Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-01-12 Public hearingNOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, at 7:00 p.m. on the 12th day of January, 1999, in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa; at whi earing the Council will consider: ~et aAn ordinance designation 2 South Linn s an Iowa City Historic Landmark. 2. An ordinance changing the zoning designation of approximately 0.2 acres located at 703 Benton Court from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) to High Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-44). (REZ98-O015) 3. An ordinance changing the zoning designation of 21.26 acres located on the east side of Naples Avenue from Intensive Commercial (C1-1) to Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone-Intensive Commercial (OSAoCI-1). Copies of the proposed resolution are on file for public examination in the office of the City Clerk, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to make their views known for Council consideration are encouraged to appear at the above-mentioned time and place. MARlAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK ppdadmin/nph-0112.doc 01-12-99 6b Prepared by: Scott Kugler, Associate Planner 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5243 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2 S. LINN STREET, COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE HARMON BUILDING, AS AN IOWA CITY HISTORIC LANDMARK. WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has reviewed and evaluated the significance of the property located at 2 S. Linn Street, commonly known as the Harmon Building, and has determined that it meets the requirements for designation as an Iowa City Historic Landmark; and WHEREAS, at its public hearing on November 12, 1998, the Historic Preservation Commission nominated the subject property for designation as an Iowa City Historic Landmark; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of December 17, 1998, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial of the proposed landmark nomination; and WHEREAS, the State Historical Society of Iowa has reviewed said nomination and concurs with the assessment of the Historic Preservation Commission that the subject property meets the criteria for designation as a historic landmark; and WHEREAS, the designation of the subject property would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's Historic Preservation Plan, which has been incorporated as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: SECTION I. The following described property is hereby designated as an Iowa City Historic Landmark pursuant to Title 14, Chapter 4, Land Control and Development, Article C, Historic Preservation Regulations: Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 4, Block 61, Original Town Plat, Iowa City, Iowa; thenco along the north line of said Lot 4 a distance of 80 feet to the northeast comer of Lot 4, thence south along the east line of said Lot 4 a distance of 67.35 feet, Ordinance No. Page 2 thence westerly to a point intersecting the west line of said Lot 4; thence north along the west line of said Lot 4 a distance of 67.48 feet to the Point of Beginning. SECTION II. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION III. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconsti- tutional. SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordi- nance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this day of ,1999. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK Ci:r°v m~y's~~ IOWA CITY HISTORIC LANDMARK NOMINATION FORM Property Address: 2-6 S. Linn Street Historic/Common Name: Harmon Buildinq Property Owner: Richard W. Pattschu11 Address: 315 Fairview Ave. Iowa City. rA 52245 Phone: H ( 319 ) W (31g) 33R-g175 Date of Preparation: 10/5/1998 Prepared by: Richard Carlson Address: 309 Finkbine Lane #10 Iowa City, IA 52246 Phone: H (319) 354-6489 W [t19 ) 384-0727 Date of Construction: 1922 (Attach documentation or list source) Odginal use of building/object/site: Funeral home Current use of building/object/site: Family planning c1 inic/apartmPnt~ Legal description of property: Iowa City Original Town Plat, Block 61, I nt 4, Patrol "A" BUILDING INFORMATION: following: Building Height: 2 Materials: Foundation Builder (if known): j. Architect (if known): Unknown If the proposed landmark is a building or structure, please answer the stories Concrete Walls Brick Roof H. Hunzinger & Co. Significant alterations or additions (explanation & date): Exterior: two automotive doors sealed; small side porch added. Interior: first story remodeled conlp]ete]y, less signifirant changP~ tn nriOinal plan an~ materials on the second story. All chanqes ca. 1950-1990. (over) 10/95 Required attachments: l) 2) 3) 4) A narrative providing information indicating the proposed landmark meets one or more of the following cdteda: A. The landmark is significant to Amedcan history, architecture, archaeology and culture or Iowa City history, architecture, archaeology and culture; or B. The landmark possesses integrity of location, design, setting, materials and workership; or C. The landmark is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or D. The landmark is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or E. The landmark embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, pedod, method of construction; represents the work of a master, possesses high artistic values; represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or F. The landmark has yielded or may be likely to yield information important in prehistory or history. Photographs showing all elevations of the building/object/site, and of any ornamental or structural details of historical importance. Plat map indicating the location of the proposed landmark. Any additional information that may help to justify the histodc importance of the nominated property. Please submit this completed form and all required attachments to the IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVA- TION COMMISSION, CIVIC CENTER, 410 E. WASHINGTON STREET, IOWA CITY, IA 52240. Iowa City Historic Landmark Nomination Harmon Building, 2-6 S. Linn Street Attachment 1 Narrative Description The Harmon Building, a two-story commercial building, was built in 1922 as a mortuary. It is an excellent example of 1920s commercial architecture in Iowa City, and displays many distinctive features of that style, including a multicolored pressed brick exterior, patterned brickwork, tile inlays, crenelated parapet wall with stone coping, and a recessed entrance with a mosaic tile floor. The building rests on a concrete foundation. It has exterior walls of pressed brick and a flat roof. The interior is divided into commercial space on the first story, and a combination of retail space and residential apartments on the second story. A notable interior feature is the beamed ceiling in the large northwest comer room on the second story. The building is rectangular in plan, and stands at a prominent comer location in downtown Iowa City. It fronts west onto Linn Street, permitting its principal facade to be viewed as it is approached from the center of town along either Iowa Avenue or Linn Street. The property is in excellent condition, and has had very little alteration above the first story since its construction. The two most prominent facades, the west and north facades, have received the most architectural elaboration. Both facades are divided into three broad bays by a row of four brick pilasters, and both are capped by crenelated parapet walls with limestone coping. Both facades display green tile inlays in the upper sections of the pilasters and in the principal wall plane near the second story windows. Finally, both facades feature a projecting water table formed by staggered brickwork. With the exception of a less ornate water table on the south facade, none of these features is found on the other two facades. Decorative features used on all facades of the building include multicolored pressed brick, limestone window sills on the second story, and a mixture of 6/I-light and 8/I-light sash. The fenestration pattern on the front facade is highly symmetrical. Where it is not perfectly symmetrical, it is balanced. A recessed panel in the brick facade was created in the first story of the north bay to balance an entry door located in the corresponding position in the south bay. The other public facade, which faces north onto Iowa Avenue, is symmetrical only above the first story. On the first story, the windows in the west bay are not mirrored in the east bay, which instead is filled by a modern wood panel containing a door and a window. This panel is described in more detail in the next paragraph. The fenestration on the other two facades is less symmetrically arranged, although the fenestration generally conforms to the three-bay pattem evident on the two principal facades. The least symmetrical facade is the south facade, which is also the least visible to the public. The second story of this facade contains single, paired, or tripled windows spread almost randomly across the facade, in a pattern that corresponds to the internal division of rooms. All the windows on the second story, and many of those on the first, are original. Some first story windows on the south and east facades are covered by exterior panels, so the presence or absence of historic sash in these locations could not be determined. The presence of several original first story windows on the north facade, however, suggests that the windows on the south and east facades are merely covered, not replaced. The windows on the second story are typically paired 8/1 or 6/1 weighted sash, although rows of three or four windows and multi-light casement windows can also be found. On the first story, the two cottage-style windows on the front facade appear to be replacements, while the exposed windows on the north and south facades are 6/1-light or 8/I-light weighted sash as on the second story. The replacement windows are of the same dimensions as the historic windows they replaced, and therefore do not alter the overall fenestration pattern. The only section in which the historic fenestration pattern has been altered significantly is in the first story of the east bay on the north facade. This section displays modern wood paneling and a modern window, and was evidently designed as an entrance to a retail store in the mid-twentieth century. The small side porch on this facade was probably constructed at about the same time. Although the original appearance of the paneled section is not known, it Iowa City Historic Landmark Nomination Harmon Building, 2-6 S. Linn Street Attachment 1 2 corresponds in size and location to a former automobile entrance located on the opposite (south) side of the building. This suggests that the paneled section on the north facade may also have replaced a large opening, perhaps another automobile entrance or a display window. The paneled section is limited to the east bay of the north facade, and does not extend above the first stoW. The building has four entry doors. The principal entrance is centered in the west facade. The mosaic tile floor in the recessed front entrance employs green and white ceramic tiles. The tile design is composed of a central field of hexagonal tiles, surrounded by a rectangular border featuring a Greek key motif. Entrances to the second stow apartments are located in the south bay of the west facade, and in the east bay of the north facade. Although the three entry doors are modem replacements, they occupy the original openings in the brick wall, and have not significantly altered the fenestration pattem on the first stoW. A fourth entrance is located in the east bay of the south facade, and is set into a plywood panel that covers a former automobile entrance. The face brick used on the building is pressed brick with a decorative exterior face. The bricks are primarily a standard orange color, but their exterior faces have been coated with a material before firing to produce various shades of red, orange, brown, green, and blue. In addition, the exterior faces display decorative vertical striations, created by drawing a wire comb across the bricks before firing. The bricks are laid in nmning bond throughout the building, except in limited areas where decorative patterned brickwork is employed. The most notable use of patterned brickwork is in the projecting water table on the noah and west facades. This water table is formed by three rows ofbricks--a soldier course beneath two rowlock courses--that are staggered to produce a stepped effect as they project from the facade. The water table consists of a single soldier course on the south facade, and is absent on the east facade. Less ornate patterned brickwork is employed on the second stoW between the green tile inlays. The lintels above the second stow windows are formed by a soldier course of bricks extending between two tile blocks. Stacked bricks extend part way down the sides of each second stow window to another tile block. The overall effect may be intended to recall, in a stylized fashion, the angularity of Gothic hood moldings. Other decorative features found only on the front (west) facade, both centered directly above the main entrance, are a limestone block that displays the name "HARMON," and a decorative gable peak in the parapet crenelation. On the interior, most sections of the first stow were not accessible for survey. Based on the areas that could be viewed from the lobby, it is likely that little remains of the original floor plan and materials on the first stoW. It is possible that the only original interior feature remaining on this stow is the oak newel post at the bottom of the south staircase. The second stow retains a much higher degree of period integrity. It is divided into a retail unit in the northwest comer and residential apartments elsewhere. The west end of the building, which contains the retail unit and Apartments 6 and 7, has undergone the fewest changes. Original doors and hardware are still present in this section. These include single-panel doors and metal doorknobs on the apartments, and, on the retail unit, double-leaf glazed doors with a rectilinear muntin configuration characteristic of the Prairie style. The retail unit also features a decorative beamed ceiling. In the center and east sections of the second stoW, the apartment doors have been replaced, although in most cases the doorways retain their original moldings. The hallway in the center section has been realigned, probably to accommodate changes to the room configuration, but the original floor plan appears to be retained at the east and west ends of the hallway. At the east end, paired casement windows open from Apartments 1 and 2 into the hallway. One of these windows retains its original latch. Larger sash windows open from Apartments 1 and 5 into the noah stairwell. Original wood baseboards with beveled caps remain in many sections of the second stow hall, particularly at the east Iowa City Historic Landmark Nomination Harmon Building, 2-6 S. Linn Street Attachment 1 and west ends of the building. Some original baseboards also survive in the two stairwells. Elsewhere the baseboard has been replaced by a simple rectangular board, or is absent altogether. The integrity of design and materials of this building from its period of significance is high, particularly on the exterior above the first story. Changes to the exterior that have been noted include the replacement of the doors and some windows, and the addition of a mid-twentieth century porch at the east end of the north facade. Changes to the interior include the complete remodeling of the first story, a recon~guration of the center section of the second story, and the replacement of some interior doors. In addition, the exterior bricks have been replaced in two small sections of the east and south facades, the two facades least visible to the public. The replacement brick is multicolored, wire-combed brick that, while not identical in color and fmish to the original brick, is both unobtrusive and an unusually sympathetic alteration. None of these changes detracts significantly from the exterior appearance of the building. History The Harmon Building was built in 1922 as a mortuary for funeral director and County Coroner Arthur C. Harmon. Before moving to Iowa City, Harmon was engaged in the furniture business, and was a funeral director for many years in Audubon, Iowa. In 1920, after he had moved to Iowa City, he was elected Johnson County Coroner, a position he held at the time the present Harmon Building was erected (Iowa City Press-Citizen [hereafter ICPC], Oct. 30, 1922, p. 2). He was defeated in his bid for re- election in 1922 by Democratic rival J. H. Donohue (ICPC, Nov. 9, 1922, p. 10). Donohue, who had been the County Coroner prior to Harmon in 1919 and 1920, also worked in the furniture business and as a funeral director. He was the proprietor of the Hohenschuh Mortuary, located nearly opposite the Harmon Building at 13 S. Linn Street, the present Linn Street Square building (ICPC, Oct. 30, 1922, p. 2). Before the Harmon Building was constructed, Harmon's mortuary was located at 112 E. College Street, near the comer of Clinton Street (1920 Iowa City city directory). In February 1922, a fire that is believed to have started in the basement furnace room of Harmon's mortuary severely damaged Harmon's building and several neighboring buildings (ICPC, Feb. 15, 1922, p. 1). A month after the fire, Harmon purchased the site of the present Harmon Building on the southeast comer of Iowa Avenue and Linn Street (ICPC, Mar. 28, 1922, p. 14). At the time, Linn Street marked the eastern limit of downtown commercial development. Harmon removed his mortuary to this location just four years after another mortuary--the Hohenschuh Mortuary at 13 S. Linn Street--was established in the area (for Hohenschuh's date of establishment, see the Donohue Mortuary ad in the 1978 Iowa City city directory). The concentration of mortuaries in this area may have been influenced by their proximity to the university hospital, now Seashore Hall, located opposite Harmon's mortuary on the north side of Iowa Avenue. Approximately half of the funds required for Harmon's new $42,000 mortuary were raised by a $22,000 bond issue, purchased largely by local banks and other business leaders (ICPC, May 27, 1922, p. 14). No architect is known to be associated with the design of the Harmon Building, which was built by J. H. Hunzinger & Co., general building contractors (ICPC, Dec. 30, 1922, p. 12). The building was constructed during the summer and fall of 1922 (ICPC, June 8, 1922, p. 2; July 17, 1922, p. 2; Oct. 30, 1922, p. 2). Harmon took possession on Oct. 31, 1922, before the building had been completed, because he had to vacate his temporary premises (ICPC, Oct. 31, 1922, p. 2). Although the Press-Citizen often gave detailed descriptions of new commercial and institutional buildings in Iowa City, it gave no such description of Harmon's new building. It did, however, describe Iowa City Historic Landmark Nomination Harmon Building, 2-6 S. Lirm Street Attachment 1 the new mortuary briefly as a "splendid structure" (Oct. 30, 1922, p. 2), and as "an ideal location, and a beautiful building" [Nov. 1, 1922, p. 2). Harmon operated the funeral parlor in his new building for only a few years before he sold the business to Bert E. Oathout & Sons in the late 1920s. Although Harmon retired as a mortuary director, he evidently continued to own the building. During the 1930s he established the Harmon Apartments on the second floor of the building, perhaps as a way of earning extra income during the Depression (1928, 1932, and 1938 city directories). He apparently died or moved from Iowa City during the 1940s (1942 and 1949 city directories). Since