HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-11-30 Bd Comm minutes11-30-10
3b 1
MINUTES APPROVED
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
OCTOBER 13, 2010 - 5:15 PM
CITY HALL, EMMA HARVAT HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Robert Anderson, Barbara Eckstein, Will Jennings,
Caroline Sheerin, Le Ann Tyson
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Walz, Sara Greenwood Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT: None
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
None.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM.
ROLL CALL: Anderson, Sheerin, Jennings, Tyson, and Eckstein were present.
A brief opening statement was read by the Chair outlining the role and purpose of the Board and
the procedures that would be followed in the meeting.
CONSIDERATION OF THE SEPTEMBER 8, 2010 MEETING MINUTES:
Sheerin offered a correction to a pitch measurement that was incorrectly written throughout the
minutes.
Eckstein offered a correction concerning the word "amount" on page four.
Walz noted that she had changed the word "motioned" to "moved" throughout the document.
Tyson moved to approve the minutes as amended.
Anderson seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0.
Board of Adjustment
October 13, 2010
Page 2 of 6
SPECIAL EXCEPTION:
EXC10-00009: Discussion of an application submitted by Theresa Tranmer for a special
exception to reduce the required front setback for an uncovered deck located in the
Medium Density Single-Family (RS-8) zone at 1610 Center Avenue.
Walz explained that the home is located in the historic Longfellow District. Center Avenue is a
residential street that is approximately four blocks long with aright-of-way width of 75 feet.
Walz said that the standard right-of-way for a street with this traffic volume would be 60 feet if it
were built today. Walz noted that the sidewalks are set back fairly far from the street along
Center Avenue. Walz said that it is typical for homes along this portion of Center Avenue to
have shallow setbacks along the frontage. She said that the subject property is set back 10
feet, which is the required setback for the property.
Walz said that front decks are considered accessory uses and have separate setback
requirements. The applicant is requesting to replace her current front stoop with a deck. Walz
explained that anything that is larger than what is required to provide access to a home is
considered a deck rather than a stoop. She said that the current stoop is roughly 3x3 feet, and
the applicant desires to replace it with an uncovered deck that is roughly 4.5x10 feet, and would
allow room for seating and potted plants. The steps would come down directly from the front of
the deck, whereas in their present configuration, the steps come off the side of the stoop and
then angle back toward the front of the property. Walz noted that the property is a small, only
3,150 square feet; current zoning requires a lot size of at least 5,000 square feet.
The applicant has received a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic Preservation
Commission (HPC) for construction of a deck, subject to approval of a final design. Walz said
that if the Board of Adjustment were to approve this special exception, the applicant would have
to go back before Historic Preservation with their final plans.
Walz said that given the size of the lot, the large width of the Center Avenue right-of-way, and
the character and building placement along the street, staff believes a small deck is a
reasonable request. Staff recommends approval of the request to reduce the setback from ten
feet to five-and-a-half feet for the purpose of an uncovered deck subject to the following
conditions:
1) Compliance with the submitted site plan;
2) The deck shall not exceed 4.5 feet in depth;
3) The applicant must get approval for the final design of the deck in accordance with HPC
recommendation;
4) The underside of the deck should be screened with lattice or other material as approved
by HPC staff;
5) The setback reduction is for the purpose of an uncovered deck only, and the deck may
not be covered or enclosed at any time in the future without an additional special
exception.
Jennings asked if the deck design would be required to have a railing, and Walz replied that she
believed that would be required by building code given the height of the structure. Jennings
asked if "coverings" would prohibit a retractable awning, and Walz said she did not believe an
awning would be excluded. She said that she thought a "covering" pertained to something
Board of Adjustment
October 13, 2010
Page 3 of 6
permanently installed. Jennings noted that when Walz described the property as "small" she
was speaking about the lot, not necessarily the structure; Walz indicated that was correct.
Eckstein asked if it was correct to say that it was irrelevant to Board considerations whether or
not the property was owner or tenant occupied. Greenwood Hektoen advised that it was indeed
irrelevant.
Sheerin opened the public hearing; no members of the public were present and the public
hearing was closed.
Tyson moved to approve EXC10-00009, an application to reduce the front setback
required for an uncovered patio or deck in the RS-8 zone from 10 feet to 5.5. feet for the
property located at 1610 Center Avenue subject to the following conditions:
1) The owner shall comply with the site plan submitted -the deck shall not exceed 4
feet, 6 inches in depth, or 10 feet in width;
2) The applicant must get staff approval for the final design of the deck in
accordance with the Historic Preservation Commission decision;
3) The underside of the deck must be screened with lattice or other materials to be
approved by historic preservation staff;
4) The setback reduction is for the purpose of an uncovered deck only and the deck
may not be covered or enclosed at any time in the future without an additional
special exception.
Jennings seconded.
Jennings said that this is the first time in his experience that an applicant for a special exception
is not present at the meeting. He asked if this was common, and Walz said that it was not.
Walz said that sometimes these processes are difficult for people to understand and she did not
think the applicant had intentionally made herself unavailable for questions. Jennings said he
had not taken any affront; he was just trying to establish how common that was and if it was
appropriate to direct questions to staff that one might have for the applicant. Walz said she
would certainly supply whatever information she had based on the information provided by the
applicant. Greenwood Hektoen noted that if there was an occasion where the applicant was not
present and board members had questions, the matter could be deferred until the applicant
could be present.
Jennings said that he was ready to proceed with the findings of fact.
Greenwood Hektoen suggested that Jennings include a finding regarding temporary coverings if
he had a position on their appropriateness for this application. Jennings said that he did not
know what fell under the realm of historic preservation, and that he did not necessarily have an
opinion one way or the other. Tyson asked if anything attached to the structure would be
considered permanent and Walz replied that she believed that a "permanent" structure would be
anything that required a building permit. Eckstein said that she lives in a historic district and has
canvas awnings on some of her doorways, which did not present any historic preservation
issues. Walz said that the prohibition on "covering" the porch stems from the fact that it is not
unusual for a covered porch to be converted to an enclosed porch; and often times that is done
without a building permit. Walz said that explicitly prohibiting the covering and enclosure of a
porch when granting a special exception gives the City an additional tool for requiring removal of
Board of Adjustment
October 13, 2010
Page 4 of 6
illegally converted porches.
Eckstein reviewed the Specific Standards.
Eckstein stated that the situation is peculiar to this property, as is required by the Specific
Standards. The lot size is unusually small, and the grade of the property requires a raised
structure of some kind for access. Eckstein noted that Center Avenue is much wider than is
currently required for a street of its traffic volume and as such has a greater distance from
properties on the other side of the street than is standard.
Eckstein said that there is practical difficulty in complying with the 10-foot setback requirement.
The existing stoop is 1.5 feet narrower than the proposed deck, but is failing, and requires
awkward, sideways access to the house. It also presents safety concerns as it has no railing.
