Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-09-14 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION THURSDAY JULY 15, 1999 - 5:45 P.M. IOWA CITY TRANSIT FACILITY MEMBERS PRESENT: Pat Foster, Rick Mascari, Howard Horan, Mark Anderson, Tom Bender STAFF PRESENT: Dennis Mitchell, Ron O'Neil CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Mascari called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the June 10, 1999, Commission meeting were approved as submitted. AUTHORIZATION OF EXPENDITURES: Bender made a motion to approve the bills. Horan seconded the motion and the bills were approved 5 - 0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION - ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA: Dick Blum, from H.R. Green Co., presented some information on precision approaches he had researched while at FAA Headquarters in Washington, D.C. The projected standards would allow Iowa City an approach down to % of a mile forward visibility and a 300-foot ceiling. A 1000' primary surface would have to be reserved, but a light lane would not be required. Mascari thanked Blum for the time he spent researching the information. PUBLIC HEARING - USAR LEASE: Mascari opened the public hearing for the three-year extension for the USAR lease at 5:52 p .m. There were no public comments. Maseari closed the hearing at 5:52 p.m. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: ao Airport Terminal Building: Maury Cohen, from HLM Design, reported on the progress of the project. He said most of the demolition was completed. There is now the question of what the Commission wants to do about asbestos abatement. There is asbestos in the floor tile and in the glazing around the windows. Two quotes were received. One was from Advanced Technologies for $ 5430.00 and the other was from Affordable Asbestos Removal for $ 4797.00. Cohen said it would be possible to abate the floor tile asbestos by leaving it in place and covering it with the carpeting. However, he recommended removing all the asbestos. Horan made a motion for a resolution to accept the bid from Affordable Asbestos Removal. Bender seconded the motion, and at roll call, it passed 5 - 0. Mascari noted that there were two telephone booths that were covered up in a hallway wall. He wanted to know if the Commission was interested in renovating the phone booths. He said he contacted the telephone company and it would cost about $130.00 per month to have pay phones in the booths. He said the phone company reminded him that the old phone booths do not meet ADA requirements. Mascari said he would be willing to buy the phones himself if the Commission wanted to restore the booths. Mascari said someone from the phone company said the booths could be worth about $ 3000.00 each. Cohen said if the phone booths were reinstailed, the handicapped assessable water fountain could not be installed in the hallway as planned. The Commission asked Cohen to get cost estimates for reinstailing one of the phones There was also a question of removing a small vestibule in the lobby area. Anderson suggested removing it to open up the lobby area. Cohen will see if there are any structural problems involved in removing the vestibule. If there are no structural concems, the Commission directed Cohen to have it removed. Cohen said there have been some complications involved with installation of the elevator. He said he thinks the details have been worked out and the contractor is working on the shop drawings. Cohen said there is a question on whether to replace the gas water heater or go with some electric in-line units. He will cost out both altematives for the Commission. he North Commercial area: A proposal was discussed from Carousel Motors to lease lots # 17 and # 18 in the North Commercial area. Bender said the Commission is trying to work out all the details to get the plat through Planning and Zoning as soon as possible. The most immediate question to be resolved is wetland mitigation. Mitchell said MMS is completing the wetland identification and devising a mitigation program. Bender said a Commission/Council subcommittee meeting would be scheduled in August to discuss conaction of infrastructure for the NCA. He said an updated appraisal would be completed by then. Horan made a motion for a resolution for Casey Cook to update the appraisal forthe NCA. The fee forthe update is not to exceed $1200.00. Bender seconded the motion and at roll call vote, the motion passed 5 - 0. ACSG project: O'Neil reported that an auction was conducted for the houses and mobile homes in the land acquisition project. The Fitzgarrald house and the Airlane Motel did not sell and ACSG will get bids to salvage and demolish the property. All of the mobile homes sold. The deadline for moving the mobiles is August 9m. There is one tenant left in the Dyer house. As soon as he has moved, the buyer of the house will have 60 days to move the house. He hopes to have the house moved by the first week in September. USAR lease: Bender made a motion for a resolution to extend the USAR lease for three years. Horan seconded the motion and at roll call vote, the motion passed 5 - 0. eJ Master Plan Update gram: O'Neil said the Commission received a grant offer from the Department of Transportation to update the Airport Layout Plan(ALP). This is a planning grant and the $24,000 project is a 70(state)/30Clocal) match. There are a number of things on the airside of the Airport that have changed since the Master Plan was completed in 1996. O'Neil said he would like to see if the Zoning Ordinance could be updated as part of this grant. Anderson made a motion for a resolution to accept the grant to update the Master Plan and the ALP. Foster seconded the motion and at roll cell vote, the motion passed 5 - 0. O'Neil said he would suggest the Commission develop a scope of services and begin the selection of the consultant as soon as possible. Southwest FBO hangar: O'Neil said the project is nearly completed, with a few minor details to complete. Iowa City Flying Service is occupying the building. O'Neil said beceuse there was a change at the southeast comer of the building, there is an erosion problem. Two alternatives would include building a retaining wall or placing asphalt in the area. The retaining wall would look nicer but installing the asphalt would be more practical. The Commission directed O'Neil to install asphalt in the area. go Airport Fly-in Breakfast: Dick Blum reported for Sertoma. The breakfast will be held in the new hangar. There will be a temporary control tower from 7:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. ICFS will be selling rides and the Young Eagles program will be giving rides. Blum said he would like to discuss Fly Iowa 2001. This is a state sanctioned fly-in event. He said this would be the tenth anniversary of Fly Iowa. Iowa City hosted the first Fly Iowa in 1991. Approximately 9,000 people attended. Blum said the Commission had expressed interest in hosting the event and Sertoma would be the local service group providing the breakfast. There will be some cost to the local community. A date other than late August will have to be picked. Mascad asked O'Neil to get some information from airports that have hosted Fly Iowa. This will be an agenda item sometime this Fall. O 'Neil said the applicetions have not been sent by the State for Fly Iowa 2001. Southwest T-hangar building: Letters of interest have been sent to everyone on the T- hangar waiting list. The Council has said if there are enough tenants to fill the hangar, they would loan the Commission the funds to build it. Rotating Beacon Tower painting grant: The Commission received a grant to repaint the beacon tower. The grant offer is for $ 24,000.00. Anderson made a motion for a resolution to accept the grant offer to repaint the rotating beacon tower. Bender seconded the motion and at roll call vote, the motion passed 5 - 0. CHAIRPERSON'S REPORT: Mascari relayed a story of trying to capture a basset hound at the Airport. Masceri said he is excited about the offer f~om Carousel Motors and he thought this could be what the Commission needs to get the NCA started. Mascari noted the article in the packet that mentioned Horan's photography award. Mascari complimented O'Neil on the way things were handled during the airplane accident. COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: Bender said he is excited about the prospects that the NCA could produce for the Airport. Horan said he took some pictures of the airplane accident for the airport files. Anderson said he was at the Terminal Building the other day and is tracking the project closely. Anderson asked about the project to rewire the wind tee and windsock. O'Neil said he sent the proposals to the IDOT and has not received permission to proceed. He will contact IDOT. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Mitchell reminded the Commission that there are ceFtain issues that they can't discuss by individual phone calls to all the members. It could be interrupted as a violation of the open meetings law. There are some issues that can be discussed in closed session. Mitchell said he would not be able to attend the next Commission meeting. He will be on vacation. O'Neil said the DTN weather service contract is due. He suggested dropping the additional aviation feature because that information is free from other sources. The 'Aviation 1' package costs an additional $ 300.00 per year. In response to an inquiry from Mascari, O 'Nell said weather information he wanted is available from the National Climatilogical Data Center at a cost of $ 206.00. It would be compiled and available sometime in August. O 'Neil said the Commission should try to update the Airport Zoning Ordinance when the Airport ALP is updated. There was a memo in the Commission packet concerning changing the ordinance relating to communications towers on public property. O 'Neil said he discussed this with Karin Franklin and said the ordinance should require a FAA airspace study for any tower to be constructed on public property so an obstruction is not created. SET NEXT MEETIN(;: The next regular Airport Commission meeting is scheduled for August 19, 1999, at 5:45 p.m. AI)JOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Rick Mascari, Chairperson MINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD Of ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 11, 1999 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS PREUMINARY Subject to Aplx'oval i MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Susan Bender, Lowell Brandt, T. J. Brandt, Michael Paul Kate Corcoran Sarah Holecek, Melody Rockwell, Anne Schulte Merlin Lawrence, John Cruise, John Stamler, Robert N. Staley CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Bender called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: All members were present except Corcoran. CONSIDERATION OF THE JULY 14. 1999 BOARD MINUTES: MOTION: L. Brandt moved to approve the July 14, 1999 minutes, as submitted. Paul seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 4-0. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: EXC99-0014. Public hearing on an application submitted by Dial Iowa City Land Development, L.L.C. for a special exception to permit a reduction in off-street parking for a 68-unit assisted living facility on Lot 1, Silvercrest Retirement Community in the Planned Development Housing Oveday (OPDH-12) zone for property located at the southeast comer of the Scott Boulevard and Amedcan Legion Road intersection. Rockwell said on June 29, 1999, the planned development and final plat for the Silvercrest Residential Community was approved by City Council. She said the appreved plan proposes development of 68 assisted living units, 120 independent living units, a 40-bed medical rehab facility, and a 900 square foot medical office on about 20 acres of land. Rockwell said the applicant is now requesting a modification of the parking requirement only for the facility that contains the 68 assisted living units, which is proposed to be on Lot 1 in a four-acre northwest portion of the site. Rockwell said the off-street parking requirement for eider residential facilities of this type is one off-street parking space per dwelling unit. She said the applicant is requesting a special exception to reduce the off-street parking requirement by 50% from 68 parking spaces to 34 parking spaces. Rockwell said the Zoning Chapter does provide that where it can be demonstrated that a specific use has characteristics such that the number of parking spaces required is too restrictive, the Board of Adjustment may grant a special exception to allow not more than a 50% reduction in the required number of parking spaces. Rockwell said the applicant has provided information on other Dial Company assisted living facilities that have slightly more than one-half parking space per assisted living dwelling unit, and their experience has shown that this provides sufficient parking for this type of residential use. She said applying the Code requirement for an eider apartment house to an eider assisted Board of Adjustment Minutes August 11, 1999 Page 2 living facility, which will have older, frail residents who are mostly in their eighties, is likely to result in excess, unneeded paving of the site. She said providing 34 parking spaces should insure that there is sufficient parking for staff, visitors, and the residents who do drive vehicles. Rockwell said staff does recognize that changes over time may occur, and there needs to be room on the site for the facility to provide additional parking spaces should that need arise in the future. She said if the Board determines to approve the request for the parking reduction, staff suggests that the approval be subject to a condition ti fat allows the City to require the_t additional. parking be installed should it be needed in the future. Rockwell said this could be done through a landbanking provision. Rockwell said reducing the required paving for such a facility, which does not have a high parking demand, is in the public interest in this developing residential area. She said the reduction in paving will allow for additional landscaping and green space on the site, which will be an amenity not only for the Silvercrest residents and their visitors, but also for neighboring residential properties. Rockwell said staff recommends that EXC99-0014, a special exception to reduce the off-street parking requirement from 68 parking spaces to 34 parking spaces for a 68-unit assisted living facility on property located in the OPDH-12 zone on Lot I of the Silvercrest Retirement Community at the southeast corner of Scott Boulevard and American Legion Road intersection be approved, subject to the stipulation that the parking reduction is tied specifically to the use of the property for an assisted living facility for elders and/or persons with disabilities and that the applicant delineates on the site plan the area that would be landbanked for 34 off-street parking spaces that the City may require to be provided if the City determines that additional parking is needed in the future. Rockwell said the map or plan that shows the location of where the landbanked parking could be done as a part of the site plan review for this property. L. Brandt said there are a couple of different site plans in the packet: one shows the parking and the potentials for banking parking and the other one looks like an amended sensitive areas site plan. Rockwell said the one that shows only the assisted living facility has a shaded area that shows the spaces that would be eliminated, but could be landbanked if the exception is approved. Rockwell said there could also be possibilities for some landbanking on Lot 1 to the north of the ddve as well. She said she thought it would be good to keep the location for the landbanked spaces flexible so that if spaces are needed nearer to the facility, they could be provided. L. Brandt said part of his reason for asking was that on the sensitive areas plan, only 23 spaces were shown for the assisted living facility. Rockwell said the applicant may be able to explain the discrepancy with the site plans. Public hearing: Merlin Lawrence 11506 Nicholas Street. #200. Omaha. NE, said he represents the Dial Company that is doing this development. He said they submitted a national study showing that the biggest traffic flow for an assisted living facility is at the times when staff are changing. This is because a van service is provided, which takes people to appointments, shopping, etc., and the fact that most of the residents are 80 years plus and do not own cam. He said the only facility Dial has which makes the parking numbers a little higher is Lincoln, Nebraska, which requires parking by the amount of land you have. He said that number is higher than normal as most assisted living facilities provide one-half or less parking spaces per unit. Lawrence said the van service is very heavily used, and not very many people own cars. He said some people own them and bring them there, and when they find they do not drive them, the cars are sold. Lawrence said employees are by far the largest number of drivers to the fa_cility. He said eliminating the' parking spaces farther away from the facility is definitely Board of Adjustment Minutes August 11, 1999 Page 3 beneficial. Lawrence said they want to be able to have parking as close to the facility as they can, so that is why they requested that the reduction be for that part that is to the south of the main entrance. L. Brandt said he was curious about the sensitive areas site plan. He said the parking that is in the plan that the Board is considering here isn't shown and in the narrative under assisted living it says 23 parking spaces required, 24 parking spaces illustrated. L. Brandt said he was curious about that. Lawrence said he did not know where that came from, because the only thing he has seen is to provide 69 parking spaces. He said that may have been a preliminary proposal or something but as far as he knows, under Code from Iowa City they are required to provide one parking space per dwelling unit which worked out to be 69 parking spaces. Lawrence said if there were something other than that, he wasn't aware of it, and they plan to put 35 spaces there. Rockwell said 68 spaces are required. Lawrence said yes and they're asking for a 34 space reduction. He said that is what is proposed. L. Brandt asked Lawrence if he had any concerns with the conditions recommended by staff pertaining to landbanking, parking spaces and making sure the parking reduction is tied to the specific use of the property as an assisted living facility. He said they are pretty routine conditions. Lawrence said the buildings are so independent that you wouldn't likely park at one and then walk over to another. He didn't think the conditions were contradictory to the way they intend to use the property. Public hearing closed. MOTION: L. Brandt moved to approve EXC99-0014, a special exception to reduce the off- street parking requirement from 68 parking spaces to 34 parking spaces for a 68-unit assisted living facility for property located in the OPDH-12 zone on Lot I of the Silvercrest Retirement Community at the southeast corner of the Scott Boulevard and American Legion Road intersection and that this approval be subject to: 1 ) a stipulation that the parking reduction is tied specifically to the use of the property for an assisted living facility for elders and/or persons with disabilities and 2) the applicant delineate on the site plan an area that will be landbanked for 34 off-street parking spaces which the City may require to be provided if the City determines that additional parking is needed in the future. T. J. Brandt seconded the motion. T. J. Brandt said he was reading the national study in the packet and found that nationally the residents of this type of facility are up there in age and that the cars would not be that much of a factor. He said he thought it was reasonable to allow the reduction in parking for the 34 spaces that are farthest from the entrance to the assisted living facility. T. J. Brandt said he did not see any problem with allowing the reduction as long as the applicant follows the stipulations set forth for future use of the parking spaces if need be. He said in his mind, the general appearance of the site would be better served and the people in the assisted living facility itself would be better served to allow the off-street parking to be reduced to 34 parking spaces and keep these spaces closer to the facility. T. J. Brandt said he would vote in favor of this exception. L. Brandt said he is persuaded by both the attached study and just considering the intended use along with the conditions that would be placed on this approval. He said it is obvious that fewer parking spaces are required for this type of use. He said he agrees with T. J. Brandt that in terms of just general appearance, it would appear that this would be helpful to reduce the amount of concrete, something we're all often concerned about. L. Brandt said because it does not look like it would be as high a traffic area as we might normally expect, reducing the amount of parking is not going to cause any particular health or safety problems. He said in terms of just the general development of this area and the neighborhood, even though it's a rather large project, it doesn't seem inconsistent with surrounding development. L. Brandt said fortunately Boar ofAdjustment Minu~s Augu~ 11,1999 Page 4 there is not a large concentration of developed properties in the area right now, so anyone in the future will know what they're moving next to. He said actually reducing the amount of concrete will assist in terms of drainage and other kinds of utility issues, and traffic issues don't seem to be a concern. L. Brandt said it looks like general standards are met. He said he would support the motion. Paul said he would agree with the previous Board members' observations. Given the demographics of the population of the assisted facility, he said the likelihood of the facility needing those parking spaces is pretty slim. Paul said if the parking demand were to increase in the future, the landbanked parking spaces could be used for staff or for tenants either way: He said he agreed with both Board members that the less concrete the better in this community. He said the way the development is laid out, reducing the number of spaces is not going to create traffic hazards. Bender said she concurs with her colleagues. She said the standards have been met and the interests of justice would be served in granting the special exception. The motion carried on a vote of 4-0. EXC99-0015. Public hearing on an application submitted by Hodge Construction for special exceptions to permit residential dwellings above the ground floor of a use permitted in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone, to modify the front yard requirements to allow a porch and parking area paving to be installed along the Gilbert Court right-of-way, and to reduce the side yard requirement for a three-story building for property located at 813 Gilbert Court. Rockwell said Hodge Construction Company is requesting four special exceptions to allow development of the property located at 813 Gilbert Court for a parking lot and a mixed use commercial residential building. Rockwell said the property is currently in the process of being rezoned from Medium Density Single-Family Residential to Community Commercial. She said the Council had first consideration on this at its July 27 meeting. Rockwell said the next meeting on this would be at the end of August for second consideration, and if the hearings are not collapsed, it is anticipated that that rezoning will be approved in September. Rockwell said vehicular access to the site would be only via Kennedy Plaza, not off Gilbert Court. Rockwell said a 26-space parking area is being proposed in conjunction with the three- story building that has a two-story townhouse style duplex on the top two floors facing east toward Gilbert Court and a commercial unit on the ground floor facing west. She said the applicant is requesting a special exception to allow dwelling units to be established in a CC-2 zone, two special exceptions for front yard modifications, one for a porch and one for parking paving to encroach into that 20-foot front yard along Gilbert Court, and a fourth special exception to reduce the side yard to allow the building to be located only five feet back from the lot line. Rockwell said in looking at establishing dwelling units above the ground floor in a commercial zone, the Zoning Chapter states that dwelling units may be established in the CC-2 zone by special exception if located above or below the ground floor of another principal use permitted in this zone and provided the density does not exceed one dwelling unit per 1,800 square feet of lot area. She said although the residential units will appear to be at ground level at the Gilbert Court side of the structure, the Housing and Inspection Services staff have determined that technically the proposed lower level commercial area would constitute the ground floor of the building. Rockwell said the dwelling units therefore would meet the requirement to be above the ground floor commercial use. Rockwell said the lot area is 14,293 square feet, which would permit a density of seven dwelling units. She said only two dwelling units are being proposed. Rockwell said the technical requiremen. ts for dwelling units on this property are met. Boar ofAdjustment Minu~s August11,1999 Page 5 Rockwell said the placement of a duplex/townhouse facing Gilbert Court would be consistent with the residential zoning along the remainder of the street. Rockwell said there might be some concern about placing residences in proximity to the reailroad line that runs down Gilbert Court but staff wanted to note that the rail line is owned by CRANDIC. She