saw temporary as something that could be curtailed at some point; it was when something else happened. He said he was always reluctant to see the Commission step into a situation like this and either confer or detract from the property value of an owner. Gibson said he was concerned about the one lot that is not owned by Oaknoll. He said Buss makes a pretty good argument, although it could probably also be argued the other way around. Gibson said he sees no reason to confer or detract from the property rights of another at this point and is seeking another way to accommodate this request for parking. Ehrhardt asked if the idea of the CZA requiring parking would work here. Yapp said it could be done with a private covenant, with the City as a signatory to those covenants. Holecek said the City would be a third party beneficiary. She stated that Oaknoll would be one party, and this runs to the benefit of the City as well, so that the City is not necessarily a third party, but other future purchasers and parties would be on notice of the covenant. William Buss. 747 West Benton Street, referred to the written statement he had submitted to the Commission, saying that it is his strong position that it is a very important principle that the Commission not adopt policies that in effect create what he would call "blockbusting, creeping rezoning, or private eminent domain". Buss said the idea that an owner, by acquiring property, Planning and Zoning Commission November 5, 1998 Page 7 then gets an expectation that there will be a rezoning that will suit his future needs is wrong in principle and very unfair to other uses that have relied upon the stability created by Comprehensive Plan zoning maps. He stated that that is not a good or prudent way to let changes take place. Buss said he, like everyone else, would be happy to arrive at a temporary solution that basically puts the bigger decision on hold. He said that to him that means no prior commitment in any direction about how the bigger decision would be made but in the meantime would not disadvantage Oaknoll in its use of the parking lot that is already there and would not create any disadvantage that he knew of to anyone else. Buss said, regarding the temporary use argument, that the ordinance itself is pretty clear in what it does, although there are always reasonable interpretations that reasonable lawyers can make. He said, however, that the ordinance does say "may" and says so pretty explicitly, and Buss did not see how else it could be interpreted. He said the time period the ordinance talks about is one of 14 conditions, and they are all preceded by "may." Buss said that other than that, it doesn't say anything about a specific time. He said, whether it be a short or long temporary period, this is about a temporary period and it carries no disadvantage to anyone to have it be a temporary period. Buss said the only possible precedents that are set are ones that would apply in this particular situation, and this is a very unique situation. He said Holecek expressed the policy of interpreting the ordinances restrictively, but he could not believe that there is not also a principle of interpreting them wisely. Buss said that if all of the human beings now in the picture are favorably disposed to this and there is no bad precedent this will set, then it's hard to see why this would be a bad interpretation. Regarding the restrictive covenant, Buss said he didn't like that because it seems to be promised on the condition that there will be an RM44 zone with that as the condition. Buss said the fact that Oaknoll chose to make this a nice parking lot was their gamble, and he would be happy to see their gamble pay off for the temporary use but did not think it should go beyond that. Buss said that for a restrictive covenant to be effective, there has to be another landowner to whom that covenant runs. He said he was not quite sure who it is being proposed that landowner would be. Buss said the City presumably has an interest in that street and maybe there is a way to make a transfer of some interest that concerns that street that would enable a restrictive covenant to attach to the City's interest. He said the critical thing with a restrictive covenant is that it should be binding on the next owner of the property. Buss said the only way it can be done is to have another property owner who has an interest. He added that if there were a restrictive covenant, he would want one of the conditions to be that it was understood that granting this covenant was in no way a preliminary decision about any other changes in zoning in this area. Supple asked Buss if he were an attorney, and he confirmed this. Supple asked Buss if he believed that a restrictive covenant placed on the property by an owner is not restrictive to that owner. Buss replied that it is restrictive to that owner, who can be bound by a contract, but the problem is in binding some other third person good faith purchaser who buys from the owner. He said a restrictive covenant does not bind the subsequent owner unless that owner agrees to the condition. Buss said the property itself is restricted if there is another property owner who has an interest in that restrictive covenant. He said that is what makes it something different from a regular contract; it has to be attached to the land and there has to be another landowner to whom the covenant is attached. Supple asked Buss if he thought another buyer of the property would not then be restricted by the covenant, and Buss said he did not. Supple said Planning and Zoning Commission November 5.1998 Page 8 the covenant goes with the land. Buss said only if it is a restrictive covenant, which it is if and only if it is actually attached to the land. He said the mere fact that there is a contract doesn't make it so, Holecek said she was envisioning the type of covenant that would run with the land with the City as beneficiary. Buss said that would make sense. William Knabe. 