Eckstein found that granting the exception is not contrary to the purpose of the setback
regulations, because the proposed deck will not impede the sharing of light, air or necessary fire
protection lanes, and maintains the opportunity for privacy between dwellings. Eckstein pointed
out that the house itself will not be any closer to the street or the neighbors. Eckstein said that
the proposed deck will actually have larger side setbacks than is required by the zoning code.
She noted again that the street is particularly wide and allows for ample separation from
neighbors.
Eckstein stated that the proposed building scale and placement reflects that of the
neighborhood in which it is located. She noted that a number of homes in the neighborhood
have structures within the setback area.
The proposal promotes a reasonable physical relationship between buildings and residences
and provides flexibility to site a building so that it is compatible. Eckstein noted that the
neighborhood is already fully developed and its character is set and maintained as a densely
built neighborhood. The proposed setback is for the purpose only of providing access to the
house in the form of an uncovered deck, not as a covered porch or an addition to the house.
The proposed deck will satisfy the 5-foot side setback requirement, and the property abuts an
alley to the east.
Eckstein said that any potential negative effects resulting from the setback exception are
mitigated to the extent practical in that the final design of the deck must be approved by historic
preservation staff to ensure the compatibility of its rails, dimensions, and design. Eckstein
explained that in comparison to the existing stoop, the proposed deck would extend only an
additional foot-and-a half into the required setback.
The house will be located no closer than three feet to a side or rear property line. The deck will
be set back more than the required five feet.
Jennings reviewed the General Standards.
Jennings said that the proposed deck will be more than 9.5 feet back from the sidewalk and will
not obscure the visibility of vehicles accessing the alley to the east.
Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being
Board of Adjustment
October 13, 2010
Page 5 of 6
provided because the neighborhood is fully developed with all necessary access roads,
drainage and other necessary facilities, including sidewalks and alleys that are already in place.
Jennings said that the subject property is asingle-family residence and does not generate
significant traffic. The proposed deck will not increase vehicle trips to the area, and thus will
have no impact on ingress or egress.
Jennings said that the applicant will submit a plan to be reviewed by historic preservationists
showing compliance with preservation guidelines. The applicant must also submit a final plan to
be reviewed by the Building Official to ensure compliance with any aspects of the code not
specifically addressed here.
Jennings stated that the Comprehensive Plan encourages reinvestment in older neighborhoods,
and this would be considered an improvement to an older home in an older neighborhood.
Sheerin invited other findings.
Tyson, Sheerin and Anderson concurred with the findings of Jennings and Eckstein.
Jennings clarified that the street is not actually 75 feet wide; rather the right-of-way is 75 feet
wide.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0.
The motion was declared approved. Sheerin advised that anyone wishing to appeal the
decision to a court of record could do so within 30 days of the decision being filed with the City
Clerk's Office.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION:
Walz announced that there would be two applications before the Board in November. Walz said
that one of them will be a revisiting of an application that came before the Board in September.
ADJOURNMENT:
Anderson moved to adjourn.
Tyson seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 5-0 vote.
N
Q
0
m
0
0
N
L
V
W
V
~A'
W
Q
L
d
s
N
O
x x X x x
0
o X X X x o
a
x x o x x
X O O X X
x x x X x
X X X ~ X
x x x x x
d'
x x x X x
M
C x X X O X
N
M x ~ X X X
1A N 'C ~A M -
~
i _ _ ~ =
L~
a o 0 0 0 0
~ W
O O o 0 0
O C ~
~
L
~ ~ Y ~
'a bq
'_ O
~ u c
~ ~
~ Q ~ ~ ~ H
Z
~ ~ ° ~
a~
~ -
;
o c
_
u
~ m 3
.D
N
u
w
~+
N
H N' N
~ ~ ~
~ Q Q
~.
C
O
d
a
0
s
u
L
L
fd
N
N
t
~-+
~L
7
N
C
~N
L
u
L
N
t
.~
L
C1
~C
G
v
L
.a
oc4 ~
•}, v
N
cN
G ~
0 ~
Z Z
X O O z
MINUTES
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
October 19, 2010
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL
APPROVED
Members Present: Dianne Day, Martha Lubaroff, Howard Cowen, Harry Olmstead,
Connie Goeb, Yolanda Spears.
Members Absent: Corey Stoglin, Dell Briggs, Wangui Gathua.
Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers.
3b 2
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): No.
CALL TO ORDER
Day called the meeting to order at 18:02.
PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: No.
CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE September 21, 2010 MEETING:
Olmstead, moved to approve.
Goeb seconded.
The motion passed 5-0. (Cowen not present for the vote)
JUSTICE. NOT POLITICS
Commissioners declined to endorse as a group and decided that they would individually address the matter
when they voted.
DECEMBER MEETING
Commissioners will place this item on the November agenda and decide at that time whether to cancel or
change the date.
SANCTUARY CITY
Day informed Commissioners that the Sanctuary City Committee has met with City Officials and that a City
Council member will request that this item be discussed at a future work session.
CONNECTIONS KICKOFF
Olmstead reported that the event was well attended and he enjoyed representing the Commission at the event.
ADAAA TRAINING
Lubaroff and Olmstead both felt the program was very educational.
FALL DISABILITY REPORT
Bowers reported that this program primarily looked at educational facilities but was very worthwhile.
HUMAN RIGHTS BREAKFAST
The Breakfast will be held on October 28th. Bowers went over the event details and asked Commissioners to
be at the event by 7 am.
SUBCOMMITTEE UPDATES
Day (Gathua, Goeb) reported on the Community Dialogues brochure and upcoming schedule. The group
hopes to have speakers available by early 2011. Lubaroff (Spear, Olmstead) reported that "bullying" within the
community and at schools is where they are trying to coordinate their efforts.
Human Rights Commission
October 19, 2010
Page 2
STRENGTHENING LATINO/A COMMUNITIES CONFERENCE Spears attended the Conference as a
representative from the Human Rights Commission. Spears felt the Conference was very informative and well
attended.
REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS
Spears completed her Cancer Walk. Day reported on the success of her fashion/art show a few days earlier.
ADJOURNMENT
Goeb moved to adjourn.
Olmstead seconded.
The motion passed 6-0 at 18:45
Human Rights Commission
October 19, 2010
Page 3
Human Rights Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2010
IMeetina Datel
NAME TERM
EXP.