said CRANDIC's new switching yard is scheduled to be completed in the Amanas later this year, so there should be a minimal use of that line in the future. She said vehicular and pedestrian conflicts with the rail line should be minimized by the proposed dev. elopment, which on the site plan shows that the existing driveway is to be removed and converted to a landscaped yard, and no sidewalk would be constructed near the rail line. Rockwell said in looking at the exceptions to establish setbacks and in particular to the front yard modification requested for the front porch, staff notes that properties located in the Community Commercial zone are required to have a 20-foot front yard setback along all street frontages. She said the applicant is proposing to construct a covered front porch over the two entrance doors to the duplex units. Rockwell said as designed, the porch would encroach six feet into the 20-foot front yard setback area along the Gilbert Court right-of-way. She said Hodge Construction is requesting a special exception to reduce the front yard requirement from 20 feet to 14 feet for the 32-foot length of the porch. Rockwell said the peculiarity of the property in this case involves the topography of the site. She said the east side of the property facing Gilbert Court is on higher ground than the proposed paved parking area and entrance to the commercial portion of the building. Rockwell said this allows the building to be designed to have a commercial site at a lower level that integrates with Kennedy Plaza and a residential appearance on the Gilbert Court side of the building. She said the front porch will soften the east facade of the building and help make the structure more residentially compatible with the neighboring RS-8 zoned properties along Gilbert Court. Rockwell said staff also noted that the addition of the front porch to the proposed mixed use building has the advantages of upgrading the property and making it more residentially compatible while requiring only a modest 7% front yard reduction. Regarding the yard modification requested for parking in the front yard, Rockwell said the City parking regulations state that in commercial zones within 50 feet of a residential zone, no parking shall be permitted in the front yard. She said the east portion of the proposed parking area is only 35 feet from the RS-8 zone boundary, which is located generally parallel to the subject property at the center line at the Gilbert Court right-of-way. Rockwell said this means there would be a 15-foot encroachment of the proposed parking area paving into the required 20-foot setback area along Gilbert Court. Rockwell said this. situation is faidy unique in that the parking area will be located at an elevation that is approximately eight feet lower than the Gilbert Court street level elevation. Rockwell said this makes the situation different in that the parking area would be less visible and less obtrusive to the residential streetscape than in most instances where parking occurs in a front yard. She said it would be a faidy substantial encroachment in quantitative terms, but this is minimized by the lower elevation of the parking area in relation to the street surface elevation. Rockwell said requiring landscaping that is a mix of trees and shrubs instead of only having right-of-way trees that are spaced approximately 25 feet apart could further soften the impact of the parking in the front yard on nearby residential properties. She said if propedy buffered, the parking in the front yard should not prove detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood and in fact could serve to provide needed parking. Rockwell said there is a parking congestion problem in the area and having the excess spaces on this lot will help resolve some of that congestion. Rockwell noted she received a call from a neighbor who was concemed about having the front - doors of the residential portio.n of the property facing Gilbert Court and having the parking for Board of Adjustment Minutes August 11, 1999 Page 6 those units at a lower level. He felt that people would probably choose to park in front of the residences, and there could be some conflict there with the railroad line. Rockwell said if the Board is concerned about this, there could be a condition applied that has been applied in other similar cases. She said the Board could require that parking spaces closest to the residence be allocated for residential parking. She said the requirement for the residential portion of the property is four parking spaces; two for each duplex unit. Looking at the side yard reduction being r~quested for a three-story struct',:re, Rockwell said the Zoning Chapter requires that where a commercial zone abuts a residential zone, a yard at least equal to the abutting yard requirements of the residential zone shall be provided along the residential zone boundary line. She said that regulation applies to that south boundary line, which abuts an RS-8 zone. Rockwell said in the RS-8 zone, a two-story building should be set a minimum of 5 feet from a side lot line, but for each story over two stories, they need to be set back an additional two feet. She said to meet the requirements, the three-story building would have to be set seven feet from the side lot line. Rockwell said the property does have a change of elevation from east to west on the site, and the structure will appear to be only two stories in height from the residential street side of the property. She said it will have a comparable elevation in relation to other residential structures that are located along Gilbert Court. She said in appearance, it wouldn't be higher than a two- story residence along that street frontage, although technically it is a three-story building. Rockwell said due to the change in grade on the site, the requested side yard exception should have a negligible affect on density, appearance of the site, use of municipal facilities or impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. Rockwell said she received a letter from Frank Simons, a neighboring property owner concerned about the parking and side yard modifications. She read the letter into the record at his request. Mr. Simons stated that he did not favor there being only five feet between the back of the proposed living units and the property line to the south. He wrote: "1 oppose this is because I do not believe that five feet is enough space in which to plant a screening hedge sufficient to block the back of the apartment as well as the parking lot lights from my sight line at 418 East Benton Street. At least, that is, in a manner fair to me as a neighbor of the proposed development. I further object because it appears that the excavation that took place when the old house was demolished assumed that this exception would be granted. The excavators encroached into the south line so far that it would have to now be filled if the exception were not to be granted, a very expensive proposition I am sure, and thus an 'inducement' for the Board to grant the requested exception." Mr. Simons also stated in his letter: "1 am concerned that even one or two more parking spaces permitted within the 20' setback area along the Gilbert Court right-of-way would put an additional burden on an already over-utilized street. The street has deteriorated greatly since the addition of the Kennedy Plaza development and the additional traffic poses hazards to the many pedestrians that must walk in the street as there is no sidewalk. The City must either' commit to upgrade the street or the exception should be denied. Again, I suspect that the parking is an essential part of meeting other requirements and thus creates a pressure on the Board to grant the exception. I request that the Board of Adjustment deny both of the requested exemptions." Board of Adjustment Minutes August 11, 1999 Page 7 Rockwell pointed out that she thought Mr. Simons was not aware that there would be no vehicular access from Gilbert Court to the proposed parking area. In looking at general standards, Rockwell said staff did find that the proposed mixed use of the property will increase its value, the landscaping that will be added to the site will improve its appearance, and the removal of vehicular access to the property from Gilbert Court should enhance safety. She said the addition of the covered porch to the residential portion of the structure and the provision of evergr3en screening along the south boundary of the property, as well as the mix of trees and shrubs along the right-of-way east of the parking area should ameliorate the effects of the yard modifications on nearby properties. Rockwell said a dilapidated residence was removed from this property, and if the exceptions are approved as requested, that former residence will be replaced with a new building that should serve to have an upgrading affect on surrounding properties. She said this should also serve to reduce some of the parking congestion being experienced from the Kennedy Plaza development. Rockwell said staff recommends that EXC99-0015, a special exception to permit a duplex residence above the ground floor level of a use permitted in the CC-2 zone, a special exception to reduce the front yard setback requirement along the Gilbert Court right-of-way from 20 feet to 14 feet for the 32 foot length of the proposed covered porch, a special exception to reduce the front yard setback requirement along the Gilbert Court right-of-way from 20 feet to five feet for the 87-foot length of the east edge of the proposed parking area, and a special exception to reduce the side yard setback from seven feet to five feet for the 30-foot length of the proposed three-story building be approved for the 813 Gilbert Court property, subject to 1) the CC-2 zoning for the property being approved by the City Council, 2) the applicant planting a mix of trees and shrubs as approved by City staff between the Gilbert Court right-of-way and the east edge of the parking area and 3) the applicant removing the existing driveway off Gilbert Court and replacing it with a planted area. Rockwell said Will Sheridan, whose property backs up on the south boundary of this property, came in to talk to her eadier in the day, and he was concerned about the lighting for the new development. Rockwell said she informed him that the lighting would meet the new standards that are set by the City for downcast shielded light where the foot-candles cannot exceed one- foot candle at the property line. She said he told her that he felt assured that he would have no problem with the lighting. Bender asked if the phone call, correspondence and visit mentioned by Rockwell was all that had been received on this item. Rockwell confirmed this. Bender asked if the request for the parking is to reduce the front yard from 20 feet to five feet. Rockwell confirmed this, saying the parking paving is proposed to encroach 15 feet into the 20- foot front yard. L. Brandt asked where the parking is. He asked if the parking is down at the Gilbert Street level and no parking area on Gilbert Court. Rockwell said that was correct. She said there is a drive now, but there will be no vehicular access off Gilbert Court. Rockwell said vehicular access will only occur through the Kennedy Plaza development. L. Brandt asked if the parking spaces we're talking about were just simply incorporated into the overall parking plan for Kennedy Plaza. He asked if the Board could recommend that specific spaces be designated for the residents. Rockwell said yes, the Board could require that the four spaces closest to the stairway to the residential units be allocated for residential use. She showed the access point on the map. Rockwell said there will probably be one or two parking spaces removed from the existing Kennedy Plaza development, a transformer box would be moved, and a connecting drive will be added. L. Brandt said the pedestrian access on the site plan looks like the porch comes out and then basically you just have a small sidewalk that leads to the steps down below. He said basically Board of Adjustment Minutes August 11, 1999 Page 8 pedestrians and vehicles will be accessing the site on the Gilbert Street level. Rockwell said that was dght. Rockwell Said the Conditional Zoning Agreement was framed to minimize the amount of vehicle and pedestrian treffic at the Gilbert Court level, because of the conflict with the reil line there. She said although that area is zoned residential, it still has almost a commercial intensity due to uses of the surrounding preperty that prebably were grendfathered in. Rockwell said there is a railroad to the north as well. She said because of the condition of the street and the reil lines, etc., the zoning agreement was designed to minimize that traffic. Holecek agreed. L. Brandt said he was having a hard time visualizing coming out of those second-level apartments facing Gilbert Court and how you get to Gilbert Court. He said it almost looks like off the front porch of the residence is an elevated sidewalk that leads down the steps to the Gilbert Street level. L. Brandt said apparently it is going to be built so residents can walk out the front door and walk across the gress to Gilbert Court. He said he could not believe residents would be hauling furniture up from the Gilbert Street level to furnish their apartments. L. Brendt said there is going to be no driveway or anything up on the Gilbert Court level; the one that's there is being taken out and nothing new is being put in. Rockwell confirmed this. Paul said Rockwell had mentioned the parking preblems at Kennedy Plaza and asked her to elaborate on that. Rockwell said a mix of residential/commercial units were put in under former parking previsions so only two parking spaces were required per dwelling unit. She 'said many of the apartments in that building have four and five bedrooms. Rockwell said the parking requirements have changed, but Kennedy Plaza is stuck with what they put in under the old parking requirements. She said there is a heavy demand for parking spaces. There has been spillover parking by the residential tenants and the commercial tenants have requested that more spaces be allocated for their use. She said the proposed development is an attempt to provide a few more parking spaces over and above what is required. Paul asked if parking is prehibited now on Gilbert Court. Rockwell said it is difficult to park along there because of the railroad line and a number of garages/driveways along there. T. J. Brandt said most tenants will likely park on the east side of Gilbert Court and walk down the little embankment into their front door rather than walking in the parking lot. L. Brandt asked if there is a Gilbert Street level access for the apartments that now are part of the Kennedy Plaza. John Cruise said tenants can get in from the Gilbert Street entrence. Public hearing: John Cruise. 920 South Dubuque Street, said he is one of the owners of the Kennedy Plaza project, along with David Hodge, who was at the meeting, Mike Hodge and a couple other partners. Cruise said this development is really to be part of the Kennedy Plaza. He said Hodge Construction is the contractor taking care of this for them, but it is going to be part of the Kennedy Plaza ownership. Cruise said they have been working over the last two years to acquire the land and then provide something that improved the neighborhood, gave them a little bit of return on their investment, and allowed them to provide a lot of additional parking. He said they legally have sufficient parking for Kennedy Plaza and in fact are probably 10 or 15 spaces above the legal amount, but it would be a lot nicer for their commercial and residential tenants if they could provide more parking. Cruise said that is the impetus behind all this. He said what the Board has in front of it is has been negotiated and worked on through the planning and zoning process, and he thinks it is a pretty good plan. He said he hopes the Board will approve it. Cruise said Hodge could probably answer more questions as far as the layout, but he would answer any questions the Board had for him. Board ofAdjustment Minu~s August11,1999 Page 9 L. Brandt said one of his concerns was how much we're impacting the neighborhood with this project, such as seeing how much parking there was or wasn't and how many cam were parked behind the apartment buildings dudng a non-school time. He said the evening he was up there he wondered where are all those people parking when the University is in session. L. Brandt said he had the concern about how you get into those apartments, and Cruise said you can get to them from Gilbert Street. L. Brandt said so theoretically if there is not enough parking up above there, some people could park down on the Gilbert Street level and still get to their apartments. Cruise said that was right; he said that right now the psrking for the residential tenants is both on the east side back there'where L. Brandt was driving at the end of Gilbert Court and in the lower lot at the Gilbert Street level. Cruise said that lot is not only a main lot right in front, but they also have a lease where they installed another lot with 10 or 12 spaces close to Dave Steve's property. Cruise said the tenants who park down below could enter the building at the northwest corner; there is a stairway there and that is how they can get to their apartments. Cruise said the proposed project .improves the situation for everybody. He said it puts more people parking off Gilbert Street and walking up to their respective apartments. He said the duplex is really a fairly low intensity use of that property. Cruise said they could put a lot more units there, but that is not their desire. Public hearing closed. Holecek said the exceptions should be considered one at a time. Bender asked if the Board should have deliberation and findings of fact on each item. Holecek said yes, she would suggest that the Board have a motion on the floor for each exception and then deliberate on each one separately, MOTION: T. J. Brandt moved to approve EXC99-0015, part A, a special exception to permit a duplex residence above the ground floor level of a use permitted in the CC-2 zone at 813 Gilbert Court. Paul seconded the motion. Paul said he would vote in favor of this. He said one reason was that in that zone, it appears as though seven dwelling units could be developed on this property, and only two are being proposed. Paul said that the proposed development is a nice use of that space, it is compatible with the neighborhood and keeps the density low. He said he thought it would also blend in with the rest of the look of the residential area. Paul said it will actually be a plus to that area, because the rest of the neighborhood does have more of a commercial look than a residential appearance along Gilbert Court. He said he thought it was important to address the parking issue as far as providing more parking for both the commercial and residential tenants of these properties. He said he would vote in favor. L. Brandt asked if simply saying in the motion to permit a duplex residence is sufficiently specific enough to indicate .that the Board is approving two units. Holecek said she thought that was sufficient. Lo Brandt said in terms of the general standards, he was not seeing any problems with this particular special exception. He said just the simple fact of adding a duplex in this area does not seem to be injurious to any health or safety concerns and actually shouldn't present that much difficulty for use of neighboring properties. He said the proposal is relatively small in terms of overall scale and impact and would actually be better than some other uses actually. L. Brandt said impacting other development doesn't seem to be an issue, and it looks like all of the necessary facilities are being provided for. He said traffic doesn't seem to be an issue down at the Gilbert Street level. L. Brandt said generally the standards seem to be met. L. Brandt asked if conditions should be applied to each of the exceptions that the Board approves, for example the planting of the mix of trees and shrubs, which he thinks is a good Boa~ ofAdju~ment Minu~s August11,1999 Page 10 idea for all four of the requested special exceptions. Bender said she had that same question. She asked Holecek about this, saying as with the landscaping condition that it would be wise to include a condition somewhere with one of these about the removal of the existing ddveway. Bender asked where to attach the conditions. Holecek said one motion could be done at the end, that all four of the exceptions are contingent upon. T. J. Brandt said he agreed with his colleagues and with Cruise that the proposed duplex is a pretty mild use of the property. T: J. Brandt said knowing that parking ~congestion, could be a lot worse without this project, he would be in favor of allowing it. Bender said she concurred. She said the lot area of over 14,000 square feet certainly lends itself for this kind of use. Bender said the fact that the CRANDIC is going to be an intermittent use when the switching yard in the Amanas is complete makes her feel a lot better in terms of the standards that deal with safety. She said she would also support this exception for dwelling units in the CC-2 zone. The motion carried on a vote of 4-0. MOTION: L. Brandt moved to approve EXC99-0015, part B, a special exception to reduce the front yard setback requirement along the Gilbert Court right-of-way from 20 feet to 14 feet for the 32-foot length of the proposed covered porch for the 813 Gilbert Court property. T. J. Brandt seconded the motion. L. Brandt said the health and safety issues are a bit of a concern because of the rail line, and generally it is kind of a congested area up there. He said presumably this will be minimized somewhat by the plan to reduce the use of that line by CRANDIC and also because, hopefully, the bulk of the human traffic on and off that porch will be going down to the Gilbert Street level and not out onto Gilbert Court. L. Brandt said hopefully that standard will be met or at least minimally impacted. He said concerning the porch, there don't seem to be a lot of issues otherwise. L. Brandt said in terms of the impact on the neighborhood, actually having a residential appearance is a good thing and is a positive in terms of meeting the standards. He said he did not see any real impact in terms of providing facilities and utilities, ingress and egress. T. J. Brandt said one of the concems is having the tenants park up there on Gilbert Court and cross the rail lines and come down into the apartments from that direction. T. J. Brandt asked if a privacy fence could be used to basically tell tenants not to park on Gilbert Court. He said he would think that 'a solid buffer rather than a landscape buffer on the front there would be safer in that it would force tenants to park down below rather than parking up on Gilbert Court and walking down the embankment into the front doors of the duplex. T. J. Brandt said he did not know how sightly that would be for the tenants when they are sitting on their front porches, but a fence could address the concern about safety and the parking issue on Gilbert Court. Rockwell said a fence in that area could not be over four feet in height. L. Brandt said in terms of evacuation and emergency access, it might not hurt to have an alternative route, even though the concern is definitely there. L. Brandt said he was surprised the Board did not hear much about people parking in the rest of the neighborhood yet. T. J. Brandt said that was the one concern that he had. He said the impact of the front porch doesn't bother him, and he was just thinking of a way to keep people from parking up on Gilbert Court since one of the concerns was the parking on Gilbert Court and the congestion on Gilbert Court. T. J. Brandt said L. Brandt was dght about the emergency vehicles and if they had to get back there to the apartments, a fence could hinder them quite 'a bit. T. J. Brandt said as long as it is included in the conditions that a buffer be put in, that would be fine. Boa~ofAdjustment Minu~s August11,1999 Page 11 Paul said he agreed with both of the Brandt gentlemen and echoed the notion that without the porch, there would be a pretty incomplete look for the front of that building on the Gilbert Court side and that would not blend as well into that residential look. Paul said he didn't see this doing any harm to the neighbors. Bender said she concurred. She said this is relatively minor front yard modification. She said when one looks at the exception in relation to the requirements, we're talking about 7%, which is pretty m'~nor. Bender said she tl-:ought the porch would keep the new building looking more in character in appearance with the rest of the neighboring properties that are residential. She said she did not see it being detrimental in terms of safety. Bender said one of the standards the Board looks at is if there is a feasible altemative. She said the porch could be left off, but she did not think the building would look as nice. She said she certainly thought the interests of justice would be served in granting the requested front yard modification. The motion carried on a vote of 4-0. MOTION: L. Brandt moved to approve EXC99-0015, part C, a special exception to reduce the front yard setback requirement along the Gilbert Court right-of-way from 20 feet to five feet for the 87-foot length of east edge of the proposed parking area for property located at 813 Gilbert Court. T. J. Brandt seconded the motion. L. Brandt said the health and safety issues are minimized by the fact that the actual parking area is set well below the actual street for which the Board is dealing with the setback. He said those issues are minimized and actually all the standards are minimized greatly by the fact of the parking being located so much below Gilbert Court. L. Brandt' said consequently the