the 1930s, the first stow has been rented to businesses, and the second stoW, with the exception of the room on the northwest comer, has been leased as apartments. City directories indicate that the northwest room housed the apartment rental office for much of the histoW of the building, and housed other businesses only in recent decades. A funeral parlor continued to operate at this address until the 1940s, after which various other businesses occupied the lower stoW. Although the building is no longer used as a funeral home, it retains its historic function as a combination of retail space and rental apartments (1938, 1949, 1959, 1968, 1978, 1988, and 1997 city directories). Statement of Significance The Harmon Building meets several of the criteria for listing as an Iowa City Historic Landmark. It is significant to Iowa City histoW and architecture as an exceptional example of 1920s commercial architecture. (Criterion A); it possesses integrity of location, design, setting, materials, and workmanship (Criterion B); and it embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type and period, specifically those of 1920s commercial architecture (Criterion E). Notable details that distinguish the Harmon Building as one of Iowa City's premier examples of 1920s commercial architecture include its multicolored pressed brick with decorative combing on the exterior face; patterned brickwork; green tile inlays; crenelated parapet; and mosaic tile floor in the front entrance. Unlike most other 1920s commercial buildings in Iowa City, the Harmon Building was constructed as a freestanding comer building that is meant to be viewed from all directions. As a result, it displays its. distinctive brick on all four facades, not just those that face the street. In this respect it differs from the only other known example of a detached 1920s commercial building in downtown Iowa City, the Iowa Apartments building at the southeast comer of Washington and Linn Streets. Built in 1924, the Iowa Apartments building displays decorative face brick on only two facades. Other examples of late 1910s and 1920s commercial architecture in Iowa City are limited to facades of commercial row buildings, the most notable of which is the present Field House bar and restaurant (111 E. College Street). Most of the existing 1920s commercial facades in Iowa City were added to older buildings, whose size and original fenestration patterns influenced the new facade designs. As a result, the "purest" examples of 1920s commercial architecture--the examples that best reflect the full range of design practices of the period--are buildings such as the Harmon Building that were newly constructed as an integrated whole. Furthermore, commercial storefronts from this period in downtown Iowa City typically do not exhibit as high a degree of period integrity or as great a sophisticatiOn~of design as are found on the Harmon Building. Many of the building's design elements,' including its green tile inlays, staggered brick water table, pilasters, and crenelated parapet, are unique in the city. The combinarion of a sophisticated, integrated design with a high degree of period integrity makes the Harmon Building an exceptional example of its type. 11/0211998 28:39 7154693388 SVENDSEN TYLER, INC. PAGE 02 SVENDSEN TYLER, INC. N~M, Dr~P I~ ROAI~ SARONA, ~#lSCONsrN 54870 715/469- 3500 Novetnb~r 2, 1998 Scott KuBier, Associate Planner City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 Dear Scott, I received the Iowa City Historic LamJmark Nomination Form for the Harmon Building, 2-6 South Linn Street. I have had an opportunity to reviver the information it contains including the application form itself; the building description, the summary of'alterations and int~-ity issues, the historical background of the property, the stalersent of significance prepared by the nominator, and the photographs. My comments regardin~ the completeness ofthe nomination, its ability to satisfy the criteria set forth in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Ordinance for designation as an individual landmark, and my overall opinion as to landmark eligibility follow. Nomination Completeness: The 10/5/98 application completed by Richard Carlson contains all ofthe elements one would normally expect to see in a nomination for an individual local landmark. The information is organized in a clear and concis~ manner and is well documonted. Photographic documentation appears adequate to evaluate int~rity issues. No floor plans were submitted (not a requirement of the application form) and no claims were made by the applicant that the imerior of the building is significant arohitecturally or historically. The only shortcoming of the nomination is the minimal reference made to the building' s downtown context. Though this is not a requirement of the application form, it would be useful information in determining the relative rarity of the building or its reprem~tative qualities. This, however, does not diminish the nomination's overall responsiveness to the application form' s questions. Ability to SatisJ~ Criteria: Mr. Carlson's nomination for the Harmon Building as a local landmark makes a case for significance under Criteria A, B and E. He asserts that it is an c~cdlent example of 1920s commercial architecture in Iowa City and that its integrity is high in terms of its location, design, setting materials and woficmanship. 11/82/1998 28:39 7154693388 SVENDSEN TYLER, INC. PAGE 83 From an architectural history perspective, the case made by Mr. Carlson for the individual signi~can~ of the Harmon Building is consistent with current national appraisals of 1920s commercial architeaure. The relative simplicity ofthe building' s overall form and design in 1922 made it a striking contrast when compared with the Classical Revival design of the Hohenschuh Mortuary aoross the street at 13 South Linn Street or the Boaux Arts style of the Post Offic.~ (1904) and Carnegie Library (1904) just to the south along Linn Strm. The contractor for the Harmon Building, J.H. Hunzinger and Company, was advertised as providing architcaural services when it first opened in 1918 so it is possible that tit= design for this building was done in-house. In any case, the sup~o execution of masonry work inoluding the crenellated parapet and mosaic tile detailing attest to its excellent constmaion. The surprisingly small number of exterior alterations lends further suppoa to the building's architectural significance. From a historical perspective, downtown Iowa City was undergoing a major expansion in the early decades of the 2~)m century. Its population grew from 7,987 in 1900 to 15,340 in 1930 with the most intense growth during the five years between 1920 and 1925 when population jumped by 4,000 persons or 36%. A series of fteestanding civic and private commercial buildings were erected at the east end of the downtown beginning shortly after the turn-of= the-century. They included the public library and post office as well as the Elks Building (190g) at Washington and Gilbert. When construction resumed after WW I, other free standing buildings included the apartment building and automobile showroom (ca. 1920) at Washington and Linn, the Masonic Temple (ca, 1920)just east elLinn Street on Washington, the Hohenschuh Mortuary, and the Harmon Building (1922). This building boom in the downtown paralleled growth on the University of Iowa campus were 33 new buildings were constructed between 1916 nnd 1934 during Walter Jessup's term as University president. Opinion Regarding Eligibility as a Local Landmark I believe that if a historical and architectural surly were completed of downtown Iowa City buildings today, the Harmon Building would be identified as architecturally significant. It would be seen as a well-preserved example of bay-front commercial building design which became popular throughout the United States during the years between WW I and WW II. The case for this significance is adequately supported by Mr. Carison's lo~a City Historic Landmark Nomination Form. Furthermore, the Harmon Building's construction is associated with a period of substantial local prosperity that was evidenced in growth of the Univenity of Iowa b~tween 1900 and 1934 and expansion ofthe downtown along and east of Linn Street after 1900. Let me know if you have any questions regardin8 my review of this nomination. Sinccrely, 'H -L II II II II~ /-/ II III II ,/ ,~/t~ ~r FAtApE (~;)ETA/L oF Tft{D :~1111't-1111111~' III · Ill · lIB I ~ , City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: November25,1998 To: Planning & Zoning Commission c~rj/j(p,~ From: Karin Franklin, Director, P~ Re: Proposed Historic Landmark Designation-Harmon Building You have before you a nomination for designation of the Harmon Building at 2 S. Linn Street as an Iowa City Historic Landmark. Based upon documentation provided by a private citizen and confirmation by a preservation consultant, the Historic Preservation Commission is forwarding this nomination to the Planning and Zoning Commission for recommendation to the City Council. The Planning and Zoning Commission may not act on this item until after receipt of comments on the item from the State Historical Society. We are bringing this item to you now due to some of the complexities of this nomination, which will be discussed below, and in hopes that the State will respond quickly and allow the Commission to act before the end of the year. Because this is procedurally a rezoning, the Commission is expected to take at least two meetings for consideration of this nomination. In advising the City Council on landmark designations, the Commission is directed to consider "... the relation of such . . landmark designation to the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, proposed public improvements and other plans for the renewal of the area involved" (Section 14-4C-6B & 14-6J-3C.2, Iowa City Zoning Ordinance). The designation of the Harmon Building is clearly consistent with the Comprehensive Plan which includes the Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan. The City's policy and practice through the support of historic preservation activities over the last 15 years has been to document and preserve the cultural heritage of the City. Designation of this building also does not conflict with the Zoning Ordinance in that the potential uses of this building are allowable in the CB-10 zone in which it is located. The point at which public debate arises over this designation is in the relationship of the designation and the consequences of designation to proposed public improvements and plans for renewal of this area. These plans and improvements call for demolition of the Harmon Building. The Harmon building is on the block which has been selected by the City Council for the site of a new parking facility and commercial space. This site was selected after much discussion of the need for parking in the downtown generally, the need for an additional parking garage, the appropriate location for such a facility, and the desirability of implementing the Iowa Avenue Streetscape project as part of an initiative to invest in the downtown to assure its continued viability. A general timeline of this discussion is reflected in the attached memorandum from Jeff Davidson to Scott Kugler. The direction the Council has taken is supported by the adopted "Downtown Iowa City Parking Study" and "The Downtown Strategy and Action Plan", and manifested in the "Iowa Avenue Streetscape Plan" and design plans for the Iowa Avenue multi- use parking facility. 2 The multi-use parking facility, as designed, requires removal of the Harmon Building, the Cottage, and Eastlawn. Designation of the Harmon Building as an Iowa City Historic Landmark would require Historic Preservation Commission review and approval of any exterior alteration to the property that requires a permit; this includes demolition. It does not seem reasonable to expect the Historic Preservation Commission would approve demolition of a building they recommended for historic landmark designation. Appeal of their action is to the City Council. The decision for the Commission, and ultimately the City Council, seems to sift down to weighing the merits of the Iowa Avenue Streetscape Project and the Multi-use Parking Garage against the merits of preserving the Harmon Building. The Historic Preservation Commission recommends designation of the Harmon Building as a landmark. Included in your packet is the information upon which they based their recommendation. The Preservation Commission in making its recommendation need not consider the issues outlined in the Code (above) which the Planning and Zoning Commission are directed to consider. Following is a brief description of the Iowa Avenue Streetscape Project and the Iowa Avenue multi-use parking garage, the rationale for each and the impact of preservation of the Harmon Building on each. The Iowa Avenue Streetscape project is intended to enhance the Dubuque Street/Iowa Avenue approach to the downtown and to the University campus. It is part of the Downtown Strategy to make downtown Iowa City more attractive and inviting. The project encompasses Iowa Avenue between Clinton and Gilbert streets and consists of removing the parking in the center of Iowa Avenue (a loss of approximately 175 spaces), widening the sidewalks, retaining angle parking on both sides of the street, and enhancing the appearance of the corridor with trees, street furniture, public art, and decorative pavers throughout the three block area. Sidewalk cares will be encouraged as well as occasional closure of the Clinton/Dubuque block for festivals and other activities. Due to concerns about the real and perceived availability of parking in the downtown, the City Council linked the Iowa Avenue parking garage with this project to ensure that the parking removed from Iowa Avenue would be replaced and additional parking would be provided. The University of Iowa has indicated their willingness to make a financial commitment to the streetscape project because of its importance to the appearance and presentation of the University campus. As noted the Iowa Avenue multi-use parking garage is responsive to the needs for parking in the downtown and the anticipated loss of parking with the streetscape project. Approximately 600 spaces are planned for this facility. The Council's decision to build a parking garage at this location came only after trying repeatedly to acquire land from St. Patrick's Church to build a facility in the Near South Side and after having limited success in negotiating a development plan for Block 102 just south of Burlington Street. The desire to provide more parking for the downtown coupled with the activity on Iowa Avenue argued for action where it was feasible and relatively immediate. Property on the north side of Iowa Avenue at the corner of Gilbert Street was pursued, but rejected as an option after discussions with the University. In designing the Iowa Avenue facility considerable effort was put into designing a building that would accommodate the needs of current users of the half block housing the Cottage, the Harmon building and the parking for Ecumenical Towers; would provide convenient and accessible parking for the general public; and would result in a building that added to the urban building fabric of the downtown. Care was taken in designing a fac.,ade that would interface with pedestrians on the street by providing commercial activity at the street level on Linn, Iowa and Gilbert streets. Elevations of the building will be presented at your Monday work session. 3 The question arises of why not save the Harmon Building and build the parking garage around it; or build on the remainder of the half block, leaving the Harmon Building and the Cottage in place? Due to the circulation needs of a parking facility, it is impossible to build around the Harmon Building, leaving it in a notch of the parking garage. Building over it is not a solution either since it results in an awkward design requiring some kind of structural supports on Linn Street for the new building. The other option of building on the remainder of the block without the Cottage and Harmon properties is possible, but results in a less desirable parking circulation system much like the Capitol Street ramp, a building which is five stories tall rather than three, no commercial activity at street level on Iowa Avenue, a design which is not in scale with downtown, or a garage with many fewer spaces. In order to entertain this option, redesign of the facility would be necessary delaying the parking garage project by at least one year, delaying the Iowa Avenue project to an indeterminate time, and exposing the City to damages from property ownere currently involved in negotiations for property acquisition. Clearly, the designation of the Harmon Building as an Iowa City Historic Landmark and the consequent likelihood of a prohibition of its demolition impedes proposed public improvements for this site which have been the subject of planning and design for nearly a year, and inhibits renewal efforts for this area. The designation would add to the expense of the parking garage project through abandonment of existing plans, redesign costs and possible damages. However, the designation need not stop these plans. Recommendation: Based on the impact designation of the Harmon Building as an Iowa City Historic Landmark would have on the plans in place for the Iowa Avenue Streetscape and the multi-use parking garage, I recommend that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend denial of the landmark designation. In coming to this conclusion, I have tried to balance the benefit that will accrue to the downtown and the community with the preservation of the Harmon Building versus the benefit that will be derived from the enhancement of Iowa Avenue and the construction of the building designed by Neumann Monson that will contain parking and commercial spaces. In 'my judgement the benefits derived from the downtown enhancement efforts outweigh the benefits derived from saving the building. If the Harmon Building is not preserved, I recommend that the City Council allocate funds for appropriate documentation of the structure prior to demolition. cc: Historic Preservation Commission City Manager ppddi^memos~harmnbld,doc City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Re: November 25, 1998 Scott Kugler, Associate Planner Jeff Davidson, Asst. Director, Dept. of Planning & Community Development Iowa Avenue Multi-Use Parking Facility In anticipation of the possibility that a request may be received to designate the Harman Building an Iowa City Historic Landmark, you asked me for a chronology of events regarding the Iowa Avenue Multi-Use Parking Facility. 1. January 1997: completion of Downtown Parking Study by City staff, establishing the need for the City to construct an additional downtown parking facility. 2. Summer - Fall 1997: discussion of potential site in the Near Southside neighborhood (St. Pat's parking lot). 3. Fall- Winter 1997: discussion of alternative sites, ultimately coming down to four: St. Pat's, Block 102, south side Iowa Avenue, and north side Iowa Avenue. 4. Early Spring - 1998: decision on preferred site: south side Iowa Avenue. Iowa Avenue Streetscape Project an important factor. 5. Spring - Summer 1998: preliminary design activities, public input process. 6. Late Summer 1998: approval of design concept by City Council, begin property acquisition. 7. Fall 1998: approval of Phase II design contract for preparation of construction drawings. 