1/19
2/16
3/16
4/20
5/18
6/15
7/20
8/17
9/21
10/19
11/16
12/21
Dell Briggs 1/1/11 X X O/E X X X X O/E X O/E
Yolanda
Spears 1/1/11 X O/E X X O/E O/E X O/E X X
Corey
Stoglin 1/1/11 O/E O/E X O/E X OIE O/E O/E O/E O/E
Dianne Day 1/1/12 X X X O/E X X O/E X X X
Wangui
Gathua 1/1/12 X O/E O/E X X X X X X O/E
Martha
Lubaroff 1/1/12 X X X X X O/E X X X X
Howard
Cowen 1/1/13 X X X X O/E X O/E X X X
Constance
Goeb 111/13 X O/E X X X X X X X X
Fernando
Mena-
Carrasco 1/1/13 X X O/E X X X O/E R R R R R
Harry
Olmstead
(8-1-2010) 1/1/13 - - - - - - - X X X
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = AbsentlExcused
NM = No meeting/No Quorum
R =Resigned
- = Not a Member
3b 3
YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION
Sunday, October 3, 2010- 4:00 PM
HARVART HALL, CITY HALL
FINAL
Members Present: Luan Heywood, Zach Wahls, Alexandra Tamerius, Jerry Gao, Matt Lincoln
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: Marian Karr, Ross Wilburn
Others Present: None
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 4:10 PM. Heywood chaired the meeting.
MINUTES:
Wahls motioned to approve the September 5 minutes. Gao seconded the motion. The motion carried
unanimously, 5/0.
UPDATE ON VACANCIES:
The Commission has two positions vacant, the Tate and an At-Large. There were no applications to fill
the positions. Announcements were to be made on the school announcements at Regina, City High, and
West High to make the student bodies aware of the At-Large position available.
BUDGET UPDATE:
The Commission has not used any funds during the past month.
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS:
Grant Programming -The Commission discussed the Grant Programming Subcommittee. At the last
meeting, the Commission unanimously approved the Youth Empowerment Grant, worth $750, to Summer
of Solutions. Karr stated she had not received invoices to release the check, and an email had been sent.
Wahls stated he would follow up with Karr to get the information.
Website & Advertising - No report.
Recognition Scholarship -The Commission discussed changes to the Youth Empowerment Grant
application:
• Change the age of applicants to 12-18
• Take out the year
• Strike "if applicable"
• Strike "add additional pages"
• Strike "less than 200 words"
• Allow 60 days for application review by the Commission
• Up to three projects will be funded
The Commission discussed changes to the Youth Recognition Grant Summary as well.
• Strike "please see your teachers for copies of the application"
• Add "community leaders" for recommendations
• Recipients will be notified by February 1
• City logo will be placed on the top of the Youth Recognition Grant Summary
Wahls motioned to approve the changes to the material in Youth Recognition Grant. Tamerius seconded
the motion. The motion carried unanimously, 5/0. The Recognition Grant Subcommittee planned to
YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION
October 3, 2010
Page2of3
contact Kim Colvin about getting the information out to the schools in the Iowa City Community School
District; and to contact Christina Allgood from Regina to inform Regina of the Grant. The Recognition
Subcommittee hoped to send out the Recognition Grant to junior high schools later in October. Karr
mentioned that publicity for the Recognition Grant could be added to the website. The subcommittee will
notify Karr when the materials are ready for the website.
CITY MANAGER UPDATE:
Wilburn stated that the City Council has hired a new City Manager, Thomas Markus. The Council is
negotiating a final contract with him. Markus was the unanimous choice of the City Council Members
and he is hoping to begin December 1, 2010.
CITY COUNCIL UPDATE:
Wilburn noted the City Council had spent a great deal of time in the hiring of a new City Manager.
MEETING SCHEDULE:
The Commission set a date for the next meeting, Thursday, November 4 at 5:00 PM.
Gao motioned to adjourn, which was seconded by Wahls. The motion to adjourn passed unanimously,
5/0, 5:10 PM.
Minutes submitted by Lincoln.
3b 4
Airport Commission
October 14, 2010
Page 1
MINUTES FINAL
IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION
OCTOBER 14, 2010 - 6:00 P.M.
AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING
Members Present: Minnetta Gardinier, Howard Horan, Jose Assouline, Steve Crane
Staff Present: Sue Dulek, Michael Tharp
Others Present: Matt Wolford
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL• (to become effective only after separate Council
action): None
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Horan called the meeting to order at 6:03 P.M.
APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES:
Minutes from the September 16, 2010, meeting were reviewed. Crane moved to approve the
minutes of the September 16, 2010, meeting as submitted; seconded by Assouline.
Motion carried 4-0. Next the minutes of the September 23, 2010, meeting were reviewed.
Tharp noted that Sue Dulek had emailed some typo corrections to him. Assouline moved to
approve the minutes of the September 23, 2010, meeting as corrected; seconded by
Crane. Motion carried 4-0.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION:_
None.
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION:
a. Aviation Commerce Park -Tharp noted that the Lot 10 sale was reapproved with the
corrected language by the city council. Dulek briefly explained the process that has to
take place before the final closing on this deal. Gardinier asked about the realtors for
Aviation Commerce Park, and whether or not they would be returning to the Commission
meetings for updates. Tharp noted that he can contact them if the Commission wishes.
He added that he does receive electronic updates from them. Members discussed a
quarterly showing where the realtors could give an update of what has been happening
with the lot sales. Tharp stated that he did put an updated sales list in Members'
packets so they could see what lots are still available.
b. Airport Farm Management -Tharp stated that he is still awaiting a response from the
wildlife management contact regarding what the Airport should plant. After talking with
the farm manager, Tharp noted that he is planning to do another bid for this planting.
Tharp responded to Members' questions, adding that they hope to realize $3,000 to
$5,000 from whatever they plant.
Z
O
~~
~~
~O
OWa,o
} W N
~ Q W
Q Z ~
Q ~
Q
O
M
o X X X X X
r-
~ X X X X X
rn
M
X X X X x
0
M
X
X
X
X
ti
ti ~ ~ ~ ~
-m Z Z Z Z
M ~ ~ ~ ~
.~
Z
Z
Z
Z i i i
N
~
X
X
X
i
i
i
O
M X X X i i i i
N ~ ~ ~ ~
N X X X ~ ~ ~ i
N
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Z Z Z '
r
~- ~ r-
~ d M M M M M M M
W X N N N N N N N
F- W ~ .- ~- r- ~ .-
.-. .-.
~ ~ ~
a
Z
F- ~
a a
..
a-
D
m
c
i~
a
a
G
L
d ~
O
7 ? d
V ~~
W r ~
a ~
~ _
~~m~~a
N N
aaaz°z°
II II II II II
XOpZ
W
Y
Airport Commission
October 14, 2010
Page 2
c. FAA/IDOT Projects - AECOM - Dulek briefly addressed the Members regarding this
resolution process for accepting projects.
i. Runway 7/25 8~ 12/30 - Consider a resolution accepting improvements to
Runway 7-25 and Runway 12-30. Gardinier moved to consider Resolution
#A10-15; seconded by Assouline. Motion carried 4-0.
ii. Obstruction Mitigation -Tharp stated that he and David Hughes spoke to the
FAA in Kansas City about this, and in order to close out the project, the
Commission needs to approve the final contract price, based on the final change
orders. This will allow the FAA to close out this project. Crane moved to
consider Resolution #A10-16 accepting work for the demolition of the
"United" Hangar; seconded Gardinier. Motion carried 4-0.
iii. Hangar ADrainage -Tharp noted that this project is almost complete. The
contractor has to return to do the final sealant work.
d. 2011 Air Race Classic -Horan noted that he signed the check request for $2,000.
