HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-07-19 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES APPROVED
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
JUNE 9, 2005-7:00 P.M.
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM
MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Brennan, Richard Carlson, Mark McCallum, Jim Ponto, Jan Weissmiller,
Tim Weitzel
MEMBERS ABSENT: James Enloe, Michael Gunn, Justin Pardekooper
STAFF PRESENT: Sunil Terdaikar
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Weitzel called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION:
Certificate of Appropriateness:
934 Iowa Avenue. Terdalkar said that the applicant proposes to remove the stairs that are part wood and
part concrete block masonry. He said the applicant will then replace the wood stairs but will not
reconstruct the masonry stairs. Terdalkar said that the applicant needs to add a parking spot at the back
of the house and is therefore will replace the driveway and the stairs are on the edge of the driveway. He
said that the applicant wants to widen the concrete driveway. He informed that the masonn/stairs h@ve
already been demolished.
Weissmiller asked if this has always been a rental property. Terdalkar said it has been a rental property
for the past few years. He said that HIS requires the owner to add a parking spot because of the number
of renters.
Weitzel said that one option is to replace the stairs, and, given the grade, a railing will probably be
required. He said that will probably be based on new requirements for riser height and tread depth, which
will probably be more than four steps and therefore require a railing. Weitzel said the intent was to
demolish the concrete, but if the stoop is over three feet high in the back, it would also require a safety
railing on the back.
Weitzel said that one thing the owner could do would be to regrade so that a railing is not required, but
there may still need to be a handrail if there is sufficient height to require four or more stairs. He asked
Terdalkar if he checked with HIS to see how far back the owner would have to extend the grading to be
compliant. Terdalkar said that at least five feet.
Weitzel said the need for a railing will be determined by the number of risers required. He said that four or
more risers trigger the requirement by HIS for a handrail, which the Commission can then review. Weitzel
said that additionally, if the landing for the stoop is over three feet above grade, there will need to be a
safety rail, which the Commission can review.
Carlson said the applicant has not submitted a plan to show what will be here. Weitzel said that the
applicant will need to either do grading so that he does not need a handrail or will need to install a pipe
rail. He said that a black pipe rail would be the least obtrusive and least expensive way to have a railing
here.
MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the demolition of the
concrete steps and to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the reconstruction of wood
stairs with either: 1) if project is carried out such that a handrail and safety rail would be required,
a black pipe hand rail is approved, or 2) the change of the grade resulting in a shorter height so
that a railings are not required by City Code, compliant with HIS inspection. McCallum seconded
the motion.
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
June 9, 2005
Page 2
Weitzel said it is possible that the stairs were original to the building, although it is a moot point now,
since the owner has demolished them. He added that this is foursquare house with some influence of
prairie-style, built around 1920.
The motion carried on a vote of 6-0.
MINUTES:
May 26, 2005.
Weitzel said that on page one in the fourth paragraph, last sentence, the word "considered" should be
changed to "recorded," and the word "landmark" should be changed to "site." He stated that in the next
paragraph on the same page, the word "remnant" should be added to the last sentence after the word
"bridge."
Carlson stated that in the last paragraph on the first page, in the first sentence, the word "impact" should
be changed to "protection." Weitzel said that the next sentence should be changed to read, "He said it will
still have to be evaluated, if there were a federal undertaking or if it were a locally designated historic
property."
MOTION: Carlson moved to approve the minutes of the May 26, 2006 Historic Preservation
Commission meeting, as amended. McCallum seconded the motion.
The motion carried on a vote of 6-0.
June 2, 2005.
Carlson stated that in the second paragraph on page one, in the last sentence, the word "posts" should
be changed to "columns." He said that in the first motion on page one, the word "raised" should be
deleted.
Carlson said that the last sentence on page one should show him as being voted Vice Chair. He said that
in the last paragraph in the 503 Melrose Avenue section on page two, after the first sentence should
come a comment to state, "Carlson clarified that the top of the sign would be four feet high." Carlson said
that on page three in the fourth paragraph, "dwarves" should be changed to "dwarfs."
Terdalkar gave the information regarding sign regulations discussed in the last meeting. He said that the
Commission does have design review authority over the signage in the historic districts. He said there are
no guidelines for signage in the Handbook, but as a permit is required to install signage, it requires the
Review and approval from the Commission.
MOTION: Carlson moved to approve the minutes of the June 2, 2005 Historic Preservation
Commission meeting, as amended. Brennan seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote
of 6-0.
OTHER:
2005 Work Plan.
Weitzel said that the work plan spells out the Commission's goals for the year. Weitzel said that so far the
Commission has mailed 1,100 notification letters to owners of properties in the historic and conservation
districts and to owners of local landmarks.