8. Spring 1999: estimated letting date/begin construction. Prior to the City Council's vote on the Phase II design contract, the Mayor stated a positive vote should be seen as the City Council's intention to build the project. The subsequent vote was 6-1 in favor of the project. Let me know if you have any questions. CC: Karin Franklin Bob Miklo Joe Fowler Eleanor Dilkes jccogadm\mem\harman.doc DEC-83-1998 13: 14 CP BUREAU 1515Z~8285~ P. ~ T~e H~t~t~l D~a~mt ~f t~t l)tt~r~t ~f Cglmnd STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF IOWA Where past meets fittun Ame~n Go~k Hot~e Eldon BI~J Kun NHL lan:l~wood Ctqllcm~ial Bildjng Inw= C]~ MatdKw F.A'IcI': Blacksmith Shop Marshalltown. Ahhlc Gardner Cabin Arntdth Park l~wn Hismricil Building Des Moines Montauk Gov~,lor's Home Union Sundai School Clerlnon[ MuSeum Clcrmnnr Plum Grove Ggvernor's Home Iowa C. irlt Too~bom Indian Tnntesboro WcstTtn Higori¢ Trails Center Cuunci] Rlu!~ ~f-. $oott R:,~,ler, Ae_so,~,,te Planner CiW of Iow~ City 410 Ea~ We,,hin&,lon Btnaet Zow~ City, Io~nx g~240-1826 Review of Nomination Form- and Dra~ C)rdinqTtc~ ~ ~e Dear Scott~ Thn, k you for providing the 8tare with an oVpox'Lantty to review and oomn~-t upon the abov~ x~ftrmoed In~pom~l de~ignatbn, For ~ollr file .n~d i'nfOT'Zla2tiOll, I have.ellelosed a copy of Ralph ~'S COmmentS. Please advise us of the City's final action in regax~ m the protmsed designedion. If you have ~_-y question~ or need additio,~al tn~rmatiun, please do nnt hesitate t~ rantact me at ~he sddress listed below, by phone at [$15/281-6826 or by eraoil at ..kxne2rat@maX...state.ia.us IOWA' HISTORICAL BUILDING 600 East Locust - Des Moines, Iowa 56319-0290 Phone: (515) 281-6412. Fax: (515) 242-6498 or (515) 282-0502 www. ulowa.edu/"shsi/i ndex.htm DEC-8~-1998 1~: 14 CP BJREAU 15152828582. P. E~ STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF IOWA When past meets J~ture 30, 1998 Am-ricnn Co~ic Hm 'Eldon Blood Run N.HL C, cntcnnial !hilctinS lets City M'~tdlcw F. dcl Blacksmith Shop Mafshallrnwn Al~hie Gudnet Cabin Arnolds l~k Iov~ Historic"d] Building Des Moines Monmak Gvvcr,,or's Union Sonday .School Clcrmoa~ Mmcum C|crmnng Iowa city Local T .rid--.+ n~.~.-.o. rot ,t--~ nuildinS. 2-6 South t.inn Strut Ihsver~,iewedt/zr~-,,-ialsouthisb~,'Mi~submiUmdbygco~,andlconcurwiththe findings and analysis of~, Carlson and Msd~ Svendsm dst it is =~ fat descrfuinS thelmllding ndumldng a~asc for il3.-~gpiGr.~underCdlniaA, B, and Eofthe The only short~nmh~, of the nomination in my opinion is the minimal discussion of Ihe buildings originzl fur, tieD u a funeral psrlor/nsonusy and t!~ possible extent to which its original d~ign andplsnmny have refb:cted this ~ For the most patt, prior~the 'I'bc eonslncUon ofbfiMin,~c sole~ fat mattna~Lar,;~____ appau: to br/e been raze, and this · xarnple may very well be ouc of da~ earliest in both Iowa City and t~c rote. Cdvm the fact dmt and allP. ntions made to it, its poUm~is_l sig~if'~c~nce tmda Criterig E as a reprcscnlativc examplc of 1920's en mor._,_=.y dnsign has btely been gorepromised. Pl.m Crave Governor's Homc Iowa Gty Tml,'-~oro 1mUam Mound~ Westcut Historic Trails Center Coundl Bluffs IOWA HISTORICAL BUILDING 600 East Local · Des Moines, Iowa $08 19-0290 Phone: (515) Z81-6412 - Fax: (515) 242-6498 or (515) 282-0502 '-,-.,w ,,;ntw, ,d,sl",k~ilindeqr.htm TOTAL P. 83 PROTEST OF REZONING TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL -', ~: ~_~ c~ ... IOVVA CITY, IOVVA :~" We, the underaigned, being the owners of twenty percent or more of the ~ of ~ property included in the prolx:~ed zoning change, or the owners of twenty perce~.'.'or r~are of the property which is located within two hundred feet of the exterior boundaries ~f the I~rOperty for which the zoning change is proposed, do hereby protest the rezonlng of the following property: This petition is signed and acknowledged by each of us with the intention that such rezoning shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of at least three-fourths of all the members of the council, all in accordance with §414.5 of the Code of Iowa. Property Address STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY On this ~ day ofp~o t m4~.t~=v; 19.Z~,before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public In and for said County and State, personally appeared '5~oL~. L~ /n c ~,~ ~., and ------~"' to me known to be the idenUcal persons ~l~arned in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same as their voluntary act and deed. Notary Public in ~nd for the State of Iowa Owner(s) of Property Address STATE OF IOWA ) ) JOHNSON COUNTY ) On this day of ,19 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared and to me known to be the identical persons named in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same as their voluntary act and deed. Notary Public in and for the State of Io~va January 3, 1999 Iowa City City Council 410 East Washington St. Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Subject: Harmon Building Dear Iowa City City Council, JAN 0 8 1999. Cll'f MANAliER'S OFFICE As I write this letter, I have to admit that I don't know the latest status of the Harmon Bldg., but wanted to express my thoughts on it. I love Iowa City, especially the uniqueness of the downtown. I came to school here 20 years ago and stayed here after I graduated because of everything the area has to offer. As you're all aware, the downtown has a unique appeal with its old buildings, great restaurants, variety of taverns and interesting shops. I think we need to preserve the old buildings to maintain one of the things that adds to the appeal and character of downtown. If the plan is still to replace the landscaped median down Iowa Avenue, I think that's a great idea and I understand that' s driving the need for additional parking. But, does the need for parking mean tearing down the Harmon building? Have all options been considered? Can a design be developed to build around the building (that would really be unique), or add additional levels to existing ramps? Everyone I talk to agrees that another parking ramp is the last thing the downtown needs. Typical ramp designs tend to be an eyesore and the ramps available today aren't fully utilized. I visit the downtown area a minimum of 3 times a week (usually in the evening) and in 20 years have only parked in a ramp probably 2 dozen times. If you look, you can usually find a parking spot without too much trouble. Before a decision is made, I hope all creative options are considered. Once the building is gone, it's not replaceable. I read with interest the Irving Weber books and am amazed at some of the stately downtown buildings that once existed but have been torn down over the years. It's doubly depressing when you look at some of the unattractive buildings that are now in their place. Let' s think carefully before we decide the fate of the Harmon building. The future of the downtown lies in preserving its character, which in part means keeping the old buildings. Respectfully, Warren Tunwall 100 Koser Ave. University Heights, Iowa 52246 The following materials regarding this item were submitted by neighboring property owners or other interested persons. OSHA GRAY DAVIDSON 14 SOUTH GOVERNOR STREET IOWA CITY IOWA 52240 USA Tel: (319) 338-4778 Fax: (319) 338-8606 osha@pobox.corn The Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission Civic Center 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, IA 52240 26 November 1998 Dear Commissioners, I understand you will be meeting on December 3 to discuss the fate of the Harmon Building. I'd prefer to talk with you h~ person, but will be out of the country, so please aoJept tiffs letter as my personal statement. Let me say right out that I've always loved the Harmon Building. I know it isn't built on a grand scale comparable to the Old Capitol or the Hotel Jefferson, but its presence has always been important in defining downtown Iowa City. Now, thanks to Richard Carlson's efforts, I know- we all know- that the Harmon Building is historically significant as well. You have his report before you, I'm sure, and will consider it carefully. Allow me to quote the remarks I made when speaking before the Historic Preservation Commission in support of Mr. Carlson's request to grant the Harmon landmark status: "I'm fortunate to live in a Queen Anne house, built in 1890. When I look out through the swift-filled glass of my windows at home, I think about the people who lived there before me, and what they saw when they looked out of those windows onto Governor Street and Iowa Avenue, watching horses and horse-drawn carnages go by. I think about their lives and about their stories. These old structures-- like the Harmon Building-- are the physical embodiment of the many stories of Iowa Citians who lived and worked here before us. When we demolish one of these buildings, it's not just a structure that's destroyed. The stories that reside there are extinguished, too." I know you are faced with a very difficult decision. But I'm asking that you fmd a way to save the Harmon Building and the stories it contains- out of respect for those who came before us, and for those who will inherit the city from us. Historic preservation is fundamentally a question of preserving our identity as a community. Who are we? Where are we going? Without a vibrant sense of our past, a deep understanding that comes, in pan, from preserving the physical structures of that past, we cannot answer those questions in a wise mariner. We' ve lost enough important building over the years. We should be good stewards of what we have left. 2 ~Tcerel~h~~ The Historic Preservation Commission FIRST CHRISTIAN (DISCIPLES OF CHRIST) DEC 0 7 1998 CITY RiANAGER'S OFFICE I~ar Mernben of th~ Planning and Zoning Commission, On December 2, on behalf of the Trustees of First Christian Church of Iowa City, I filed an official protest to designation of the Harmon Building as an Historic Landmark. Our reasons for protesting that designation are as follows: 1. In principle, we support the preservation of buildings which are of aesthetic and historic si~i~canee to our community and commend our City for its historic preservation efforts. However, while the Harmon Building may qualify technically for nomination as an Historic Landmark, we do not believe the building has sufficient architectural, aesthetic, or historic merit to warrant the special recognition and protection which Historic Landmark status confers. 2. We believe that the greater access to downtown public services, businesses, churches and other centers of community life which the planned parking facility would allow serves as a higher and better use of the land at Linn Street and Iowa Avenue than the Harmon Building. The planned parking facility will also accommodate many of the businesses whose buildings it will displace. 3. It is very likely that our congregation will decide within a few months whether to remain at 217 Iowa Avenue or move our primary location to a site on North Dubuque Street. One of the major factors which our membership will weigh in m__aking this decision is the availability of parking downtown. If naming the Harmon Building as an Historic landmark places the future of the parking facility in doubt, that action may have a direct affect on what our members decide. In addition to the Trustees' reasons, I would add one of my own. With my own hands I renovated a home that was placed on the National Register of Historic Places and normally find myself preferring preservation to development. In the case of the Harmon Building, however, I find the attempt to save an undistinguished building at potentially great cost to the living businesses/organizations which surround it to be mainly an attempt to block the parking facility. As such, I believe that designating the Harmon Building as an Historic Landmark would do a disservice to the cause of historic preservation by lowering the standards for what deserves that designation to a point where support and respect for Historic Landmark status would be greatly eroded. Thank-you for your voluntary service to our community. On behalf of the Trustees, I ask you to consider our reasons. Sincere , r ~ounc~,McmbershnC 12/7/98 217 IOWA AVENUE P.O. Box 887 IOWA CITY, IA 52244 (319),337,4181 Linda Severson From: paula brandt < paula-brandt@uiowa.edu > To: Iseverso@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu Subject: Harmon Building Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 7:56 AM Linda--Could you forward this letter to the editor to Scott K.? it to the ICPC. Thanks! pb --- begin forwarded text I've seRt Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 O7:55:01-0600 To: icpc@inav.net From: paula brandt < paula-brandt@uiowa.edu> Subject: Harmon Building To the Editor: Your editorial, "Timing is wrong for designation," raised several issues that are frustrating to those of us who care about Iowa City's architectural history. Unfortunately, deals are made, plans are developed, and papers are signed before the public realizes that significant buildings are threatened with demolition. For years the City Council had been discussing a parking ramp south of Burlington Street to encourage development on the south side. Who would have thought that instead we'd get a ramp on Iowa Avenue, and that both the Harmon Building and Eastlawn would be destroyed? Since the buildings weren't offered to the public for sale, the people who want to save a structure on site--whether it's Bluffwood, the houses recently demolished by Mercy Hospital, or the Harmon Building--have few options since the new owners aren't interested in saving or selling the building, only in developing the land. In this case, it took Rich Carlson to step forward, do the research, talk to experts, and work with the Historic Preservation Commission to fight City Hall, even though most of us were saying it's a waste of time--a done deal. That research has now been completed on the Harmon Building and the HPC has determined that it meets landmark designation guidelines. That information will be presented to Planning and Zoning and the City Council. If they choose to demolish the building, they will at least be making an informed decision. They may even use their new knowledge to insist that the facade of the Harmon Building be incorporated into the new ramp's facade. The Historic Preservation Commission should not be criticized for expanding the community's and our City's decision-makers' knowledge of our buildings. In fact, the Commission would be remiss if it didn't. Paula Brandt 824 N. Gilbert Iowa City 52245 (H) 354-6948 (W) 335-5618 --- end forwarded text Page 1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, at 7:00 p.m. on the 12th day of January, 1999, in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa; at which hearing the Council will consider: 1. An ordinance designation 2 South Linn Stre as an Iowa City Historic Landmark. anordinance changing the zoning de of approximately 0.2 acres located at 703 Benton Court from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) to High Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-44). (REZ98-0015) 3. An ordinance changing the zoning designation of 21.26 acres located on the east side of Naples Avenue from Intensive Commercial (C1-1) to Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone-Intensive Commercial (OSA-CI-1). Copies of the proposed resolution are on file for public examination in the office of the City Clerk, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to make their views known for Council consideration are encouraged to appear at the above-mentioned time and place. MARlAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK ppdadmin/nph-0112.doc 6c Prepared by: John Yapp, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5247 ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE CONDITIONALLY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION ON A 8,740 SQUARE FOOT PROPERTY LOCATED AT 703 BENTON COURT FROM MEDIUM DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-8) TO HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RM-44). WHEREAS, Christian Retirement Services, owner of Oaknoll Retirement Center, owns the property at 703 Benton Court located in the RS-8 zone; and WHEREAS, approximately two years ago, a parking lot was permitted on the property at 703 Benton Court as a temporary use while an addition to the Oaknoll facility, which displaced on- site parking, was being constructed; and WHEREAS, Christian Retirement Services desires to make the parking lot at 703 Benton Court permanent following completion of the addition to the Oaknoll facility, which permanent use requires the rezoning of the property to RM- 44, the same zoning as Oaknoll Retirement Center, to which the parking lot is an accessory use; and WHEREAS, Iowa Code 415.5 (1997) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting an applicant's rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, to satisfy public needs directly caused by the requested change; and WHEREAS, Christian Retirement Services acknowledges that certain conditions and restrictions are reasonable, in the form of a Conditional Zoning Agreement, to ensure appropriate future development of the property, particularly with respect to the residential uses to the south and the west; and WHEREAS, Christian Retirement Services has voluntarily offered to place restrictive covenants on the property which have the affect of limiting the use of the property to a parking lot, unless a development plan is submitted and approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Council, following public notice and a public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: SECTION I. APPROVAL. Subject to the terms and conditions of the Conditional Zoning Agreement, attached hereto and incorporated by Ordinance No. Page 2 reference herein, the property legally described below is hereby redesignated from its current zoning of RS-8 to RM-44; Lot 11 and the north 14 feet of Lot 12 of Streb's First Addition to Iowa City, Iowa. SECTION II. ZONING MAP. Upon final passage, approval and publication of this ordinance as provided by law, the Building Official is hereby authorized and directed to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to conform to this conditional zoning change. SECTION III. CONDITIONAL 7ONING AGREEMENT. Following final passage and approval of this ordinance, the Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to sign, and the City Clerk to attest, the Conditional Zoning Agreement between the applicant and the City. SFCTION IV, CFRTIFICATION AND RECORDING. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this ordinance which shall be recorded by the owner at the office of the County Recorder of Johnson County, Iowa, upon final passage and publication as provided by law. SECTION V. RFPFALER. AIj ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this ordinance are hereby repealed. SFCTION VI. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of this ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. SFCTION VII. FFFFCTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as required by law. Passed and approved this __ day of ,1999. MAYOR A'I'rEST: CITY CLERK ppdadmin/ord/oaknoll.doc CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT THIS CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT is made by and between the CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, a municipal corporation (the "City") and C~ RETIREMENT SERVICES, INC., an Iowa nonprofit corporation CCRS'). WHEREAS, CRS has requested that the City rezone approximately 8,740 square feet of property located at 703 Benton Court, Iowa City, Iowa (the "Real Estate") from RS-8 to RM-44 zoning classification under the Ordinances of the City; and WHEREAS, the proposed rezoning will allow the development of the Real Estate in a manner which may be incompatible with the use of surrounding properties; and WHEREAS, Iowa Code Section 414.5 (1997) provides that the City may impose reasonable conditions on granting an applicant's rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs directly caused by the requested change; and WHEREAS, the existing use of the Real Estate as a parking lot, permitted as a temporary use during construction by CRS on adjacent property which temporarily eliminated parking on such adjacent property, is a use which is compatible with existing conditions in the neighborhood and would conform to all applicable requirements of the RM-44 zoning classification upon the removal of the four parking spaces dosest to Benton Court to meet setback requirements and the appropriate landscaping and screening of that area; and WHEREAS, CRS acknowledges that certain conditions and restrictions are reasonable to insure appropriate use of the Real Estate, particularly with respect to lower density uses of the real estate located to the south and west of said property; and WHEREAS, CRS has agreed to use the Real Estate in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Conditional Zoning Agreement to address the above-referenced issues. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, agreements, stipulations and conditions herein contained, the parties agree as follows: 1. The placement, height and design of any structure on the Real Estate must be compatible with the residential neighborhood to the west and south of the Real Estate, and must be submitted to and approved by the City. In the event of the desire of CRS, its successors or assigns, tO construct or otherwise place any structure upon the Real Estate, such owner must submit a Development Concept Plan to the Department of Planning and Community Development prior to development, The Director of Planning and Community Development shall review and evaluate such concept plan based on the criteria listed above, the City's then-existing development ordinances and other conditions existing in the neighborhood in which the Real Estate is located. The Director shall complete such review within the 21-day period provided by City Code and shall submit a report of such review to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission shah review such report and conduct such further study as it deems appropriate and shall submit such review and recommendation to the City Council, which shah act thereon in the same manner as if an appeal had been taken from a decision of the Director with regard to a site plan. 2. CRS acknowledges that the conditions contained herein are reasonable conditions to impose on the Real Estate and under Iowa Code 414.5 (1997) and that said conditions satisfy public needs which are direc~y caused by the requested zoning change. 3. CRS acknowledges that, in the event any portion of the subject property is transferred, sold, re-developed or subdivided, aH development and re- development will conform with the terms of this Conditional Zoning Agreement, regardless of whether recited in any subsequent transfer documents. 4. The parties acknowledge that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be deemed to be a covenant running with the land and with the title to the land, and shall remain in full force and effect as a covenant running with the title to the land unless or until released of record by the City and may not be superseded or avoided by separate private covenants not recorded and not within the City's knowledge. The parties further acknowledge that this agreement shah inure to the benefit of and bind aH successors, representatives and assigns of the parties. 5. CRS acknowledges that nothing in this Conditional Zoning Agreement shah be construed to relieve the owner from complying with all applicable local, state and federal regulations. 6. The parties agree that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shah be incorporated by reference into the ordinance rezoning the subject property, and that upon adoption and publication of the ordinance, this agreement shall be recorded in the Johnson County Recorder's Office at the expense of CRS. 7. It is understood that CRS has contemporaneously placed Protective Covenants and Restrictions (the "Covenants") on the Real Estate for the benefit of the City, which Covenants are incorporated herein by this reference. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to negate or supersede the Covenants, and CRS agrees to satisfy all conditions herein and in the Covenants. 2 DATED at Iowa City, Iowa this day of ,1998. CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA Ernest W. Lehman, Mayor By: Marian I~ Karr, City Clerk 'Cibf' CHRISTIAN RETIREMENT SERVICES, INC. ~'~LAtt°rn Y'$ ,c~~~~/_//~ 27 By: Cra~, W~e~side~nt~ sy: 3 STATE OF IOWA ) ) ss: JOHNSON COUNTY ) On '~his day of , 1999, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa, personally appeared Ernest W. Lelunan and Marin K. Karr, to me personally known, who being by me duly sworn, did say that they are the Mayor and City Clerk respectively, of the corporation executing the within and foregoing instrument, that the seal affixed thereto is the seal of the corporation; that said instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of the corporation by authority of its Board of Directors; and that Ernest W. Lehman and Marian K. Karr as officers acknowledged the execution of the foregoing instrument to be the voluntary act and deed of the corporation, by it and by them voluntarily executed. Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa STATE OF IOWA ) ) ss: JOHNSON COUNTY ) On this } t day of January, 1999, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa, personally appeared Craig Welt and Sister Agnes Giblin, to me personally known, who being by me duly sworn, did say that they are the President and Secretary respectively, of the corporation executing the within and foregoing instrument, that no seal has been procured by the corporation; that said instrument was signed on behalf of the corporation by authority of its Board of Directors; and that Craig Welt and Sister Agnes Giblin as officers acknowledged the execution of the foregoing instrument to be the voluntary act and deed of the corporation, by it and by them voluntaqly~.~executed. PATRICIA HEIDEN My Commission 4 PROTECTIVE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS that the undersigned, CHRISTIAN RETIREMENT SERVICES, INC., an Iowa nonprofit corporation C'CRS") being the owner of the following described real estate located in Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa, to-wit: Lot 11 and the north fourteen (14) feet of Lot 12 of Streb's First Addition to Iowa City, Iowa, according to the recorded plat thereof, for its benefit and the benefit of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipal corporation (the "City"), hereby imposes the following covenants and restrictions on said property as covenants running with the land, and with such force and effect as if conveyed in each subsequent conveyance of said premises, or any part thereof, or any transfer of said premises occurring by operation of law: 1. Said premises shall be utilized only for surface parking purposes in conjunction with the operation of Oaknoll Retirement Residence owned and operated by CRS on certain adjacent real estate, said parking to be utilized for the exclusive benefit of residents, employees, visitors and other invitees to Oaknoll. No rental of parking spaces upon said premises, other than to residents or employees of Oaknoll, shall occur. 2. The design, screening, setbacks and all other aspects of the surface parking lot maintained upon the above-described real estate shall, at all time, conform to the requirements of all applicable ordinances of the City. 3. No change in the use of the above described premises shall be made by CRS except upon application to the City, such application to set forth the proposed use of said real estate accompanied by a site plan meeting all requirements for site plans contained in the Code of Ordinances of the City. Following such filing, the same shall be considered and acted upon in the same manner as is prescribed for preliminary plats under the requirements of Sections 14-7B-2(E)(2), (4) and (5) of the Code of Ordinances of the City. 4. These covenants are to run with the land and shall be binding upon CRS and all persons claiming by, through or under CRS for the maximum time period permitted, from time to time, under the laws of the State of Iowa. If CRS or its successors or assigns violate or attempt to violate any of the covenants or restrictions herein before the expiration thereof, the City may undertake any proceeding at law or in equity against the person or persons violating or attempting to violate any such covenants and restrictions and (a) secure an injunction preventing such party or parties from further violation of said covenants and/or (b) recover damages, costs and other sums due by reason of such violation or violations. The foregoing remedies shall be in addition to; and not in limitation of, any other remedies which may be available to the City by virtue of any such violation. 5. Invalidation of any of these covenants by judgment or court order shall in no way affect any of the other provisions hereof which shall remain in full force and effect... DATED at Iowa City, Iowa this / j ~ day of , ~"7~.q.4~ta..~ ,199~. CHRISTIAN RETIREMENT SERVICES, INC. By: . By: ~f'~/O ~ Sister Agnes Gxli~lin'in,x~,n, Secretary STATE OF IOWA ) ) SS: JOHNSON COUNTY ) On this j i day of LZ~,.'~,,,-~.- 1998, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and fqt,the State /'of Iowa, personally appeared Craig Welt and Sister Agnes Giblin, to me p~/sonally known, who being by me duly sworn, did say that they are the President and Secretary respectively, of the corporation executing the within and foregoing instrument, that no seal has been procured by the corporation; that said instrument was signed on behalf of the corporation by authority of its Board of Directors; and that Craig Welt and Sister Agnes Giblin as officers acknowledged the execution of the foregoing instrument to be the voluntary act and deed of the corporation, by it and by the~\oluntarily executed. My Commission ~ , ~ I | ' I ? -~-O~c- .tary Public in' and for the ~tate of ~wa 2 DATED at Iowa dry, Iowa this day of CITY OF IOWA CITY, By: By: Ernest W. Mayor K. Karr, City Clerk "city" RETIREMENT SERVICES, INC. BY\\William H. Burger, President By: Pa icia Jensen, Secretary 'CRS' 3 STATE OF IOWA JOHNSON COUNTY f )! )iss: ) On this day undersigned, a Notary Public W. Lehman and Marjan K. sworn, did say that they are executing the within and of the corporation; that said corporation by authority of its Marjan IC Karr as officers be the voluntary act and deed executed. of , 1998, before me, the and for the State of Iowa, personally appeared Ernest to me personally known, who being by me duly Mayor and City Clerk respectively, of the corporation instrument, that the seal affixed thereto is the seal gtrument was signed and sealed on behalf of the of Direc~rs; and that Ernest W. Lehman and .- L the e/Xecution of the foregoing instrument to the cTration, by it and by them voluntarily / Public in and for the State of Iowa STATE OF IOWA ) ) SS: JOHNSON COUNTY ) f On th/s da~ of undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the William H. Burger and Pa~iicia Jensen, to me duly sworn, did say that/they are the corporation executing the' within and foregoing procured by the corporation; that said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors; Patricia Jensen as officers acknowledged the be the voluntary act and deed of the corporation, executed. · 1998, before me, the of Iowa, personally appeared known, who being by me Secretary respectively, of the that no seal has been was signed on behalf of the that William H. Burger and of the foregoing instrument to it and by them voluntarily Notary Public in and ~Or the State of Iowa 4 PROTECTIVE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS DRAFT KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS that the undersigned, CHR/STIAN RETIREMENT SERVICES, INC., an Iowa nonprofit corporation ("CRS") being the owner of the following described real estate located in Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa, to-wit: Lot 11 and the fourteen (14) feet of Lot 12 of Streb's First AdSi(t~on to Iowa City, Iowa, to the recorded plat thereof, ,// of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a m~nicipal corporation the following covenants and restri~_'_'ons on said property land, and with such force an effect as ff conveyed in / for its benefit and the (the "City"), hereby ' as covenants running with each subsequent conveyance said premises occurring by 1. Said shall be utilized o y for surface park/ng purposes in conj. cUon with.the o. peraUon Oak.on . eUre . nt Residen . . owned and ope...d parking spaces upon said premi~ ~ other tl?4~ to residents or employees of Oak.oil, shah occur. / Z The design, s ~ee ' '~ setbacks and aH other aspects of the surface parking lot maintained upon the ibo" escribed real estate shaH, at all time, conform to the requirements of aH applicable.,ord ances of the City. 3. No change in the u of the above described premises shah be made by CRS except upon application to e City, such application to set forth the proposed use of said real estate accompani by a site plan meeting all requirements for site plans contained in the Code of Ord' nces of the City. Following such filing, the same shall be considered and aclnd upon the same manner as is erescribed for preliminary plats under the requirements of tions 14-7B-2(E)(2), (4) ~nd (5) of the Code of Ordinances of the City. ' 4. These covenants are to run w~ the land and shall be binding upon CRS and all persons claiming by, through or u der CRS for the maximum time period permitted, from time to time, under the laws o the State of Iowa. If CRS or its successors or assigns violate or attempt to violate any the covenants or restrictions herein before the expiration thereof, the City may under e any proceeding at law or in quity against m.e.perso. or persons vi.ol..ting. or U.'ng to violate a.y suSh sums due by reason of such violation or violations. The foregoing,remedies shall be in addition to, and not in limitation of, any other remedies which may be available to the City by virtue of any such violation. / / / 5. Invalidation of any of these covenants by l~~a judgme or court order shall in no way affect any of the other provisions hereof which sha in in full force and effect DATED at Iowa this day of // ,1998. / / CHRISTIAN RETIREM~'SERVICES, INC. William H. ~B~rger, President / ? / / / Patrid ensen, Secretary / STATE OF IOWA ) /"' ) ss: / } SON COUNTY ) / On fl%is day 0~ , 1998, before me, the un ersigned, a Notary Public in and for the S te of Iowa, personally appeared VV'~liam FL Burger and Patrici~ Jensen, to me pe nally known, who being by me duly sworn, did say that th~e~ are the President an Secretary respectively, of the corporation executing the ~ and foregoing ins ent, that no seal has been procured by the corporati · that said instrument w signed on behalf of the corporation by authority o its Board of Directors; and t William H. Burger and Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa 2 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: January 7, 1999 To: City Council From: John Yapp, Associate Planner//Iy/ Re: REZ98-O016, Request by Christian Retirement Services to fezone the property at 703 Benton Court from RS-8 to RM-44 This memo is to summarize some of the results of the discussions held during the Planning and Zoning Commission meetings regarding the request by Christian Retirement Services to rezone the property at 703 Benton Court from RS-8, Medium Density Single-Family Residential to RM-44, High Density Multi-Family Residential. Conditional Zoning Agreement: The applicant has proposed a Conditional Zoning Agreement in conjunction with the proposed rezoning, in order to address some of the concerns raised during Planning and Zoning Commission discussions about the type of development that could occur on the property if it is rezoned to RM-44. The Conditional Zoning Agreement states that the placement, height, and design of any structure on the property must be compatible with the residential neighborhood to the south and west. Under the proposed Conditional Zoning Agreement, a Development Concept Plan would need to be submitted and approved by the City Council, after having recommendations by staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission, prior to any development taking place on the property at 703 Benton Court. Protective Covenants and Restrictions: The applicant has also volunteered to place protective covenants on the property at 703 Benton Court. The Covenants would limit the use of the property to a surface parking lot to be utilized for the exclusive benefit of residents, employees, visitors, and other invitees to Oaknoll Retirement Center. The property could only be used for a purpose other than a surface parking lot only if a site plan is approved by the City Council, after having recommendations by City Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission. This process would be similar to the process of having a plat approved. Temporary Use Permit: The parking lot at 703 Benton Court was originally permitted as a temporary use while an addition to Oaknoll was being constructed, which disrupted parking on the site. There was a clear rationale for permitting a temporary lot, because on- site parking was made unavailable for a temporary period of time. Once the construction of the addition is completed, however, there is no rationale to permit this parking area as a temporary use. During Planning and Zoning Commission discussions, an argument was made that the parking lot at 703 Benton Court could continue to be permitted as a temporary use for an indeterminate amount of time, until other plans for the property are made. This argument is based on an interpretation of the Temporary Use section of the zoning code that the Building Official could allow temporary uses for longer than one year, or could renew temporary use permits periodically on a yearly basis· One of the conditions the Building Official "may include" on a temporary use permit, found in the Conditions of Approval section (14-6L-2D) for a temporary use, is: Provision for a fixed period of time, not to exceed one hundred eighty (180) calendar days for a temporary use not occupying a structure, 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· In staff's view, a temporary use is by it's very nature temporary, and cannot be renewed on a periodic basis· A copy of the minutes from the November 20, 1997 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting during which the temporary use permit was discussed is attached. In response to a question from Supple, Boothroy, Director of the Housing and Inspection Services Department, responds that the maximum time period for a temporary use permit [for a use not occupying a structure] is 180 days. This makes it clearer that the intent of the temporary use permit is to allow certain uses only for a fixed, temporary period of time. Conclusion: If the property at 703 Benton Court is to be used as an accessory use to an RM-44 use, in this case Oaknoll Retirement Center, it needs to be rezoned to the same zone as the principal use. Should the rezoning request not be approved, the uses permitted in the RS-8 zone include a single-family or duplex residence, or the lot may remain vacant. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that REZ98-0016, a request to rezone the approximate 0.2-acre property at 703 Benton Court from RS-8, Medium Density Single-Family Residential, to RM-44, High Density Multi-Family Residential, be approved, subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement which states the placement, height, and design of any structures 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. Approved by: ~ ~7~~ ' Ka n Franklin, Director of Planning and Community Development MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 20, 1997 PAGE 8 MOTION: Chait moved to approve SUB97-0029, a preliminary and final plat of M & W Addition, a 0.48 acre, two-lot residential subdivision located at 803 S. Summit Street, subject to legal papers being approved prior to City Council consideration and that the legal papers incorporate language regarding: 1) the required Historic Preservation Commission review, and 2) a payment to go toward sidewalk repair or reconstruction during the South Summit Street Bridge replacement project in lieu of construction of sidewalks. Supple seconded the motion. Ehrhardt said she had some discussions about this item with Ruedi and Cecile Kuenzli and Pat Folsom as well as another party whose name she did not know, who said the sign on the property had been down since Saturday night and so they thought the meeting on this item had been canceled. Ehrhardt said Cecile Kuenzli had asked for, and Ehrhardt had received from Kugler, aedal photographs of the area. Ehrhardt said Kuenzli then determined the average lot width to be 80 feet. Kugler agreed that there are some very large lots in the area, and the larger lots are more common them, although the smaller lot size would not be totally foreign to this distdcto Ehrhardt said the character of the street is comprised not only of the houses, but also of the size of the lots they sit on. She said the proposed subdivision would create small lots for that street. Bovbjerg said these two potential lots are at the tail end of South Summit Street where all of the lots are smaller, and over these years, these homes have been in-fill. She said there was a modest house to the south of the property and another modest home to the south of that. Bovbjerg said she thought it would be in character with that block, both on that side of the street and across the street, to have a modest house on a modest lot there. She said she was also concerned with the smaller widths, but she took a good look at nearby lots and thinks this would be in character with the block, especially since it will be examined by the Histodc Preservation Commission. Gibson said the image of Summit Street as monstrous houses on big lots is not the reality. He said there a lot of very small homes there with very narrow lots. Gibson said he thought this would be consistent in terms of in-fill and would provide another opportunity for development within the city. Kugler said staff feels the most important thing in terms of site design may be the setback, as it is the setback that creates the character of Summit Street. He said it is also important to get a building that is compatible with other structures in the district. Kugler said a well-designed and well-sited home on this lot could fit nicely within the district. He added that he believed the Histodc Preservation Commission would look closely at the design, as it would be the first time the Commission would be approving a new pdmary building on a lot in a histodc district. The motion carried on a vote of 6-1, with Ehrhardt votinQ no. CODE AMENDMENT ITEMS: Public discussion of an amendment to the Zoning Chapter to provide for temporary use permits to regulate short-term activities, such as special events or seasonal outdoor storage and sales. Doug Boothroy, the Director of Housing Inspection Services, said the temporary use ordinance would give staff direction as to what can and cannot be done in terms of allowing temporary uses for special events that are put on by businesses. He added that it would set up some MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 20, 1997 PAGE 9 standards by which the City can have temporary uses that are compatible in vadous zones throughout the community, as well as providing consistency, organization, and order to the whole process. Boothroy said the ordinance would identify the temporary uses that would be permitted and would address some of the other concems City staff has had in terms of allowing temporary uses in areas staff was not sure should be allowed to begin with. Boothroy said he discussed changes in the language with Holecek and would have them ready by the next meeting. Bovbjerg asked about the reference to contractors' construction yards as well as the reference\ to circuses, rodeos, and carnivals, since rodeos are not allowed in Iowa City. Boothroy said the revised draft would delete the reference to circuses, rodeos, and carnivals. He added that contractors' construction yards referred to staging areas for temporary storage of building materials in development areas. He said it would not be for sales. Supple asked about the/ time pedod for the permit. Boothroy said the maximum was for 180 days. Gibson asked if camivals would be disallowed with the deletion of the reference, and said that would be imprecise if carnivals did not involve animals. Boothroy said he felt carnivals would fall under the category of fairs or festivals. Gibson suggested discussing the requirements in terms of animals in order to be more precise, if the real goal is to keep out animals. He added that a circus would not necessarily involve animals either. Starr said if there is already an ordinance dealing with the animal issue, carnivals and circuses could be left as a temporary permitted use, and the other City ordinance would kick in if animals were involved. Boothroy said he would read that section of the Code involving the animal is,Sue and attempt to make the uses consistent with that. Public discussion: There was none. Public discussion closed, MOTION: Ehrhardt moved to defer to the December 4, 1997 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission an amendment to the Zoning Chapter to provide for temporary use permits to regulate short-term activities such as special events or seasonal outdoor storage and sales. Supple seconded the motion. Gibson said he was not totally comfortable with the regulations, although he had absolutely no objection to the intent of the amendment. He said he was troubled that the City is wdting rules and more rules to govem our behavior and deal with all the ambiguous situations. Gibson said he was somewhat ambivalent about the issue. Bovbjerg said that frequently these amendments are wdtten in response to perceived or actual abuse of privileges either by length of time or taking up space. She added that if people are unaware of the rules and regulations, the City at some point needs to have a brochure or a flag go up to notify people of such rules. Gibson said we do have rules, specifically rules about parking and signs. He said the notion of wdting rules about temporary things is complex to start with, and there is a certain disjointedness about it. Gibson said he may vote for the amendment, but he did have reservations. City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: October 29, 1998 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: John Yapp, Associate Planner RF798-0016, a request by Christian Retirement Services to rezone the lot at 703 Benton Court from RS-8 to RM-44 At the Planning and Zoning Commission's recent October 15 meeting, the Commission, staff, the applicant, and a few members of the public discussed RF798-0016, a request by Christian Retirement Services to rezone the lot at 703 Benton Court from RS-8, Medium Density Single-Family Residential to RM-44, High Density Multi-Family Residential. The rezoning request was made to allow Oaknoll, in the short term, to make permanent a parking lot that was permitted as a temporary use. In the long term, Oaknoll hopes to expand their facility to the west side of Benton Court. During discussion, the Commission asked staff to explore whether there is a way for Oaknoll to continue to use the property as a parking lot without rezoning it, or to somehow limit the uses permitted on the property to parking or development solely related to the Oaknoll facility. Staff explored continuing to allow the parking lot as a temporary use, imposing a Planned Development Housing (PDH) Overlay Zone, a code amendment to permit parking in a separate zone, and a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA) to restrict the uses permitted on the site. Temporary Use: The parking lot was originally permitted as a temporary use while an addition to Oaknoll was being constructed, which disrupted parking on the site. There was a clear rationale for permitting a temporary parking lot, because on-site parking on the Oaknoll site was made unavailable for a temporary period of time. Once the construction of the addition is completed, however, there is no rationale to permit this parking area as a temporary use. Temporary uses are by definition permitted only for a fixed period of time, usually for one year or less. Planned Development Housing Overlay Zone: The Planned Development Housing (PDH) Overlay Zone is intended to provide flexibility in architectural design, placement, and clustering of buildings, encourage the preservation and best use of existing landscape features, promote an attractive and safe living environment compatible with surrounding residential developments, and to provide an alternative method for redeveloping older residential areas. Staff feels it is inconsistent with the intent of the PDH zone for a parking lot to be permitted under the umbrella of the PDH overlay zone. There are no structures being proposed, no landscape features being preserved, and no unique designs being proposed that would otherwise not be permitted within the zoning ordinance. Allowing a parking lot to be permitted under the PDH overlay zone would potentially set a precedence and make it possible. for owners of other multi-family apartment buildings to buy up surrounding properties of a different zone, and request a PDH overlay zone for a parking lot. Code Amendment: One possibility brought up at the October 15 meeting was to allow the parking lot to remain, but to not rezone it to RM-44. This would require a code amendment allowing parking in a separate zone from the principal use. Allowing multi- family uses to place parking areas in separate zones would set a precedent that would have severe consequences for the rest of the City. Owners of multi-family apartment buildings would be able to purchase lots in single family neighborhoods and place permanent parking lots on them. For this reason, staff recommends against proposing a code amendment to permit permanent parking in a separate zone. Conditional Zoning Agreement: Conditional Zoning Agreements (CZA's) are typically not used to limit the uses permitted on a property, unless there is a unique circumstance that a property is not suitable for a certain use. In general, however, if a property is not suitable for a certain use or set of uses, it should not be rezoned to permit those uses. For example, staff cannot recommend that a CZA be adopted to only permit a parking lot on the property at 703 Benton Court, for that would be taking virtually all of the rights the property carries under the RM-44 zone. CZA's are often used, however, to require more public oversight of building design and placement, landscaping materials, driveway location, and similar design and appearance conditions. Staff recommends that the rezoning of the lot at 703 Benton Court be permitted subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement which states the placement, height, and design of any structures 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. While this condition will not regulate the density of the uses permitted on the site, it will give extra oversight to the Commission and the public of what may be constructed on the site in the future. This condition would hold regardless of who controls the property. Appropriateness of the Rezoning Request: In the October 15 staff report regarding this item, staff noted that it has been the City's practice to attempt to zone properties so the transition between zones happens at the rear lot lines. Staff noted that while .the 16-24 units/acre shown on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map for this area is less than what potentially would be permitted in an RM-44 zone, staff feels that because the rest of the Oaknoll property is zoned RM-44, there is a justification for this lot to be zoned RM-44 as well. Christian Retirement Services owns two of the three remaining lots on the west side of Benton Court, and in the long run hopes to expand in that direction. However, the applicant is not prepared to request rezoning of the wes~ side of Benton Court because they have no plans for expansion at this time, and they do not control all the properties. Staff does feel that, in the future, it may be appropriate to rezone all the properties on the west side of Benton Court to a higher density residential zone so the zoning change occurs at the rear lot lines rather than across the street. No Parking in the Front Yard: During research of these issues, staff discovered that the temporary parking has parking within the 20-foot front yard. Parking within the front yard is prohibited in residential zones, except that detached single-family dwellings are permitted to have one parking space in the driveway aisle in the front yard. Should this rezoning request be approved, the parking lot will need to be modified so there is no parking within the front yard, and the 20-foot front yard setback is returned to turf or some other landscaping. Should the rezoning request not be approved, the uses permitted in the RS-8 zone include a single-family or duplex residence, or the lot may remain vacant. STAFF RFCOMMFNDATION Staff recommends that RE798-0016, a request to rezone the approximate 0.2-acre property at 703 Benton Court from RS-8, Medium Density Single-Family Residential, to RM-44, High Density Multi-Family Residential, be approved, subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement which states the placement, height, and design of any structures 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 build~pg permit being issued. by: Community Development STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: RF798-0016. 703 Benton Court GENFRAI INFORMATION: Applicant: Applicant's Attorney: Requested action: Purpose: Location: Size: Existing land use and .zoning: Surrounding land use and zoning: Comprehensive Plan: File date: 45-day limitation period: Prepared by: John Yapp Date: October 15, 1998 Christian Retirement Services Oaknoll Retirement Residence 701 Oaknoll Drive Iowa City, Iowa 52246 Phone: 351-1720 Robert Downer 122 S. Linn Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Phone: 338-9222 Rezoning from RS-8, Medium-Density Single-Family Residential, to RM-44, High-Density Multi-Family Residential To allow for the permanent establishment of a parking lot that was permitted only on a temporary basis while an addition to Oaknoll Retirement Residence was being constructed. 703 Benton Court 0.2 acres Asphalt parking lot: RS-8 North: East: South: West: Retirement Center: RM-44 Retirement Center: RM-44 Residential: RS-8 Residential: RS-8 This property is on the border between 8-16 units/acre and 16-24 units/acre in the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. September 22, 1998 November 6, 1998 SPI::CIAI INFORMATION: Public utilities: City water and sewer are available to the site. Public services: City fire and police protection are provided. Oaknoll utilizes private refuse collection. Transportation: Transit service is available via the Oakcrest route on Benton Street. Physical characteristics: The property is occupies by an asphalt parking lot. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Christian Retirement Services purchased the property at 703 Benton Court approximately 2 years ago. This 0.2-acre lot is on the north end on Benton Court, adjacent and across the street from the Oaknoll Retirement Center. City staff permitted the establishment of a temporary 24-space parking area on the property while an addition to the Oaknoll Retirement Center (Oaknoll) was being constructed. The construction of the addition has temporarily disrupted an area of parking on the Oaknoll site. Because the property at 703 Benton Court is in a separate zone from the Oaknoll property, the parking area was only permitted on a temporary basis. The parking area was required to be hard-surfaced with asphalt for the duration of the construction project. The City had advised the applicant that Oaknoll would no longer be able to use the property for temporary parking following the completion of the addition, which is expected to occur this fall. The applicant desires to establish a permanent parking area on the site, which requires it's rezoning from RS-8 to RM-44, the same zoning as the rest of Oaknoll's property. The parking lot is expected to be used by a mix of Oaknoll staff, residents, and visitors. If the property were not rezoned, the parking area would have to be removed from the property. ANALYSIS: The existing Medium Density Single-Family Residential Zone (RS-8) is primarily intended to provide for the development of small lot single-family dwellings. Duplexes and zero-lot line dwellings are also permitted, provided certain dimensional requirements are met. The proposed High Density Single-Family Zone (RM-44) is intended to establish areas for the development of high-density multi-family dwellings and group living quarters. This zone is intended to be located near an arterial street for access. Permitted uses include multi-family dwellings and neighborhood centers. Nursing Homes are permitted as a provisional use, according to certain dimensional requirements. Other provisional uses permitted in the RM-44 zone include family care facilities, adult day care, religious institutions, eider family and group homes, fraternity or sorority houses, real estate centers, child care centers, and other types of eider housing. Relationship of the subject property to Oaknolh This lot is both adjacent to and across the street from the Oaknoll Retirement Center. On the north boundary, the parking area is elevated above Oaknoll's property. The north boundary contains a guardrail and vegetative screening to provide a barrier between the parking lot and the Oaknoll property below. To the east, directly 3 across the street from the parking lot, there is an entrance to the Oaknoll property. The lot at 703 Benton Court provides a very close parking area for the residents and visitors using the entrance to Oaknoll on Benton Court. Relationship of the property to the residential neighborhood: Single-family residences are to the south and west of the parking lot on 703 Benton Court. Oaknoll has planted evergreen screening along both the south and west boundaries, as is required by City ordinances. This screening provides a buffer between the residences and the residential properties, which will improve as the vegetation matures. The parking lot surface is set slightly below the grade of the adjacent properties, and water appears to drain to the street, not to adjacent properties. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan supports "projects that provide group living for seniors." Allowing this parking lot to remain permanently will help support the Oaknoll facility, and will have a positive effect on the surrounding neighborhood by providing parking for vehicles that otherwise would need to park on residential streets. The evergreen screening along the south and west sides of the parking lot provide a green buffer between the residential properties and the parking area. Staff is not aware of any complaints from the neighborhood about this parking lot that has existed for approximately two years. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the specific area of the rezoning request as a transition area between the 16-24 units/acre area occupied by Oaknoll and the 8-16 units/acre occupied by the residential neighborhood. While the 16-24 units/acre shown on the Land Use Map is a lower density than the RM-44 zone the Oaknoll property has, staff feels that in this situation there is a justification for it to have the same zoning as the rest of the Oaknoll property. Generally, it has been the city's practice to zone properties so that the transition between zones occurs at rear property lines. The Comprehensive Plan land use map reflects this, and shows the zoning change happen at the rear lot lines in-between Benton Court and George Street. Having the zone change take place at the rear lot lines is preferable because the front of the lots, or the more public side of the lots, face properties of a similar zone. Christian Retirement Services has purchased two of the three remaining properties on the west side of Benton Court, and in the long run hopes to expand in this direction. It may be appropriate in the future to rezone all of the properties on the west side of Benton Court to a higher density residential zone so that the change in zoning occurs at the rear lot lines rather than at the street. Traffic: No new units are being proposed for Oaknoll. at this time, and therefore there should not be an increase in traffic in the area as a result of this rezoning. Theoretically, if this 0.2 acres were developed with residential units, there would be a slight increase in the amount of traffic traveling from Benton Street to Benton Court. The City is in the process of developing design alternatives for improvements to Benton Street to improve traffic flow and circulation. Elderly housing facilities typically generate much less traffic than other multi-family uses. STAFF RFCOMMFNDATION: Staff recommends that RE798-0016, a request to rezone the approximate 0.2-acre property at 703 Benton Court from RS-8, Medium Density Single-Family Residential, to RM-44, High Density Multi-Family Residential, be approved. ATTACHMFNTS: 1. Location Map. 2. Statement from Applicant. Approved by: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner Department of Planning and Community Development IJJ 8S~ j~J 4 I I I,i Ct~ O ~ J J J W -- ~T z J JJ ~A!J0 UC Item 11. The subject property was originally the personal residence of applicant's predecessors. At the time of purchase of the property the predecessors retained ownership of the house and moved it from the premises. Thereafter, following receipt of permission from the City of Iowa City for use of the property as a temporary parking lot, the basement was filled and the lot was landscaped and surfaced for purposes of a temporary parking lot during construction of an addition to applicants facilities. Applicant was advised by the City of Iowa City that it would no longer be able to use said property for parking purposes following completion of applicant's addition, which will occur prior to the end of 1998. Applicant desires only to be able to continue to utilize said lot for its present use as a parking lot. Being able to so use said premises will lessen congestion in the area and will remove on-street parking from neighboring streets. January 6, 1999 To the Mayor and City Council: REZ98-0016 It is regrettable that Oaknoll and its neighbors must come to the City Council for a resolution that would permit the use of a single lot for parking -- a use to which no one objects. It is amazing that the solution that you are asked to approve is an up-zoning from RS-8 to RM- 44. I object to this rezoning for three reasons. 1. The area of Iowa City in which the proposed parking lot is located is characterized by a mixed use of single family residential and high-density multi-family. It is critically important that high density uses not be expanded. The neighborhood communities in this area are relatively fragile; if it appears that people may not rely on existing zoning, these communities will begin to disintegrate. A change from RS-8 to RM-44 is a drastic rezoning. 2. The rezoning in this instance is recommended by the planning staff as an accommodation of the private interests of a single private property owner and to the detriment of the community of other private property owners. This private accommodation gives the applicant property fights greatly in excess of those claimed to be wanted but quite consistent with the applicant's future plans. One might call this spot zoning, block busting, or private eminent domain. By whatever name, it is unfair and it is a misuse of the zoning laws; and that is why it did not receive the Planning and Zoning Commission's approval. 3. It seems unacceptable that no more modest solution has been found to facilitate what could be an unobjectionable continuation of a temporary use granted by the City. What one would expect in this situation is that the staff, the applicant, and any interested community members in the neighborhood would look for a way to permit the desired use without significantly changing the status quo. I assume that there must be a way and that our zoning laws are not so rigid and restrictive as to preclude such a solution. I do not suggest that there is only one way, but the existing city ordinance, Section 14-6L-2, Subsection A.9, authorizing temporary permits does seem a promising way to preserve and extend the current use. Consider the following: (1) This ordinance expressly authorizes permits for "Other temporary uses which, in the determination of the Building Official are compatible with the land use district and surrounding land uses." (Subsection A.9.) Note that this provision does not give the Building Official unbridled discretion but only the power and the duty to determine whether the temporary permit is "compatible" with surrounding uses. (2) Nothing in the ordinance requires that a temporary use be for a fixed period of time. On the contrary, one of the conditions that a temporary permit may include is a provision for a fixed period of time. (3) Such a condition (for a fixed period) may be imposed only for the purpose of ensuring that the permit will be "in accordance with the findings required by this Section [i.e., "compatible" land uses] and to satisfy the public needs directly caused by the proposed temporary use." (4) If the parking lot is thought to be a permanent use which is needed for the continuing operation of Oaknoll, that is an odd claim in view of the fact that: (a) The parking lot was created in the first place under a temporary permit because the construction of the Oaknoll addition made some of the existing parking unavailable; (b) The City planning staff forthrightly recommends that this lot be rezoned in anticipation of the fact that Oaknoll is buying up the block and will eventually want to have the entire block rezoned RM-44; (c) Once the lot is rezoned RM-44, Oaknoll or its successors may convert that lot into any RM-44 use, subject only to the restrictions agreed to as part of a conditional zoning agreement. I like having Oaknoll as a neighbor. I hope that they will be able to use the lot in question for parking. But not on the basis of a zoing change from RS-8 to RM-44. William Buss 747 West Benton Street 2 November 13\9, 1998 re: REZ98-0016 To: Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission At the time this is written, I have no clear basis for knowing just how this matter will be presented at the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on November 19, 1998, and I apologize in advance if the focus of this statement is somewhat off target. I have stated my position previously. I think it is a idamental misapplication of the zoning laws to rezone a particular lot or a particular street to accommodate the private plans of a particular property owner. In a drastic upzoning from RS-8 to RM-44, I think it is particularly inappropriate to be influenced in whole or in part because the applicant is an owner of an adjacent RM-44 property who has acquired property interests in the neighboring RS-8 zone. In this particular case, the owner of Oaknoll has requested a lot to be rezoned from RS-8 to RM-44 for the specific purpose of continuing to use that property for a parking lot for which the owner has had temporary permission during a period of over two-years of construction work on the Oaknoll premises. No one has objected to the continued use of this property as a parking lot pending decisions about the rezoning of neighboring properties which is expected to be requested at some date in the future. In general terms, Iowa City Ordinance, Section 14-6L-2, expressly authorizes a permit to be issued on a temporary basis, and nothing in this provision prohibits such a permit to be used to authorize the temporary continuance of the parking lot use. Nevertheless, the Planning & Zoning Commission has been advised that this ordinance must be iterpreted, against its own express language, to prohibit such a temporary permit, partially on the ground that such an ordinance must be interpreted "strictly," and partly on the ground that the city official responsible for issuing such temporary permits will refuse to issue one for this purpose even if the Planning & Zoning Commission interprets the ordinance to permit such use and recommends the issuance of the permit. At the same time, the staff of the Commission recommends that the RS-8-to-RM-44 rezoning be permitted. The staff recommendation is unqualifiedly based on its own belief that a more extensive rezoning of RM-44 will take place in the future and thus this rezoning should be permitted in order to authorize the continued use of the parking lot in the mean time. The more extensive rezoning is not before the Commission, and I assume that all agree that the Commission should not make a rezoning decision now in anticipation of what it might do in the future. In short, the Commission is asked to rezone RS-8 property to RM-44 as an accommodation to the applicant's use of the parking space. It is understandable why the applicant prefers to achieve its expressed immediate purpose through rezoning which may seem to place its foot in the door for a later rezoning effort. But treating the recommendations of the staff and the interpretation of the law together, one can only conclude it would be arbitrary and capricious to use a drastic rezoning rather than a temporary permit to achieve the desired accommodation. It is my understanding that the rezoning proposal may be accompanied by a restrictive covenant that would somewhat restrict future uses. That would be a clear improvement to a rezoning proposal without a restrictive covenant. But even limited in this way, using rezoning for the claimed purposes seems inappropriate. November 3, 1998 re: REZ98-0016 To: Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission The application of the present owner of the Oaknoll Retirement Home to rezone the lot at 703 Benton Ct. from RS-8 to RM-44 is a small matter with potentially large implications. I assume that Oaknoll is a good neighbor, and I do not doubt the importance of nursing and retirement facilities in Iowa City. But the request for rezoning is in no way limited to that use, and a rezoning jump from RS-8 to RM-44 is a gross overkill in order to obtain continued use of a parking lot for parking lot purposes. No one objects to the use of this lot as a parking lot, and surely the zoning law ought to be interpreted in a manner that makes this possible if there is a reasonable way to do so. I believe that Iowa City Ordinance, Section 14-6L-2, Temporary Uses, may be so interpreted. That section expressly provides for temporary use permits for "Other temporary uses which, in the determination of the Building Official are compatible with the land use district and surrounding land uses." (Subsection A.9.)~ The previously permitted parking lot use has already established that this temporary use is "compatible with the land uses presently on the site and with existing land uses in the general area." (Subsection C.2.) Although the ordinance does not expressly require a "rationale," one is plainly available: A rezoning decision in the future is contemplated, and no one objects to this interim parking space use until such a decision is made. To the extent that this interpretation of the law sets a precedent, it sets a precedent only for a situation that satisfies this rationale. Nothing in the ordinance requires that a temporary use be for a fixed period of time. On the contrary, one of the conditions that a temporary permit may include is a provision for a fixed period of time. Of course, I do not argue that there is no other interpretation for resolving this issue in a manner that satisfies all interested persons. The Planning and Zoning staff has argued that the plausibly available alternatives would create an unacceptable precedent, and that may well be true. Yet it is clear that the staff anticipates that the west side of Benton Court will eventually be rezoned RM-44, and the reason given by staff for its anticipatory approval of this change is itself a far worse precedent. The general area on both sides of West Benton Street which includes the lot in question is decidedly a mixed zone area, combining single family residential uses and high density apartments. It is critically important that the balance of zoning now established in this area not be changed. Benton Street should not be made to tolerate additional traffic; more RM-44 construction will not be the source of housing for school-age children who would attend the two ~ A temporary use permit may also be issued for "parking areas in conjuction with a permitted use." neighborhood schools in the immediate vicinity; any significant growth of RM-44 development will reduce the value of the area for residential purposes. It is these broad public considerations that should influence the Planning & Zoning Commission's decision, not the narrow interests of a private property owner who has no present fight whatsoever to have this property rezoned for its private advantage. In the explanation of its view that rezoning is appropriate, the staff points to the fact that "the rest of the Oaknoll property is zoned RM-44," that the owner of Oaknoll "owns two of the three remaining lots on the west side of Benton Court," and that, in the long run, Oaknoll's owner "hopes to expand in that direction." Although I am sure it is not intended to do so, this reasoning conveys a very cynical message of approval of a form of block busting that favors high density uses: It informs the citizens of Iowa City that zoning lines are not a very secure basis of stability. It announces that an owner of property in a high density zone can expand its high density development by purchasing property in an adjacent much lower density zone with the expectation that the acquired property will be upzoned. Citizens unfortunate enough to live in the next block or the block after that should regard their days as being numbered; it will just be a matter of time and economic motive until the line is pushed in their direction. One suggested response to this blockbusting policy is to ask, "How can anyone complain: upzoning increases the value of your property?" There are two problems with this response. First, it is not true that the value of the neighbors' property, one or two steps removed, will increase; indeed, their property will become less valuable for residential purposes because of their new high density neighbors (and, at the same time, cheaper for the entrepeneurial accquirer of the property). Second, and more important, many people buy homes because they want to live in them as part of a neighborhood community, not to hold for resale at the "highest and best use." The Iowa City Comprehensive Plan seems to understand that deeply human desire when it talks about a "community of neighborhoods." When the Smiths go into their backyard for a cookout and see that their neighbors, John and Mary Jones, have been replaced by the Cloudview Apartments, the Smiths will take no comfort from staffs position that favors putting the transition between zones at the rear lot line. Nor will the Smiths' neighbors across the street find much assurance that the staff position will protect them when Cloudview starts buying up the property on either side of the Smiths. William Buss 747 West Benton Street Iowa City, Iowa 52246 Copy: Karin Franklin, Robert Miklo, John Yapp, Robert Downer WEEBER-HARLOCKE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION 1101 Weeber Circle Iowa City, Iowa 52246-5169 January 7, 1999 Members of the City Council City of Iowa City Civic Center 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Re: Rezoning Request at 703 Benton Court o::r3 ~ Dear Council Members: As spokesperson for the Weeber-Harlocke Neighborhood Association, I am writing to express our opposition to the request to rezone property at 703 Benton Court from Medium Density Single- Family Residential (RS-8) to High Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-44). This property is located on the north side of West Benton Street. Benton Court is a direct extension of Weeber Street. We are not opposed to Oaknoll Retirement Services continued use of this property as a parking lot for its employees. Our opposition is to the requested change in zoning (RS-8 to RM-44), which would be in violation of the City' s Comprehensive Plan. Moreover, we believe approval of the proposed change constitutes "spot zoning" even though this view is not shared by the City's Planning and Zoning Staff. In a recent conversation with Karen Franklin, she stated this request would not be "spot zoning" because the property in question is adjacent to property owned by Oaknoll Retirement Services and that property is already zoned RM- 44. Hence the newly acquired property would be merely an extension of existing property. If the City Planning and Zoning Staff wishes to use this argument to counter the "spot zoning" argument, then it would be wise to consider the property at 703 Benton Court is not only adjacent to RM-44 property owned by Oaknoll but also adjacent to several other properties that are presently zoned RS-8. If in this case "spot zoning" is to be viewed solely as a "red herring" argument, then one must ask why did the City's Planning and Zoning Commission spend so much time on this issue. It was debated and discussed thoroughly by Commission members. The Planning and Zoning Staff was asked repeatedly to research and provide an alternative solution. As you know, no other solution was offered so the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended against the rezoning with a 3-3 vote. One suggestion made by Commission members was that the temporary use permit (which allowed for creation of the parking lot) be extended and that the property remain RS-8. This idea was reject by the Planning and Zoning Staff because such use of the permit in their view would exceed the original intent. The permit would be in effect beyond a perceived restricted period of time. It would seem difficult to defend such a rigid position about something labeled "temporary" when the term itself has no fixed time parameters. Yet the primary concern expressed by Staff was an extension of Re: Rezoning Request at 703 Benton Court, page 2. the temporary permit would set a bad precedent. Other developers could apply for a temporary use permit to establish parking lots on properties not recognized as appropriate for such use. This is a valid concern. However, we would argue there is a greater danger when a piece of property is rezoned from RS-8 to RM-44 just to satisfy the specials interests of an individual property owner and without regard for the City's Comprehensive Plan. Although we do not consider ourselves to be as well versed in planning and zoning issues as our city planners, it is not too difficult to find articles that support our view of the 703 Benton Court rezoning request.. Enclosed is a brief article titles "Understanding Spot Zoning," that conveys in a more universal way our views about this issue. I have marked several passages which seem especially relevant. The intent here is not to burden you with additional reading, but to demonstrate the basis for our concerns. We hope you will concur with us that a more appropriate solution to the current problem must be found. Therefore, we urge you at this time to reject this request to rezone 703 Benton Court from RS-8 to RM-44. ~2~e.