1101 Circle, said he represented the Weeber-Harlocke Neighborhood Association. He said they opposed the proposed rezoning for four reasons. Knabe said his group opposes the change because it is inconsistent with the land use for this area in the Comprehensive Plan. He said the land use map shows the recommended zoning for this area as 16 to 24, not RM-44. Knabe said his group opposes the zoning change because it would reduce the buffer zone for the north side of the neighborhood. He said they also oppose the proposed zoning change because it represents the emergence of a zoning policy that could eventually lead to the demise of the neighborhood. Knabe said his group also opposes the zoning change because it places the neighborhood in direct opposition with Oaknoll Retirement Center, although such conflict does not appear to be the choice of either party. Knabe said the proposed zoning change is not about neighborhood opposition to Oaknoll and not about opposition to an off-street parking lot. He said it is about changing the zoning of a parcel of ground from one of the lowest residential densities to the highest, under the pretense such change is needed to satisfy some clearly non-existent rationale. Knabe said he is truly grateful to those members of the Commission who are taking the time to think about this issue and are putting forth considerable effort to come to a solution. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Chait moved to approve REZ98-0016, an application submitted by Christian Retirement Services to rezone a 0.2 acre parcel from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) to High Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-44) for property located at 703 Benton Court, subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement that states the placement, height, and design of any structure on the site must be compatible with the residential neighborhood to the west and must be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to a building permit being issued. Bovbjerg seconded the motion. Bovbjerg said that if the conditions were attached to this, it could make this work. She said she understands the neighborhood fears but thinks that if workable conditions can attach to the land and the City can be an interested party then this could be acceptable. Bovbjerg stated that if for some reason those conditions cannot be attached, she would be worried about this and would be for writing temporary in whatever script it could be written. Ehrhardt said that she would not vote for this motion as stated because it would be voting for a higher density. She said, however, that she is very willing to work on this but would like to see the restrictive covenant before voting on the application. Bovbjerg suggested that the motion be withdrawn and the item be deferred to give time to work out a restrictive covenant that would be acceptable to the applicant and the City. Holecek said another option would be to vote subject to the restrictive covenant as offered by the applicant and subject to and being approved prior to City Council consideration. Planning and Zoning Commission November 5, 1998 Page 9 Supple asked Holecek if Downer's proposed covenant would be acceptable to the City. Holecek said it would be acceptable as a general principle but would need to be looked at more closely. Ehrhardt asked Buss to repeat what he would like to see in addition to Downer's proposed covenant. Buss said he had suggested that it be understood that this is not in any sense a conditional approval of some future rezoning and is not in any way a preliminary decision regarding zoning or a precursor to determinations of zoning for the rest of the block for the future. Gibson asked what the value of that would be. Yapp said it would mean that if a rezoning were applied for in this area, staff could not, in future staff reports, use this case as a precedent. Supple asked Downer if he would object to having the statement to the effect that this rezoning is not a precursor to determinations for the rest of the block be part of the restrictive covenants. Downer said he would not have a problem with that. Downer said the question was raised as to whether there would be a difference between drafting the restrictive covenants before the matter leaves the Commission and is voted on or if it is conditioned on this being done prior to a City Council vote. He said the applicant would strongly prefer the latter because the temporary permit the applicant has now, by its terms, is running out, as the period of construction is coming to an end and there has been a partial certificate of occupancy on the addition. Downer said the applicant does not want to be in violation of the ordinance. Gibson asked Downer who the applicant felt under threat to if this is not resolved by the time the set of circumstances he described arrived. Downer said the applicant would be in violation of the permit, and as a 501 (c)3 tax-exempt organization that also enjoys a partial property tax exemption and because of the other regulatory bodies that supervise the operation of the facility, Oaknoll does not want to be in violation of anything. Yapp said there is no public hearing on this item already set for a City Council meeting. Gibson said he did not know why, when the Commission is holding the cards on this, it would give away the deck before making a decision. He said the Commission would give away a position depending on something happening, and he did not understand what the rush to judgment is on this. Gibson said the Commission is giving away negotiating posture. Holecek said, given the discussion, it might be