Gardinier asked if anything had been done further with operations. Tharp noted that
beyond the meeting with him, Gardinier and staff from Jet Air, he felt that a good starting
plan was in place. Gardinier also noted that the Iowa Children's Museum and the Girl
Scouts are onboard for the aviation activities during this time.
e. Corporate Hangar "L" -Tharp noted that he and Horan met recently with Dale Helling
of the City Manager's office and talked about this hangar project. The recommendation
from the meeting was that the Airport Commission should meet with the City Council
again to present their change in plans. Tharp responded to Members' questions
regarding some of the aspects of this project. Tharp noted that he believes that if they
were to build another hangar, they would be able to fill it fairly quickly.
FY2012 Budget -Tharp noted that he, Gardinier, and Crane met recently to review the
FY12 budget. He continued, stating that they are looking at similar funding levels as
before. This would be the $100,000 General Levy from Council. Tharp gave Members a
quick rundown of the FY12 budget, highlighting some of the projects, such as Willow
Creek. Members continued to discuss the areas that need to be cleaned up around the
Airport, and how they might want to make this a part of their annual budget. Tharp then
briefed Members about the fiber optic network project and how he will work with the
City's IT department on this. Crane moved to approve the FY2012 budget as
presented; seconded by Gardinier. Motion carried 4-0.
g. Airport "Operations": Strategic Plan Implementation; Budget; Management-
Tharp began by discussing the resolution for Hangar 42. He explained why they have to
address the University's lease agreement in this manner. Gardinier asked for
clarification, to which Dulek responded. Assouline moved to consider Resolution
#A10-17 approving the lease agreement with the University of Iowa for Hangar
#42; seconded by Crane. Motion carried 3-0; Gardinier recused herself on this
vote.
Tharp continued to discuss the FY12 budget. The creation of a formal plan for the
Commerce Park funds was also discussed. Tharp noted that Helling had suggested this
during their meeting, noting that other than paying down debt, the Commission needs to
have some type of plan in place. Gardinier addressed the issue of having money set
aside each year, to finance projects unbudgeted for. This led to some discussion by
Members, with Tharp clarifying how the various accounts are set up through the City.
Airport Commission
October 14, 2010
Page 3
The discussion turned to having Tharp draft a memo regarding the Airport's formal plans
regarding the lot sale funds. Members agreed that having some type of reserve account
is a priority for them. Tharp brought the discussion back to the budget. He stated that
he is working to get some miscellaneous things done on the Hertz facility, like carpeting
and drywall patching, in hopes of readying it for marketing. Once he has bids he will
know better what they can afford to update.
i. Commission Subcommittee Use -Tharp quickly reviewed the active
subcommittees, noting that Gardinier wanted to talk further about how the
subcommittees are created and what they are actually looking at. In the
past, subcommittees have been more `task driven,' according to Tharp.
Gardinier stated that her suggestion is to align the subcommittees to their
goals and strategies as outlined in the recent 5-year plan. A budget
committee, for example, could be one subcommittee, and another could
be economic development. Gardinier also suggested committees for
'community liaison' and `infrastructure.' Crane noted that he would be
willing to work on economic development. Tharp suggested they contact
Wendy Ford at the City to discuss this aspect. Members continued to
discuss how they would like to structure these various committees.
Gardinier offered to work on the community liaison aspect. Crane will
work with Gardinier on this. Horan and Assouline will work on
infrastructure.
h. FBO /Iowa Flight Training /Whirlybird Reports -Tharp suggested members first
discuss the resolution. Tharp noted that this was a change in language to have the
contract insurance requirements better reflect what the Airport was expecting. Horan
moved to consider Resolution #A10-18 approving the amendment with Whirlybird
Helicopters LLC; seconded by Crane. Motion carried 4-0. Matt Wolford with Jet Air
spoke to Members. He shared what they have been working on, noting the weeds were
cleaned up as discussed. Wolford stated that on November 2, at noon, the Chamber of
Commerce will be at the Airport for a luncheon. He added that they will be giving a tour
and a presentation as well. Everyone was invited to attend.
i. Subcommittees' Reports -None.
j. Commission Members' Reports -Horan shared that he was part of an interviewing
group for boards and commissions in the City Manager search.
k. Staff Report -Tharp noted that the new City Manager has been hired and will begin
December 1. Tharp also noted that he did not hear anything new while at the FAA
Conference recently. Dulek stated the application deadlines for the Commission
opening.
SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING:
The next regular meeting will be Thursday, November 18, 2010, at 6:00 P.M. at the Airport
Terminal building.
Airport Commission
October 14, 2010
Page 4
ADJOURN:
The meeting adjourned at 8:04 P.M. Crane made the motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:04
P.M.; seconded by Assouline. Motion carried 4-0.
Chairperson
Date
c
O o
N ~
'C
V .-~
r9~
n o ~
V
Q O a
D
00
•N W
'~ ~
~ W
O U
UZ
~a
o~
Z
a~
a F.
Q
10/14 ~ X X X X z z
z
9/16 g
Z
X
X
X w
O ~
Z ~
z
8/19 X X x X X Z z
7/27 ~ g
X X X X X Z Z
7/15 X X X X X Z z
7/1 X X X X X z z
6/17 X X W
O X W
O ~
Z ~
z
5/20 w X X X X Z z
O
4/29 X X X z X p z
4/15 X X X ~
Z X X ~
Z
3/18 X X X z ~ X z
2/18 X X X z z X X
1/21 X X X Z Z X X
M ~ O N ~ N O
a
w X r
o r
0 ~-
0 ~
0 ~
0 ~-
0
0
f- W M
O M
O M
O M
O M
O M
O M
O
V ww,,
W
W
~ ~ d
~+ ~C ~
Q1
T
Q c~ ~ 3~ c 'a m o
W j c m °'
~+ c a
i
L
Z ~~ ~
O O ~
C ev p m r L ~ d O +~+
C9~ Z2 ~C9 -~Q NU ~~ ~N
a~
E
~ ~
~ `
N ~
~ ~
W ~
+r r7
N ~ N ~
~ Q Q Z
~ II II W ~
YXOOz
3b 5
IOWA CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION APPROVED
MONDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2010--5:30 P.M.