Weitzel said that the directive from the senior planner is to continue to do other things besides review the
certificates of appropriateness. He said that one of the directives from City Council is to coordinate with
Friends of Historic Preservation in educating the public about the benefits of historic preservation,
including financial incentives and requirements.
Conference/Workshop
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
June 9, 2005
Page 3
Weitzel said there is a conference sponsored by the State Historical Society coming up and that
possibilities travel funds are being explored to allow one Commission member to attend with staff. He
said the conference will discuss tax credits and also rehabilitation projects and building code issues.
Weitzel asked if anyone wanted to attend. Seeing no volunteers, Weitzel said that he would like to attend
the conference June 23 and 24th.
Terdalkar asked for a consensus on the date of the next meeting as there will a conflict due to the
workshop dates; he said that there is one application pending to date. Thursday, June 30th was agreed
upon as day Commission's for the second meeting.
HRDP Grant.
Weitzel said the CLG coordinator informed him that the HRDP grant was approved. He said the project
was to rewrite the Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan, which is a companion document to the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
Weitzel said the current plan was written in 1992. He said there is now a new focus on what the
Commission will be doing, with less emphasis on new historic districts and more emphasis on certificates
of appropriateness and education. Weitzel said there will continue to be more districts, especially as
neighborhoods propose them to the Commission.
Weitzel said the Commission would like to see a survey done as part of the Central District planning
process. He said the Historic Preservation ordinance needs to continually be updated. Weitzel said some
money was earmarked in the grant for reproducing the 1992 map of historic resources in Iowa City.
Weitzel said this will be about a yearlong project, and the staff will soon be starting the process to find a
consultant to do the work. Weitzel said an outside consultant will result in an impartial document.
Weitzel asked if there has been any progress on the website, and Terdalkar said some information has
been collected but nothing has been finalized yet.
Weitzel said that the neighborhood brochures have been an ongoing project. He said he believes the
brochures are at the point of final editing and are about ready to go to the printer. Terdalkar said he would
check on that.
Weitzel said that Goosetown continues to be a concern, and downtown has been part of the planning
process too, to get a central business district or downtown historic district. He said that critical points for a
downtown district are finding local support and finding a landowner willing to sit on the Commission,
which is required by State law. Weitzel asked Terdalkar to find out if the downtown representative would
have to reside in the district or if it could be a business owner or property owner.
Weitzel asked for opinions regarding what the Commission's priorities through December should be.
Terdalkar said that the first big thing would be the Preservation Plan update, and work can start on that
right away. He said that besides the consultant, the department will be able to hire an intern for the
project.
McCallum said he has attended some of the meetings on new zoning. He said that there have been some
improvements, but he does not think they are aggressive enough. McCallum said he believes the
Commission is missing a big opportunity through the Zoning Code to add more incentives for historic
structures. Weitzel said one problem is that historic properties are located in a multitude of differently
zoned areas.
McCallum said that the standards to receive financial incentives to preserve historic buildings are so high,
that the incentives have no practical effect. He suggested having some kind of special review process to
allow flexibility for historic structures. Weitzel asked McCallum to draft something for the Commission to
review. McCallum agreed to come up with specific proposals.
Weitzel suggested having the staff working on the Zoning Code Review talk to the Commission about
whether such a proposal would be appropriate, and, if so, why and how it would work. Terdalkar said he
would find out about arranging a session with the staff.
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
June 9,2005
Page 4
Ponto asked about the status of the Commission pursuing the reduction of the fee for building permits for
projects in districts that would not otherwise require a permit if the property was not in a district. Weitzel
said the fee for that has been reduced to a flat fee of $30, the minimum fee. He said that HIS needed to at
least cover the staff time for the filing of the permit.
weitzel stated that there is already a need for some rewriting of the guidelines. He said that the point
system for multi-family design review has been revoked since the guidelines were written, so that section
on design review will need to be rewritten to reflect the new multi-family design review process. Weitzel
said the Commission also needs to write guidelines for signs and stair rails, among other things.
Carlson asked about the annual preservation awards. Weitzel stated that Friends of Historic Preservation
will be preparing for the awards ceremony. He said that nominations will be accepted through July 1st and
award ceremony will most likely be conducted in August.
Regarding Goosetown and the North Side district nominations, Weitzel said the City Council has directed
the Commission to wait a year or so to educate people and to contact people who might be interested. He
said the Commission could contact people in Friends of Historic Preservation and the North Side area to
let them know that the Commission is essentially waiting for them to do something.
Discussion of Quorum Requirements and Meeting Attendance.
Weitzel suggested some options for dealing with the difficulty in having a quorum at Commission
meetings. He said one possibility is approaching those members who do not routinely attend the
meetings and asking them to resign. Weitzel said another idea is to wait until the terms of those who do
not attend expire and then try to recruit someone else.