preferable to defer this until the Commission has a chance to examine the restrictive covenant. Yapp said the applicant will need to waive the limitation period. Gibson said he is not in favor of doing this at all. He said that if it weren't for the action of some landownership in this area, this would clearly be spot zoning. He agreed that this would be creeping zoning as well as private eminent domain. Gibson said he would not be able to vote in favor of this, and that is why he has been looking for a way to let Oaknoll do what they want to do and do it legally, rather than to confer the highest density possible in this community to one lot. He said that no matter what the conditions are, if the end result includes rezoning, this is not acceptable to him anyway. Chait withdrew the motion to approve, and Bovbjerg withdrew her second. Bovbjerg proposed a deferral so that the language regarding the restrictive covenants could be presented to the Commission to give a certain comfort level in putting this forward. She said the reluctance of going with this one lot is understandable, but she did not think it is spot zoning. Bovbjerg said that this is a changing neighborhood, and there are tensions between two differing uses. She said it is difficult to make the uses compatible. PIann~ng and Zoning Commission November 5.1998 Page 10 MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to defer REZ98-0016, an application submitted by Christian Retirement Services to rezone a 0.2 acre parcel from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) to High Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-44) for property located at 703 Benton Court. Chait seconded the motion. Supple asked if the applicant would be willing to grant a waiver until the Commission's November 19 meeting. Downer confirmed that the applicant would be willing to do so. Yapp stated that while a rezoning application is in process, City staff would typically not give a citation for a violation. Supple asked if the neighbors were notified of this rezoning application, and Yapp confirmed this. Ehrhardt asked, regarding the restrictive covenant, what the process would be if Oaknoll bought the remaining lot and wanted to put in new apartments in two or three years. Holecek said this would remain a parking lot until a different plan is submitted for review and approved by the City through the regular procedure. Ehrhardt said that would have to be done anyway, and Holecek confirmed this, but said that during that time, this could not be sold to someone else who could come in and use it for something other than a parking lot. She said this would restrict the use to a parking lot until there is further review by the City and the plan is changed. Yapp added that without any conditions, a development is simply approved by City staff and typically does not go to the City Council. Ehrhardt said that when a plan comes before the Commission, the Commission can hardly say no, that the restrictive covenant will not be released. Holecek said the City can deny a plan as long as there are articulable criteria as to why the Commission would be denying the underlying rights, on a larger scale. Shi~ stated that the Commission could not capriciously say no to a development, but the underlying rights for an RM-44 zone have been voluntarily restricted until such time as a plan is found approvable by the City. Holecek said a plan could be found unacceptable because of incompatibility with the neighborhood. Gibson said he would vote for the deferral but appealed to staff and legal counsel to find a way to make this happen without forcing the rezoning of this property. Supple said she would also like to see such efforts. She said she has concerns because the Commission is being asked to rezone a property to accommodate a certain specific need of a specific owner, which the Commission would probably otherwise not do. Supple said the specific purpose of this seems very reasonable and logical. She said the result of doing this though, would be to grant rights that are greater than the specific need. Supple said she doesn't want to grant those rights. She said it would be great if staff .can find some other way and added that she would probably find the restrictive covenant acceptable. Chait said the Commission has done the best it can with this issue and has been backed into this situation by virtue of the interpretations being made of all of the different regulations. He said there is no better alternative than this one and thinks this addresses the concerns and allows this to happen, although it does not give the ideal, which would be to not rezone to RM- 44. The motion to defer carried on a vote of 6-0. Planrang and Zoning Commission November 5, 1998 Page 11 REZ98-0014. Public discussion of an application submitted by Maxwell Development Company to rezone a 21.26-acre parcel, Lot 8 and Outlot A, WB Development, and Lot 1, Resubdivision of Outlot A WB Development, from Intensive Commercial (C1-1) to Sensitive Areas Overlay (OSA-CI-1) for property located on the east side of Naples Avenue, south of its intersection with Alyssa Court. (45-day limitation period waived to November 5) Yapp said this is an application for a sensitive areas rezoning of Lot 1, Lot 8, and Outlot A of WB Development. He said the sensitive areas rezoning would allow the filling and grading in two areas of the site and would also include one area where grading work has already been done. Yapp said the work on the north side of Lot 8 would have the effect of filling in a swale to a more gradual slope creating more developable area, and the work on the east side of Lot 8 would have the same effect of creating a more gradual slope and slightly more developable area on the lot. He said staff recommends approval of the rezoning, subject to the removal