impact on the neighborhood is pretty minimal and the impact on other development is minimal. He said this requested yard modification won't affect utilities, facilities, and ingress/egress. He said he was in favor; T. J. Brandt said he was also in favor of granting this special exception. He said one main reason would be to alleviate some of the parking congestion that has already been experienced in the Kennedy Plaza area. T. J. Brandt said ddving through there on 'occasion with the traffic parking congestion, he thought the additional parking would be an added bonus for everyone involved. He said he thought justice would be served by allowing the parking lot setback. Paul said he agreed. He said looking at the standards, they have been met. Paul said nobody is really being hurt; there is no detrimental damage being done to the neighborhood. He said it would alleviate parking congestion problems in that area and be a solution to the situation. Bender said she agreed. She said when you look at the specific standards, .the amount of the exception, as staff pointed out in the report, in quantitative terms is relatively high. Bender noted that because of the way the parking is set at a different level that helps ameliorate the affects. Bender said a condition is needed to require a landscaping buffer that will help soften the impact of the parking in the front yard. She said she wanted that as part of approving this front yard parking. Bender said she thought the Board was in agreement on that. She said in terms of the neighborhood, she thought it would help reduce spillover parking onto the street. Bender said she certainly thought it is wise thing to do and she would vote in favor of the front yard reduction for parking. The motion carried on a vote of 4-0. MOTION: L. Brandt moved to approve EXC99-0015, part D, a special exception to reduce the south side yard setback from seven feet to five feet for the 30-foot length of the Board of Adjustment Minutes August 11, 1999 Page 12 proposed three-story building located at 813 Gilbert Court. T. J. Brandt seconded the motion. L. Brandt said the same comments he made on the previous matters apply to this special exception as well. He said the comments earlier about ensuring that the screening is there are important. L. Brandt said he thought the standards were met. Paul said he agreed. Paul also said he agreed about the landscaping and thought it was pretty important to this issue. He said he would support this special exception. T. J. Brandt said for the fourth time the standards have been met. He said he too would be in favor of the proposed special exception to reduce the side yard requirement. Bender said she concurred. She said she thoughtall the standards have been met, and she did not see any way that the yard reduction would be a real substantial change or detriment to the neighborhood. The motion carried on a vote of 4-0. MOTION: L. Brandt moved that all four of the preceding exceptions that have been approved are all subject to: 1) City Council approval of the CC-2 zoning for the property, 2) the applicant planting a mix of trees and shrubs, as approved by City staff, between the Gilbert Court right-of-way and the east edge of the parking area, 3) the applicant removing the existing driveway off Gilbert Court and replacing it with a planted area), and 4) the applicant providing vegetative screening along the south boundary of the property. T. J. Brandt seconded the motion. Bender said she felt the Board had reached consensus on the conditions of approval through the discussions. Holecek said she thought the Board's discussions support that they find these conditions necessary to make the findings of fact previously articulated. The motion carried on a vote of 4-0. FXC99-0016. Public headng on an application submitted by John and Virginia Stamler for a special exception to modify the front yard setback requirement to allow a garage and breezeway to be constructed along an undeveloped portion of McLean Street for property located in the Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) zone at 358 Lexington Avenue. Rockwell said this fairly sizable property is located at an intersection of two streets. She said one of those streets, although it is platted and appears on the Zoning Map, has never been improved or had a paved surface for a street. Rockwell said this is a faidy straightforward special exception that involves a single-family residential property that is technically considered a corner lot. She said the portion of McLean Street right-of-way that abuts the Stamler property has never had a street constructed within it. Rockwell said there are no underground utilities associated with the right-of-way, and over the years, the neighboring property owners have constructed pdvate driveways and retaining walls, planted landscaping, and have generally used the area as an extension of their yards. Rockwell said when the Stamlers decided to replace the existing single-stall garage with an attached two-car garage, they found they needed to resolve two issues with the City. She said first, they wanted to locate a portion of their private ddveway within the public right-of-way, and secondly, they wanted to locate the new attached garage and connecting breezeway within the required 20-foot front yard setback along the McLean Street right-of-way. Rockwell said on June 15 of this year, the City Council granted permission for the Stamlers to construct a ddveway I.eading to the proposed location of a new garage on their property. She Board of Adjustment Minutes August 11, 1999 Page 13 said the applicants are now requesting a special exception to reduce the required front yard setback along the McLean Street right-of-way from 20 feet to five feet to allow construction of the new garage as proposed and a reduction in the front yard setback from 20 feet to 11 feet to allow for the construction of a six-foot wide connecting breezeway between the new garage and the existing residence. Rockwell said an accurate site plan has been submitted and is before the Board that shows the dimensions of the proposed structures and the distances of those structures from the property line. It also gives a more accurate depiction of how the breezeway will be constructed. Rockwell said the peculiarity of the situation in this case relates primarily to the existence of the platted McLean Street right-of-way where to date no street has been constructed. She said although there is no topographical barrier, there has been extensive discussion among staff as to whether a street would ever be put through, and the answer is no. She said staff does not feel that putting a street through would serve any purpose. She said it would do nothing to alleviate traffic problems, and in fact could introduce a potential traffic conflict at the crest of a hill. Rockwell said in looking at how substantial the exception is in relation to the requirement, the 13% encroachment seems reasonable given that the garage and breezeway will be set back some distance from Lexington Avenue and will not create a sense of structural crowding on the lot. Rockwell said under the current and anticipated future circumstances of McLean Street not being paved or used as a street, the requested exception for both the garage and the breezeway represent a fairly modest front yard reduction that would have a minimal impact on the surrounding neighborhood. She said although the applicants could meet the setback requirements, compliance of the garage with this setback could harm a large oak tree. Rockwell said the staff report mentions some concern about the access point for the proposed driveway where it intersects with Lexington Avenue. She said there is recognition that the Board and staff don't have jurisdiction over this; use of the public right-of-way is under the jurisdiction of the City Council. Rockwell said however, staff would encourage the Stamlers to have the access point on Lexington be as far to the south as is possible to keep the drive usable, but to pull that drive access point away from the intersection, away from the crest of the hill, and away from the ddveway immediately to the north. Rockwell said the placement of the new garage and connecting breezeway as proposed by the applicants should not lessen the use and enjoyment of neighboring properties. She said the garage and breezeway have been designed to be architecturally compatible with the existing residence, and the location of both the garage and driveway have been planned to avoid the loss of mature trees on the site. Rockwell noted that the proposed garage is actually being placed further away from the east lot line than the existing garage. Rockwell said staff recommends approval of EXC99-0016, a special exception to reduce the front yard setback requirement along the McLean Street right-of-way from 20 feet to five feet for the 24-foot width of the proposed two-stall garage and from 20 feet to 11 feet for the six-foot width of the connecting breezeway for property located in the RS-5 zone at 358 Lexington Avenue, subject to no conditions. Public hearing: John Stamler. 358 Lexington Avenue, said he is an applicant for this exception. He said Rockwell basically explained what they want to do. Stamler said they would like to have a connected two-car garage instead of the detached one-car garage. He said in doing that, they have designed it to take into consideration their neighbors and also their lot. Board of Adjustment Minutes August 11, 1999 Page 14 Stamler said they are proposing to move the garage away from their neighbors to the east a little bit to improve the distance between the two garages, which is now only about two or three feet. He said they will also grade the ddveway so that all the runoff from the water won't go down into their north neighbors' ddveway like it's been doing, but will go out to the street. Stamler said they had choices of where to put the garage, and they wanted to put it away from the real front of the house which really is along Lexington Avenue, He said McLean Street is not constructed, and they want to put the garage back away from the front of the property to make it less visible from the actual street. He said that places it on the east side of the property. Stamler said they wanted to put the garage away from that large oak tree that sits east of the house. Stamler said they talked to the City Forester who recommended a 15-foot clearance from the tree for any pavement or structures. He said they tried to do that. Stamler said if they set the garage back 20 feet, then it would be within about seven feet from the trunk of the tree, so they tried to keep it as far away from that tree as they could. He said also a garage set back 20 feet would block windows on the east side of the house and that would alter the character of the house quite a bit if the large dining room windows on that side of the house are blocked. Stamler said he thought the garage being closer to the north doesn't really disrupt the neighbors to the north since there is 50 feet of right-of-way in between. He said they are still 55 feet from the north neighbors' lot line, so he did not think it would really bother them. Stamler said those are the reasons why they want to come within five feet of the property line. Robert Staley. 405 Hutchinson Avenue, said he is a neighbor, not directly across from the Stamler property, but kitty-comer across the McLean Street right-of-way. He said they have a driveway that was constructed in 1977 in the McLean Street right-of-way, and they approve of this alteration that has been requested. Staley said they have also been kind of interested in the City's use of the McLean Street right-of-way and are most happy to hear the City is not planning to build a road through there. He said they are happy to take care of the yard, so to speak. Paul asked Stamler if there has been a problem with drainage and runoff to the north. Stamler said it does slope down to the driveway; it does drain down that way. He said he did not think the neighbors had problems with it getting into their house, but it flows around to the east side of their house and flows quite a bit when there is a heavy rain. Paul said he was cudous about that. Stamler said in the spring when it thaws and freezes, the neighbors get the runoff into their driveway. Stamler said he thought it would be nicer to have the drainage go to the street instead of the neighbors' driveway; that their project would actually improve the existing drainage ' situation. Public hearing closed. MOTION: L. Brandt moved to approve EXC99-0016, a special exception to reduce the front yard setback requirement from 20 feet to five feet for the 24-foot width of the proposed two-stall garage and from 20 feet to 11 feet for the six-foot width of the proposed connecting breezeway for property located in the RS-5 zone at 358 Lexington Avenue. Paul seconded the motion. L. Brandt said this sounds like a good project to him. He said generally he liked the property, but he thought this is an improvement. L. Brandt said staff and the applicant have stated it very well; there are just a lot of pluses here. He said he did not see anything that is injurious to other properties, in fact he thought it was probably an improvement. L. Brandt said the new garage would be further away from the east property than it is now, and it is not a significant encroachment into the north property. He said he thought the driveway would be something that anybody in the neighborhood would find desirable. He said it opens up some potential for some Board of Adjustment Minutes August 11, 1999 Page 15 green space at the front and side of the house, which he thought would also be nice. He said the ingress/egress is kind of a non-issue, because it is provided for already in terms of Council approval of the driveway. L. Brandt said it looks like a good plan that he would support. Paul said he thought it was a good plan as well, especially since it doesn't impede on a street that doesn't exist. He said knowing the property over the years, he appreciated the proposed design and taking into consideration the trees on the property, because they are a valuable part of the property. Paul said he agreed 'with L. Brandt that it would be an enhancement to the property as well as an enhancement to the Stamlers' life in that they would be able to get in and out of the garage without going outside. Paul said he thought it would improve the property and is injurious to no one. He said he too would vote in favor. T. J. Brandt agreed with L. Brandt and Paul that the standards have been met. He said the encroachment is very minimal when compared to the size of the lot. T. J. Brandt said knowing that there is not going to be an impact to the neighbors, he too would vote in favor of this exception. Bender said she concurred. She said a 13% encroachment is relatively minor. Bender said because of the way things are set on the lot, there are not feasible alternatives that would not require a front yard modification. She said that looking at the standards of effects on population density and municipal facilities, none of those are affected. Bender said it is really not any kind of a detriment in terms of safety. She said she would like to reiterate what staff said about moving the ingress point as far away from the intersection as possible. Bender said she would think that to be a prudent thing to do, but it is out of the Board's jurisdiction. She said she too would support the application. The motion carried on a vote of 4-0. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION: Bender said she would be absent for the October meeting. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Adjournment was moved by T. J. Brandt and seconded by L. Brandt. The meeting ended at 6:35 p.m. Susan Bender, Chairperson Melody Rockwell, Secretary Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte ppdadmin/minsrooa811 .doc SIGN IN SHEET IOWA CiTY BOARD OF AD]U~llvlENT MEETING WEDNESDA Y~ AUGUST ll/ ~999 - &:O0 P. I~, Civic Center Council Chambers 2. 3, 4. 5. 6, Z 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 1Z 18, 19. 20. Name Address Phone ~ n,dJ., ~.~ ~ ~-~qz- ~~ ~ ...... ~~ /c,~ MINUTES IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES REGULAR MEETING THURSDAY, - JULY 22, 1999 AT 5:00 PM Agenda item 3A Members Present: Members Absent: Staff Present: Winston Barclay, Linda Dellsperger, Shaner Magalh~es, Lisa Parker, Linda Prybil, Jesse Singerman, Jim Swaim Mary McMurray Maeve Clark, Susan Craig, Larry Eckholt, Debb Green, Kara Logsden, Martha Lubaroff, Liz Nichols, CALL TO ORDER: Due to the absence of Mark Martin, Vice President Lisa Parker called the meeting to order at 5:00 pm Two new board members, Shaner Magalh~es and Linda Prybil were welcomed to the Board. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was noted that Ross Wilburn's name was incorrectly spelled. The minutes were amended to read that Parker is writing a piece for the Chamber newsletter about the Library's decision not to pursue the option of a branch library. Magalh~es noted that he is not a State Historical Society Librarian; he is the Bureau Chief. Swaim/Singerman approved the minutes as corrected. The vote was unanimous UNFINISHED BUSINESS Board of Trustees Annual report. Craig drafted the Board's annual report using suggestions and direction given at the last Board meeting. There were no changes. This report will become part of the City's compilation of reports of Boards and Commissions as well as part of the Library's annual report. Building Project. The Board is scheduled to meet with City Council on August 23. Craig asked the Board how they wanted to prepare and if they wanted to send council anything prior to the meeting. One suggestion is to summarize what took place at the last joint board/council meeting on May 17 and review the community survey. Craig said that if the conversation included a request for money, a resolution would have to be on Tuesday's formal agenda that would allocate $60,000 for a design on 64 1 A. Board said that was what they wanted. Prybil asked about the possibility of expanding West which appears to be a non- issue now for many reasons including expense, parking, etc. We could be ready to answer questions about an architect. In the past, Craig was told we would be permitted to select one of the two architects we've dealt with previously without another bidding process because ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES JULY 22, 1999 PAGE 2 Agenda item 3A they went through a competitive selection process. The initial step would be to use one of those architects to prepare a proposal. Once a referendum campaign is over and successful, we could then enter into a competitive bidding with architects for design. We want a firm commitment on space, approval and money before going ahead with a contract with an architect. Craig will go back to the most recent architect and work with them on a timeline and a contract. Craig will draft a memo to Council reflecting what the Board wants to discuss at the meeting, run it by the Building Committee for approval before Martin signs it. NEW BUSINESS FY99 Planning - The document which gave an updated report on completed tasks, was included with the packet for review. In response to a question about Y2K compliance - Nichols reported that testing is almost complete. We are about to replace our administrative local area network with a new compliant server. We will be converting data bases to new compliant software. Contigency plans have been submitted to City. The main concern at this time is the HVAC system. Enrich Iowa. We will be getting about ~ 15,000 this year. Craig hopes to see it remain and increase over the next three years. Mobil units. The survey has been completed and during this fiscal year we will prepare a recommendation. Although there is concern about the future of Sycamore Mall, the kiosk useage has continued to go up in the 4th quarter. Our role in serving young children was discussed and the Board asked about plans to find opportunities to serve adolescents? This ' objective has been included in the FY01 plan. Swaim recommended that we have a staff member serve on the Empowerment Board that provides services to children birth through five. FY00 plan. Sending our newsletter via e-mail was suggested. Although it is available on the Web perhaps sending it electronically with hyper-links to various library items of interest would be useful. In response to a question about availability of asking reference questions 24 hours/day, Clark explained that we need to determine how to set up a proxy server so we only answer questions for Iowa City and Johnson Co. It is not as simple as it may seem. In response to another concern, Logsden explained that we have equipment related to special needs. Several pieces of equipment will be located in one area (for vision impaired). The new Innovative software has a module that provides a larger type version of our catalog. More outreach to those who cannot come to the Library is in the FY01 plan since it has budget implications. Dellsperger commented that this is a hefty group of objectives and the staff has a lot to do. Since parking is such an issue and the City's parking revenue is down, a suggestion was made to offer City money for parking for library patrons. A motion was made to adopt plan for FY00. Dellsperger/Swaim Craig reviewed how we make use of our plans. We've been through several 5 year planning processes and they guide our decisions and the services offered and therefore the budget requests. The Board adopts the plan for the next budget year. In September you see the ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES JULY 22, 1999 PAGE 3 Agenda item 3A budget that reflects the priorities Board has adopted in July and in June/July of next year, staff develop written goals for themselves and departments based on the plan. We depend on the plan for guidance and use it frequently. Craig asked those from the Board who served on the planning committee to speak about the process and how the Mission, Vision, and Goals evolved. Many community people participated in the sessions. Changes in the mission and vision statements were drafted by Craig. Most of the time was spent developing the vision statement. The group was pleased with the outcome which allows us to move forward to completing a brief yet encompassing plan. Goals and Strategies came from the Vision and Mission statements. While Singerman agreed that the plan is a reflection of the needs of the library, she questioned the idea of putting collections and programs at the end. She feels they deserves a higher priority. Dellsperger reviewed for the Board the thinking that went into this placement of collections and programs. Collections and programs currently cnrrently are at a level that need constant maintenance however it was felt that other areas need attention. How can we continue to keep our collection and programs at the current excellent level until we have a facility in which we can expand. Swaim agreed with Singerman that our ability to do good community relations is contingent on having successful collections and programs. The committee zeroed in on five important goals; how necessary is it to establish priorities? Singerman said that historically we have prioritized the goals. She respects the role of the committee; however the role of Board is to set policy for the institution. Singerman made a motion to place Collections and Programs afterr Facilities. Swaim seconded the motion. Parker called for a vote. The motion passed four to three. Magalh~es, Parker, Singerman, Swaim voted Aye. Dellsperger, Barclay, Prybil voted Nay. Barclay then made a motion to move Service to the number 3 position stating that if we were going to prioritize in overall priority service should be second. Swaim seconded it. Parker asked for further discussion. Dellsperger passionately described her disappointment in changing a document that was worked on long and hard by community, Board and staff. Moving this goal up would result in others being moved down. A vote was called. Parker, Singerman, Prybil voted nay. Swaim and Barclay voted aye. Dellsperger and Magalh~es abstained. Swaim suggested that in the future we make it clear to a planning committee that their work is a recommendation and that there may be some minor adjustments. Parker asked for comments on the Goals and strategies. Magalh~es asked about adding construction to the Facilities goal. Craig responded that we adopt these goals for one year and can revise next year if we're ready for construction. Swaim suggested targeting public forums to special groups. Parker asked for a motion to adopt the FY01 plan. Singerman moved approval. Swaim seconded. Asked for vote. All voted Aye. Adopt NOBU Budget, As a review for new members, Craig explained the difference between the operating budget that comes from the City and gets zeroed out at the end of the year, and non-operating funds that come from gifts. Largest amount of funds comes 'from Open Access and Access Plus which come from the State. We have discretion over these funds. Approximately $60,000 ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES JULY 22, 1999 PAGE 4 Agenda item 3A is carried over. It was suggested we earmark 910,000 to buy some parking for patrons. Board asked Craig to speak to Joe Fowler about the possibility. Dellsperger asked for some clarification about the ongoing items and how it was decided to commit certain funds to certain activities. Staff positions will probably not change in the near future. Half time for Development Office assistant was approved by the Board. Quarter time public services clerk was to enable us to shift salary funds and hire a Circulation Coordinator. Staff reserve is a contingency fund. Art Purchase is an ongoing project for Art to Go. We allocate 95,000 to pay consultants to work with non-profit agencies and help them develop their