CITY CABLE TV OFFICE, 10 S. LINN ST.-TOWER PLACE PARKING FACILITY
MEMBERS PRESENT: Hans Hoerschelman, Gary Hagen, Saul Mekies
MEMBERS ABSENT: Laura Bergus
STAFF PRESENT: Mike Brau, Bob Hardy
OTHERS PRESENT: Michael McBride, Lee Grassley, Devon Friese, Beth Fisher, Kevin
Hoyland
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL
None at this time.
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION
Grassley said that Mediacom is moving towards a full digital platform in Iowa City. He is
seeking a legal opinion on what that might mean for the local access channels channel positions
given the provisions in the franchise agreement on channel location. Grassley said there is
nothing new in regards to retransmission consent negotiations with Sinclair Broadcasting.
Hoyland reported that 2 positions have been created that covers some aspects of the school's
cable TV operations. Mekies asked if the City received a response to the letter sent to the
superintendent. Hardy said the letter was sent 3 weeks ago and no response has been received.
Mekies said the Commission has been sending letters for 5 years. Looking to the transitioning of
personnel as a reason little progress has been made is not productive. There is a limit how long
the efforts of the Commission to improve the use of the school channel should go on. It may be
worth considering recommending to the City Council that the school channel be given to another
entity. Hoerschelman said the initiative to get parents and teachers to take the lead in
productions may lead to the eventual take over of the channel by those who will use it rather than
relying on the administration. Mekies said the Commission could begin looking for another
entity to give the channel to and inform the administration that the reason is that the school
district has been unresponsive. Hardy said that the initiative to build the channel up from the
grassroots received a positive response from those administrators at that time but they have since
left the school district. Mekies said that the hiring of the two new people is an opportunity that
needs to be seized.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Hagen moved and Hoerschelman seconded a motion to approve the amended September 27,
2010 minutes. The motion passed unanimously.
ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMISSIONERS
None.
SHORT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
CONSUMER ISSUES
Hardy referred to the complaint report in the meeting packet and noted there were three
complaints. Hardy said there were a number of outages in the last month. Hardy received a
letter urging more Spanish-speaking channels. Hagen asked about a complaint in which a
consumer service representative asked for a subscriber's driver's license number and social
security number. The subscriber refused to provide the information and the representative said
they could not help them. Hardy said he had no way to follow up on the complaint. The
customer service representative was located off shore. Grassley said this situation is a training
issue and Mediacom executives in New York will be informed. Grassley said Mediacom does
collect subscriber social security numbers when they install a digital video recorder as the
equipment is quite expensive and Mediacom needs to run a credit check on the subscriber. A
social security number should not be requested for a service call. Grassley said handling of
customer service calls will be changed by the end of the year. In-coming calls will be routed to
the nearest call center and then to the next closest if all representatives are busy. Hardy said
Mediacom's call centers at times seem to be unable to get information about problems in Iowa
City to call centers in other areas. Hoerschelman said that sometime the toll free number is busy.
Grassley said that is not supposed to happen and he will look into the problem. Mekies asked if
it is possible to view a log of outages. Hardy said he has records of outage complaints he
receives. Mekies asked if all outages could be determined. Hardy said the City has the right to
view Mediacom's outage logs and he would look into it. Hoerschelman suggested that
Mediacom could set up a Twitter account for consumers to use to inform Mediacom of outages.
MEDIACOM REPORT
Grassley said that with regards to the Triennial Review that it may be desirable for the
Commission to put together a list of issues they wish to cover. Grassley said that the issues
should fall within the purview of franchise performance, plans, and prospects. Grassley said that
Mediacom has hired Michael Bradley and Associates to assist with the Triennial Review. Hardy
said the City requested information from Mediacom in the past and did not receive it. Hardy said
that the Triennial Review involves a public meeting and that it will be held before the next
Commission meeting. Grassley requested that he not be expected to attend all Commission
meetings in person and that a telephone hookup be used in cases where there are not important
matters to be discussed and his physical presence would not be required. Grassley said that
Mediacom is moving towards a full digital platform in Iowa City. He is seeking a legal opinion
on what that might mean for the local access channels channel positions given the provisions in
the franchise agreement on channel location. Grassley said there is nothing new in regards to
retransmission consent negotiations with Sinclair Broadcasting. The role the Federal
Communications Commission plays in the Cablevision/Fox retransmission consent negotiations
could impact the Sinclair negotiations. Senator Kerry has prepared legislation to be introduced
next session that would specify a process before a broadcaster could pull their channel if
negotiations were not yielding an agreement. The legislation also would require third party
arbitration at some point in the process. Hagen asked about Mediacom's poor ratings by J.D
Power and Associates. Grassley said three years ago Mediacom's people responsible for
customer service were changed in an effort to improve customer service. Mediacom
acknowledges there is a need for improvement. Telephone wait times for the local region are
about 30% better than Mediacom system-wide. The idea of a service calls going to the most
local available customer service representative originated in this region and it is anticipated it
will be adopted system-wide.
UNIVERSITY OF IOWA REPORT
McBride reported that UITV was down for a day due to a problem with some equipment. Alive
election night program is planned with DITV. In November the basketball press conferences
will begin. The University Symphony will be recorded twice in November. Two Dance Gala
events will also be recorded.
KIRKWOOD COMMUNITY COLLEGE
A written report was included in the meeting packet.
PATV REPORT
No representative was present. A written report on PATV programming not available in time for
the meeting packet was distributed.
SENIOR CENTER REPORT
Hardy said Light emailed him and informed him that she was ill.
LIBRARY REPORT
Fisher reported that 17 live events were recorded in October. Among theses were 5 children's
programs and 8 adult programs. There are 8 children's and 2 adult programs planned for
November.