of the east area from the plan because it is wooded, has more of a scenic value, and provides a transition between the developed and developable portion of Lot 8 and the stormwater pond in Outlot A. Yapp said the engineering staff has reviewed the plan and has found that the filling of these areas will not in the long run undermine the stability of any critical or protected slopes, although in the short run it will result in some erosion until new vegetation takes hold. He added that the City Forester has said that 80% of the trees are damaged, although they will continue to have some life in them if left alone, but if the vegetation is removed, the trees by themselves could not hold up the slope. Yapp said staff has also received information from the National Soil Conservation Service, and the applicant has agreed to plant native seed mixes on any altered or disturbed slopes. Bovbjerg asked if the engineering staff looked at the central area on the north part of Lot 8. Yapp said they did and had the same answers. Bovbjerg said there is apparently already silt there from earthmoving. Yapp said there was some silt there associated with the development of the warehouse facility. Bovbjerg said one of the rationales for working on the central ravine is that there is already silt there, so why don't we just keep it going. She asked if the engineering staff looked at that not as a fill place but alternatively as a place where the current spillover could be stabilized and no more fill would be put in. Bovbjerg said the property hasn't changed since this was planned so that this is not a rectification of the silt that shouldn't have occurred in the first place but is an alteration of the property. She said it is ironic, although she understands the rationale, to use the Sensitive Areas Ordinance in order to disturb sensitive areas. Yapp responded that such an alternative was not looked at by the engineering staff. He said that the same kind of stabilization could be done by seeding the area and as new vegetation takes hold, it would become stabilized. Yapp said that much of the existing vegetation in the central ravine is still in place, although there is some silt on it. Bovbjerg said she is looking for a corrective solution for that ravine, rather than further filling. Supple asked if anything was pushed into the ravine to the east. Yapp said that area does not have any erosion. Bovbjerg said that, regarding the northwest area, the Commission would be approving something which had been done that was not according to plan. Yapp confirmed this. He said the approved plan showed a retaining wall that was not constructed, but staff feels it would be more destructive now to require that the fill be taken out and a retaining wall be put back in. Planning and Zomng Commission November 5, 1998 Page 12 Public discussion closed. Jeffrey Maxwell 4325 Beaver Hollow. Cedar Rapids, said he is a sewer and grading contractor in the Iowa City area and is the applicant. He said his biggest concern is making sure everyone understands what he is trying to do. Maxwell said that in reference to the northwest corner area, the furthest eastern portion of the grading was required to fulfill engineering's request to project the storm sewer outlet piping downstream and provide a very flat, disbursement piping system that allows the upper level to drop through a structure and project into the stormwater basin in a very flat mode. Maxwell said that takes some of the abrasion out of the heavy water flows during a storm. He said the grading was required to make sure the pipe was adequately secured. Maxwell said the original grading in that area was required in order to get a gravity flow sewer across the ravine, which was one of the original recorded easements in the original plat of the preliminary and final plat approval of the WB Subdivision. Maxwell said the tree damage in this area was probably some of the worst in the City. He stated that 80% of the trees that he is trying to use as a buffer to the detention basin were damaged or destroyed. Maxwell said that with the grading work he is planning to do, he is planning to push to the east about 60 feet or so further than he currently can in order to make Lot 8 a more usable lot. He said that would include cleaning up the dead and broken trees and reestablishing the fir trees and ash trees. Maxwell said he owns the land and should at least have the right to go in and clean out the damaged trees. Maxwell said he plans to regrade any of the silt, and the bulk of the silt in the detention basin comes from the north side from the original WB Development and has nothing to do with the development of his. He said that since he now owns the detention basin, he plans to clean and dredge the entire bank and will landscape it in the mixture recommended by staff. Maxwell said the entire north side of the detention basin needs to be regraded, and he owns the land and intends to do that, with the guidance of City engineers. Ehrhardt said that regardless of whether the Commission approves or denies this, Maxwell can still clean up the trees. Yapp confirmed this. Ehrhardt asked Maxwell if, regarding the northwest area where the approved plan called for putting in a retaining wall, he talked with engineers and discussed whether their plan wasn't going to work and whether the other plan was a better one. Maxwell said he did talk with them, and there was a lot of dialogue during that process. Ehrhardt said, regarding the silt going over the silt fences, that Maxwell's history is not very good. Maxwell said he would like Commission members to visit the site so that he could show them that that is not the case. He said that currently there is no silt projected any further than Engineering's improvement requirements. Gibson asked Maxwell if he was saying that