Weitzel said another option might be to change the Commission's by-laws to set a quorum at some
number, although he did not know the legalities of that. Terdalkar suggested making amendment to the
by-laws to address the number of members required for a quorum. He said the City Attorney's office has
informed that in the absence of a specific number in the Commission's by-laws, a quorum requires a
majority of the total number of Commission terms available. Terdalkar said he would ask Mitch Behr,
Assistant City Attorney what the possibilities are. McCallum said the by-laws should take into account
vacant positions, because the Commission has no control over that.
Weitzel noted that after three consecutive unexcused absences from Commission meetings, the
Commission may ask the Mayor to remove a Commission member from office and appoint a new
Commission member.
Weitzel said that he is reviewing a due process pamphlet put out by the National Trust and Roberts'
Rules of Order to try to incorporate them in the by-laws. He said he plans to put his thoughts together for
the staff to look over so that they can be added to the by-laws and/or procedures.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 8:12 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte
mtyntJdata/pcd/minutes/H PC/hpc06-09~5 doc/
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
June 9, 2005
Page 5
Historic Preservation Commission
Attendance Record
2005
Name Expires 1/8 1/13 2/10 2/15 3/10 4/14 4/28 5/t2 5/26 6/2 6/9
M. Brennan 3/29/08 .................... X X X X X X
R. Carlson 3/29/07 ........ X X X X X X O/E X X
J. Enloe 3/29/06 X X X O O X X O O O O/E
M. Gunn 3/29/07 O/E X O/E O/E X X X X X X O/E
M. Maharry 3/29/08 X X X X X X X ................
M. McCallum 3/29/06 X X X X X X O X X X X
J. Pardekooper 3/29/07 O/E X X O O O/E O O O O O
J. Ponto 3/29/07 X X X X X X X X O/E O/E X
A. Smothers 3/29/05 O/E O/E X X X ........................
J. Weissmiller 3/29/06 O/E O/E O/E O/E O/E O/E O/E O/E O/E X X
T. Weitzel 3/29/08 O/E O/E X X X O/E X X X X X
Key:
X - Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
..... Not a Member
MINUTES FINAL/APPROVED
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL
THURSDAY, MAY 19, 2005
Members Present: Jerry Anthony, Lori Bears, Mark Edwards, William Greazel, Brian Richman,
Jayne Sandier, Michael Shaw
Members Absent: Matthew Hayek, Rite Marcus
Staff Present: Tracy Hightshoe
Public Present: Charlie Eastham, Maryann Dennis
CALL MEETING TO ORDER
Vice chairperson Anthony called the meeting to order at 6:40 PM.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM APRIL 21, 2005
Motion: Sandier moved to approve the minutes as submitted with one name correction. Richman
seconded the motion.
Motion passed 7:0,
PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Hightshoe said that at the last council meeting, the Council approved the budget, but did not approve the
requests for variances concerning financial terms. She said that the Council discussed the requests and
current policy at their May 16 work session and decided to defer it to the next meeting. Council directed
staff to draft a policy that acknowledges that some public facility improvements depreciate over time.
Hightshoe stated staff will present a policy to Council that most likely is based on the dollar amount
assisted, thus larger projects will have a longer financing term than smaller projects. For example, a
project receiving $20,000 might have a four-year financing term (declining balance loan or conditional
occupancy loan); whereas a project receiving $5,000 may only have a one-year financing term.
Richman asked what is the difference between a forgivable loan, declining balance loan and a conditional
occupancy loan. Hightshoe said that a conditional occupancy loan is a loan that never needs to be repaid
unless the property is sold or services stated in the agreement are discontinued. The full amount of the
loan is repaid in either one of these situations (sale of property or discontinuation of the services during
the financing term). A forgivable loan is forgiven at the end of a set time period. A declining balance loan
is a loan where a certain percentage is forgiven each year until the final year of the financing term. Thus
if the financing term is 10 years, the City would forgive 1/10 each year and after 10 years the loan is
completely forgiven. If the property is sold or services discontinued in year 5, 50% of the original amount
would need to be repaid to the City.
Sandier asked if there is a break down of what the Council is looking for with the declining balance loans.
Hightshoe said that the Council gave no direction, just asked the staff to acknowledge depreciating
assets.
Richman said he considers that it is a policy problem that the commission should review. He added that
our federal funds will get tighter and tighter and the commission would need to try to recycle the funds as
much as possible. Richman suggested the commission review the policy as part of the annual review
process. Hightshoe said that the commission could always make recommendations for the next allocation
round (FY07). Hightshoe stated staff is under time constraints with the agreements for the upcoming year,
starting July 2005 (FY06).