ICCSD REPORT
Hoyland reported that 2 positions have been created that covers some aspects of the school's
cable TV operations. Hoyland said he has written a letter asking for clarification who would be
responsible for the channel. The librarian at Twain Elementary is interested in exploring how
they might utilize the channel. A meeting with Hoyland, the librarian, Coleman, and Goding is
anticipated to discuss possibilities. It is hoped this project can serve as an example for others in
the school district of what can be done. The West High football games shot by the City of
Coralville and North Liberty have been cablecast. Hoerschelman asked about Regina. Hardy
said Regina had been a part of the old educational consortium but had not been active. Mekies
asked if the City received a response to the letter sent to the superintendent. Hardy said the letter
was sent 3 weeks ago and no response has been received. Mekies said the Commission has been
sending letters for 5 years. Looking to the transitioning of personnel as a reason little progress
has been made is not productive. There is a limit how long the efforts of the Commission to
improve the use of the school channel should go on. It may be worth considering recommending
to the City Council that the school channel be given to another entity. Hoerschelman said the
initiative to get parents and teachers to take the lead in productions may lead to the eventual take
over of the channel by those who will use it rather than relying on the administration. Mekies
said the Commission could begin looking for another entity to give the channel to and inform the
administration that the reason is that the school district has been unresponsive. Hardy said that
the initiative to build the channel up from the grassroots received a positive response from those
administrators at that time but they have since left the school district. Those connections need to
be rebuilt. Hagen said he was encouraged by the two positions whose job descriptions involve
supervising cable TV. Hoyland said that it might be productive to send the school board a
similar letter as the one that was sent to the superintendent. Hardy said that the school district is
in disarray as the new superintendent is coming in and rearranging the administration. It is
possible that they are having discussions about cable TV but he and the Commission have not
seen any results from it. Mekies noted that the City has not had a City Manager for a long period
of time, yet the City functions. The use of a transition period as an excuse for lack of action
lacks credibility. Mekies said that Hoyland has been coming to the Commission meetings for a
number of years asking for help in improving the channel and the best the Commission seems to
be able to do is write a letter. Mekies asked why one couldn't pick up the phone ask to speak to
the superintendent and ask him who is responsible for cable TV. Hardy said he does not have a
reason to call him. The channel is running programming and the channel is operating as well as
many of the other channels. They just don't have as much programming. Hoyland said that any
inquiries from the public on who is responsible for the channel would likely be directed to him.
Mekies said that the hiring of the two new people is an opportunity that needs to be seized.
Mekies asked about Coralville and North Liberty recording the West High football games.
Hoyland said Coralville and North Liberty initiated the effort to record the games. Mekies asked
why the City High games are not recorded. Hardy said he has no desire to cover the City High
games. PATV has been working with City High on another program. In the past City High had
no interest in recording the games because they were concerned opposing teams could use the
recordings to their advantage. Hoerschelman said he hopes the new group formed to create a
bottom up approach to cable TV productions will pick up such opportunities. If the new group
does not get support or is slowed down by the administration, then the Commission should
express their displeasure. Hoerschelman said the Commission should write a letter to the
superintendent asking who is going to be responsible for the school channel. Mekies said a letter
is not needed. An email or phone call should be sufficient. Hardy said he will try to have a
response from the school district who will be responsible for the channel by the next meeting.
CITY CHANNEL REPORT
Hardy referred to the quarterly report in the meeting packet. Hardy said audio podcasts of City
Council meetings are now available. No applications have been received for the opening on the
Commission. The City Cable Division budget was accepted. It is much like past years and has
no big changes. Anew position was created and approved. Funds were available as Hardy's old
position has been eliminated. Two University Heights City Council meetings will be recorded
and cablecast.
BYLAWS
This item was tabled.
TRIENNIAL REVIEW
This item was tabled.
ADJOURNMENT
Hagen moved and Hoerschelman seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed
unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 7:09.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael Brau
Cable TV Administrative Aide
11=30-10
3b 6
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED
OCTOBER 21, 2010 - 7:00 PM -FORMAL
CITY HALL, EMMA HARVAT HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Josh Busard, Charlie Eastham, Elizabeth Koppes, Michelle Payne,
Wally Plahutnik, Tim Weitzel
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ann Freerks
STAFF PRESENT: Sara Greenwood Hektoen, Tabatha Ries-Miller, Karen Howard
OTHERS PRESENT: Jean Fisher, Michael Chan, Sue Kloos, Jennifer Turchi, John
Nicholson, Nancy Purington, Jason Kakert, Tom Hobart, Craig
Albrecht
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
On a 6-0 vote (Freerks absent) the Commission voted to recommend approval of REZ10-
00009, an application submitted by University of Iowa for a rezoning from Intensive
Commercial (CI-1) zone to Institutional Public (P-2) zone for approximately 1.38 acres of
property located at 385 Ruppert Road.
On a 6-0 vote (Freerks absent) the Commission voted to recommend approval of the
proposed zoning changes from their current zoning to P1, the neighborhood public zone,
for:
1) Thornberry Dog Park from OPD-5 ;
2) Frauenholz-Miller Park from OPD-8;
3) Sandhill Estates Part 1, Outlot M, from OPD-5;
4) Sandhill Estates, Lot 2, and part of Lots 3 Sz 4 from ID-RM;
5) Dean Oakes Sixth Addition, Outlot A, from OPD-5;
6) Oakmont Estates from OPD-5;
7) Country Club Estates from RS-5;
8) Ralston Creek area west of Scott Boulevard from RS-5;
9) North of McCollister Boulevard from IDRM.
On a 5-0 vote (Eastham recused; Freerks absent) the Commission voted to recommend
approval of rezoning to P1, Neighborhood Public zone, from RS-5 for Taft Speedway.
On a 5-0 vote (Busard recused; Freerks absent) the Commission voted to recommend that
the City Council forward a letter to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment
recommending that a temporary conditional use permit for a asphalt and concrete recycling
operation be approved subject to:
1) An expiration date of the conditional use permit that corresponds to the end-date of
the current recycling operation;
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 21, 2010 -Formal
Page 2 of 9
2) The County requiring any improvements that are necessary as determined by the
County Engineer.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
REZONING ITEMS:
REZ10-00009: Discussion of an application submitted by University of Iowa for a rezoning
from Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone to Institutional Public (P-2) zone for approximately
1.38 acres of property located at 385 Ruppert Road.
Tabatha Ries-Miller presented the staff report and explained that the subject property is
immediately adjacent to the Iowa City Airport. It has been acquired by the University of Iowa and
will be used as a helicopter landing facility. According to the zoning ordinance any land owned by
a State entity such as the University of Iowa and used for public purposes must be zoned
Institutional Public (P-2). This zoning designation is intended to provide notice to the public that
the land is held in state or federal government ownership and, therefore, is not generally subject to
City zoning requirements.
A motion was made to approve the rezoning and the motion carried 6-0 (Freerks absent).
REZ10-000011: Discussion of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City to rezone the
following publicly owned properties:
1) From Planned Development Low Density (OPD-5) zone to Neighborhood Public (P1)
zone for property located in Dean Oakes Sixth Addition, Terrill Mill Park, Thornberry
Dog Park 8~ Peninsula Park, and Oakmont Estates
2) From Planned Development Low Density (OPD-5) zone and Interim Development
Multi-Family (ID-RM) zone to Neighborhood Public (P1) zone for property located in
Sandhill Estates
3) From Planned Development Medium Density (OPD-8) zone to Neighborhood Public
(P1) zone for property located in Frauenholz-Miller Park
4) From Low Density Single-Family (RS-5) zone to Neighborhood Public (P1) zone for
property located west of Scott Boulevard, south of Ralston Creek and in Country
Club Estates
5) From interim Development-Multi Family (ID-RM) zone to Neighborhood Public (P1)
zone for property located on McCollister Boulevard, east of the Iowa River.