the development in the northwest corner was built according to direction from City engineers. Maxwell responded that the flared-in section at that point and requested cover over the pipe was under engineering request. Gibson asked if what is there, the grading that has been objected to, was done at the behest of City engineers. Maxwell said he was directed to place the flared-in section at the location that it is shown, which is the furthest east, red line in the upper northwest corner of the overhead map. He said that as one comes further and further away, in order to make that slope uniform in the four to one request of the steepness, which is what Engineering wanted, he carried that four to one slope uniformly all the way across the face of the slope so it could be landscaped. Maxwell said that when they got into the discussion of a retaining wall, he tried to fit a retaining wall into that concept, but it made no 'sense. Planning and Zoning Commission November 5, 1998 Page 13 Gibson asked Yapp if staff agreed with that characterization of what happened. Yapp said he agreed with most of the characterization. He said the latest grading associated with the storm water pipe outlet is as Maxwell has stated. Yapp said there was a retaining wall requested by the City and shown on the plan that was not installed. He said he believes the reason it was not installed was the belief that the creation of a more gradual slope was preferable to the installation of the retaining wall. Yapp said the retaining wall was requested to minimize the grading near the slopes protected by the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. Maxwell said that engineering-wise, it made absolutely no sense to put a retaining wall there. He said that as a result of putting a retaining wall there that had some sense of a sheer drop-off, any semi-tractor that comes in and misses that curve and slides over on a rainy or icy day would come to a sheer drop-off or retaining wall over the embankment. Maxwell added that the only issue was a very slight corner of a very long, narrow critical slope that was the path of the cattle. He said the erosion in that slope was the perimeter of the pond where the cattle walked, and that was what started the erosion. Chait asked, if most of the northwest area was done the way it was to comply with putting the stormwater pipe in the way the City wanted, would it not be more accurate to reduce the area shaded in red by about 80%. Yapp said he shaded in the areas to show the grading, both proposed and completed. Chair said that in reality the only area not in compliance with what the City wanted, the retaining wall, was maybe 20% of what is shaded. Yapp said that was correct, and he had tried to make that clear in one of the staff reports. Gibson asked why the Commission was discussing this area if installing a retaining wall at this point would be completely impractical. Holecek said the approval of this would legitimize that which is already done in the field that is not consistent with a prior plan. Bovbjerg said the issue is irrelevant because the work has already been done and is better left alone. Holecek said the real issue is the easternmost slope. Maxwell said he takes direction from the engineering staff every day. He said the little bit of erosion that has occurred has happened since he was told by the planning staff not to touch the issue any further until this issue is clarified. Maxwell said the silt that has occurred will be dredged out according to City specifications, and he would do that in any case. Maxwell said the issue at hand is the damaged trees on the established Lot 8 in the area that contains the least sensitive of the slopes on the entire site. He said he has planted 30 twelve- foot tall evergreen trees and six-inch caliper trees out there and has every intention of continuing the same pattern. He said it would be a reasonable request to clean up the trees, but he has been told not to touch them. Kugler said the Sensitive Areas Ordinance allows woodland management activities as an exception to the ordinance. He said there is nothing that would restrict Maxwell from cleaning up the area, but what is restricted are grading activities within those sloped areas without approval. Gibson said the issue is not removal of the trees but is whether Maxwell should be allowed to grade in that area. Maxwell said that what he is saying is that since the trees are damaged, they cannot be a legitimate excuse for not grading. He said if there is another reason for not grading then he wanted to know what it would be. Gibson responded that there are a lot of reasons why this is a sensitive area. He said the Sensitive Areas Ordinance would not just protect the trees here but would also protect the slopes. Maxwell said the Sensitive Areas Ordinance does allow grading here, and Yapp replied that it allows grading with the approval of City Council. Maxwell said he wants to make Lot 8 more developable to allow the parking lot to be large enough to handle the truck traffic he Planning and Zoning Commission November 5. ! 