~, William E. Knabe Neighborhood Spokesperson -2- PCJ Article: "Understanding Spot Zoning," by Robert C. Widner http://www.webcom.comFpcj/articles/wid060.html Planning !'timer: Understanding Spot Zoning by Robert C. Widner, Esq. /l"rofii l.~,~uc /3, /~u,~dc' 1 '. ul II~c' l'( :l. II'iific'i' /994/ Most planning commissioners have heard the impassioned cry that a particular rezoning decision will constitute an invalid "spot zoning." This allegation typically arises where the community is considering the rezoning of a single lot or small parcel of property held by a single owner and the rezoning will permit land uses not available to the adjacent property. Because spot zoning often focuses on the single parcel without considering the broader context, that is, the area and land uses surrounding the parcel, it is commonly considered the antithesis of planned zoning. While rezoning decisions that only affect a single parcel or small mount of land are most often the subject of spot zoning claims (as opposed to rezonings of larger areas), a locality can lawfully rezone a single parcel if its action is shown to be consistent with the community's land use policies. As I will discuss shortly, courts look to the community's comprehensive plan, or to other planning studies, in determining whether the rezoning is, in fact, consistent with local land use policies. Of course, whether a particular rezoning constitutes an unlawful spot zoning depends largely upon the facts surrounding the zoning decision and upon the judicial decisions of each state. However, courts commonly note that the underlying question is whether the zoning decision advances the health, safety, and welfare of the community. A zoning decision that merely provides for individual benefit without a relationship to public benefit cannot be About the Author Robert Widner is an attorney with the law firm of Gorsuch Kirgis in Denver, Colorado, where he focuses on local government and land use planning law. He previously seved as assistant city attorney for the City of Arvada, Colorado, and as legal counsel to the Arvada Planning Commission. Widner holds a master's degree in urban and regional planning and is an adjunct faculty member at the University of Colorado Graduate School of Architecture and Planning in Denver. According to Widner, if you're confronted with a claim that a 1 of 3 11/20/98 8:33 AM PCJ Article: "Understanding Spot Zoning," by Robert C. Widner http://www.webcom.com/-pcj/articles/wid060.html legally supported. Where a particular zoning decision is not supported by a public purpose, the zoning decision is arbitrary and may be subject to invalidation as unlawful spot zoning. Although courts throughout the nation differ in their specific approaches when reviewing spot zoning claims, the majority consider: 1. the size of the parcel subject to rezoning; 2. the zoning both prior to and after the local govemment's decision; 3. the existing zoning and use of the adjacent properties; 4. the benefits and detriments to the landowner, neighboring property owners, and the community resulting from the rezoning; and 5. the relationship between the zoning change and the local government's stated land use policies and objectives. "Because spot zoning often focuses on the single parcel ~ ~ithout e ~ ~nsidering the t,~ ~ ~,~oader context :~,~ it is commonly ~nsidered the ~tithesis of planned zoning." This last factor -- the relationship of the rezoning decision to the community's land use policies and objectives -- is perhaps the most important one. As a result, when a planning commission (or governing body) initially considers a rezoning request it should determine whether the request is consistent with the comprehensive or master plan. Many communities' zoning codes also require a separate planning study that examines the merits of the proposed rezoning. This further ensures that any rezoning is consistent with the community's land use objectives, and not a case of spot zoning. The bottom line is that courts will give considerable weight to evidence that the locality's rezoning decision reflects thoughtful consideration of planning factors. It should be noted that there is one situation where a rezoning decision that does not conform to the comprehensive plan may nevertheless be upheld. That is where there is evidence showing significant changes in the community since the adoption of the plan that would justify a rezoning of the property. This is especially tree where a review of other factors, such as benefit to the community and the size of the rezoned parcel, indicate that the rezoning was not merely intended to confer a benefit to the property claim that a particular rezoning may constitute spot zoning, seek the opinion of your commission's attorney -- it might avoid litigation later Take a look at a look at alist of all of the PCJ's Planninq Law Primer columns. Consistency of rezoning with the comprehensive plan 2 of 3 11/20/98 8:33 AM PCJ Article: "Understanding Spot Zoning," by Robert C. Widner http://www.webcom.com/-pcj/articles/widO60.html owner. Please note that this article is copyright protected by the Planning Commissioners Journal. You are welcome to download or print the article for your own personal use -- or to provide a link to this article from another Web site. For other use of the article, please contact the Planning Commissioners Journal. 3 of 3 11/20/98 8:33 AM We the residents of Oaknoll want to express to you, the Iowa City Council members, our desire for approval of the rezoning request of the temporary parking lot located at 703 Benton Court. Our concern for parking is great. Our not-for-profit retirement residence has struggled with overcrowded parking lots for residents, guests, and employees. This additional lot on Benton Court makes a convenient and safe access for residents living in this area of the Oaknoll Community. No matter what age, having access to a car gives us the sense of independence and allows us to stay active. In the past when parking has not been available, many family and friends have had to drive around the block many times to find a parking spot. This becomes inconvenient for them especially if they need to just drop off or pick up a resident or if the weather conditions are less than perfect. We fear that without convenient parking for them they may chose not to come visit as often. So much of our livelihood and well-being depends on interaction with loved ones, friends, and visitors from the community. There are residents who also need help getting in and out of the building and into cars because they use wheelchairs and walkers. Once again, convenient parking is essential for them. This lot has also provided parking for the staff alleviating the congestion on George and Oakcrest Streets which would appear to make the homeowners in the area more appreciative. From our above concerns, we strongly urge you to approve the rezoning of this temporary parking lot. Signed the concerned residents of Oaknoll Retirement Residence: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, at 7:00 p.m. on the 12th day of January, 1999, in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa; at which hearing the Council will consider: 1. An ordinance designation 2 South Linn Street as an Iowa City Historic Landmark. 2. An ordinance changing the zoning designation of approximately 0.2 acres located at 703 Benton Court from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) to High Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-44). (R~-AO0nl 5) ordinance changing the zoning designation of 21.26 acres located on the east side of Naples Avenue from Intensive Commercial (C1-1) to Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone~Intensive Commercial (OSA-CI-1). Copies of the proposed resolution are on file for public examination in the office of the City Clerk, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to make their views known for Council consideration are encouraged to appear at the above-mentioned time and place. MARlAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK ppdadmin/nph-0112.doc 01-12-99 6d Prepared by: John Yapp, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5247 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF LOT 8 AND OUTLOT A WB DEVELOPMENT, AND LOT 1, RESUBDIVISION OF OUTLOT A, WB DEVELOPMENT, A 21.26 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF NAPLES AVENUE, SOUTH OF ITS INTERSECTION WITH ALYSSA COURT, FROM INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL (C1-1) TO SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL (OSA-CI-1). WHEREAS, Maxwell Construction Inc., owns Lot 8 and Outlot A, WB Development, and Lot 1 of a Resubdivision of Outlot A, WB Development, and has applied to rezone the property to OSA-CI- 1 to permit the grading and filling of critical slopes (25% - 39% steep) and to permit grading and filling in the required buffer area of protected slopes (greater than 40% steep), as shown on the attached rezoning exhibit; and WHEREAS, the purpose of regulating development on and near steep slopes is to promote safety in the design and construction of development, minimize flooding, landslides, and mudslides, minimize soil instability, erosion, and downstream siltation, and to preserve the scenic character of hillside areas, particularly wooded hillsides; and WHEREAS, one purpose of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance as a whole is to permit and define the reasonable use of properties which contain environmentally sensitive features and natural resources while recognizing the importance of environmental resources and protecting such resources from destruction, and to foster urban design that preserves open space and minimizes disturbance of environmentally sensitive features and natural resources; and WHEREAS, the Sensitive Areas Ordinance allows the alteration of critical slopes and the alteration of the buffer area of protected slopes with approval of a Sensitive Areas Overlay rezoning and Sensitive Areas Development Plan, and; WHEREAS, the grading and filling in the area labeled A of the rezoning exhibit is associated with Ordinance No. Page 2 the installation of utlities and the construction of Sierra Court, the private drive serving this site; and WHEREAS, while containing critical slopes and protected slope buffer areas, the swale labeled a~ B on the attached rezoning exhibit does not contain any additionally enhancing sensitive environmental features such as a grove of trees or a stream corridor, nor is it scenic in the sense that it does not contain woods or other unique vegetation; and WHEREAS, allowing the filling and grading of the areas labeled as A and B on the attached rezoning exhibit allows reasonable use of the subject property; and WHEREAS, the swale labeled as C on the attached rezoning exhibit is an undisturbed, wooded, scenic area primarily within an outlot specifically set aside for open space and stormwater management, and the Planning & Zoning Commission has recommended the removal of Area C from the rezoning exhibit and Sensitive Areas Development Plan, such that grading and filling will not be permitted in Area C as proposed; and WHEREAS, the attached rezoning exhibit constitutes the Sensitive Areas Development Plan associated with the proposed rezoning to SAO-CI- 1, and represents that filling and grading which is permitted in areas of critical and protected slopes. Further, a grading plan will need to be approved prior to development activity taking place on the property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: SFCTION I. APPROVAL. The property legally described below is hereby reclassified from its current designation of C1-1 to OSA-CI-1, and the Sensitive Areas Development Plan submitted by the applicant, as shown on the attached rezoning exhibit, is hereby approved, subject to the removal of the proposed grading and filling on Area C from the plan: Lot 8 and Outlot A, WB Development, Iowa City, Iowa in accordance with the recorded plat in Book 36, at Page 118, of the Records of the Johnson County Recorder's Office, and Lot 1, of the resubdivision of Outlot A, WB Development, Iowa City, Iowa, in accordance with the plat recorded in Book 38, at Page 201, of the Records of the Johnson County Recorder's Office. SFCTION li. ZONING MAP. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa to conform to this amendment upon the final passage, approval, and publication of this Ordinance No. Page 3 ordinance as provided by law. SFCTION III. CFRTIFICATION AND RECORDING. Upon passage and approval of this Ordinance, the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this Ordinance for recordation in the Office of the Recorder, Johnson County, Iowa, at the property owner's expense, all as provided by law. SECTION V. SEVFRABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision, or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconsti- tutional. SI=CTION VI, FFFFCTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval, and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this day of ,19__ MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLER / ppdadmin~ord~allyssa.dod City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: January 7, 1999 To: City Council From: John Yapp, Associate Planner REZ98-0014, Lot 8 and Outlot A, WB Development, and Lot 1, Resubdivision Outlot A, WB Development The applicant, Maxwell Construction, Inc., originally applied for a Sensitive Areas Rezoning to permit the altering of critical slopes (25%-39% steep), and in the buffer area of protected slopes (>40% steep), for the areas labeled A, B and C on the attached diagram. Much of the grading in area A has already been done, in conjunction with the installation of sewers, and in the construction of Sierra Court, a private Drive serving the site. The applicant's intent for areas B and C is to fill and shape existing ravines, in order to create more developable area on Lot 8. Both staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission have recommended that the application for the Sensitive Areas Rezoning, to permit the altering of critical slopes as shown on the attached plan, be approved, subject to area C being removed from the plan. Staff has noted in the staff report that the ravine in area C, in contrast to the ravine in area B, is an undisturbed, wooded, stable ravine which is primarily in Outlot A, which is designated as open space and a stormwater management area. The photographs found in the computer disks provided to the City Council are of area C. A revised staff recommendation, which incorporates the attached diagram, is below. The substance of staff's recommendation has not changed from the October 15 staff report. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that REZ98-0014, a request to rezone Lot 8 and Outlot A, WB Development, and Lot 1, Resubdivision Outlot A WB Development, from C1-1, Intensive Commercial, to OSA-CI-1, Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone, and the associated Sensitive Areas Development Plan, be approved to permit the grading shown in areas A and B of the rezoning exhibit, subject to the establishment of natural plant species on the altered slopes, and the removal of area C from the plan. Approved by: nior Planner Department of Planning and Community Development L .I !! CITY OF IOWA CITY PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT M~MORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: John Yapp Terry Robinson ' October 30, 1998 Naples Avenue Tree Species My inspection of the site reveals that Siberian Elm is the dominant species in the area; Mulberry is the only other species that is present. Seventy to eighty percent of the trees in the area were damaged in the June 29th storm. There are numerous trees that were blown over. Even though the area is heavily grazed, there is no apparent erosion at this time. It is my opinion that the trees will survive for some time even though they have experienced considerable damage. It is also my opinion that the trees alone will not hold the soil in place over time if the grass cover is removed. If you have any questions, please call. TREE COVERAGE--SWALE AT THE EAST BOUNDARY OF LOT 8 Existing Trees Type Condition Count Percentage Chinese Elm Live 12 22% Chinese Elm BrokenTop 28 52% Chinese Elm Blown Down 11 20% Chinese Elm Standing Dead 3 6% Total Existing Trees 54 100% Proposed Trees Evergreens Crabapple Serviceberries Oak STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: REZ98-0014. Lot1, Lot 8, Outlot A, WB Development GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Requested action: Purpose: Location: Size: Existing land use and zoning: Surrounding land use and zoning: Comprehensive Plan: File date: 45-day limitation period: SPECIAL INFORMATION: Public utilities: Public services: Prepared by: John Yapp Date: October 15, 1998 Maxwell Development Company PO Box 1802 Iowa City, IA 52244 Phone: 354-5858 Rezoning from C1-1, Intensive Commercial, to OSA, Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone. To allow the grading of critical slopes, and to allow grading within the required buffer area of a protected slope. East of Naples Avenue, south of its intersection with Alyssa Court. 21.26 acres Commercial, Stormwater basin; C1ol, Intensive Commercial North: East: South: West: Commercial; Commercial Highway 218 Agricultural; Agricultural Commercial; County Planned Commercial C1-1, Intensive County A2, CP2, General Commercial September 28, 1998 November 12, 1998 Municipal water and sewer are available. The City provides Municipal fire and 2 police protection. Refuse collection must be provided by a private hauler for commercial uses. Transportation: There is no transit service on the west side of Highway 218. Physical characteristics: The property contains small areas of critical (25%-40%) and protected (>40%) slopes. The southern portion of the property is relatively flat, while the northern portion contains a stormwater detention basin with relatively steep slopes. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The applicant, Maxwell Development Company, is requesting a Sensitive Areas. Overlay Zone for a 21.26-acre parcel on Lot 8, and Outlot A of WB Development, and Lot 1, Resubdivision Outlot A WB Development, located on the east side of Naples Avenue, south of it's intersection with Alyssa Court. The area proposed for rezoning contains critical and protected slopes. The Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone is required for any grading done to areas of critical slopes (25%-40%) or the required buffer of protected slopes (>40%). The rezoning exhibit submitted by the applicant shows three areas of grading and filling that would impact the critical and protected slopes on the site. Previous Sensitive Areas Site Plans approved by the City included a retaining ,wall roughly parallel to the private drive along the east boundary of Lot 1. This retaining wall was intended to have the effect of minimizing the grading area adjacent to the protected slopes. The need for the retaining wall was a result of the applicant wishing to construct the private road further to the east, and closer to the sensitive slopes, than was shown on previous plans. The applicant never installed the retaining wall, and instead graded a more gradual, but longer, slope from the access drive down to the natural topography of the land was created. The applicant has stated the intent of the longer slope, and the limited grading into the critical slopes, eliminated the need of constructing a retaining wall over a City maintained storm sewer. This is misleading, as the retaining wall the City expected would be installed did not go over the sewer, but curved away from it. A Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone for the grading done on the east portion of Lot 1, associated with the utilities, is needed because the applicant deviated from what was shown on approved plans. The rezoning exhibit reflects this more gradual but longer slope. The rezoning exhibit also includes two other areas of grading and filling of critical slopes. One area is along the northerly property line of Lot 8 and into Outlot A, and the other is along the easterly property line of Lot 8, but primarily within Outlot A adjacent to Lot 8. Both areas are natural swales that have the function of directing water to the stormwater detention pond in Outlot A. The applicant is proposing to fill in and grade the ravines in these locations to create a flatter approximate 25% slope. The applicant has noted that this action will enable to owner to better maintain vegetation on the ravines, and will allow for a larger portion of Lot 8 to be developed. 