Dennis said that part of the intent of HUD is to provide money for cities to keep projects going. She said
that if the intent is to get the money back, as an organization they have a history of repaying loans and
would be happy to continue doing so for future projects.
Eastham said that it would helpful to find ways to use HOME and CDBG funds to maximize the number of
rental and owner occupied housing that could be built over a certain time.
Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes
May 19, 2005
Page 2
Sandier said at this point there is hardly any money coming back. Hightshoe stated the City has various
housing projects repaying the City for funds invested in affordable housing. HACAP, GICHF, Burns &
Burns projects, and a few other housing providers make monthly or annual payments to the City for
mostly rental housing projects.
Richman said they would have to decide what would serve the community over the long term. He added
that there would be a whole set of policies that would need to be considered.
NEW BUSINESS
Review of Allocation Process - Creation of Subcommittee
Hightshoe said that each year the commission reviews the allocation process. The commission may
either create a subcommittee or review the process at a regular meeting. Members agreed to establish a
subcommittee to review the entire funding process and make recommendations. Richman, Sandier and
Greazel volunteered to be on the subcommittee.
Greazel suggested that the subcommittee meet with a few applicants and determine the difficulties with
the application process to make the process more user-friendly. Richman stated his goal would be to get
the application process, with its scoring and ranking evaluations, in sync with the goals of the City and
HCDC.
Sandier mentioned that everyone looks at scores and rankings differently and creating some guidelines
would help. Anthony said that the subcommittee should also look into the issue of the proforma. Edwards
said that the scoring is generally used to determine whether the applicant would meet the threshold to be
funded or not. Bears said that she hopes that the applicants would still be required to attend the training
session.
Hightshoe encouraged the subcommittee to review project timeliness in each application and the
applicant's capacity and skills to complete a project within the required time periods. CDBG funds are
evaluated based on timeliness. The majority of non-housing projects should be able to be completed
within a year. Hightshoe also requested the commission review how much documentation, not requested
by HCDC, may be submitted by applicants. This year several items were submitted after the application
deadline, but during the commission review process and question/answer session.
Summer Schedule
The commission decided to not have a meeting in July unless important matters need to be discussed.
The June HCDC meeting will be held after the Community Development Celebration.
Upcoming Appointments
Hightshoe said that Sandier, Edward and Anthony's terms expire September 1, 2005. The deadline to
reapply is July 13, 2005.
OLD BUSINESS
Discussion of National Community Development Week Celebration
Hightshoe said that the date for the celebration has not been set. She said that it would most likely be
June 29th or 30th. She added that Old Brick volunteered to host it. Hightshoe announced that this year's
celebration would focus on volunteerism. She mentioned that there would be a guest speaker and
approximately 4 awards given out to outstanding community volunteers and/or organizations.
Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes
May 19, 2005
Page 3
MONITORING REPORTS
Shelter House
Richman said that the Emergency Assistance Program provides help with security deposits, emergency
rent or utility assistance. He said that there is about $100 available for each family, available only once a
year, to help pay for rent, secure housing, or pay utility bills. He said that since July 2004 Shelter House
provided assistance to 52 families, 32 households with the CDBG funds. As of Mamh 2005, they've
spent $2,736 of the CDBG funds.
Richman said that the way the program works is that the assistance is a grant to the assisted family,
except for security deposits. Security deposits that are repaid to an assisted family get returned to the
program to be recycled for assistance to another family.
Hawkeye Area Community Action Program
Hightshoe said that the project was for the acquisition of two properties for the transitional housing
program. She said that HACAP acquired the properties and two families are in the units. HACAP received
$148,000 for two units.
United Action for Youth
Edwards said that they had their progress slowed by a couple of factors. He said their fund raising
campaign did not go as expected and took much longer than anticipated. The historic preservation issue
concerning the windows slowed them down due to the research and expense of finding the right windows
to use. Edwards stated they hope to start the project in June.
City of Iowa City - Housing Rehabilitation
Edwards said that the City uses CDBG and HOME funds to rehabilitate existing homes. He said that the
lead issue is slowing them down and increases expenses, but they are still on track with their project.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Edward moved to adjourn. Greazel seconded the motion.
Motion passed 7-0.
The meeting adjourned at 8:20 PM.
Minutes submitted by Bogdana Rus.
s :lpcdlminutes/HCDC12005105-19-O5. doc
Housing & Community Development Commission
Attendance Record
2005
Term
Name Expires 01/20 02/17 03/10 03/17 04/21 05/19 06/30 00/00 00/00 00/00 00/00 00/00
Jerry Anthony 09/01/05 X X X X X X
Erin Barnes 09/01/06 X X X X ........