Eastham stated that he and his wife own a condominium in the Idyllwild subdivision. He said that
while their individual unit is not located in the 200-foot objection area, property owned by their
condominium association likely falls within that area for item #8 in the staff report, Taft Speedway.
As a result, Eastham said, he is unsure if he needs to recuse himself from some or all of the items
on this application. Greenwood Hektoen advised that the motion could likely be structured so that
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 21, 2010 -Formal
Page 3 of 9
a vote on the Taft Speedway issue was taken separately from the other items; Eastham could
then recuse himself from that vote.
Ries-Miller stated that the properties on the application are all currently owned by the City. The
purpose of the rezoning is not to change the intended use of the properties; rather it is to bring
each property into compliance with the zoning ordinance. Miller said that the zoning ordinance
states that all properties owned or controlled by the City have to have a P1 zoning to reflect the
public use of the land.
Ries-Miller briefly described each property location and its current function or use. In these
descriptions she stressed that each property would retain its current use and that the suggested
zoning changes were a matter of bringing the zoning in sync with the use and into compliance with
code.
Payne asked how the properties came to be zoned the way they are rather than as P1. Ries-Miller
said that in most cases the City acquired the properties as a part of the subdivision process, so the
property was originally zoned as a part of that subdivision. Payne asked if this meant that the
properties had not actually been designated as green space as a part of the subdivision process.
Howard said that typically subdivision agreements contain language that states that a parcel will be
dedicated at a certain point in the development process. She said that the City usually does not
accept a land dedication until all of the construction around that area is completed. She said that
this was not necessarily the case for each of the properties on the agenda, but that this is the
general pattern. Payne asked if this meant that such rezonings were required on a periodic basis,
and Howard said that was the case. Howard said that the intention of the P1 zoning designation is
to give notice to the public that the land is publicly owned and being used for public purposes.
There were no further questions for staff and Koppes opened the public hearing.
Jean Fisher, 1830 Bristol Drive, said that she is primarily concerned with the agenda item dealing
with the Dean Oakes Sixth Addition. She said that Bristol Drive currently dead-ends near Jake's
Way, and she is concerned that a possible motivation for this rezoning could involve future plans to
extend Bristol Drive through to Prairie du Chien. Fisher said that she purchased her property last
spring and had no intention of relocating to a busy cut-through, which is what she fears could
happen if Bristol is extended. She asked how she can find out if the City ever plans to hook Bristol
onto Prairie du Chien. Howard said that she did not believe that the City had any plans to do so.
She said that the topography of that area is pretty rugged. She said that as a general rule if a
street terminates at the boundary of the property it gives some indication that the street may
eventually be extended. Howard said that in this case, Bristol Drive end in a cul-de-sac before
reaching the property boundary, which usually means there is no intention for that road to be
continued. Fisher said that most of her neighbors had assumed that was the case, but also noted
that tearing out a circular patch of concrete would not be a big deal for the City if it decided to
extend the road. Greenwood Hektoen assured Fisher that if the City ever did plan to change the
use of the property there would be a public process for comment. Greenwood Hektoen noted that
there are easements in place for the property for sanitary sewer and other purposes, so a rather
extensive public process would take place before any such change in use could occur and Fisher
could avail herself of those processes at that time. Fisher said her concern is that she is not an
adjoining property owner so she would likely not be notified of such processes, and would have to
be very "tuned in" to know that anything was happening. Greenwood Hektoen said that she
believed that the extension of Bristol Drive was a very remote possibility given the topography and
the existence of easements on the property. Fisher asked if there would be a trail on the site in the
future. Howard said that she did not believe there were any plans. She said the property is
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 21, 2010 -Formal
Page 4 of 9
currently listed as "open space," and serves primarily as a buffer. Ries-Miller noted that the file for
the subdivision specifically said that the area being discussed was left undeveloped because of the
steep slopes and the wish to preserve the topography and woodlands that buffer the residential
neighborhood from Interstate 80.
Michael Chan, 927 Oxen Lane, said he lives in the Sandhill Estates area and is mostly concerned
with the entrance to the park and the parking that takes place there. He said he would like to know
if park users will have on-site parking or will be parking along the sides of Oxen Lane and other
nearby streets. Chan said that Oxen Lane is very narrow, especially in winter when snow piles up
along the side of the road. Chan suggested that the street should be designated as one-side
parking if park users are going to be parking along the street. Howard said she did not know if
there was a specific plan for the development of the park at this time. She said that the best
resource to determine if there is such a plan would be the Parks Director. She explained that the
intention for this meeting was just to bring zoning into compliance with the zoning ordinance. She
said that typically when a park is being developed for the first time the Parks Department will have
public meetings and invite people who live in the area to provide input and voice their concerns.
Howard provided Chan with the name of the Parks Director, Mike Moran, so that he could discuss
his concerns with him.
Sue Kloos, 3586 Vista Park Drive, stated that her concern was about the property across the street
from Scott Park. She asked if it was correct that the property was currently green space and that
the plan is for it to stay that way. Howard and Koppes indicated that that was correct. Plahutnik
explained that the intention of the meeting was to change the actual legal description of how the
land is zoned; none of the uses are intended to be changed. Plahutnik explained that many of
these properties are currently zoned residential which is clearly not their current use. This
meeting's purpose is to bring the zoning in line with the use and show, through the zoning, that the
properties are publicly owned.
Jennifer Turchi, 194 Broadmoor Lane, said that she has been involved in the park meetings that
have been held in her neighborhood regarding Frauenholtz-Miller Park. She said that since the
new St. Patrick's church opened their doors one of the neighborhood's concerns is about parking.
Turchi said that Broadmoor Lane, Nottinghill Lane, and Red Hill Lane are all private roads that are
being used by people who do not live in the neighborhood. Turchi said that she has been very
active on this issue, and that she is concerned that the development of a park in the area will bring
even more parking problems. Turchi said that either the church is not in compliance with the City's
parking requirements or they are over-capacity every Saturday and Sunday. Turchi said that when
parking was brought up as an issue with the Parks Department, neighbors were told that they had
to direct their concerns to the public works department, as Parks was not in charge of parking.
Turchi said that she was attending the meeting in part to find out exactly who she needs to be
talking to on this issue. Howard said that parking issues are taken care of through the City's Public
Works and Traffic Engineering Departments. Howard said that if parking is allowed on both sides
of the street at the time a street is built then, typically, the City continues to allow it until such time
as it is brought to the City's attention as an issue. If the neighborhood requests it, the traffic
engineers may go out and do a traffic count and look for solutions. Howard advised Turchi to talk
to Darian Nagle-Gamm in the Planning Department, or call Planning and ask to speak to someone
in Traffic Engineering. Turchi said that she feels like she and her neighbors have been getting two
different stories, as they are being told to direct their concerns to a different person or department
each time they contact the City.