web pages. Their total budget is 919,000. We obtain much benefit and exposure from this partnership. Move approval of NOBU budget for FY00. Singerman/Barclay. All voted Aye. Appointments to Arts Advisory Committee approved. Dellsperger/Shaner STAFF REPORTS Information about City Plaza hotel. Notice the construction and new playground equipment. Training opportunities on ICN. See Lubaroff if you want to register. Kara Logsden is leaving next week for maternity leave. Development Office report is included in packet. Speaking of training opportunities - Logsden reported that our ICN room is getting very busy. PRESIDENT'S REPORT Martin was not at meeting. ANNOUNCEMENT FROM MEMBERS Swaim announced the, August 7, UAY Art Fair. Young people will be selling their art; includes live entertainment. Prybil encouraged everyone to attend the best County Fair. Starts Monday at 10:00 am Singerman mentioned the second Community Forum held by Library on July 8 which was unattended. DISBURSFMENTS Review VISA expenditures for June, 1999. Approve disbursements for June, 1999 Swaim/Singerman ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES JULY 22, 1999 PAGE 5 Agenda item 3A SET AGENDA ORDER FOR AUGUST MEETING After the meeting, Board will adjourn out for dinner. ADJOURNMFNT: Meeting adjourned at 7:00 pm Minutes taken and transcribed by martha Lubaroff MINUTES PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AUGUST 11, 1999 MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: GUESTS: Toni Cilek, Barbara Endel, Matt Pacha, Rex Pruess, Alien Stroh; Craig Gustaveson arrived at 6:20 p.m. Bruce Maurer, Kathy Wallace, Ross Wilburn Terry Trueblood, Mike Moran Richard Dyson, Tami Thompson, Margaret Looneer, Paul McDonald FORMAL ACTION TAKEN Moved by Pruess, seconded by Endel, to approve the July 14, 1999 minutes as written. Unanimous. Moved by Pruess, seconded by Stroh, to move forward as rapidly as possible with the Walden Hills section for trail connectivity, to keep an eye open for Walden Wood, Part 6, and to abandon prior thoughts of a trail going through a passive park atmosphere~ Unanimous. Moved by Stroh, seconded by Pruess, to comply with staffs original recommendation to accept fees in lieu of !and dedication in Scott Boulevard East, Part 4. Unanimous. "WALDEN WOOD PARK" DEVELOPMENT Trueblood noted in June 1995 the commission approved acceptance of a 1.7-acre donation of open space (Outlot A). At the time, the commission indicated that an important component would be to construct a trail from Walden Road in a northerly direction through the open space to eventually bridge over Willow Creek and connect into Willow Creek Trail, Phase One. Originally the narrow area at the north end of the property within the gas line easement was thought to be 28 feet wide between the sub-station fence and the adjacent property owners; in reality, the area is only 4 to 5 feet wide. Staff met with representatives of the neighborhood to discuss potential development plans. Their feeling is that the trail is not necessarily an important component, citing ADA issues and the proposed development for Walden Wood, Part 6 where a connection is proposed at the north end of Jensen Street. Trueblood noted the trail may also have a connection further to the west, off Irving Avenue, near the existing trail bridge. In view of what the City Council decided with regard to the Burry Street connection, it is uncertain if this trail will be constructed in that it will go between two houses (yet to be occupied). A letter was received from Richard Dyson and Tami Thompson who have concerns with the proposed public path for the open area between Jensen Street and Walden taking part of their yard to build the trail. Richard Dyson indicated he lived in the last house on the north end of Jensen Street, noting it would be very difficult to put any trail along the gas pipeline easement. He did not feel Walden Hills was out of the way, with it only being one block away. He did not find the idea of a bridge terrible depending on where it is located, noting people are already cutting through yards. Paul McDonald, a member of the Walden Wood Neighborhood Association, surveyed the neighborhood about how to develop the green space. The majority wants a passive park without a trail and would like to Parks and Recreation Commission August 11, 1999 Page 2 of 4 begin discussions to connect the neighborhood via a footbridge to the existing Willow Creek Trail. McDonald felt a trail would be disruptive and would ruin the passive aspect of the park. He also noted the very steep slope of this area. Pruess asked the neighbors present if they are supportive of a bridge that would connect the Walden Woods open space area with Willow Creek Trail. McDonald indicated there were many families in Walden Woods with young children, and if they could walk down Jensen Street and cut through to get over to the path in either section, they would rather see a bridge. Pruess stated a footbridge would provide connectivity to Walden Hills and Walden Woods, noting he would like Walden Hills completed as soon as possible. Trueblood stated a change order to complete this will be included in the Willow Creek Trail Phase II project if the developer regrades the area to comply with original plans. Pruess felt there was a need for both the Walden Hills connection and a bridge in the Walden Woods development. He indicated he uses the trail a lot and finds it difficult to get to the Willow Creek Trail in this area. Pruess noted the cheapest route would be the Walden Hills connection unless the City Council states the path cannot go between two houses. The Walden Woods route would be very expensive, making it very unlikely to occur. Tami Thompson noted people are now creating their own makeshift paths, and it is very unsafe with children using logs to get to the other side. Pruess stated the message needs to come from the residents that from a safety perspective this trail is needed. Trueblood did not see the need for a trail through the Walden Woods open space if Walden Wood, Part 6 would occur, which would provide a viable substitute. A neighbor stated based on his interaction with the city and the developer they will not be changing the plans for Walden Wood, Part 6 with respect to the proposed open space, due to the easement and inability to build on it. Moved by Pruess, seconded by Stroh, to move forward as rapidly as possible with the Walden Hills section for trail connectivity, to keep an eye open for Walden Wood, Part 6, and to abandon prior thoughts of a trail going through a passive park atmosphere. Unanimous. Trueblood noted there is money budgeted this fiscal year for park development and staff will meet with the neighborhood association to develop plans for it. CITY PARK AMUSEMENT RIDES Pacha indicated he approached the Noon Rotary Club President regarding operation of the City Park amusement rides, who indicated if a proposal is submitted for a contribution, they would be willing to consider it. Handicare sent a letter stating they are very interested from the standpoint of getting a number of groups to operate the rides. Pacha felt this would be difficult to administer and would rather have one group oversee it if possible. Trueblood noted when service clubs have projects they are usually short term, and he felt it would be difficult to get a group willing to run the rides from April through October on a daily basis, with coordination being a major problem. With respect to Handicare's suggestion that the City and County work together to purchase the rides and maintain them, Endel questioned profitability, but felt the financial aspect of groups running the rides would be worthwhile considering. Trueblood stated the city's goal would be to make it a break-even proposition. He felt it was unrealistic to think the rides would be run the way they are now - all day, every day, and would need to look at a limited operation. Endel felt it would take a great deal of staff time to administer; Stroh felt there would be a need for an on-site supervisor. Cilek agreed it would be difficult to go from one family doing everything to having a number of groups involved. Parks and Recreation Commission August 11, 1999 Page 3 of 4 Trueblood noted the Commission and City Council are on record supporting pursuit of efforts to save the train and carousel in City Park for future operation. He felt the City might also want to consider purchasing the small airplane ride and possibly the concession stand. Cilek noted everyone she has talked to wants to keep the rides in City Park. The commission as a whole supported retaining the rides, but expressed concem about the amount of staff time that would be necessary to administer the operation. Staff will be meeting with the City's insurance carrier to determine insurance costs or concems and contacting "experts" in the field to determine the value of the rides. Drollinger has indicated he needs an answer by August 25; the matter is tentatively scheduled for the City Council's August 23 work session. Trueblood stated Drollinger has also requested a fee waiver for 1999. After discussion, the commission as a whole did not support waiving the fee, noting it is like any other business venture. SCOTT BOULEVARD EAST, PART 4 Originally, staffs recommendation was to take fees as opposed to land; however, a new development has occurred. The conditional zoning agreement requires a 25-foot wide easement be provided for a future trail connection to the east. Trueblood noted there is approximately .5 acres that could be accepted as open space. It is quite hilly with many trees and would be a passive area. The down side to accepting is that it is a stone throw's away from Scott Park. If fees were accepted they could be used at a future time to develop a trail. Pacha asked what the fees would be; Trueblood noted the value had not yet been determined. Moved by Stroh, seconded by Pruess, to comply with staffs original recommendation to accept fees in lieu of land dedication in Scott Boulevard East, Part 4. Unanimous. Pruess noted one reason for this recommendation is the lack of staff to maintain parkland the City currently has. Endel noted a trail would give access to more people, instead of being an isolated area COMMISSION TIM~ Stroh asked if the Iowa River was low enough to finish the Iowa River Corridor Trail; Trueblood stated it is, but he didn't know the current status of the project. Pruess asked if Ned Ashton Park would be Completed this fall; Trueblood stated it would likely not be because it will be combined with atum lane project on Benton Street, which will not be let for bid until this fall. He stated at the very least a crushed limestone trail section will be installed in time for the upcoming trails celebration. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Trueblood reported on the following: Bid Openings. There are two major bid openings set for next week; Cemetery Expansion Project and the Riverside Festival Stage. Parks and Recreation Commission August 11, 1999 Page 4 of 4 Buildings. Both soccer buildings at the Soccer Complex and the park maintenance building at Napoleon Park are proceeding well. Skateboard Park. The construction of a temporary skateboard park at Mercer Park is nearly completed. Tennis Courts. A contract has been signed for resurfacing the City Park tennis courts. Mercer Park tennis courts need to be rebuilt. Staff is in the process of developing plans and specifications, with the project to be bid out this year and construction to occur either this fall or next spring. Willow Creek Trail. The City Council reconsidered its action regarding the segment of trail from the new bridge over to Burry Drive, and they approved a 5-foot wide trail through this area. Staff informed them it would be difficult to put in a 5-foot wide trail due to size constraints of contractor's equipment. They indicated they did not object to increasing the trail to 6 feet wide if necessary. Still waiting to hear back from the contractor as to problems/costs. Parks and Recreation Foundation. A meeting will be set to discuss possible fundraising for the City Park amusement rides and Riverside Festival Stage. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjoumed at 6:30 p.m. COUNCIL (LISA, I SIDED) MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING CO THURSDAY, AUGUST 19, 199~ - ~ :au r.,v,. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 'pRELiMiNARy3uP' T . Subject to Approval MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Bovbjerg, Pam Ehrhardt, Dick Gibson, Marilyn Schintler, Dean Shannon MEMBERS ABSENT: Benjamin Chait, Lea Supple STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Sarah Holecek, Anne Schulte OTHERS PRESENT: Kim Jureco, Mike Singer, Howard Vernon, Lucas Van Ordan RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 5-0, of amendments to Zoning Chapter Section 14-6M- 1A7 concerning home occupations, as recommended by staff to prohibit cedain types of uses, institute specific limitations of operation to protect the residential character of the neighborhood and allow for one non-resident employee via the minor modification process, and amendment of Section 14-6V-3, the minor modifications procedures, to allow a non-resident employee in a home occupation. Recommended approval, by a vote of 5-0, of amendments to Zoning Chapter Section 14-60, concerning sign regulations to allow banner signs in shopping centers under certain conditions, as recommended by staff. Recommended denial, by a vote of 0-5 on an affirmative motion, of amendments to the Zoning Chapter to allow office uses in the Low Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-12) zone. CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Supple called the meeting to order at 7:37 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES ON CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: Bovbjerg said a list of current vacancies was posted outside the Council Chambers. She said City government always needs citizen comments and asked those present to check the vacancies periodically. REZONING ITEM: Public discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development for a preliminary planned development plan (OPDH-12) for Lot 77 of Walden Woods, Part 6, a 16-unit residential development located at the north end of Jensen Street. Bovbjerg said the note on this item states that it will be deferred until revised plans are received. Miklo recommended that this item be deferred indefinitely. The consensus of the Commission was to defer the item indefinitely. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 19, 1999 Page 2 The consensus of the Commission was to take the agenda items out of order to accommodate those at the meeting who had come to speak on a particular item. CODE AMENDMENT ITEMS: Public discussion of amendments to the Zoning Chapter to allow home occupations to have one non-r~sident employee. and amend the performance standards for home occupations. Ehrhardt said she would be excusing herself from this decision because she has a home occupation, and this decision could affect her financially. Miklo said he did not think it would. He said everyone lives in a certain zone, and whenever those codes are amended the Commission members still have a right to vote. Miklo said he did not see this as a direct financial influence on her. Ehrhardt said she would then participate in the decision. Schintler said she has a business in her home but is not planning to hire anyone. She said she would not exclude herself from this decision. Miklo said this item is on the agenda because of a related matter, a request to amend the zoning ordinance to allow business or office uses in the RM-12, Low Density Multi-Family Residential zone and possibly other multi-family zones. He said staff looked at that request and felt it was not appropriate and did not meet the intent of the zoning ordinance. Miklo said at the same time, staff looked at what was allowed in terms of business uses within the residential zone, and in all cases those fall under home occupations. Miklo said it has been some time since the home occupation ordinance has been updated, with it being essentially in its current form since 1983. He said staff felt with some changes in technology and patterns of employment, it is appropriate to update the ordinance at this point. Miklo said staff has identified some occupations that would not be appropriate in a residential zone, such as motor vehicle.repair, machine shops, medical and dental offices, kennels, and a few others. He said in the past these home occupations have resulted in complaints from neighboring property owners, and it is difficult to operate a business such as this without having a negative effect on the surrounding residential neighborhood. Miklo said another change staff is proposing is to put in a provision that no additional paving for parking spaces be permitted for a home occupation and that home occupations should not be permitted if they generate a greater volume or type of traffic than normally found in a residential neighborhood. Miklo said this will be difficult to enforce because there could be all sorts of traffic associated with the typical household, but in the event there is a home occupation and the neighbors complain about constant customer traffic or semi trucks making regular deliveries, there should be a way to redress that. Miklo said the other major amendment would be to put a size limit of 25% of the principal dwelling unit floor area for use by a home occupation. He said the home occupation could only equal 25% of the total floor area, whether it be in the garage, a basement, or in part of the house. Miklo said currently there is no restriction on the area that a home occupation can occupy. He said because a home occupation is intended to be an accessory use to the principal residential use, staff feels a size limitation should be put on it. Miklo said perhaps most importantly, another change being proposed is to allow up to one non- resident employee for a home occupation. He said currently home occupations are restricted in that all people participating in the home occupation must also reside in the residence. Miklo said this amendment would permit the building official to allow up to one non-resident employee to come into the home to participate in the operation of the business. He said staff is Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 19, 1999 Page 3 recommending that this only be permitted after a minor modification hearing, a hearing for which all property owners within 200 feet are notified and given a chance to learn about the proposal and then speak for or against it. Miklo said in this manner, the building official can determine whether the specifics of the home occupation are appropriate in that residential zone to allow up to one employee. Miklo said there is also a clarification that the home occupation's owner aqd operator has to have the residence as his or her pdmary residence. He said staff recommends approval of these amendments to the ordinance. Ehrhardt said a beauty shop could not sell beauty products in a home occupation, and Miklo confirmed this. Miklo said no commodity can be sold on the premises except that which is produced on the premises. He said this is so as not to encourage a retail operation. Ehrhardt asked if a small engine repair shop would be allowed as a home occupation, and Miklo said it would be allowed under the current and proposed ordinance. Regarding enforcement, Ehrhardt said the only time a building inspector would come would be by complaint, and Miklo confirmed this, stating that this and the other issues Ehrhardt had mentioned would not be a change from the current regulations. Bovbjerg said the 25% of the floor area excludes the attached garage. She asked what happens when the attached garage is the place of business. Miklo said it can be used for the place of business, but for calculating the 25%, the garage is first subtracted because it is a fairly large space, and the idea is to keep the area to be used for home occupation fairly small. Bovbjerg said one non-resident employee could come in, but what about the status of volunteers. Miklo said that is something the enforcement officer would have to deal with. He said he did not think it would frequently be a problem. Public discussion: Kirh Juraco. 323 Fairview Avenue, said she is the owner of Bear N' Balloons. She said she currently operates her balloon/bouquet business out of her home. Juraco said she has two small children and is aware of many people hiring others who are actually doing other things under the auspices of childcare. She said this should be addressed, because there are all kinds of businesses now operating out of homes, and that seems to be the way technology is going. Juraco said she believes Coralville now allows a non-resident employee to work in a home occupation business. Juraco said she has been working with the Chamber of Commerce's home based business group. She said there is quite an interest in getting this zoning change, and there is a genuine need for it. Gibson asked Juraco if she were actively involved in the business in her home. Juraco said she was. Gibson asked if she thought the Commission should approve this if the business owner were allowed to have a job outside the home and was not present or actively involved in the business. Juraco said she thought the person living at the home should be actively involved in the business. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Schintler moved to amend the Zoning Chapter to rescind Section 14-6M-1A(7) and replace it with the following: Home Occupations, provided the use is located within the dwelling unit or accessory building, and the dwelling unit is the bona fide primary residence of the owner and operator of the home occupation in which they reside during Planning and Zoning Commission Minu~s August19,1999 Page 4 non-business hours, subject to the following conditions: A. Motor .vehicle repair, machine shops, medical and dental offices, kennels, welding, and mini-storage facilities are prohibited as home occupation uses. Any home occupation use which changes the fire safety rating or the occupancy separation classification requirements of the structure is prohibited. B. No commodities shall be sold on the premises, except that which is produced on the premises or accessory to the home occupation conducted on the pre,nises. C. The home occupation does not require the paving of any additional parking spaces, and generates no greater volume or type of traffic than that which is normally expected in a residential neighborhood. D. There shall be no indication (except a permitted sign) from the exterior of the dwelling unit or accessory building, such as noise, smoke, dust, or outdoor storage of materials, that there is a home occupation use on the premises. There shall be no visitors or deliveries to the home occupation use before 7 a.m. or after 10 p.m.E. The home occupation use shall comprise no more than twenty five percent (25%) of the gross floor area of the principal dwelling unit, excluding area devoted to an attached garage. F. Non-resident employees are prohibited, except one non-resident employee may be permitted if approved by the Building Official as a minor modification to the home occupation use, according to the procedures in Section 14-6V, Minor Modification Procedures. Chapter 6, Zoning, Article V, Minor Modification Procedures, Section 3, Applicability, shall be amended to add the following: H. One non- resident employee for a home occupation use. Shannon seconded the motion. Gibson asked if this motion would permit a person to own a home occupation business and not actually be actively employed in that business, but be employed somewhere else while hiring an employee to come in and run the business. Miklo said he did not believe so. He said the dwelling unit must be the bona fide primary residence of the owner and operator of the home occupation. Ehrhardt said she is very much in favor of this. She said in her own neighborhood, there are many home occupations. Ehrhardt stated that she thought the number would grow, and it is a very positive thing for the City to accommodate that growth. Bovbjerg said Juraco brings up an interesting case of hiring a babysitter and having that person assist in a home occupation. She asked, if she had a home occupation with one non-resident employee, could she also hire a babysitter to take care of small children. Miklo confirmed that and said it is currently permitted. He said a person could hire someone to clean his or her house or tutor his or her children under the same scenario. Bovbjerg said the employee would then have to be specific to that occupation. Holecek said arguably yes, but questioned how the City would be able to police that type of situation. She said whether this is legitimizing that which is already occurring or acknowledging the expansion of technology and people having home- based businesses, it is difficult to enforce a situation where someone is coming into the home and doing 50% of one thing, 40% of another, and 10% of another. She said it becomes an exercise in hair-splitting. Miklo said this is somewhat related to the 25% floor area cap in that if there are one or two employees, that cap is not likely to be exceeded. He said if there is a home occupation owner who hires an employee and also has a babysitter who is actually working in the business, at some point they will need to expand above that 25%. Miklo said there are other safeguards as well in the proposed ordinance. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. Public discussion of amendments to the Zoning Chapter to allow public utilities in commercial and industrial zones. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 19, 1999 Page 5 Miklo said the current zoning ordinance does not provide for public utilities other than those that are allowed in the City right-of-way by City permission or by franchise. He said staff feels it is appropriate to amend the zoning ordinance to provide for public utilities, especially given the new technologies that are coming about and the need for some of these utilities. Miklo said staff has identified a number of zones where staff is recammending they be approved. He said in the industrial and intensive commercial zones, staff is recommending public utilities be allowed as provisional uses, that is, they are allowed as long as they meet certain provisions. Miklo said those provisions would include screening from the public right-of- way and from residential zones by either vegetative screening or a masonry wall. He said staff is also recommending they be approved by special exception in the Commercial Office (CO-1) zone, the Neighborhood Commercial (CN-1) zone, the Highway Commercial (CH-1) zone, the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone, and the Central Business zones. Miklo said in those zones, the Board of Adjustment would have to review the specifics for the utility: where it is to be located and how it is to be screened. He said if the Board of Adjustment was not satisfied as to the appropriateness of the location, it would have the ability to deny that particular permit. Miklo said staff recommends the amendments be approved, but understands from the informal discussion that the Commission would like to defer this item and have staff do additional research on how to address the design concerns on how these facilities would appear in the community. Ehrhardt said the pictures of the sheds show a propane tank. She asked if that were a requirement of the building. Miklo said the representatives of McLeod provided the pictures and may be able to answer that question. Ehrhardt asked if the screening would include everything involved with the utility shed. Miklo confirmed this. Public discussion: Mike Singer. McLeod USA, said he was at the meeting to answer the Commission's questions. He said McLeod is a direct competitor with the US West system by virtue of federal deregulation and is recognized by the State of Iowa and the federal government as a public utility. Singer said in its efforts to expand their service area into the Iowa City area, McLeod needs to locate technical use space, including locations for remote terminals and points of presence that are basically variations on a hierarchy of how the system will be built out. Singer said McLeod places a great deal of its technical switching equipment inside existing buildings. He said he has looked at the information addressed in the proposed Zoning Chapter amendment. Singer said McLeod would like to work with the City on a clarification of the process that would address the location of this equipment inside existing structures. Singer said it might be helpful if the zoning ordinance would either address that issue or say there are no additional requirements, if in fact there are none. Singer said given what McLeod does and is trying to do as part of the deregulation process, they would prefer to be considered a permanent use as opposed to a provisional use. He said that is how they see their service to the community. Singer said when McLeod constructs on bare ground, they lease the site for ten years, sometimes longer. He said McLeod typically tries to get an area of land between 50 feet wide and 100 to 150 feet deep. Singer said McLeod's focus is to place its facilities into industrial and heavy, commercial areas. He said the residential issue may come up at some future time, but is not McLeod's chief concern at this point. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 19, 1999 Page 6 Singer said McLeod's interest is to have a clear, well-defined process for the placement of its facilities. He said if there are conditions placed on siting a shelter, such as screening, landscaping, setbacks, etc., McLeod would like to work with the City to describe exactly what those conditions would be. Singer said McLeod would like to see sort of a template to know exactly what City requirements are in order to proceed, budget and organize their build-out schedule. Singer said as McLeod gets into some of the retail areas, they would be very sensitive to the requirements of the community and neighborhood. He said it is their goal to work with the City as best as possible. Singer said McLeod is a permanent fixture in the community, is a direct competitor with the local telephone company, and will eventually become the local telephone company. He said because of that, McLeod obviously needs to work within the community. Singer said if they are assured that there is a uniform application of all the regulations to all telecommunications public utilities within the community, there will not be any other issues. Singer said if more detail can be put into the industrial and heavy, commercial areas by specifying fencing or landscaping of a certain type as well as width requirements so that McLeod can include that in its design concepts, that would be very helpful. Singer said Yapp informed him the Commission had concerns about the aesthetic issues. Singer said he thought he spoke for all of McLeod in saying that whatever is a reasonable expectation of them to accommodate the aesthetics and character of the community and neighborhood, they will work very closely with community and neighborhood leaders to accommodate those expectations. He said McLeod's only concern is being able to maintain that balanced approach to the aesthetic issues versus the cost to build out. Singer said McLeod is a rapidly growing company and does not want to get into a position where there is a lot of uncertainty with regard to what additional items might be placed on them. He hoped to see those requirements well defined up front. Singer said the only other issue that might come up is the aesthetic concern and said the City may ask for certain items. He said McLeod has to be careful that those things do not conflict with the actual technical use of the space they need to have. Singer said in many cases there would be a generator on the site. He added that the manufacturer took the photograph with the propane tank; McLeod does not have those on-site. Singer said the generators they use for some of the smaller facilities are natural gas generators. Singer said roofing issues, aesthetic issues, outside fabric issues, or something the Board of Adjustment might require for these shelters to meld into the community are fine, as long as McLeod can be sure that the requirement doesn't interfere with the technical use of the facility. Singer said in many cases they are unmanned, technical uses with fairly specific temperature controls. He said McLeod needs to maintain a high degree of security for those, because they don't want to lose power. Singer said McLeod does not want to attract attention to these shelters. Singer thanked the Commission for addressing this. He said it would be very helpful for McLeod to have this as a provisional use, and anything they could do to assist the Commission in coming up with clarifications for specific requirements, they would like to do. Schintler asked if there were any way these could be put under ground. Singer said the problem with that is that this is very sensitive technical equipment with fiber optic running through it. He said the switching equipment is very sensitive to humidity, and with most of the equipment, it would be terribly imprudent for McLeod to put it anywhere where something could flood out the vault. Singer said with the pure cable where one sometimes see vaults built into the ground, it just houses the fiber optic line itself. He said with anything that actually makes the gizmos work, it is very dangerous to put it underground for McLeod's purposes. Planning and Zoning Commission Minu~s August19,1999 Page 7 Howard Vernon. McLeod USA, said he is the Director of Network Construction and Installation for the Eastern Region, which includes Iowa. He said McLeod can put these facilities underground, but it is very cost prohibitive. Vernon said there are also some hazards to the equipment as well as to those going down underground. He said there are OSHA regulations regarding how long people can be underground with this equipment as well as right-of-way issues when you go down that deep where there are other utilities underground. V3rnon said McLeod has done it on occasion, but it is a very reare exception and usually due to traffic volume in an area. Gibson asked if McLeod's competitors bury their utility connections underground. Vernon said he would say yes they do on occasion, just like McLeod does. Ehrhardt said the space requirement was estimated to be 50 by 100 feet. Singer said that is what McLeod searches for when locating its larger facilities. He said the smaller ones, the remote terminals, are frequently located in spaces as small as 35 feet by 45 feet. Singer said McLeod tries to place them in the back of a building or the remote corner of a parking lot in a warehouse district or something like that. Miklo pointed out that these amendments would not only apply to telecommunications companies, but also to gas and electrical providers like MidAmerican Energy. He said there may be any number of utilities that fall under these provisions. Ehrhardt asked if the idea was that when possible, McLeod likes to incorporate its equipment into an existing building. Singer replied that many times that is easier and faster, and they can often be up and running inside a building much quicker versus bringing a shelter onto a site. He said to date in Iowa City, the majority of the facilities are actually inside structures. Ehrhardt asked if there were ever contamination on the site, for example, from PCBs. Singer said there was not. Singer said McLeod is a publicly traded company and upon going into a site, has an environmental investigation done before even entedng into a lease. He said McLeod always goes into a clean site and leaves it a clean site, too. Gibson asked Singer if he had any uncertainties about the legality or appropriateness of going into an existing building and if that was one of the things McLeod is asking the Commission to address. Singer said no, that actually the discussions they had with Iowa City City Attorney's Office and the Planning Department led them to believe they can go into an existing structure without any additional type of requirement. He said because this issue is coming up, it may be helpful to codify that understanding to address the relatively new nature of having multiple public utilities. Singer said it is just a point of clarification. Gibson asked what the purpose was of a generator on these sites. Singer said inside the sites are batteries, and the batteries are used as a backup if there is loss of electric power. He said the batteries operate for at least eight hours, and if power still does not come back, the emergency backup generator would kick in. Singer said they are not a constant power source but are emergency, temporary backup generators. Schintler asked if the smaller units are more likely to go into residential neighborhoods in the future. Singer confirmed this. Gibson said at some point, the Commission would have to confront the issue of appearance in terms of residential neighborhoods as well. He said it is of much less concern in the industrial and intensive commercial zones. He said once McLeod moves into more restrictive commercial and residential zones, the Commission will be increasingly concerned about the appearance of structures. Gibson said the pictures were terrible - about the worst example that could be found. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 19, 1999 Page 8 Vernon said the pictures were from the manufacturer and are about the worst pictures you can get. He said the reason for that is that McLeod is just now implementing this technology. Vernon said they are working with their vendor, and the vendor has committed to putting any kind of facing on there that McLeod wants: brick, siding, etc. He said they can make it blend in with the community around it and can landscape it as they have done in other areas, whatever is needed in that particular area within a reasonable cost. Vernon said the vendor could make it so it is not as an obtrusive an eyesore, as the pictures might reflect. Gibson said Singer 'made a comparison between the economic considerations and the aesthetics. He asked if McLeod would be asking the Commission to forget about its aesthetic concerns in terms of what is put into the ordinance in the event the economics seemed to be getting out of line. Vernon said yes, he thought McLeod would be asking the Commission to consider that. Vernon said McLeod is in this to compete with US West and in other states, Ameritech, and eventually with TCI. In order to do that, McLeod has to play catch up with them. Vernon said there are things they can do based on their financial model to satisfy the aesthetic needs, but there comes a point when that is cost prohibitive and McLeod loses money. He said they are not in the business to lose money. Gibson asked if McLeod would ask the Commission to apply lesser standards to them than the competition because they are a startup business. Vernon said absolutely not - that their position has always been that all they want is a level playing field with US West or TCI or any competitor that comes in. He said they would also expect the same thing of another competitive local exchange carrier coming in to compete against McLeod. Holecek reminded the Commission not to get too bogged down in the concept that this is a McLeod application. She said Commission members should keep in mind that this would apply to all utilities. Regarding residential areas, Schintler asked where McLeod finds sites in such an area. Vernon said they mainly look to private property owners. Singer said no part of the business plan in Iowa City at this point includes service that requires this type of equipment inside residential areas. He said when it does happen, he believes that the type of aesthetic concerns the Commission has would be pretty well established so that McLeod could sit down and work out in the first couple of sites exactly what the Commission is looking for. Regarding the site acquisition process, Singer said the engineering department from McLeod determines where the best places are to go to make service available for the company and the customers. He said then, even in most residential areas, there might still be some commercial space identified, e.g. a 20-foot by 30-foot or 30-foot by 40-foot site behind a building. Singer said McLeod's sensitivity to where these would be placed is going to be tempered by what they would anticipate as objections from the neighborhood. He said that is a process McLeod would like to see handled with the Planning staff and the Board of Adjustment throwing out some options, having McLeod enumerate the technical requirements for serving the area, and then seeing what would happen at that point. Singer asked if there were a minimum presence of a utility that would kick in the Board of Adjustment process. He said that if this is for all utilities, it could potentially include something as small as a telephone cabinet, a natural gas Christmas tree, some type of structure, or some type of metering unit. Miklo said it hasn't been discussed in terms of size. He said that with gas lines and telephone transformers, there are several locations where those are currently in residential zones and are much smaller than anything that has been seen recently. Miklo said that is something staff will need to look at. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 19, 1999 Page 9 As a point of clarification, Singer said we're talking about those units that are off of the right-of- way and not used for transmission. He said we're really not talking about the conveyance of the utility, but really some type of pumping station or switching station, a permanent shelter, maybe not cabinet-sized. Singer said the trend in the future is for miniaturization of a lot of the telecommunications equipment, so what is currently housed in a shed may some day be in a cabinet. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Ehrhardt moved to defer discussion of amendments to the Zoning Chapter to allow public utilities in commercial and industrial zones to the September 2, 1999 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Gibson seconded the motion. Gibson said he thought this was a useful conversation. He said he was initially highly skeptical of what the Commission was being asked to approve. Gibson said this is an inevitable requirement that the Commission is probably going to have to satisfy in some way, and with more dialogue, he is beginning to think that this is probably a pretty measured response as far as the staff recommendation is concerned. He said he would eventually be asking staff if they are still comfortable with the recommendation and think it is a measured response. Gibson said what he really likes about it is the dependence on the Board of Adjustment to give an opportunity to measure each case in terms of its scope and probable effects on neighboring properties. He said he was pretty comfortable with that. He said the Commission needs to be prepared for the inevitable extension of this sort of thing into residential neighborhoods, and whether or not the Commission has the appropriate authority to deal with the aesthetic issues that will start being more and more important as this moves into the residential areas. Ehrhardt said the 50-foot by 100-foot site size seems very big, and she was considering what kind of structures would be appropriate. She said she assumed it was up to the Commission if it wanted to delineate more in the way of screening. Miklo said the screening is actually pretty specific as the staff recommendation refers to Section 14-6S of the current code, which sets forth the screening requirements for parking lots between residential and commercial zones. He said it basically requires arbor vitae to be planned four foot on center and three feet high at the time of planting, which after a few years will result in a solid hedge. Miklo said in a case where a special exception is required, the Board of Adjustment could look at this further and ask for different sorts of trees, trees in addition to a fence, extedor coverage of the building in brick or some other material, etc. He said there is a lot of opportunity in those zones for the Board to be very specific. In terms of size, Miklo said this will also include power substations, and the City has some rather large ones such as the large one on Mormon Trek Boulevard, which, if proposed today, would fall under these provisions. He said there was not actually a building involved there, but rather large transformers. Ehrhardt asked what kind of research staff would do before the next meeting. Miklo said staff would investigate other codes and try to come up with more specifics in terms of aesthetics and design. He said he would not anticipate recommending anything different for the industrial and C1-1 zones, as staff is pretty comfortable with the guidelines as proposed. In the other zones that are closer to residential zones, Miklo said staff would look at more specifics. Bovbjerg asked if Commission members wanted to give staff specific direction with regard to the research to be done. Gibson said the fact that this covers everything by way of utilities is somewhat daunting. He said there needs to be a high level of flexibility in this. He said the Commission may not be able to put the cookbook out that McLeod seems to be looking for, although it would probably be practical to do one for McLeod and that kind of technology. Gibson said electric utilities are more difficult to deal with, for example. He said a lot of what Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August19,1999 Page 10 McLeod is talking about could be dealt with, depending on where they are putting their facilities and what they are putting in near existing buildings in that area. Gibson said they could build a house if they needed it to fill a 50-foot by 100-foot foot lot with their equipment. He said rather than get a box out of a catalog that is plopped down on a site and then has to be screened, other possibilities should be considered to make this work. Gibson said we should make it look intrinsically appropriate right from the start, and then we don't have to worry about screening it. He said the problem is there are such a wide range of things conceivably covered by this, and it is difficult to deal with. Gibson said the Commission could deal with the ones that are more probable. Bovbjerg said conditions are changing rapidly and somewhere between predictability and flexibility, the Commission should be able to come up with a legal, workable ordinance. The motion to defer carried on a vote of 5-0. OTHER: Public discussion of a request to amend the Zoning Chapter to allow overnight boarding of animals in small animal clinics in the Commercial Office (C0-1) zone. Miklo said staff received a letter requesting an amendment to the CO-1 zone to allow this. He said the zoning ordinance was amended in 1996 to allow veterinary clinics in the commercial office zone, but it specifically did not allow kennels or overnight boarding for animals that were not being treated in the clinic. Miklo said the Commission should decide whether it wants to consider an amendment to allow veterinary clinics in the CO-1 zone to operate kennels for animals that aren't being treated at the clinic, and if so, where the item should go on the pending list. Miklo said in 1996, staff was recommending against kennels in the CO-1 zone because commercial office zones are often intended to be buffers between residential zones and other commercial uses, and there are often negative externalities associated with kennels. He said in the couple of years this veterinary clinic has been in operation, there have not been those associated problems. Miklo said this particular CO-1 zone does not happen to abut a residential zone, but if the Commission makes this amendment, it would apply City-wide, and there are other office zones that might be more sensitive in terms of their proximity to residential areas. Despite the concerns of three years ago, Miklo said Scott Kugler, who prepared the previous amendment, felt this was something that could be investigated further to see if it would be a reasonable use. Miklo said he anticipated that if this change were allowed, staff would recommend it be by special exception to allow for the Board of Adjustment review on a case by case basis. He said in those areas where there might be the potential residential or existing residential uses in very close proximity, staff might not recommend overnight boarding of animals to the Board of Adjustment. Public discussion: Lucas Van Ordan. 2122 ACT Circle, said three years ago he asked the Commission to approve his request to allow small animal veterinary clinics in the CO-1 zone. He said the Commission and subsequently the City Council accepted the Commission's recommendation to allow the clinic application. Van Ordan said he indicated at that time he would like to address at a later date the possibility of allowing an ancillary service of on-site non-medical boarding of animals. Planning and Zoning Commission Minu~s August19,1999 Page 11 Van Ordan asked the Commission to make the request of staff to do the research. He said he would like to have it addressed in as short a time frame as possible. He said he was available to take questions. Ehrhardt asked if there would be someone at the boarding site at all times. Van Ordan said there would not. He said to the best of his knowledge, the closest boarding facility for animals with a' 24-hour staff for non-medical boarding is a place in Chicago where they board 400 animals per night. Ehrhardt said Van Ordan had stated at the informal meeting that the animals are not in outside pens, but she said another kennel could have outside pens. Van Ordan said as was discussed with the previous request, he did not seek to have outdoor runs where animals would be allowed to stay outside during the day, for obvious reasons of noise encroachments to adjoining property. Miklo said it could be a condition that no outdoor runs are allowed. He said apparently outdoor runs are allowed in the C1-1, Intensive Commercial zone. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Schintler moved to put consideration of a request to amend the Zoning Chapter to allow overnight boarding of animals in small animal clinics in the Commercial Office (CO-1) zone on the pending list. Gibson seconded the motion. Ehrhardt said she was hesitant to do this, although she would probably vote yes. She said she was hesitant because of the burden on staff right now. Ehrhardt said there are other things to be considered before this, so that she would vote yes but would hope this would go toward the bottom of the pending list. Gibson said he almost regards this as a no-brainer, assuming that the impact of this is contained within the walls of the facility. He said it should not take a great deal of staff time to work on this item. Gibson said he thinks this is a demand that is being placed on society right now, and it is something the Commission should be responsive to. Bovbjerg said the reality of the urbanized person and the desire for pets does change things. She said a lot of people have pets, and she would like to see what staff comes up with in the research. The motion to place this item on the pending list carried on a vote of 5-0. Ehrhardt asked if people were specifically waiting for resolution of other items on the pending list. Miklo said there is nothing on the pending list that anyone is waiting on a current project for. Bovbjerg asked if any items were put on the list at the request of City Council. Miklo said items one and three are items that there has been a lot of discussion on lately. He said items four, five, and six are back burner items. Gibson said at the risk of underestimating the complexity of this issue, he would suggest position number two for this. He said he did not think it would take a great deal of staff time and is certainly much less complex than the existing tree regulations as far as the review process goes. Gibson said putting it below two or three would be like writing it off, because it probably won't happen then. Ehrhardt said she had a problem with moving this item up on the pending list. She said some time ago someone asked her when item 13 on the list would be considered, and Ehrhardt said it could be a long time. Ehrhardt said that item has now moved up to number three, so to move something ahead of that item now seems unfair. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August19,1999 Page 12 Schintler agreed with Gibson that this item should not take long. Shannon said he also didn't think this would take long and didn't think it would be very complicated. He said an item like the street width issue will take a lot of time to resolve. Miklo said item one is being worked on with the assistance of a consultant and will involve a two-year process. He said some work has already been done on item two. Shannon said he wouldn't have a problem with making this item one and then having it be in and out and done. Miklo said putting this item as number one on the list would mean that the other things would have to wait a little longer. Gibson asked what it would take to have this come back to the Commission in three months time. He said he was reluctant to put it as item number one, because it would send a bad signal. Miklo said if this were item three or four, it would come back to the Commission in a matter of months. MOTION: Ehrhardt moved to put consideration of a request to amend the Zoning Chapter to allow overnight boarding of animals in small animal clinics in the Commercial Office (CO-1) zone on the pending list as item number four. Shannon seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. Bovbjerg asked if the applicant and other CO-1 zone people would be informed routinely on this item. Miklo said he would inform Van Ordan and any other veterinarian when this comes up again. He said staff would not notify everyone who has CO-1 zoned property. CODE AMENDMENT ITEMS: Public discussion of amendments to the Zoning Chapter to allow banner signs in shopping centers. Miklo said staff recommends the zoning ordinance section on sign regulations be amended to allow banner signs as described in the staff report. Shannon said he saw the banners at Gateway Plaza and said there were not any names on them at all. Miklo said under the proposed ordinance amendment, the banners would be allowed to have the name of the shopping center on them, not the names of individual businesses. Schintler asked why staff allowed Gateway to keep the banners up if they are currently not allowed. Miklo responded that the enforcement people felt as long as there was some progress on this code amendment item, they would let them stay. Public discussion: There was none. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Gibson moved to approve amendments to the Zoning Chapter to allow banner signs in shopping centers, specifically that Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article O, entitled "Sign Regulations," be amended to allow identification banner signs in large parking areas as follows: 14-60-2, Definitions, be amended to include the definition of an identification banner sign. IDENTIFICATION BANNER: a sign of canvas, nylon, or other durable material that is permanently affixed to a light pole by structural members on the top and bottom of the sign (or two opposite sides), which identified a multi-business Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 19, 1999 Page 13 shopping center, not an individual business. 14-60-5C{2), Provisional signs in the CO-1, CN-I, and R/O zones, be amended to add the following: 14-60-5C(2)(d): Up to two identification banner signs affixed to each shopping center parking area light pole, provided the parking area contains a minimum of 200 parking spaces, each banner sign is no more than three (3) feet wide and six (6) feet tall, each banner sign is consistent in appearance and size, the bottom of the sign is no less than ten (10) feet and the top of the sign is no higher than twenty (20) feet above grade, and the pe,'mit for the banner sign is given for no more than one (1) year. The permit will be renewable if the banner signs are in good condition or replaced with new banner signs. 14-60-5D(2), Provisional signs in the CH-1, CC-2, and C1-1 zones, be amended to add the following: 14-60- 5D(2)(e): Up to two identification banner signs affixed to each shopping center parking area light pole, provided the parking area contains a minimum of 200 parking spaces, each banner sign is no more than three (3) feet wide and six (6) feet tall, each banner sign is consistent in appearance and size, the bottom of the sign is no less than ten (10) feet and the top of the sign is no higher than twenty (20) feet above grade, and the permit for the banner sign is given for no more than one (1) year. The permit will be renewable if the banner signs are in good condition or replaced with new banner signs. Shannon seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. Public discussion of amendments to the Zoning Chapter to allow office uses in the Low Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-12) zone. Miklo said this item was brought before the Commission based on a request by Bill Nowysz to operate an architect's office in the RM-12 zone. He said staff is recommending against this, as outlined in the staff report. Miklo said in lieu of this, staff did recommend amendments to the home occupation provision. Gibson said that under the proposed home occupation amendments if Nowysz chose to live in an RM-12 zone, he could have an architect's office in his home and could also hire another architect. Miklo said that was correct. Public discussion: There was none. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Schintler moved to approve amendments to the Zoning Chapter to allow office uses in the Low Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-12) zone. Gibson seconded the motion. The motion was denied on a vote of 0-5. OTHER: Public Discussion of Planning and Zoning Commission Annual Report. Ehrhardt asked how many total acres were annexed into the City. Bovbjerg said it was about 40 acres. MOTION: Gibson moved to approve the Annual Report as presented. Ehrhardt seconded the motion. Bovbjerg thanked staff for all the work done in the course of the year. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 19, 1999 Page 14 The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. CONSIDERATION OF THE JULY 15. 1999 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES: MOTION: Ehrhardt moved to approve the minutes of the July 15, 1999 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, subject to correction of a typographical error. Schintler seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 4-0-1. with Gibson abstaining. Conference: Ehrhardt discussed a conference entitled "Placemaking: Creating, Protecting and Preserving Places in Iowa" to be held on September 9 and 10 in the Iowa Memorial Union. Miklo said any interested Commission members should contact him. Agricultural Land Use: Ehrhardt said she had a conversation with Jim Sladek, a local farmer with a 3,500 acre farm, regarding clustering and its effects on land use. Sladek feels that clustering often leaves little acreages that are almost unfarmable, because they are just little 50-acre patches. Ehrhardt said it is something for the Commission to consider. Miklo said the few cluster developments that the Commission has reviewed have not come from very large parcels in the first place. Bovbjerg said they have also been at the request of the owner. Articles: Bovbjerg distributed an article from the Christian Science Monitor regarding Homeowner Association rules and regulations. She also referred to a Saddlebrook community-wide garage sale, and Commission members discussed the legality of that. Bovbjerg also referred to an interesting article entitled "Why is Everybody So Mad About Development?" Time Limits: Gibson brought up time limits for speakers, saying that on a recent television program he watched, a disembodied voice, not the emcee, broke in to say time was up. Bovbjerg said at a recent political event, a yellow light flashed to let the speaker know time was running out, and then a red light came on for a second, after which the microphone cut out. Holecek said Commission members had pointed out how good the dialogue was earlier in the evening regarding evolving technology. She said the Commission may not want to put itself in the position of not having flexibility. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:08 p.m. Dean Shannon, Secretary Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte ppdadm/min/p&zS-19-99 .doc F T:30 l:>.rrt. '~sas~ Sic3~ IN.. Z I0. II. POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - June 21, 1999 Lobby Conference Room CALL TO ORDER Chair L. Cohen called the meeting to order at 7:03 A.M. ATTENDANCE Board members present: L. Cohen, P. Farrant, and P. Hoffey. Board member absent: John Watson. Staff present: Legal Counsel C. Pugh and Administrative Assistant S. Bauer. Also in attendance was Lt. Weiss from the ICPD. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by P. Hoffey and seconded by P. Farrant to adopt the Consent Calendar. Discussion followed. Referencing the memorandum from Chief Winkelhake regarding racial profiling, P. Hoffey commended the Chief for taking this action. Motion carried, 3/1, Watson absent. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL None LEGAL COUNSEL Motion by P. Farrant and seconded by P. Hoffey approving Catherine Pugh as new legal counsel to the PCRB. Motion carried, 3/0, Watson absent. COMPLAINT FORM INFORMATION SHEET Legal Counsel stated she had not yet contacted the City Attorney about the information sheet. Chair questioned whether the information sheets should be attached to the PCRB form and the police form. The original goal of the Board was to have a simple card attached to the police department form so people would be informed of both processes. Cohen also questioned the sites where both forms are available. Lt. Weiss informed the Board that when a citizen comes to the ICPD to file a complaint on an officer, they're directed to a supervisor. The general practice is the supervisor goes over the two options (complaint forms) that are available to them. Weiss stated it might be helpful for the supervisor to have the information sheet as a reference and to sign off on it. It was his belief that the police department complaint forms are only at the department. Following discussion, the Board deferred further discussion to the meeting of July 27. Staff was directed to take no further action on distribution of the information sheets until after that meeting. PRIORITY SETTING GOALS Staff was direc.ted to insert the goals (with categories) in the annual report under "Long Range Planning/Plans for Fiscal 2000." Cohen suggested that a police policy, procedure or practice (PPP) be discussed at the August 10 meeting. After discussion, staff was directed to invite the Chief or a member of his department to the August 10 meeting for a discussion of the policy on unmarked cars and plainclothes police officers in making traffic stops. The issue had previously been addressed in a PCRB public report, and is again a current concern of the Board. It was also decided that before a presentation on a particular policy, procedure or practice, that a Board member research the topic so as to be better informed in going into discussions with the department on its policies, procedures and practices. P. Hoffey volunteered to research the issue of unmarked cars and plainclothes police officers in making traffic stops. ANNUAL REPORT PLANNING The draft of the annual report was discussed, to include possible Board concerns. Legal Counsel was directed to research what the authority is regarding acquisition of officer statements. Staff was directed to prepare another draft for discussion at the July 27 Board meeting. NEW BUSINESS The appointment of a new Board member will be made by Council on June 29. Noting the two members previously selected to meet with the new Board member would comprise a board quorum, Cohen stated instead that she and Bauer will meet with the new person the first week of July, if possible. If Board members wish to meet with the new member, individually, they may do so. Time will also be reserved during the July 13 meeting for new board member orientation. POLICE POLICIES, PROCEDURES, PRACTICES (PPP) Discussed above. MEETING SCHEDULE · Regular Meeting July 13, 1999, 7:00 P.M. Special Meeting July 27, 1999, 7:00 P.M. · Regular Meeting August 10, 1999, 7:00 P.M. · Special Meeting August 24, 1999, 7:00 P.M. P. Hoffey advised he will be absent only for the July 13 meeting. PUBLIC DISCUSSION None BOARD INFORMATION None 'STAFF INFORMATION None EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by P. Hoffey and seconded by P. Farrant to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5 (1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22.7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. Motion carried, 3/0, Watson absent. Open session adjourned at 8:00 A.M. Regular meeting resumed at 8:20 A.M. ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by P. Hoffey and seconded by P. Farrant. Motion carried, 3/0, Watson absent. Meeting adjourned at 8:20 A.M. POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - August 24, 1999 Lobby Conference Room CALL TO ORDER Chair L. Cohen called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M, ATTENDANCE Board members present: L. Cohen, P. Farrant, P. Hoffey, J. Stratton and J. Watson. Staff present: Legal Counsel C. Pugh and Administrative Assistant S. Bauer. Also in attendance was Captain T. Widmer of the ICPD. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by P. Hoffey and seconded by P. Farrant to adopt the Consent Calendar. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Receive PCRB Public Report//99-03 POLICE POLICIES, PRACTICES, AND PROCEDURES In Car Reco. rdinq Devices General Order Deferred until receipt of City Attorney's response to C. Pugh's correspondence of August 20, 1999. Update .by Legal Counsel on Search & Seizure Law durin(3 Traffic Stops C. Pugh gave an overview of the Fourth Amendment, stating the principle is reasonableness and a balancing of competing interests. The two recent Supreme Courts cases regarding searches during traffic stops are: 1. Houghton, which allows police officers with probable cause to search a car, and may inspect a passenger's belongings that could conceal what they are searching for even if there is no evidence that they are engaged in a common enterprise, A warrant is needed if the person is not in the car or the car is on private property. 2. Knowlea, a US Supreme Court case, rejected Iowa's search incident to citation. Must now have probable 2 REVIEW PROCESS REPORT-WRITING cause to search a car or be searching it incident to arrest of the driver. (Can no longer search without probable cause when they issue speeding ticket, however driver can still be asked for consent to search.}. Discussion refiarding Chief Winke!hake's Presentation on Plainclothes Police Officers and Unmarked Cars in makinJ3 Traffic Stops. Cohen stated she was glad to see something in the Press Citizen about the presentation as a means to educate the public. it was the consensus of the Board that it was a good presentation. Hoffey stated he appreciated reviewing the policy governing traffic stops in general. He stated he is still of the opinion, however, that traffic stops should not be made by plainclothes police officers in unmarked vehicles for the safety of the citizens. Hoffey considers the black tee-shirts worn by the SCAT team as 'plainclothes" as the officers are not in uniform. & The Board discussed the 'Suggestions for Modifying the Report Writing Process." , Farrant stated the motivations for making this a basis for discussion are { 1) to maintain the skill the Board has developed in writing reports; (2) to develop the most rational procedure for writing reports. * Farrant stated a brief, containing all the salient information, would get everybody to the same level of information. , A standard procedure for reviewing complaints would be easier to draw a new person into the report-writing process. · Watson suggested Step #3 include a more thorough group discussion before the report-writing starts, to include whether the allegation as stated in the Chief's Report reflects the allegation the complainant has. Legal counsel agreed that the Board can rephrase the allegation to reflect what the Board feels more closely d NEW BUSINESS states the complaint. (This might be included on a checklist at the Step #3 level.) The steps could be collapsed. Sufficient time to go through this process was discussed; at a minimum, three to four meetings would be required. The Board agreed to follow the suggestions, as outlined, for the next complaint. Chair advised that on the last PCRB Report that went to Council, there appeared a particular date that was agreed as a Board would not appear, so the Report was amended before it was distributed. Chair reiterated the Board's direction to staff that any new General Orders from the ICPD be included in meeting packets as information received. These will not appear in the Consent Calendar, nor will they appear on the agenda for discussion. If the Board wishes substantive discussion on a particular General Order, then a request should be made during "New Business" to put it on the agenda. J. Stratton inquired whether editorial changes in the General Orders should be discussed, clarified, and sent onto the Department. Watson also inquired about comments on the clarity of the Orders. Capt. Widmer responded that if the Board had comments regarding editorial changes or unclear language, it would definitely be looked at by the Department; if the Department agreed, the Order would be amended and be reissued with the corrections. Hoffey repeated that if a Board member wishes to have a General Order called forward, then one simply needs to ask that it be put on the next agenda for discussion. MEETING SCHEDULE · Special Meeting September 2, 1999, 2:00 P.M, · Regular Meeting September 14, 1999, 7:00 P.M. · Special Meeting September 28, 1999, 7:00 P.M. · Regular Meeting October 12, 1999, 6:00 P.M. 4 PUBLIC DISCUSSION BOARD INFORMATION STAFF INFORMATION EXECUTIVE SESSION · Special Meeting October 26, 1999, 7:00 P.M. Capt. Widmer inquired whether there's been a problem with what the Department views as the allegations to be on a complaint and what the Board views as the allegations. Capt. Widmer explained how the department determines the allegations; it's usually the style of the investigator who is assigned. A discussion followed. Widmer would like to receive the Board's input on how it can make sure that what it sees as the allegation is the same as what the Department sees. Jo Stratton - asked Capt Widmer questions regarding the Traffic Order, specifically the use of radar. L. Cohen - noted the City Attorney is now receiving the Board's packets. C. Pugh- Legal Counsel raised the issue regarding e-mail received by staff. She will contact the City Attorney about how e-mail is handled with the City Council. Pugh will report back to the Board; she requested that this be put on the agenda for the next meeting for discussion. Motion by P. Farrant and seconded by P. Hoffey to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5 (1)(a) of the Code of iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22.7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. Motion carded, 5/0, all members present. Open session adjourned at 8:40 P.M. Regular meeting resumed at 9:20 P.M. Motion by P. Farrant and seconded by J. Watson to approve PCRB Public Report #99-03, as amended, and forward it to the City Council. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. For the purpose of reviewing the Chief's Report on Complaint #99-04, a meeting was scheduled for September 2, 1999, 2:00, in the PCRB office. Because the Board is not receiving all the information it needs in its investigations, staff was directed to further research subpoena power in police citizens review board investigations and to include it as an agenda item. ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by J. Stratton and seconded by P. Farrant. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. Meeting adjourned at 9:26 P.M. PCRB PUBLIC REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL This is the Report of the Police Citizens Review Board (the "Board") review of the investigation of Complaint PCRB #99-03 (the "Complaint"). BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Section 8-8-7 B, the Board's job is to review the Police Chief's Report ('Report") of his investigation of a complaint. The City Code requires the Board to apply a 'reasonable basis" standard of review to the Report and to 'give deference" to the Report 'because of the Police Chief's...professional expertise." Section 8-8-7 B.2. While the City Code directs the Board to make "findings of fact,' it also requires that the Board recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify his findings only if those findings are "unsupported by substantial evidence,' are 'unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious," or are "contrary to a Police Department policy or practice or any Federal, State or local law." Sections 8-8-7 B.2{a),{b), and (c). BOARD'$ PROCEDURE The complainant initially contacted the Mayor's office (date unknown) and was sent a PCRB complaint form. On May 4, 1999, the Complaint was received at the office of the City Clerk. As required by Section 8-8-5 of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Police Chief for investigation. The Chief completed his Report and submitted it to the Board on July 30, 1999. The Board voted to review the Complaint in accordance with Section 8-8-7 B. 1 (a), which means the Board may examine all complaint information on the record with no additional information. 