998 Page t 4 anticipates having use the building that is compatible with the current building that is already there. He said that if aesthetics are a concern and he would be getting rid of damaged trees and replacing them with desirable trees, he did not see what the justification would be for denying this. Gibson said there is a Sensitive Areas Ordinance in this community in order to protect those sensitive areas. He stated that trying to square up this lot or increase its developability is not a rational reason for the Commission to authorize Maxwell to go in there and grade the ravine. Gibson said this did not really have anything to do with the trees, as far as he is concerned. He said the Commission needs to follow and apply the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. Gibson said that someone wanting to expand his lot 60 feet is not a reason for the Commission to violate that. Maxwell asked what the reason would then be for denial since grading is allowed in that type of slope. Yapp said that grading in a critical slope, a slope over 25%, requires approval of a sensitive areas rezoning, which is what this application is for. He confirmed that staff has recommended that the Commission not approve this request for the easternmost slope. Bovbjerg said the Commission and the City have had bad experiences with alterations of what were very sensitive slopes, whether under this ordinance or previous to it. She said she is very wary of disturbing any sleeping giant on this site, whether it is pleasing to the eye or visible or not. Bovbjerg said she feels that every tree is holding the soil and every plant is a useful plant. She said she had a problem with going in and regrading, making something unstable which is stable, even though it could be engineered. Maxwell said, if the intent is to improve the aesthetics of the area in a maintenance-free, erosion-protected area with landscaping, then it seems odd that he is prevented from bringing another revenue-producing property into the City in an area in which there are no neighbors other than cattle. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Shannon moved to approve REZ98-0014, an application submitted by Maxwell Development Company to rezone a 21.26-acre parcel, Lot 8 and Outlot A, WB Development, and Lot 1, Resubdivision of Outlot A WB Development, from Intensive Commercial (C1-1) to Sensitive Areas Overlay (OSA-CI-1) for property located on the east side of Naples Avenue, south of its intersection with Alyssa Court. Bovbjerg seconded the motion. AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to amend the motion to include the condition, "subject to the grading of the east side being excluded from the plan". Shannon seconded the amendment. Chait asked if, in the area the amendment would exclude, there was information presented by engineering and forestry that that area could be filled and erosion control methods could be applied that would work and be acceptable to the people reviewing it. Yapp said that was true as far as stability of the slope was concerned. Chait said he would vote against this motion because he is against excluding the eastern piece of land. He stated that he finds Maxwell's argument compelling in terms of what he has done and what he intends to do to improve the property. Chait said he likes what Maxwell has done and finds it to be an improvement. He said that what Maxwell is proposing is reasonable. Planning and Zoning Commission November 5, 1998 Page 15 Shannon said he agrees with Chair. Shannon said Maxwell has a plan and he did not see why he cannot carry through with the use of his own property. Shannon said he did not feel Maxwell should be nit-picked like this if he is going to do the right thing, which Shannon believes he would do. Gibson said he is troubled by the idea that the Sensitive Areas Ordinance would be thrown out in making this decision. He said he didn't know what the ordinance was for if the Commission is going to allow Maxwell to just fill in the ravine so he can expand his lot and is going to disregard the Sensitive Areas Ordinance because the plan looks good. Shannon said the applicant made the statement that he can fill in the area safely. Gibson said that whole issue is spurious. He said it had to do with erosion of existing slopes, and filling will not contribute to the erosion of existing slopes, although there may be some erosion from the new fill put in there. Chair said the Sensitive Areas Ordinance allows for grading subject to Commission approval, so approval does not mean the ordinance is being thrown out. Gibson said he agreed and added that it is almost impossible for the Commission to deal with this issue, given the level that the argument has moved to. He said the Commission should visit the property to see what has been done and not make a judgment based on an overhead map with markings on it. Gibson said it sounds like Maxwell is trying to do the right thing, and if so, the Commission should probably try to accommodate him if he is being consistent with the ordinance. He said the Commission really needs to see the property because the process is not working for this item. Supple said the reason the process is not working is because this is a fairly technical issue. She said the engineers should be making decisions like this. Gibson said that is the reason he is inclined to approve what staff recommends unless there is some evidence to the contrary. Chait asked what the proposed slope is for this area. Yapp replied that it is about a four to one slope. Maxwell said it is much flatter than that and is more like seven to one. He said the embankment grading in that area would be graded to no steeper than six to one. Bovbjerg said the reason for the Sensitive Areas Ordinance and the reason for the Commission's existence is to do the right thing for the land. She said someone has to speak for the land, as the Supreme Court has ruled, and those kinds of things are behind land use ordinances. Bovbjerg said that the land as it is is the best way to leave almost any land. She said the slope that was done relative to the storm sewer sounds like a good alteration but felt the one on the east side should not be disturbed aside from tree cleanup. Bovbjerg said, regarding the center area, that she feels that less should be done than is suggested. She said that she would go along with the motion as proposed but would prefer that the center ravine not be downgraded as far as it is. Bovbjerg said that while expanding one's developable property is a concern, it should