Lori Bears 09/01/07 X X X X X X
Mark Edwards 09/01/05 X O/E X O O X
William Greazel 09/01/06 O/E X O X X X
Matthew Hayek 09/01/07 X X X X X O
Rita Marcus 09/01/06 O/E X X X O O
Brian Richman 09/01/07 X X X O/E X X
Jayne Sandier 09/01/05 O/E X X X X X
Michael Shaw 09/01/06 .................... X
Key:
X = Present
0 = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
..... Not a Member
MINUTES APPROVED
IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
JUNE 8, 2005
EMMA J, HARVAT HALL-IOWA CITY, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Michael Wright, Ned Wood, Karen Leigh, Vincent Maurer,
MEMBERS ABSENT: NONE
STAFF PRESENT: Robert Miklo, Sarah Holecek
OTHERS PRESENT: Gayle King Zeithamel, Joseph Altenhoff, Harry Wolf, Garry Sanders
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Maurer called the meeting to order at 5:03pm.
CONSIDERATION OF THE MAY 11, 2005 BOARD MINUTES
Wright said that under the third paragraph under the first special exception instead of "where it is crossed
by the railroad", it should be "where it crosses the railroad".
MOTION: Wright moved to approve the minutes from May tt, 2005. Wood seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5:0.
SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS:
EXC05-00009 Discussion of an application submitted by Doc's Standard Inc. for a special exception to
permit a used car lot on property located in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 801 South
Riverside Drive.
Miklo said that the application has been withdrawn by the applicant.
EXC05-00010 Discussion of an application submitted by Paul Kalb for a special exception to allow
reduction of the required 20 foot rear yard to 5.4 feet to allow an addition to an existing single-family
house located in the Medium Density Single Family Residential (RS-8) zone at 1012 Hudson Avenue.
Before presenting the staff report Miklo showed pictures with the location of the property, illustrations with
the existing house and the proposed changes.
Miklo said that the applicant would like to make some structural improvements to his rental property. He
would like to put'a 57-square-foot addition on the rear of the house and in doing so square off the rear
fa(;ade and fix some structural problems with the roof.
He mentioned that the required rear yard in the RS-8zone is 20-feet. However, the existing house is
located 5'4" from the rear property line, making it a nonconforming structure. He said that according to the
Iowa City Zoning Code, a nonconforming structure may be enlarged, provided the enlargement does not
increase the nonconformity. Miklo said that the applicant would like to square off the northeast corner of
the home by adding a small addition. Since the addition would be located in the required rear yard, it
would be an enlargement of a nonconformity and would not be allowed unless a special exception is
granted to reduce the rear yard to 5 feet.
Miklo stated that the special exception could be granted when the applicant demonstrates that there is a
peculiar situation and a practical difficulty in complying with the requirements of the chapter. Miklo added
that the staff considers that there is a practical difficulty and a peculiar situation in the current application.
Miklo said that the peculiar situation is that the existing home is set back approximately 78 feet from the
front property line, considerably further from the street than the other homes along the frontage.
Regarding the practical difficulty of the property, Miklo said that the existing house is in need of repairs.
He added that over the years a number of changes have been made to the home resulting in varying
Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes
June 8, 2005
Page 2
rooflines and a cobbled together appearance. He said that the current owner would like to square off the
rear fa(;ade and make a more uniform roofline and in the process fix some structural problems.
Miklo said that besides the specific standards there are seven general standards that need to be
considered. He said that the specific proposed exception would not be detrimental to or endanger the
public health, safety, comfort or welfare. Miklo said that in staff's opinion the proposed reduction will not
be detrimental or endanger the public, but should be an improvement.
He mentioned that the proposed exception should not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the
neighborhood. He said that the addition is small and would result in a structural and aesthetic
improvement to the existing home. The property abuts the rear yard of triangular lot that faces Douglas
Court. He mentioned that sufficient yard space exists between the properties to afford each owner some
privacy. In addition, he said that a six-foot tall privacy fence separates the two properties and limits views
between the abutting yards.
Miklo continued by saying that the establishment of the specific proposed exception should not impede
the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in
the zone in which such property is located. He said that the proposed addition would improve the
aesthetics of the home as viewed from neighboring properties.
Miklo said that adequate measures should be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize
traffic congestion on public streets. He said that the proposed exception will not result in a change to
vehicular access.
Next, Miklo said that the proposed would be consistent with the short-range Comprehensive Plan of the
City. He said that the Comprehensive Plan identifies this neighborhood as an area where efforts should
be made to improve the housing stock.
Staff recommends that EXO05-00010an application submitted by Paul Kalb for a special exception to
allow reduction of the required 20 foot rear yard to 5.4 feet to allow an addition to an existing single-family
house located in the Medium Density Single Family Residential (RS-8) zone at 1012 Hudson Avenue be
approved.