2 The Chief's investigation includes an interview with the complainant conducted by internal affairs at the Iowa City Police Department on May 13, 1999, before the Complaint had been formally filed with the PCRB. A transcript provided to the PCRB is a synopsis of the interview session. The interview lasted 19 minutes. The Board met on August 10, and August 24, 1999, to consider the Report. FINDINGS OF FACT At approximately 1:15 a.m. in April 1999, the complainant and two friends, all Hispanic males, left a local bar in the downtown area end proceeded north on Dubuque Street enroute to Motine IL. The complainant was driving a Toyota 4x4 pickup truck with oversize tires. The streets were wet and there was a light rain at the time. As they proceeded north on Dubuque Street, they were followed for three to five blocks by a marked police car, which eventually made a right turn onto a side street. All three passengers in the Toyota were aware of the police car behind them. The two friends of the driver told him to be careful and watch the speedometer since they had been drinking. Continuing north on Dubuque Street after the police car turned off on a side street, they met a second police car southbound in the 600 block which, after passing the Toyota, made a U-turn and began following them. The complainant was aware of the second poliGe vehicle behind him. Both vehicles continued north on Dubuque Street before being stopped by Officer 900430 just north of Foster Road. Officer 900430 approached the pickup truck and told the complainant that he was stopped because he had been speeding. The complainant felt he had not been speeding and told the officer so. After admitting to drinking a few beers, the complainant was given two preliminary breath tests, both registering .06. Officer 900430 then issued the complainant a speeding ticket for ten miles over the speed limit (35 mph in a 25-mph zone). As the complainant continued to deny speeding, he was told by the officer, according to the interview at the Iowa City Police Department on May 13, 1999, that he could have given him two speeding tickets. The officer told the complainant that he clocked him at 25 mph over the speed limit just before he made the U-turn on Dubuque Street and again farther north on Dubuque Street. Also during the interview, the complainant said he asked Officer 900430 if he could see his speed as registered on the radar. When this request was denied, the complainant asked the officer to tell this to his friends. His friends were told by Officer 900430 that he did not have to show the speed reading because it is not Iowa law. The complainant was not allowed to drive because of the breath test. A passenger was given a breath test and then allowed to drive the truck. CONCLUSION Allegation #1. The complainant feels that he was stopped only because the officer observed three Hispanic males in his truck and not because of the speed. He believes that the first officer following him would have given him a ticket if he had been speeding. Officer 900430 states that when he met the truck and detected the speed, he could not see who was in the truck due to the rain and glare of lights. The officer said he did not know there were Hispanic males in the truck until after the stop was made. The question of ethnic bias on behalf of the officer was discussed by the complainant and his passengers on their return to Moline and again later that day when a friend of the complainant, a former police officer, said that the complainant fit the profile of certain people that are stopped by the police. However, there was nothing said during the stop regarding ethnic bias. The question at that time centered on the speed of the vehicle which 4 was denied by the complainant but will be a matter for the court. The refusal to allow the complainant to see the reading on the radar unit probably created serious doubt in the mind of the complainant about the validity of the stop, but it appears the officer is not required to permit this. Accordingly, the conclusion in the Chief's Report (1) that there is no evidence to indicate a traffic stop was initiated due to the complainant's ethnic origin, (2) that the complainant's vehicle was detected to be speeding by radar, and (3) that nothing was said during the stop to indicate ethnic bias is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious. The allegation is NOT SUSTAINED. DATED: August 24, 1999 MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 1999 - 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS PRELIMINA Subject to pr0val MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Bovbjerg, Benjamin Chait, Pam Ehrhardt, Dick Gibson, Marilyn Schintler, Dean Shannon, Lea Supple MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Andrew Matthews, Bob Miklo, Melody Rockwell, Anne Schulte OTHERS PRESENT: Michael Singer, Allan Berger, Jim Dane, Cole Chase, Larry Wilson, Bart Schuchert, Vicky DiBona, Gene Schuchert, David Stoudt RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, of amendments to the Zoning Chapter concerning the location and installation of utility substation facilities in commercial and industrial zones, subject to certain conditions. Recommended, by a vote of 6-1, with Gibson voting no, that the City Council send a letter to the Johnson County Board of Supervisors recommending approval of a conditional use permit for a home business at 3005 Highway 1 NE in Johnson County, subject to conditions intended to limit the size of a commercial use in a non-commercial zone. CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Supple called the meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES ON CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: Supple said a list of vacancies is posted on the bulletin board in the lobby. She asked those present to look at the list and exercise the opportunity to serve the City and to have a voice in decisions made regarding the City of Iowa City. CODE AMENDMENT ITEM: Public discussion of amendments to the Zoning Chapter to allow public utilities in commercial and industrial zones. Miklo said staff is recommending that the ordinance be amended to allow utility substations for electric, telephone, gas, telecommunications switching and relay facilities, and water and sewer pumps, or lift stations. He said staff recommends amendments to the definition section of the ordinance and to allow these facilities be permitted in the industrial and intensive commercial zone as a provisional use, provided they are screened from any adjacent residential zone and from the public streets. Miklo said a provisional use does not require any special permits; the utility company would simply need to show that the special provisions for establishing such a use were met when getting the permits from the building department. Miklo said in the commercial office, neighborhood commercial, highway commercial, community commercial, and downtown zones, staff recommends the substations be permitted by special Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 2, 1999 Page 2 exception, which would require approval by the Board of Adjustment. He said the Board could impose conditions or deny the application if the location is determined to be inappropriate for this use. Miklo said staff recommends approval as outlined in the August 27 memo. Supple asked if there was specific wording for the zoning change. Miklo said staff does not have the ordinance drawn up, but the conditions to be included are noted in the August 27 staff memo. Ehrhardt asked how staff would define the term "highly visible," with regard to the commercial zones. Miklo said it would be something that was visible from a public street or a residential zone. Ehrhardt asked if this would refer to any area visible from a public right-of-way, and Miklo confirmed this. She asked if such a facility would require brick. Miklo responded that it would be up to the Board of Adjustment to determine on a case by case basis. Supple asked if there were an applicant with regard to this item. Miklo said McLeod USA, a telecommunications company brought this item to staffs attention, but the City is the applicant in this case, because the ordinance applies to a range of public utilities, not just McLeod USA. Public discussion: Michael Singer, 832 Spencer Drive, said he is an Iowa City resident representing McLeod USA. He said McLeod appreciates the City's efforts to clarify this issue. Singer said currently, there is not a provision within the Zoning Chapter to allow for the placement of these structures on private property. He said there is a lack of clarity as to the process. Inside of structures, Singer said a building permit process is involved. Singer said the planning staff did an excellent job in pulling together the issues McLeod thought should be addressed. He said McLeod is supportive of the proposed ordinance. Singer said there are still a couple of issues for thought. He said the definition used for the substation basically defines the flow of service - a large trunk going down into a smaller feeder going down to some other level. Singer said a problem may arise at some future point because there is no size limitation included within the description. He said under the proposed definition, the service coming to an individual residence could in fact fit under the description. He said he did not think that was the intent of the proposed definition. Singer said at some point, telecommunications equipment will be smaller and more efficient. He said there may be a time when the distribution of service can be achieved without having to use a big box, cabinet, or canister. Singer said one of the questions that will always come up is whether the placement, even on private property for relatively small items, would require extra procedures and approvals. Singer said as telecommunications distribution equipment gets smaller, it will be more likely to be located within the right-of-way, so this may not become an issue. He said if it does become an issue, perhaps some sort of service level could be identified to differentiate what will required to meet extra provisions. Singer said another issue is that the placement of telecommunications equipment and most utilities in newer subdivisions are forced into the frontage. He said that makes just about everything in a distribution network visible. Singer said this equipment is not always located within the right-of-way, but are far enough back from the curb and sidewalk so as not to raise an issue. He said over the course of the next few years, McLeod would like to work with the City on these two issues: the size limitation and the visibility issue. Singer said McLeod would like to have the opportunity to come back and revisit the issue after a couple of years of trying out the proposed ordinance. Singer said the third paragraph of staffs recommendation refers to highly visible areas where the Board may consider requiring a brick fagade. He said not every piece of technical Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 2, 1999 Page 3 equipment, for example a substation, would benefit or even be compatible with some type of brick faCzade. Singer said he understood the intent that the structure has to fit in with the surrounding community. He said instead of a brick facade being the only option offered in the amendment language, perhaps the simple addition of the words "other appropriate material" might give greater flexibility at some point. Singer said they are happy to have the Board of Adjustment decide what the material should be, but frankly there are some places where clapboard materials would be more appropriate than a brick frontage. Singer said McLeod believes that as they go through this process and begin to place telecommunications facilities in even some of the more visible commercial and retail areas, they will learn how that is supposed to be done. He said they would hope at some point that the process would become more of an administrative function to determine what the appropriate look for some of the more routine facilities would be, rather than being required to go through the Board of Adjustment, which can be an arduous and time-consuming process. Singer said McLeod appreciates the ordinance proposal by staff. He said it basically serves what McLeod hopes to do as a telecommunications provider in Iowa City. Miklo said staff recommends a brick fac,,ade, based on long term maintenance. He said these are generally fairly small buildings. Miklo said because these buildings are unoccupied, they are less likely to be maintained, e.g., painted or repaired if vinyl siding is damaged. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to approve amendments to the Zoning Chapter to allow utility substation facilities in the I-1, I-2, and C1-1 zones as a provisional use, subject to substation facilities located outdoors or in an independent structure being screened from the public right-of-way and from residential zones according to the screening requirements in Section 14-6S, or by a decorative fence or wall approved by City staff, and to allow utility substation facilities in the CO-1, CN-1, CH-1, CC-2, CB-2, CB-5, and CB-10 zones by special exception, subject to substation facilities located outdoors or in an independent structure being screened from the public right-of-way and from residential zones according to the screening requirements in Section 14-6S, or by a decorative fence or wall approved by the Board of Adjustment. When considering the utility substation facility request, the Board shall consider the compatibility of the facility in terms of size, scale, location, and design in relation to surrounding structures and uses. For enclosed utility structures located in highly visible areas, the Board may consider requiring a brick fa{~ade. Water and sewer pumps or lift stations approved by the city as part of a subdivision or construction plan approval do not require Board of Adjustment consideration. Shannon seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. COUNTY ZONING ITEM: Public discussion of an application by Allan and Jennifer Berger for a conditional use permit to allow a veterinary clinic as a home business at 3005 Highway 1 NE in Johnson County. Miklo said several months ago the Commission reviewed a request to rezone this property for a commercial designation in the County. He said the property is on the west side of Highway One in the Iowa City Fringe Area within two miles of the City limits and is across the highway from the Furrows Edge residential Subdivision. Miklo said based on the Fringe Area Agreement and the County's Comprehensive Plan, staff found the proposed location was not appropriate for a commercial zone. The area is generally agricultural and residential in nature. He said it was Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 2, 1999 Page 4 also felt that a full-fiedged veterinary clinic would not be appropriate in this setting; however, a more limited-sized veterinary clinic might be considered by the Board of Supervisors. Miklo said there is a concern with traffic, because of the speeds and condition of Highway One in this area, and staff would not recommend a business use or a home business that would generate a large amount of traffic. Miklo said staff recommends if the County determines this to be an appropriate use in this area that they issue a conditional use permit for a home business with limitations placed on the size of the business. He said staff suggests that 1 ) no more than 30% of the total square footage measurement of the dwelling unit and accessory buildings be used in the operation of the business, 2) only one non-resident employee be allowed for this business, 3) the boarding of animals not be permitted except those being treated as part of the clinic's operation, 4) the Board of Health approve all provisions for medical and animal waste disposal and 5) a time limit of three years to give the applicants time to establish the business. Miklo said if the business is successful and grows, it could be relocated at that point, or if it stays at a low-key level, the applicants could request that the County renew that permit. Schintler said the Commission had discussed limiting the business to 30% of the square footage of the existing floor area. Miklo said the Commission could add that provision to the recommendation, but staff did not think it was necessary. He said if the Bergers wanted more space, it would be very expensive to add more and then only be able to use 30% of the new square footage. Miklo said the fact that the business would be limited to one non-resident employee would tend to keep this a fairly small clinic. Shannon asked how many animals could be kept on the acreage if it were a livestock operation. Miklo said the area is zoned agricultural, and an agricultural zone of this size would permit a livestock operation of about 150 animals. Shannon asked what the current ordinance says about the number of employees that would be allowed in this business. Miklo said this is a conditional use permit in the County, and the County can place whatever limit it wants on the number of employees. He said he thought in the County zoning ordinance, there are two levels of home businesses: a home occupation similar to Iowa City's ordinance that may allow up to two employees and this provision for a conditional use permit for a home business allowing whatever the County decides is appropriate. [Editor's note: The County allows no non-resident employees for home occupations and a maximum of two non-resident employees for a home business if approved by the Board of Supervisors.] Regarding the 30% requirement and possibly linking it to existing square footage, Gibson stated that building a 1,000 square foot building to get 300 additional square feet for the business could easily be done for $10 per square foot, as there is nothing that stipulates what kind of space this is limited to. He added that he did not think it was a major issue in any case. Public discussion: Allan Berger, 3005 Highway One NE, said he works for the University of Iowa as a veterinarian, his wife works as a more traditional veterinarian out of Tipton and Iowa City, and together they operate a house-call practice, which does not require any on-site operations. He said he and his wife would like to expand on what they are doing now; however, the clinic they are proposing would still be supplementary to their house-call practice. Berger said he was comfortable with what he believes is the intent of the staff report and the various restrictions proposed with one exception. He said he would like a clarification and change to the one employee condition. Berger said he would like to see that provision changed Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 2, 1999 Page 5 to "less than two full-time equivalent employees." He said if the Commission wanted to place a restriction on how many employees can be present simultaneously, that would be acceptable. He said his father in New Jersey is doing a lot of the billing, and based on IRS laws may be considered an employee. Berger said he was comfortable with the intent of the conditions - to keep the business small, but wondered how some of this will be measured and what the definition of an employee is. Berger said the business will stay small and he will continue to be employed by the University of Iowa, so only his wife will work in the business in the traditional sense, resulting in less than one full-time equivalent veterinarian. He said it would be the number of veterinarians that determine the volume of the clinic, not the number of off-premise employees. Ehrhardt asked if including the term "on-site" for the employee restriction would be sufficient to keep Berger's father working on the billing. Berger said it would be sufficient for that. He said veterinary clinics frequently employ on a part-time hourly basis a high school student who is interested in exploring a career in veterinary medicine. Berger said it is an important educational role and something they could do for the community. He said he did not think it would affect operations, but he would like to be able to provide this type of service. Berger said he did not see why it is perceived that the number of veterinarians would correlate with the number of people who visit the clinic. Gibson said there was not an implication that it was correlated to the number of veterinarians involved, but the concern was related to the number of non-resident persons employed at the clinic. He asked Berger if he could expand the business considerably, particularly with boarding activity, by hiring non-veterinarian employees. Gibson asked if there were a limit to what could be done in having two veterinarians in the practice. Berger said for boarding there isn't, but for traditional veterinary services, which is what they intend to provide, it might make a difference. Gibson said he thought boarding was probably the major consideration here. Berger said he understood that boarding was currently allowed as an accessory use under the existing agricultural zoning classification for his property. Gibson asked if boarding is an issue here. Miklo said under the proposed conditions, boarding would not be permitted, except for those animals being treated at the clinic. Ehrhardt asked if the Commission should limit this approval to go with the owner of the business. Berger said the County included a condition in the proposal that Berger had to live there and own the property in order for the permit to be valid. He said he was fine with that restriction. Berger said the veterinarians would control the volume of the business and related traffic. He said he was surprised the City was not imposing that condition, but was going to rely instead on square footage and number of employees limitations. Berger said he thought he could make a compelling argument that the more employees the clinic has, the less volume will be going through it. He said the better managed it is, the fewer clients they will need to see to make their costs back. Chait said the concern about the number of employees has to do with the possibility of having one or two veterinarians and a lot of part-time employees doing a lot of business and generating a lot of traffic. He said the Commission had discussed allowing the equivalent of one full-time employee. Chait asked if it were feasible that in the course of the business there would only be one non-resident employee at a time on the premises. Berger said it would be difficult to predict. He said he envisioned having one person on call, who would come in a couple of hours a week to help clean, etc. Chait asked Berger if he were comfortable with the wording for one full-time employee. Berger said if there were someone answering the phones on a close to full-time basis, that would preclude him from having a student coming in a couple of hours a week. He Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 2, 1999 Page 6 said he was therefore not comfortable with the wording, because he would like to have someone on-site to answer the phone and someone else to help with the animals when needed. Berger said he would actually like to have less than two full-time equivalent employees. Gibson said it sounded like Berger wanted a full-time employee on site who will do things besides answering the telephone, such as help with animals, plus the opportunity to have additional part-time help to deal with incidental activities. Berger said that was correct. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Chait moved that the Commission recommend that the City Council send a letter to the Johnson County Board of Supervisors recommending approval of a conditional use permit for a home business at 3005 Highway I NE in Johnson County subject to: 1) no more than 30% of the dwelling units and accessory buildings shall be devoted to the home business use, 2) no more than one (1) non-resident employee associated with the home business use, 3) no boarding of animals, except as associated with necessary treatment of the animals, 4) the Johnson County Health Department must approve all animal and medical waste disposal methods, and 5) a time limit of three years, which may be renewed if reviewed and approved by the County Board of Supervisors according the Conditional Use criteria in the Johnson County Zoning Ordinance. Schintler seconded the motion. Shannon said he liked what the applicants were trying to do on this property. He said he did not understand why the County would be trying to restrict this use, when there was the possibility of having 150 hogs on the property. Shannon said it seems like it would be a very clean business. He said he supports this business and could not see anything wrong with it at this location. Ehrhardt discussed the possibility of adding a condition that this use be specific to this owner and adding a condition to allow a student to work here part-time for the experience of it. She said she would also like to add the term "existing" to the 30% of square footage condition and the term "on-site" to the non-resident employee condition so Berger's father could continue to do billing for him. Chait said he would like to consider allowing somewhere between one and two full-time equivalent employees, which would allow for a student to work at the clinic. Ehrhardt said that would not necessarily restrict the extra person to a student, whichwas her intention, rather than just having a bigger business. Bovbjerg said she had a problem with the term "associated with" in condition two, because it is somewhat vague. She said she could go with something more than one full-time employee, but did not think the wording should be so specific that the employees should have to account for each thing they did each day. Bovbjerg said with a rezoning, the use goes with the land, but she thought a conditional use permit would be for this particular business and these particular people. Miklo said he believed that was addressed in the County zoning ordinance already -- that home businesses are associated with the people living there. Bovbjerg said since the conditional use approval would go with this particular business, there should be no problem of expansion into other uses. She said the recommendation as proposed by staff sounds properly restrictive. Gibson said he would vote no on this application. He said he has read about the Department of Transportation's plan to create a super two highway from somewhere south of Iowa City to Mount Vernon on Highway One. Gibson said there is a capacity problem on Highway One right now, or the DOT would not be contemplating building that highway. He said he did not think it was appropriate for a society to encourage additional development that does not need to be Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 2, 1999 Page 7 located along a corridor, especially if it diminishes the capacity of that highway. Gibson said that is exactly what is going to happen in this case, and it can also happen incrementally with a lot of small decisions. He said then there has to be a very large taxpayer investment again to restore the highway to some sense of usability and functionality. Gibson said the Commission should not allow that to happen. As for the livestock analogy, Gibson said nothingcan be done about that anyway; there is not much ability to control that. He said there is also not much ability to control the issue of the so-called home business, because the Board of Supervisors already provides for that. Gibson said the Commission is being asked to exceed that and step beyond it, but he thought the Commission should say no. He said he thought the Commission was arguing about minutiae as far as the rest of the points go. MOTION: Chait moved to amend the main motion to change condition number two to read: there shall be no more than two full-time equivalent non-resident employees on site, regardless of what they do, associated with the home business use. Shannon seconded the motion. Ehrhardt said she could not support the motion. She said the intent is not to make this a commercial business, but to give it a period for incubating the business. Ehrhardt said if Berger used the condition to its fullest potential, he could have two employees on the site in addition to his father working off-site. Chait said his intent was to allow for someone to answer the telephone in addition to having a part-time student. Supple said she would vote no on the amendment. She said the intent of this is to have a small business. She said it is not meant to be a large, growing, booming business, so she thought one employee should be sufficient. Supple said she would vote to include the term "on-site," but would not vote for two, and particularly not for two full-time equivalent employees. She said the business could then end up with six part-time employees there all at the same time, which would go against the intention of keeping traffic down. The amendment failed on a vote of 2-5, with Bovbjerg, Ehrhardt, Gibson, Schintler, and Supple voting no. Bovbjerg said this would be a good balance between allowing a business to get started and wanting to keep it restrictive. She said in the next three years, the Commission would see what happens, but this is not cast in stone. MOTION: Ehrhardt moved to amend the main motion to change condition number one to read: No more than 30% of the existing dwelling units and accessory buildings shall be devoted to the home business use and to change condition number two to read: There shall be no more than one (1) on-site non-resident employee associated with the home business use. The motion died for lack of a second. Supple said it is her understanding that Highway One will undergo a lot of changes and probably carry a lot of traffic. She said such improvements are not expected for another five to ten years in the future so that the three-year limitation on this application is reasonable. She said if it is appropriate in three years for this permit to be renewed, then the Board of Supervisors can do so, and if not, they can make that decision at that time. Supple said this is a reasonable request with reasonable restrictions, and she would vote yes. Ehrhardt asked if approval of this would preclude Berger's father from doing the bookkeeping in New Jersey if thero is another on-site employee. Matthews said the way this is now worded without the "on-site" clarification, anyone associated with the business arguably would be a non- resident employee associated with the business. He said if the intent is to restrict the on-site Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 2, 1999 Page 8 activities and number of employees on-site, the Commission may want clarification added. Miklo said he feels it is fairly clear that this is associated with the home business, meaning on the property itself. He said if the Commission is concerned, it could add the terminology. Matthews recommended that the Commission spell out the terms and not leave it to another City Department to interpret what is intended. MOTION: Ehrhardt moved to amend the main motion to change condition number two to read: There shall be no more than one (1) on-site, non-resident employee associated with the home business use. Bovbjerg seconded the motion. The amendment carried on a vote of 6-1, with Gibson voting no. The main motion carried on a vote of 6-1, with Gibson voting no. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM: South Central District Plan. Discussion of the South Central District Arterial Street Location Study Report & Discussion of Setting a Public Hearing on an Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to Adopt and Incorporate the South Central District Plan for Property Generally Located West of Highway 218, South of Highway 1 and East of the Iowa River. Gibson said he would be recusing himself from this item because of a conflict of allegiance. He said he is employed by The University of Iowa, and there are some statements attributed to him in the staff report that he made on behalf of The University of Iowa, which makes it difficult for him to appear to be able to deal with this impartially. Gibson said no one should make presumptions regarding the University position on this item, because he is recusing himself. Ehrhardt said if a decision were made about the arterial street and river crossing location, would Gibson be able to participate after that decision was made. Gibson said the Commission may make a decision about the arterial, but the decision is not finally made until the City Council takes action, so that the issue may not be resolved at the time the South Central District Plan is being discussed at the Commission level. Rockwell said the South Central District is one of the ten planning districts and as such, when approved, will become part of the Comprehensive Plan. Rockwell said the district extends into the County and, in fact, about 52% of the land within the district is in the County in an area that can be served by gravity sewer and may be developed as part of the City in the future. She said there are no annexation plans at this point, but if owners of properties choose to come into the City, the plan would be there to guide that development. Rockwell added the plan calls for the preservation of Ryerson's Woods and the Johnson County Fairgrounds. Rockwell stated there are four subareas, each with very different characteristics in terms of the types of land uses and also the environmental features. She said last year a draft plan was presented that contained similar elements to what is now being proposed in that it describes the subareas and proposes potential future land uses for Subarea B, Highway One, Airport North, Subarea C, River Corridor, and Subarea D. Rockwell said Subarea A for the airport area will be governed by the Master Plan for the Airport. Rockwell said during discussion of the plan last year, one of the major issues of concern was where the arterial street connecting Mormon Trek Boulevard and the Sycamore L should be located. She said the Commission deferred consideration of the draft plan pending a report from Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 2, 1999 Page 9 EarthTech, the consulting firm that evaluated 15 alternative alignments based on environmental features, traffic flow levels, costs, topography, existing structures and land uses, practical engineering considerations, and the ability to serve developing properties in the area. Rockwell said the options were narrowed to four, and she showed them on an overhead map. She said the four alignments were then further evaluated, and the consultant recommended option N2 based on it having the best overall traffic service, reduced environmental impacts when compared to other alternatives, and, relatively speaking, a lower impact on existing businesses and residences. Rockwell said the final recommendation is detailed on page 28 of the EarthTech report, and copies of that report are available. She added that Jeff Davidson would be at the Commission's September 13 and 16 meetings to answer the more technical questions about the report. Rockwell said because of the comments that came from the initial round of public meetings on the draft plan last year, staff made some changes to the text and maps of the draft plan. She said on pages 11 and 12, the text and map of the draft plan were amended to reflect the recommended route for the south arterial street and river crossing. Rockwell said the rear lane that is to serve commercial properties north of the airport is shown entirely on airport property, and the through street from Dane to Riverside is removed. She said one street onto Dane was removed and a connection north to the arterial was shown and cul-de-sac streets were shown instead. Rockwell said further, staff would be recommending that the southernmost river crossing, an area that is not likely to be able to be served and unlikely to be developed, be removed from the plan as an option. Rockwell said on page 31, regarding the commercial, institutional section south of the airport in Subarea D, the text and the map have been changed to allow more flexibility in development of that commercial area. She said as with other planning districts in Iowa City, the text encourages the integration of institutional uses within the commercial area instead of having commercial and institutional uses shown as separate areas. Rockwell said on page 32 in the southwest rural area of the district, the plan encourages continuation of agricultural uses. She said in the future, when development does begin to occur, the plan indicates that low-density, conservation subdivision design should be considered in the now rural areas south of the airport. Rockwell said the text suggests that a through road is not feasible, but cul-de-sac roads may be considered. Rockwell said the plan is still in draft form and staff welcomes comments from the public and the Commission on changes to improve the plan before it proceeds on to City Council. Ehrhardt asked how the City would handle the relocation of the homes; she said the recommended arterial route would displace two homes. Rockwell said if someone is displaced by a City public works project, the City ensures they have alternative arrangements. She said generally the City purchases the property and provides compensation for securing an alternative residence. She said possibly the homes could be relocated within the same manufactured housing park in which they are now located. Ehrhardt asked if the City would ever condemn property. Rockwell said the City has the authority to do that and could do so. Ehrhardt said regarding the N1 and N2 options, the report states that N1 would have the least impact on wooded wetlands. She said on the map the routes look to be pretty close, and there did not seem to be much of a difference as to how much of the wooded wetland would be taken using N1 versus N2. Rockwell said it would be a marginal difference, but the N2 route dips a little further to the south into a marshy area. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 2, 1999 Page 10 Supple stated at the Monday meeting Davidson said N2 was the consultant's recommended route. She asked for staff's opinion, and Miklo said staff concurs with that assessment. Supple said Davidson has said that the N2 route cuts through University property. Rockwell confirmed this. Supple said the indication was that negotiations were possible with the University, but if not, the curve could be changed to an acceptable, although not ideal, alignment. Ehrhardt said a number of the property owners in the area said they did not want the road to go through their property, yet the consultant's recommended plan shows the road going through their properties. Rockwell confirmed this. Public discussion: Jim Dane, 4507 Dane Road S.W., read a statement into the record from his uncle and aunt, George R. and Marjorie Dane, who live at 4120 Dane Road but could not attend the meeting: We have read the location study report by Earth Tech dated May 1999. This addresses the location for a south central arterial between US 218/Iowa Highway 1 and Sycamore Street. We commend Earth Tech for the thoroughness of its study and analysis in arriving at the recommendation for Alternative N2 as having the best balance of engineering design features, good traffic service, and protection of the social and material environment. Their economic and engineering reasons and conclusions are difficult to refute. However, we believe that insufficient consideration has been given to the aesthetic vistas which would be lost if the western portion of the road were built as recommended. The recommended route comes within a few hundred feet of our home, and as you would expect, that does not please us. From comments made at the informal meeting, it appears that construction of this arterial will not be soon. The concerns we express are more for the benefit of those who will follow us than for ourselves, but because we are the ones currently in possession, we feel we have a responsibility to speak up. We understand things change and have watched Highway one change from a gravel road to a four lane divided highway. The outward pressure from Iowa City appears irresistible. In its report, Earth Tech describes the compromises and changes which were forced by substantial economic developments. These developments have a present and vocal constituency, but undeveloped land has no advocates, unless those currently in authority assume that task. Our property has remained undeveloped due to the fact we have resisted and turned aside the many pleas from developers and real estate agents to sell just a few acres. We feel an obligation to pass on to others that which we have been given. As a family we have not yet come to grips with the best way to do this, but placing an arterial street so close to the summit of our property will certainly change things. In every direction we see the sights our family has been privileged to enjoy for over 70 years. We know the Indians enjoyed this too because of the arrowheads found in the fields around us. Directly south of our home where N1 is, ten arrowheads were found. We feel a responsibility to preserve and protect these things. Similar sites on the hills in and around Iowa City have already been lost. Why build on the high ground? Why not build the road further down the slope and follow the valley rather than the ridge? Why destroy something which is irreplaceable? It is wise to plan for future developments. Too often we have had to react to events already taking place, and then try to retrofit services to meet existing conditions. But in so planning, we must keep an eye to the future. The beauty of our countryside is our inheritance. It is difficult to quantify in dollars, but we have an obligation to pass on these Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 2, 1999 Page 11 things. We feel the study and analysis is focused on the present and the benefits for those here now. Someone has to speak for the intangibles to be enjoyed by future generations. Cole Chase, 3034 Rohret Road SW, said he is with the Chamber of Commerce. He said he has reviewed the documents and been part of the planning process since the first community meeting about one year ago. Chase said he is generally supportive of the N2 alignment. He encouraged the City to expedite the connection between Mormon Trek and Riverside, the segment south of the airport. Chase said this should address some of the growing congestion on Highway One from Mormon Trek to Riverside. Larry Wilson said he is a campus planner for The University of Iowa. He said he is not at the meeting to take a position on the road, because the University has been involved in the planning and have made it clear they will continue to work with the City to find a mutually acceptable solution. Wilson pointed out that the impact on the University's property is not casual. He said figure eight on page 31 shows that the road would require moving a significant pad of an existing building that the University now fullyoccupies. Wilson said the building is the Mossman Consolidated Business Services Building, where services such as printing, central delivery, receiving, and shipping have been consolidated in order to get them off campus. He said there is a need for this kind of consolidation off campus. Wilson said about the time the City began its study, the University also began planning for its property so that there would be a more focused, long-term use of it. He said when the University first started planning, they thought the road alignment would be south of where it is ending up and would therefore not impact University property. Wilson said as things progressed, the focus was more on the N2 location, so the University put its planning on hold. He said the University planning progressed far enough to say that there is a long term continuing need for this property, and the University would like to add to it, essentially using the whole site as a building in a different configuration and adding to the building with additions. Wilson said the University cannot remove that much of the building and still use it in the same way, so they would have to find ways to address the needs at that site or another site. He said he wanted the Commission to be aware that this would not have a casual impact, but the University would continue to work with the City to see what could be mutually worked out. Bart Schuchert, 3911 Schuchert Drive S.E., said it was stated that 52% of the property involved here is in Johnson County, but he did not see any representative at the meeting from the Johnson County Board of Supervisors. He said he gets the idea from talking with a couple of them that they have not been an integral part of this plan. Rockwell said the County planning staff and the Board of Supervisors were notified of all the meetings. She said there was a representative at the Monday night meeting. Rockwell said the land that is in the County, which remains in the County, continues under the Board of Supervisors' governance. She said once it is annexed into the City, this plan would be used as a guide. She stated the plan would not apply as long as the land is in the County. Schuchert asked if it was correct that annexation has to be voluntary. Rockwell said annexation has almost always been voluntary; she said it would be a very unusual circumstance for the City to force annexation. Schuchert said there are numerous other big issues other than the route of the road, for example zoning and the recommended use of land. He said he is quite concerned with having to build a church or some other institution on the front of his property when it is now zoned Highway Commercial. He said it would take the land values down to zero. Schuchert said it would take all the valuable land he might ever have and make it totally worthless. He said the road is a big factor, but the devaluation of his land to where he would have to give it away or sell Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 2, 1999 Page 12 it to the 4-H Fairgrounds is no small thing, and he is very concerned about that. Schuchert said comments attributed to him discuss the location of the property, but he also talked about the land use, and there is nothing in the whole report about the discussions and concerns for the land use proposal. He said there were long discussions about the institutional land use; where there is now Highway Commercial, it would now be going into public services and institutional. Schuchert said there is a nice little green area of public and private open space before he ever gets to his house, so he sees that as a real significant issue. Schuchert said we should look at the whole package, because it has significant impact on someone like him who has spent 62 years on the same property. He said the alignment of the road, as best he can tell, is going right through the middle of his property. Schuchert said we discussed the possibility of going through one or the other end of the property, not right through the middle. He said a road going right through the middle of his property would totally take up everything, although he was not totally opposed to having one go through on the north or south end and share the right-of-way with the other property owners. Ehrhardt asked for the location of Schuchert's property. He pointed it out on the map, showing it as directly north of the fairgrounds. Schuchert said the land to the west of his should be shown as Wolf property to make the map current. He said he would like to see that land kept residential in nature. Supple asked Schuchert if, when he speaks of land use, he is particularly speaking of his land and how his land is to be used. Schuchert said he is specifically speaking of the fact that it is now zoned Highway Commercial, which has some commercial value, and the proposed land use under the draft plan would change it to institutional. He said he had never seen that land use before this proposal, but as it was explained to him, it would have very limited commercial value. Supple said all of Schuchert's land is not zoned Highway Commercial. Schuchert agreed but said the prime part of it is. Supple said she read the plan as proposing the land for Neighborhood Commercial. Miklo said the area is addressed on page 31 of the plan, which is a general guide and not an exact zoning ordinance in that it does not specify what zone will be applied here. He said the plan does suggest how the area should be looked at if it is annexed. Miklo said the third paragraph on page 31 addresses this particular property, showing that it is somewhat flexible, and some of the language was changed based on previous meetings and concerns of property owners. He read, "The Neighborhood Commercial node may also offer good locations for institutional uses such as a church, a daycare center, a fire station, and the extension of the fairgrounds. This would provide a suitable buffer between the industrial uses to the east and the single-family residential uses that are projected to occur west of the property. Because the area is adjacent to residential development and along a major entranceway to the City, it should be designed so that it does not become a commercial strip." Miklo said this language in the plan does provide for some commercial activity in that area, but does not get specific. Schuchert said this significantly affects the value of his property by totally restricting what can be there. Miklo pointed out that the road Schuchert has referred to is one of the alignments that has been proposed to be eliminated. Schuchert said, in looking at the comments, part of what is said is true apropos the road going through the middle of the property - that is true. He said alternatives were also discussed. He said he would not object to nearly as much if the road were on the north end or the south end of his property. Supple said the arterial street is not planned to go within a quarter mile of Schuchert's property. Schuchert said that wasn't the point. He said the comments state that Schuchert prefers that the Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 2, 1999 Page 13 road, the proposed N5 route, not cross his property. Schuchert said we know that it is now not going to. He said the point is that he also said he opposed that because it was proposed through the center of his property. He said his other comments about having the road on his north or south property line are not included in his comments in the consultant's report. Schuchert said all of the comments should be included. He said there was also a lengthy discussion on recommended land use, but those comments were not included either. Chait said the quotes can perhaps be made more accurate, but they are just a sample. He said the comments cannot include every quote from everyone about everything. Schuchert said he understood that, but staff should not pick out only the quotes that support their own point of view. Vicky DiBona, 4173 Dane Road, said Rockwell has contacted her about holding a neighborhood meeting for those who live in the area known as Yocumville, the group of homes along thewest side of Dane Road. She said she appreciated that and has distributed copies of the plan to neighbors and would distribute more when she received them. DiBona said the main concern is that she and her neighbors have input. She said they have information that may be helpful to the Commission in its decision. She said they also have emotional ties to the area. DiBona said they understand the traffic flow in the area. She stated there are points that are not included on the map that should be on the map, including a waterway that would influence the development plan in that area. DiBona said the neighbors would like to work together on the plan to overcome being left out of the initial phases of planning for the area. Bovbjerg said the Commission will potentially hold several meetings on this item and will not come to a vote until they feel comfortable that everything has been heard. Gene Schuchert, 1814 Hafor Drive, said he wished the report would show a map of how the land is currently zoned. He said the current land use map shows his property is residential, but there is no map that shows that it is zoned Highway Commercial. He said he is asked monthly to sell some of the property in this district. David Stoudt, 4165 Dane Road, said he had concerns about the potential archaeological sites on the land. He said these sites might be of value and questioned if there were a provision for preservation or further investigation of such sites. Stoudt said this was important as some of these areas of archaeological sites have already been lost. Stoudt said regarding the trail pattern, that the public areas are focused along the eastern sections of the district. He said he would like to see his area of the district included as part of the trails and open space planning for the district. He asked the Commission to consider an area for public use, e.g., a trail, in his area to be included as part of the trail system. DiBona asked the Commission to leave a green space area behind the homes along Dane Road. She said it is a good future place for recreational trails and sites. Stoudt referred to page 14 of the draft plan showing that his area is out of the loop of the trail system. He agreed that the green space in his area is important and should possibly be expanded. Stoudt agreed with the Danes that a key aspect of this area is the aesthetic value and said that the focus of the plan on the arterial street system will completely wipe that out. He said he is also concerned about how access would be gained to the property behind the residential area. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 2, 1999 Page 14 Supple asked if there were standards for determining a specific degree of importance for an archaeological site. Rockwell said the Sensitive Areas Ordinance includes language for protecting archaeological sites. She said if a burial site is known or discovered, the State requires protection of that area. Miklo said the City does not have a program for archaeological finds and relies on the State Archeologist in such instances. Stoudt said it appears that one of the potential road alignments shown on page 5 of the plan would cross three noted archaeological sites. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Shannon moved to set the public hearing for the South Central District Plan for the September 16, 1999 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Ehrhardt seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. CONSIDERATION OF THE AUGUST 19, 1999 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES: MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to approve the minutes of the August 19, 1999 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting as amended at the informal meeting. Shannon seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. OTHER: Ehrhardt asked for a description regarding the process of determining what is an archaeological site and which of the sites would be most valuable. Miklo said staff would address this at the next meeting. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:28 p.m. Dean Shannon, Secretary Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte ppdadm/min/p&z9-2-99.doc