not take priority over the stability of land. (Gibson left the meeting at 9:45.) Ehrhardt said she would vote against the motion, because she is opposed to grading either the center or the east area. She said that as an alternative, she could support appreving the grading already done on the northwest site. Chait asked Maxwell, given the alternatives of approving this without the eastern site or having it denied, if it mattered to him. Maxwell said it does matter to him, as it would matter to anyone if the choice were 70% of what they were asking for or nothing. He said that he would like to have Commission members visit the site to become more informed. Maxwell said that Planning and Zoning Commission November 5, 1998 Page 16 everyone is concerned about erosion. He said that yet this year he should seal up with at least winter wheat or rye, because if he waits much longer, he won't be able to get down to the site. Shannon withdrew the motion, and Bovbjerg withdrew her second to the motion. They both said they would like more information and would like to visit the site. Holecek said that to have everyone present at the site visit would require a public meeting. She said that two people at a time could visit the site without holding a public meeting. Supple asked Maxwell if he would be willing to waive the limitation period for two more weeks. Maxwell said that would be acceptable, but he was concerned about potential erosion on the two sites. He said the deferral would follow along with his directive to not disturb those areas and to not proceed to try to prevent exactly what the Commission is concerned about to begin with. Maxwell said he would like to install at least silt fencing. Yapp said he did not think it would be a problem for Maxwell to seed the area but would find out and call Maxwell. Kugler stated that this will have to go through the City Council for approval, and it would be January at the earliest before this rezoning is resolved. Yapp said it would be acceptable to add silt fences and either seeding or straw. Holecek said that would not be development activity under the Sensitive Areas Ordinance, and the City could not prevent Maxwell from doing that much. Shannon said he did not want to disregard the Sensitive Areas Ordinance that is in place at all but said he has seen a lot of areas that were unstable that were made stable by a Caterpillar. He said the Commission should do the best thing and thought the Commission should take a look at the site. Supple said she would prefer to vote instead of defer. She said she would prefer to have a motion to state that the engineering staff should make these decisions because this is technical and beyond her area of expertise. Supple said she did not feel she would know more whether she examined the area or not but said she would attend the meeting to visit the site and would vote for deferral since that seemed to be the consensus. The motion to defer carried on a vote of 5-0. The consensus was to visit the site as a group to allow Commission members to hear each other's questions and comments. DEVELOPMENT ITEM: SUB98-0026. Public discussion of an application submitted by Dav-Ed Limited for a final plat of Galway Hills Subdivision, Part Five, a 13.63 acre, 8-lot residential subdivision located on the south side of Melrose Avenue and west of West High School. (45-day limitation period expires November 29) Kugler said the deficiencies have been addressed, and staff is recommending approval of this item subject to the approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to City Council consideration of the plat. Public discussion: There was none. Planning and Zoning Commission November 5, 1998 Page 17 Public discussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to approve SUB98-0026, a final plat of Galway Hills Subdivision, Part Five, a 13.63 acre, 8-lot residential subdivision located on the south side of Melrose Avenue and west of West High School subject to the approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to City Council consideration of the plat. Ehrhardt seconded the motion. The motion carried on a motion of 5-0. SUB98-0020. Public discussion of an application submitted by Howard Winebrenner for a preliminary and final plat of a resubdivision of Lots 3, 4, 5, and 6 of W. B. Development, an 8.33 acre, 8-lot, commercial subdivision located on the south side of Escort Lane. (45-day limitation period waived to November 5) Kugler said staff received revised plans, but they are still being reviewed. He stated that the applicant has submitted a letter requesting deferral of this to the next meeting. Public discussion: There was none. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to defer SUB98-0020, an application submitted by Howard Winebrenner for a preliminary and final plat of a resubdivision of Lots 3, 4, 5, and 6 of W. B. Development, an 8.33 acre, 8-lot, commercial subdivision located on the south side of Escort Lane. Chait seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. VACATION ITEM: VAC98-0006. Public discussion of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City to vacate street right-of-way located east of North Market Square Park, and south of Horace Mann School. Yapp said staff recommends approval of this vacation subject to the old Johnson Street right-of- way remaining open to public recreational use and not being fenced off or otherwise separated from Market Square Park, the alley right-of-way remaining open to fire and emergency vehicle access, and to the retention of all necessary utility easements. Ehrhardt asked what the process the school would have to go through if it wanted to sell the property. Holecek said it would be similar to a disposition, as the school is also a public entity and would have to go through a hearing through