Public Hearing Opened
Gayle Kinq Zeithamel, 429 Douglass Court, said that she is the property owner that would be most
affected by the proposed changes. She said that the property at 1012 Hudson Avenue has been in
disrepair for 27 years since she moved onto her property. She mentioned that they do not rent and she
does not plan on moving. She added that the property at 1012 Hudson Avenue had always looked the
same. She brought pictures to support her argument. She added that the structure of the house had not
been kept up; the general maintenance has not been kept up either. She said that she installed a wood
fence in order to obstruct vision. She said that any addition would only magnify the existing situation.
Zeithamel said that she would be concerned about the roof, the general structure and repair before this
time, and not having an addition put on to add to the length of the building. She said that the building
intrudes on her property, to the aesthetics of her property and the usage of the backyard. She said the
house currently is imposing on her property because it sits so close to the property line. She said she
would not want to see it enlarged any more. She said that she has had to invest in the privacy fence and
planting of trees to try to gain some privacy for her property. She mentioned that she would like to see
the structure repaired and brought into compliance with zoning rather than given any special privileges.
She asked if there is a drawing showing what the new additions would look like.
Public Hearing Closed
Leigh asked if the property has passed the rental inspection. Miklo answered that he is not sure but
assumes that the property had passed previous inspections. He said that his understanding was that the
applicant wanted to make improvements to the house because he had trouble renting it in its current
state. Leigh asked if a drawing of the addition was submitted with the application. Miklo said that it had
not been.
Iowa City Boar of A~ustment Minutes
June 8,2005
Page 3
Maurer asked if the design of the addition was within the purview of the Board. Miklo said that with a
special exception the Board could place restrictions on the design of a building since it was granting
waivers from specific zoning requirements.
Miklo said that if the Board felt it needed further information from the applicant, it could defer this request
to the next meeting to allow the applicant to respond.
MOTION: Wright moved that EXC05-00010 00010an application submitted by Paul Kalb for a
special exception to allow reduction of the required 20 foot rear yard to 5.4 feet to allow an
addition to an existing single-family house located in the Medium Density Single Family
Residential (RS-8) zone at 1012 Hudson Avenue be deferred to the July 13 meeting. Alexander
seconded the motion.
Wright stated he would vote to defer because he the Board needed to see the plans for the building to
determine if it would be an improvement over the current situation.
Motion passed 5:0.
EXC05-00011 Discussion of an application submitted by Jehovah's Witnesses Iowa City for a special
exception for a religious institution on property located in the Community Office (CO-1) zone at 2923
Northgate Drive.
Miklo sad that thero are no specific criteria listed in the zoning code for religious institutions located in the
CO-1 zone, but the applicant must demonstrate that the general standards are met.
Miklo said that the specific proposed exception should not be detrimental to or endanger the public
health, safety, comfort or general welfare. He added that thero is adequate space on the proposed
property for the proposed use and the associated parking, and staff finds that the proposed exception will
not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare.
Miklo stated that the proposed exception should not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the
neighborhood. Miklo continued by saying that the establishment of the specific proposed exception
should not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for
uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located.
He mentioned that the properties along Northgate Drive are all at least 1 acre in size, including the
subject property proposed for a religious institution. As such, there is sufficient site area to separate the
activities on the proposed property from other properties in the vicinity. Thero should be little impact, if
any, on surrounding properties.
Miklo said that the peak hours would be on weekends and in the evenings, so traffic to the site should be
minimal during regular business hours. He added that here might be some occasional overlap between
the peak hours of use for the proposed church and the Preucil School of Music located across the street
from the subject property. However he said, the traffic volume along Northgate Drive is not high for its
design and that it has sufficient capacity to handle traffic from the proposed use and other uses in the
area.
Miklo said that adequate measures should be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize
traffic congestion on public streets. He said that a 70-foot wide pedestrian parkway easement is required
along Northgate Drive as a part of the development, and plans foe the parkway are included with the
application.
Miklo said that except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being
considered, the specific exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or
standards of the zone in which it is located. Miklo said that the proposed special exception is for the use
of the site only. The applicant will still be required to meet all other City Code requirements.
Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes
June 8, 2005
Page 4
Miklo said that the proposed use should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Miklo
said that the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area for office development and that a religious institution
would be compatible with office uses. He said that the proposed use and anticipated traffic for the
proposed religious institution will be compatible with other uses permitted in this area as long as the site
is designed in a manner that complies with the City's zoning and site plan review standards.
Miklo said that staff recommends that EXC0$-O001'I an application submitted by Jehovah's Witnesses
Iowa City for a special exception for a religious institution on property located in the Community Office
(CO-1) zone at 2923 Northgate Drive be approved.