3 ANALYSIS: Sensitive Areas Ordinance. The Sensitive Areas Ordinance requires a Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone for any development activities impacting critical slopes and/or protected slopes. Any property containing critical or protected slopes is required to submit a sensitive areas overlay rezoning application, sensitive areas development plan, and a grading plan, prior to any development activity. The purpose of regulating development on and near slopes is to: 14-6K-11(1): a. Promote safety is the design and construction of developments. b. Minimize flooding, landslides, and mudslides. c. Minimize soil instability, erosion, and downstream siltation. d. Preserve the scenic character of hillside areas, particularly wooded hillsides. The following design standards for regulated slopes apply to this proposed rezoning: .14-6K-11(4)(b): Except for driveways and utilities installation, no grading or excavation shall be allowed outside the construction area on lots containing protected slopes. Grading and excavation shall be minimized on steep and critical slopes. 14-6K-11(4)(e): To maintain the stability of ungraded areas, existing vegetation shall be retained to the maximum possible. Grading Associated with Utilities and Street Installation The grading on the east portion of Lot 1 and the northwest portion of Outlot A is already done, and was completed as part of the street construction and installation of the storm and sanitary sewers. The retaining wall shown on previously approved plans was not put in. Instead, the applicant graded a more gradual, but longer slope, that impacted a small portion of critical and protected slopes. While this grading goes into the buffer area required around the protected slope, grading associated with 'essential public utilities' is permitted within required buffer areas. Staff is troubled that this grading was done without City approval, and in fact deviated from the approved plan significantly by not installing a retaining wall that staff understood would be installed. However, the end result is a more gradual slope off of tlie private drive than were the retaining wall installed. Also, because the work has already been done, it may be more environmentally destructive to attempt to change the grade of the slope again just to install the retaining wall. Staff recommends approval of the rezoning for the grading associated with the utilities installation, subject to native plants being used as vegetative cover. Native plants, because of their larger root systems and adaptability to this climate, have been shown to provide better erosion control and filtration of water than imported species. They are lower maintenance once they are established. The native plants also have the potential to give the area more scenic value. The use of native plants is consistent with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance, which promotes the protection and enhancement of natural and native prairie areas. Staff recommends that if the rezoning is approved, the applicant provide staff with a seed mix of native species to be used on the altered slopes prior to Planning and Zoning Commission voting on this item. Grading and Filling of Natural Swales The proposed grading and filling of two swales, primarily on Outlot A, would alter the portions that have critical slopes (25%-40% slopes) to achieve a swale with a 4:1 (25%) slope. The applicant contends that this will allow for a swale that is easier to maintain. The applicant has noted that filling in these swales will create more developable area on Lot 8. The majority of the portions of the swales proposed for filling and grading are within Outlot A, which is designated for stormwater management and open space. Areas within Outlot A would be filled to achieve a small increase in the amount of developable area on Lot 8. Swale at the northern boundary of Lot 8: The swale at the northern boundary of Lot 8 appears to have good vegetative cover, but has had some silt deposits on it from development activities on Lot 8 as well. This swale is not visible from the main roads in the vicinity such as Highway 218 and Naples Avenue, and therefore it does contribute to the overall scenic quality of the area. Filling and grading activities on this particular swale would not affect any protected slopes (40% + ), which receive a higher level of protection than critical slopes. While erosion and siltation may be increased while development activity occurs on the slope, it should cease as soon as a vegetative cover is again established on the slope. Similar to the grading done on eastern portion of Lot 1, staff recommends that should the proposal to grade this swale be approved, native plant material be required as a vegetative cover on the graded areas. Swale at the east boundary of Lot 8: The swale at the east boundary of Lot 8 and the southwestern portion of Outlot A is different from the one at the north part of Lot 8 in that it has an area of protected slopes (40%+), it is visible from Highway 218, it has some tree cover, and it has been relatively undisturbed from nearby development activities. A 2-foot buffer is required for every 1-foot of vertical rise of the protected slope, which in this case comes to an approximate 20-foot required buffer. Some of the proposed grading for this eastern swale would impact this buffer area. The buffer is required to protect the integrity of the 40% + slope. The ordinance states that development activities may take place within the protected slope buffer if a geologist or professional engineer can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that the development activity will not undermine the stability of the slope. The applicant has not provided this justification. This swale is visible from Highway 218, and has some tree cover which add to its scenic quality. The ordinance states that one of the intents of regulating slopes is to "preserve the scenic character of scenic hillsides, particularly wooded hillsides." Staff acknowledges that the trees located here are not of landmark quality, and many of them were damaged during the June storm. However, even with limited tree coverage this critical slope provides a transition between the protected slopes on Outlot A and the urban development expected on Lot 8. Summary: Approving the grading associated with the street and utilities installation, even though it was done without City approval, will be less destructive than removing the fill and erecting a retaining wall as shown on the approved plans. Permitting the filling and grading of the swale at the north end of Lot 8 will increase the developable area of this property without 5 greatly encroaching into a natural area. The proposed grading on the east side of Lot 8, however, would encroach more substantially into the natural area in Outlot A, and staff recommends that it not be approved. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that REZ98-0014, a request to rezone Lot 8 and Outlot A, WB Development, and Lot 1, Resubdivision Outlot A WB Development, from C1-1, Intensive Commercial, to OSA-CI-1, Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone, and the associated Sensitive Areas Development Plan, be approved to permit the grading along the east portion of Lot 1 and the northwest portion of Outlot A associated with the installation of utilities, and the swale beginning at the north portion of Lot 8, subject to the establishment of natural plant species on the altered slopes, and removal of the proposed grading of the swale along the easterly portion of Lot 8. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Rezoning Exhibit 3. Letter from Applicant Approved by: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner Department of Planning and Community Development ~NVO LLI n, 0 O. I I r, NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT AND ESTIMATED COST FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE PARK MAINTENANCE BUILDING IN N~,POLEON PARK, IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA TO ALL TAXPAYERS OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AND TO OTHER PERSONS IN- TERESTED: Public notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will conduct a public hearing on plans, specifica- tions, form of contract and estimated cost for the construction of the Park Maintenance Building in Napoleon Park in said City at 7:00 p.m. on the 12th day of January, 1999, said meeting to be held in the Council Chain- bers in the Civic Center in said City. Said plans, specifications, form of contract and estimated cost are now on file in the office of the City Clerk in the Civic Center in Iowa City, Iowa, and may be inspected by any persons interested. Any persons interested may appear at said meeting of the City Council for the purpose of making objections to said plans, specifications, contract or the cost of making said improve- merit. This notice is given by order of the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa. MARlAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK parksrec/res/napolnpn,doc NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT AND ESTIMATED COST FOR THE SUMMIT STREET BRIDGE RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA TO ALL TAXPAYERS OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AND TO OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS: Public notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will conduct a public hearing on plans, specifications, form of contract and estimated cost for the construction of the Summit Street Bddge Reconstruction Project in said City at 7:00 p.m. on the 12th day of January, 1999, said meeting to be held in the Council Chambers in the Civic Center in said City. Said plans, specifications, form of contract and estimated cost are now on file in the office of the City Clerk in the Civic Center in Iowa City, Iowa, and may be inspected by any interested persons. Any interested persons may appear at said meeting of the City Council for the purpose of making objections to and comments concerning said plans, specifications, contract or the cost of making said improvement. This notice is given by order of the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa and as provided by law. MARlAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK pweng%sumbnph.doc NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT AND ESTIMATED COST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SAND PIT PUMP STATION LOWER TERMINUS IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA. TO ALL TAXPAYERS OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AND TO OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS: Public notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will conduct a public hearing on plans, specifications, form of contract and estimated cost for the construction of the Sand Pit Pump Station Lower Terminus, in said City of Iowa City at 7:00 P.M. on the 12th day of January, 1999, said meeting to be held in the Council Chambers in the Civic Center in said City. Said plans, specifications, form of contract and estimated cost are now on file in the office of the City Clerk in the Civic Center in Iowa City, Iowa, and may be inspected by any interested persons. Any interested persons may appear at said meeting of the City Council for the purpose of making objections to and comments conceming said plans, specifications, contract or the cost of making said improvement. This notice is given by order of the City Council of the City of Iowa city, Iowa and as provided by law. MARlAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the City Council of Iowa City will hold a public hearing on the 12th day of January, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Iowa City, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, regarding the City Council's intent to conditionally convey the vacated portions of the Old Johnson Street and alley right-of-way located east of North Market Square Park and south of Horace Mann School to the Iowa City School District for the purpose of providing a public park for students of Horace Mann School, said conveyance to be without compensation as a conveyance to a governmental entity for a public purpose pursuant to Iowa Code §364.7(3) (1997). Persons interested in expressing their views concerning this matter, either verbally or in writing, will be given the opportunity to be heard at the above-mentioned time and place. MARlAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK sarah\landuse\horman.nph City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: January6,1999 To: City Council Members From: Tim H"~n~n'es, Acting Senior Building Inspector Re: Adoption of Uniform Codes The Board of Appeals and the Historic Preservation Commission have met and discussed your items of concern and below is a discussion of their recommendations. 1. The permit fee section of the code has been revised such that additional fees are not paid when the applicant reports the total value of construction. This will be accomplished by having the applicant provide two values for the proposed construction. The first value is used to calculate the permit fee which will not include the value of plumbing, mechanical and electrical work since separate permits are collected for such work. The second value required will include the value of all construction to include plumbing, mechanical and electrical. The second value is used for statistical reporting purposes for construction evaluation reports and by including the total value it will more accurately report the value of construction in Iowa City. A third alternative for foundation walls was added as an exception to the foundation wall reinforcing section. This option was made possible through the collaboretive efforts of the Iowa City Homebuilders Association, local engineers, the Board of Appeals and City staff. The City Council made a revision which would require a building permit when applying new siding and installing new windows in single family and duplex dwellings and accessory structures when located in a Histodc Oveday Zone. Attached you will find a memo from Scott Kugler stating the Historic Preservation Commission recommends adoption of the proposed code as amended. However, the Board of Appeals recommends against this revision and requests that the Council consider eliminating item 12b from Section 106.2 in the local amendments of the 1997 Uniform Building Code. In conclusion the amendments to the Uniform Building Code incorporate the revisions made by Council to require a building permit when siding or windows are installed on structures located in the Historic Oreday Zone. Attachments: 1. Memo from Scott Kugler to Tim Hennes dated 12/17/98 2. Minutes of Board of Appeals Meeting of 12/7/98 cc: Doug Boothroy, Director, Housing & Inspection Services Dennis Mitchell, Assistant City Attorney Im~mem\thl-4.doc Members of the Iowa City City Council Civic Center, 410 E. Washington Iowa City, Iowa 52240 January 12, 1999 Dear City Council Members: We support the proposed building cede amendment whereby properties that are historic landmarks or in historic districts require a certificate of appropriateness to m-side a building or replace windows. Siding and windows are defining hallmarks of a historic structure. Alterations to either deserve careful, informed consideration. Siding an older home can cause irreversible changes and major problems. · Original millwork and trim---especially around windows, porches, and gables-- is often removed and discarded. · Applying siding can damage the original siding, such that future homeowners who wish to revert to the original siding find it fiddled with nail holes and rot. · The dimension, texture, and reflective qualifies of artificial siding are just different enough that a re-sided home sticks out like a sore thumb, thus eroding the historic character and integrity of the entire neighborhood or district. Replacing windows is also tricky. Windows are another defining characteristic of a historic home. We know through first-hand experience that the Historic Preservation Commission can help the homeowner find the most appropriate long-term solutions for a window replacement. We understand the process from several perspectives. We have lived in a historic district for fourteen years. We applied to the Historic Preservation Commission in 1991 for a certificate of appropriateness (which we received, along with some excellent advice that improved our project). And one of us later served a term on the commission. Requiring certificates of appropriateness for alterations to historic properties means that the homeowner ends up receiving sound advice on affordable solutions that will maintain the home's historic integrity for decades. In essence, everybody wins--the current owner; the neighborhood and public who value Iowa City's historic street-scape; and future owners, who are not inheriting someone's short-term solutions in 1999 that turn out to be major headaches in 2020. Sincerely, Jim and Ginalie Swaim 1024 Woodlawn Iowa City, Iowa 52245 cc: Scott Kugler, Historic Preservation Commission David C Thompson 827 Brown St Iowa City, IA 52245 To Whom It May Concern, I am writing you regarding the proposed change in the Building Code which would make permits necessary for window replacement and residing when the building is located inside a Historic District. I am unable to attend tonight's meeting so I am submitting this letter to express my opinions. I do own a home inside an Iowa City Historic District so this change has the potential to impact me directly. I am strongly opposed to the adoption of this proposed change for two reasons: 1 ) I am not convinced that siding and window replacements should require approval. These items are primarily cosmetic and are often performed in an effort to upgrade a building. Imposing someone else's biases and cosmetic opinions on a homeowner who wishes to upgrade his or her home should not be done. 2) Obviously siding and window replacement is not really a concern of the Building Inspection Department or they would be asking that permits be required city wide and not just in Historic Preservation Districts. When this District was created we were assured that items not requiring permits would not need pre-approval. If you now enact special permit requirements for Historic Districts you will be subverting the intent of that earlier assurance. I would ask you to consider these points carefully and not create special permit requirements for Historic Preservation Districts. Sincerely, David C Thompson