the school board. Chait said the fact that the property is open and not fenced would stay with the property and whoever bought the property would be subject to those conditions. Ehrhardt said the school could not build on the property then, and Holecek confirmed this. Shannon asked why the City doesn't keep the property and remove it from the right-of-way, making it part of the park. Yapp said the school district put some playground equipment on part of the old Johnson Street right-of-way last spring with the consent of the Parks and Recreation Commission. He said that Horace Mann School uses and maintains that property, and the Planning and Zoning Commission November 5.1998 Page 18 school district asked the City to pursue the vacation and to turn the property over to the school district. Holecek said the City is basically transferring liability with this vacation and disposition. Public discussion: There was RORe. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Ehrhardt moved to approve VAC98-0006, an application submitted by the City of Iowa City to vacate street right-of-way located east of North Market Square Park, and south of Horace Mann School subject to the old Johnson Street right-of-way remaining open to public recreational use and not being fenced off or otherwise separated from Market Square Park, the alley right-of-way remaining open to fire and emergency vehicle access, and to the retention of all necessary utility easements. Bovbjerg seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. CODE AMFNDMFNT ITEM. Public discussion of an amendment of Zoning Chapter subsection 14-61-1A, Provisional uses of the zoning code to permit accessory apartments in accessory buildings and to remove the requirement that occupancy is limited to an eider or person with disabilities. Kugler asked the Commission to defer this item indefinitely. Public discussion: There was none. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to defer public discussion of an amendment of Zoning Chapter subsection 14-61-1A, Provisional uses of the zoning code to permit accessory apartments in accessory buildings and to remove the requirement that occupancy is limited to an eider or person with disabilities, indefinitely. Chait seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. CONSIDERATION OF THE OCTOBFR 15. 1998 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES: MOTION: Chait moved to approve the minutes of the October 15, 1998 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, as written. Shannon seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. PLANNING AND 7ONING COMMISSION INFORMATION: Kugler said there would be a presentation by Steven Apfelbaum, ecologist with the Ecological Society of America, at 7:00 on the evening of the date of the Commission's next informal meeting as well as a more informal afternoon meeting. The consensus of the Commission was MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION TUESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1998 MEMBERS PRESENT Bebe Ballantyne, Joanne Hora, Terd Miller, Allan Monsanto, Kenneth Mobily, Larry Pugh, Deborah Schoenfelder, M. Kathryn Wallace, and Philip Zell MEMBERS ABSENT None STAFF PRESENT Linda Kopping, Julie Seal, and Michelle Buhman GUESTS PRESENT Ruth Bell, Lee McGovem, Jackie Hess, Jim Aliaire CALL TO ORDER Wallace called the meeting to order at 3:00. MINUTES Motion: To approve September minutes as distributed. The motion carded on a vote of 9-0. BallantynelMonsanto. PUBLIC DISCUSSION None. SENIOR CENTER UPDATE Operations - Kopping The Senior Center budget deadline is noon October 21. Kopping will review the budget with the finance committee immediately following this meeting and make any necessary changes. The budget will be reviewed with the entire Commission at the November meeting. City manager, Steve Atkins, ordered a city-wide departmental review. Kopping, Seal, RogUsky and Buhman met on several occasions to identify major issues to be addressed over the next three years. Action steps were identified and tentative dates set. Overall the presentation went well and the process was a positive experience for the staff. The need for a second haft-time receptionist was stressed several times in the review. Since Kopping met with Joe Bolkom, Jonathan Jordahl, Patdck White, and Steve Atkins numerous options for providing additional space for the Senior Dining program are being explored. Jean Mann, Director of Eldedy Services Agency indicated her staff is very crowded and would like more space as well. Parking statistics were distributed and reviewed. Staff will continue compiling parking information and Kopping will review it with Joe Fowler, Director of Parking and Transit. The goal is to request adequate, but not excessive parking for the Center dudng and MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION TUESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1998 after construction of the Iowa Avenue parking facility. Joe Fowler will be at the November Commission meeting to review and discuss parking options. Pro.qrams - Seal Events occurring in November were reviewed. Volunteers - Rogusky Not available. COUNCIL OF ELDERS -Aliaire, Bell A report from 'the Council of Elders was given. COMMISSION VISITS City Council- Ballantyne A report from the City Council meeting was given. Board of Supervisors - Zell A report of the Board of Supervisors meeting was given. COMMISSION DISCUSSION Commissioners discussed recruiting individuals to fill upcoming vacancies on the Senior Center Commission. City Council appointments, Zell and Mobily indicated they do not plan on reapplying. Johnson County appointment, Joanne Hora indicated she has reapplied for the Commission. Motion: To adjourn. Motion was carded on a vote of 9-0. ZelllMonsanto. The meeting was adjoumed at 4:30. 2