Public Hearing Opened
NONE
Public Hearing Closed
MOTION: Leigh moved that EXC05-00011 an application submitted by Jehovah's Witnesses Iowa
City for a special exception for a religious institution on property located in the Community Office
(CO-1) zone at 2923 Northgate Drive be approved. Alexander seconded the motion.
Alexander would vote in favor of the motion. She said she does not believe that it would be detrimental or
endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. She said that appears to be adequate
space on the property for the proposed use. She mentioned that it would not be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property
values in the neighborhood because of the sufficient area that separates the properties. Alexander said
that for the same reasons it should not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of
the surrounding property. She added that it would not have a negative effect on traffic, and the proposed
use would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Maurer would vote in favor of the application. He said that all the standards have been met.
Wright would also vote in favor. He said that the seven general standards are met.
Leigh would vote in favor for the reasons already stated.
Wood would vote in favor for the reasons already stated.
Motion passed 5:0.
EXC05-00012 Discussion of an application submitted by WaI-Mar/Stores Inc., for a special exception for
a gas station and a drive thru pharmacy on property located in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone
on Ruppert Road.
Miklo said that recently the City Council agreed to sell a portion of the Aviation Commeme Park to a Wal-
Mart Stores Inc., who would construct a Wal-Mart Supercenter on the west 21.86 acres. The property is
currently going through a rezoning process to change from Intensive Commercial, Cl-1 zone to
Community Commercial CC-2. Should the property be rezoned to CC-2, general retail uses would be
permitted on the property.
Miklo said that Wal-Mart Stores is proposing a drive-through pharmacy and gas station on the property,
which are common at other Wal-Mart Supercenter locations. Auto-and-truck oriented uses, including
drive-through facilities and gas stations, are required to receive special exception approval to be
permitted in the CC-2 zone.
Miklo noted that there are three issues raised by drive-through pharmacies: how well the drive-through
area is separated from surrounding pedestrian and vehicular use areas, whether there is enough vehicle
queue storage area, and compatibility of the drive-through area with adjacent land uses.
He said that the proposed drive-through pharmacy consists of two lanes located at the northwest corner
of he proposed store. Traffic accessing the drive-through pharmacy is separated from the main parking
Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes
June 8, 2005
Page 5
lot, and entering traffic will not be inhibited by any stop or yield signs, and will not cross pedestrian use
areas. Traffic exiting the drive-through pharmacy will cross a pedestrian access to the store, however it
appears visibility would be adequate, and traffic exiting the drive-through pharmacy will be traveling at a
Iow rate of speed and staff did not anticipate that there would be pedestrian and vehicular conflicts.
Miklo noted that the Wal-Mart drive-through pharmacy would have more than enough queuing area for
waiting vehicles, and due to its location the line of vehicles will not impact any public street. He also
mentioned that the drive-through pharmacy should be compatible with surrounding properties, which
include other commercial uses and the Iowa City Municipal Airport.
Miklo mentioned that the specific proposed exception should not be detrimental to or endanger the public
health, safety, comfort or general welfare. He said that auto-and-truck oriented uses are not uncommon in
this commercial corridor. The drive-through pharmacy is separated from other pedestrian and vehicular
use areas. The access points for the gas station would be appropriately separated from the nearest
intersection. He mentioned that the gas station would not be in the runway protection zone of the airport,
and that there are no neighboring residential uses that would be affected by the gas station traffic.
Miklo stated that the proposed exception should not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the
neighborhood. He mentioned that adjacent developed properties are commercial, and many are high-
traffic-generating businesses. He added that appropriate commercial development has the potential to
increase values of the general area.
Miklo continued by saying that the establishment of the specific proposed exception should not impede
the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in
the zone in which such property is located. He said that the auto-and-truck oriented uses should be
compatible with and generally accessory to the larger retail Supercenter proposed for the property. He
added that the appropriate infrastructure will be designed as part of the subdivision and public
improvements on the property.
Miklo said that adequate measures should be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize
traffic congestion on public streets. Staff recommends the special exception for the auto-and-truck
oriented uses on the property, as proposed, be approved subject to a subdivision of the property being
approved that reflects the appropriate infrastructure.
He added that adequate measures should be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize
traffic congestion on public streets. He mentioned that the drive-through pharmacy would be located so
that queuing traffic will not impact public streets. The gas station is proposed at the intersection of two
public streets. The driveways would be separated from the intersection by approximately 120 and 180
feet respectively, which is appropriate spacing for a collector street such as this. Traffic turning onto and
out of the gas station will not affect Highway 1, the main arterial street serving the area.
Miklo said that except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being
considered, the specific exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or
standards of the zone in which it is located. Provided a subdivision of the property is approved that.
includes appropriate transportation and utility infrastructure, as approved by the City, the auto-and-truck
oriented uses as proposed should conform to City standards.
Next, Miklo said that the proposed use should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. He
added that the Comprehensive Plan reflects Retail/ Community Commercial development for this
property, and the proposed uses would be consistent with a large traffic-generating business proposed for
the area.
Staff recommends that £XC05-000'12 an application submitted by Wal-Mart Stores Inc., for a special
exception for a gas station and a drive thru pharmacy on property located in the Community Commercial
(CC-2) zone on Ruppert Road be approved subject to a subdivision of the property reflecting
infrastructure providing appropriate access to the uses as proposed.
Iowa City Boa~ of A~ustment Minutes
June 8,2005
Page 6
Public Hearing Opened
Joseph Altenhoff, 1475 South Perryville Road, Rockford IL, said that they are filling the application to try
to keep the project moving forward if the other elements of the project would move forward as well. He
said that due to limited construction season they would like to start the construction as early as possible.
Regarding to the access to the gas station, he said that they would like to have most of the exiting traffic
coming from east driveway.
He mentioned that for the drive-through pharmacy they proposed enough space for 8 cars to wait in line.
Harry Wolf, Iowa City, said that he represents the City, the seller of the property, and would answer any
questions from the Board.
Garry Sanders asked what was the deadline for submitting the application. Miklo answered that typically
the application should be submitted four weeks prior the meeting. Sanders said that it disturbs him that
Wal-Mart could not wait for the first public input on the zoning for the project, or the very first comment, or
vote by the elected officials, because the construction season is short, and City Council will run up on
this. He strongly objects for the matter to be decided at this point, and he proposes it to be deferred, due
to the fact that nothing was decided by the Council. He said that he does not understand how could a
decision be made based on a possible rezoning that had not been concluded yet.
He asked if this is the best we could do with the public land. He said that there is a lawsuit filed against
Wal-Mart every 6 minutes. He added that the Board should decide what would be the right thing in this
case. He said that at the minimum the Board should defer until the rezoning for the entire parcel has been
done.
Public Hearinq Closed
MOTION: Alexander moved that EXC05-00012 an application submitted by Wal-Mart Stores Inc.,
for a special exception for a gas station and a drive through pharmacy on property located in the
Community Commercial (CC-2) zone on Ruppert Road be approved subject to a subdivision of the
property reflecting infrastructure providing appropriate access to the uses as proposed. Wood
seconded the motion.
Wright would vote in favor of the application. However, he said that it was difficult to separate the fact that
the Board is looking just at a pharmacy and a gas station, and not at the store as a whole. Holecek said
that the Board is deciding on the auto-and-truck oriented portion of the business. He said that assuming
that the zoning would go through; he said that the specific proposed exception should not be detrimental
to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. The proposed exception should not
be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially
diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. He mentioned that adjacent developed properties
are commercial, and many are high-traffic-generating businesses the establishment of the specific
proposed exception should not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the
surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located.
Maurer would vote in favor. He said that all 7 standards have been met.
Alexander would also vote in-favor. She said that the use of public land is not in the Board's jurisdiction.
She added that she based her vote on the reasons already stated.
Wood would vote in favor of the motion. He said that it meets the general standards.
Leigh would vote in favor of the motion for the reasons already stated. She added that the Board's review
is limited to the special exception question and not the rezoning.
Motion passed 5:0.
Iowa City Boa~ of A~ustment Minutes
June 8,2005
Page 7
OTHER:
MOTION: Alexander made a motion to adjourn to executive session to discuss strategy with
counsel in matters that are presently in litigation or where litigation is imminent where its
disclosure would be likely to prejudice or disadvantage the position of the governmental body in
that litigation pursuant to Iowa Code 21.5(1)(c). Wright seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5:0.
The meeting adjourned at 6:20 PM.
Chairperson Maurer reopened the meeting at 6:58PM.
MOTION: Alexander made a motion to direct the City Attorney's Office to appeal the decision of
the Iowa District Court in and for Johnson County in case nos. CVCV064983 and CVCV065060.
Leigh seconded the motion.
Motion passed 4:1 with Maurer against the motion.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION
NONE
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 7:05 PM.
Minutes submitted by Bogdana Rus.
s:/pcdlminutes/BOAI2OOS/O6-O8-O5.doc
Board of Adjustment
Attendance Record
2005
rerlTl
Name Expires 01/12 02/09 03/09 04/13 05/11 06/08 07/13 08/10 09/14 10/12 11/09 12/14
Carol Alexander 01/01/08 X X X NM X X
Ned Wood 01/01/10 .... X X NM X X
Karen Leigh 01/01/07 X O/E X NM X X
Vincent Maurer 01/01/06 X O/E X NM X X
Michael Wright 01/01/09 X X X NM X X
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
..... Not a Member