John Nicholson, 194 Broadmoor Lane, said that he would recommend not rezoning the property
until a traffic study is done. He said that because of the high volume of traffic in the area, he
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 21, 2010 -Formal
Page 5 of 9
believes that a risk could be posed to children and families that come to play in the park. Koppes
asked Greenwood-Hektoen for clarification on whether or not the rezoning would actually affect
any plans for the park. Greenwood Hektoen explained that the plans for the park could be
implemented with or without the rezoning. Koppes noted that leaving the rezoning as OPD would
not stop the City from building a park there, since the land has already been dedicated to the City
to be used for park.
Nicholson asked what the purpose of zoning was then and Greenwood Hektoen advised that that
was a broader conversation than could be addressed in that forum. Howard said that she
understood that this rezoning was somewhat confusing because most rezoning occurs because
someone actually wants to change the use of a property. In these cases, the City already owns
the property and the only purpose in having a "P" designation on the zoning map is to give the
public notice that the property is owned by a public entity and is being used for a public purpose.
Howard said that all of the other zones on the zoning map are private property designations, but
this case is more of a formality intended to serve notice that the land is publicly owned.
Payne asked Nicholson if he had attended the park development meetings. Nicholson said he had
attended one and had spoken with Mike Moran and the park designers. He said the first two
meetings were where most of the decisions were actually made, and the last one was more of a
progress report. He said that there were 30 or 40 people at the first two meetings, but it was
unclear what percentage of those people were actually from the nearby church and what
percentage were from the neighborhood. He said that the input received from the first meeting to
the second was substantially different. He said that the church wanted basketball courts but the
neighbors did not; the church wanted public restrooms but the neighbors did not, particularly since
the proposed location of the restrooms was near the residential properties and not the church side
of the park. Payne suggested that the park development meetings might be an appropriate forum
for Nicholson to express his concerns about parking, traffic, and the concerns about children being
at risk due to traffic flow. Nicholson said they had brought those issues up in that forum but they
had not felt like it was being heard very well. Plahutnik noted that unfortunately the Planning and
Zoning Commission does not have any authority regarding the design of the park.
Nancy Purington, 1706 Prairie du Chien Road, said that her concern was with the Dean Oakes
Sixth Addition. She said the area in question is behind her property and is full of wildflowers and
has never been graded or tilled. She asked what the possibilities were for what could happen with
that property as a result of rezoning. She said that the only access for a park would be from Bristol
Drive. Purington said that she could not imagine how that land could be turned into a park, and
wondered what the plans for the property are. Ries-Miller said that the function of that area is
preservation of the wooded areas and steep slopes. Ries-Miller said the intention at this point is to
keep it as an environmental preservation area. Purington said that was good to know. Ries-Miller
said that there was no intention to change the use at this time.
Jason Kakert, 218 Red Hill Lane, said he lives close to the Frauenholtz-Miller Park. He said that
the map being shown is a little out of date. He said that something to think about with the planning
of the park is that people might actually use it as acut-through. He said that Lower West Branch
Road does not go all the way through as the map seems to indicate. Ries-Miller explained that the
markings Kakert was referring to actually indicate a public right of way, not the existence of a road.
She noted that the confusion might stem from the fact that there are actually two parcels that join
to make the park, one of which is already zoned P1.
There were no further comments from the public and Koppes closed public hearing.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 21, 2010 -Formal
Page 6 of 9
Koppes invited a motion.
Payne motioned to recommend approval of the proposed zoning changes from their current
zoning to P1, the neighborhood public zone, for:
1) Thornberry Dog Park from OPD-5 ;
2) Frauenholz-Miller Park from OPD-8;
3) Sandhill Estates Part 1, Outlot M, from OPD-5;
4) Sandhill Estates, Lot 2, and part of Lots 3 & 4 from ID-RM;
5) Dean Oakes Sixth Addition, Outlot A, from OPD-5;
6) Oakmont Estates from OPD-5;
7) Country Club Estates from RS-5;
8) Ralston Creek area west of Scott Boulevard from RS-5;
9) North of McCollister Boulevard from IDRM.
Plahutnik seconded the motion.
Koppes invited discussion.
Eastham said he had enjoyed and benefited from the public hearing. He said that the comments
about parking and traffic issues near public uses had been instructive. Eastham said that he
believed the Commission had attempted to make clear that the traffic and parking issues would
have to be addressed by other City bodies; however, he acknowledged them as legitimate
concerns that could likely be resolved to the satisfaction of neighbors.
Plahutnik added that there is no limit to what can be brought before the Commission for discussion;
the limitation comes in terms of whether the Commission can actually do anything about the
matter. He said that the concerns expressed are now in the public record, which does get read by
City Council and others, so presenting the concerns to the Commission was not a wasted effort.
Weitzel acknowledged the truth of what Plahutnik had said, but added that the matter before the
Commission presently was really a formality and a requirement of the zoning ordinance.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0 (Freerks absent).
Koppes invited a second motion.
Payne motioned to approve the rezoning to P1, Neighborhood Public zone, from RS-5 for
Taft Speedway.
Plahutnik seconded.
Eastham recused himself from this particular item as he and his wife own a property in the Idyllwild
subdivision and their development is within the 300-foot boundary of the subject property.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0 (Eastham recused; Freerks absent).
CONDITIONAL USE ITEM:
CU10-00001: Discussion of an application submitted to Johnson County by S&G Materials
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 21, 2010 -Formal
Page7of9
Company for a temporary conditional use permit to operate an asphalt and concrete
recycling operation on property located at 4059 Izaak Walton Road.
Busard recused himself because he had worked on this application in his professional role at the
County.
Howard presented the staff report, which had been prepared by Christina Kuecker. She said that
S&G has applied to the County for an amendment to a previously issued conditional use permit.
The property is within the city/county fringe area, but is outside the City's growth area boundary.
The County's zoning ordinance allows the City Council to comment on conditional use permits in
these cases. Howard said the County has a requirement that if the City Council opposes a
conditional use permit then a 4/5 majority vote by the County Board of Adjustment is required to
approve the permit.
Howard said the original application for conditional use was for asand-mining operation. S&G now
wants to amend that permit to also allow concrete and asphalt recycling on a temporary basis.
Howard said that these operations were actually already going on counter to the permit that was in
place; however, once it was brought to S&G's attention that they were in violation of their
conditional use permit, they submitted the appropriate application for a change to the permit.
County staff had a number of conditions for approval that they had recommended as noted in the
staff memo. At their meeting on the previous evening the County Board of Adjustment
recommended approval of the application subject to those conditions and City Council
recommending approval. Howard said that staff recommends that the City Council forward a letter
to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment recommending approval, subject to the conditions
noted in the staff memo regarding an expiration date being established and assessment of the
conditions of Izaak Walton League Road by the County Engineer.
Eastham asked whether the City or County Sensitive Areas Ordinance would apply to this
application and Howard said that it would be the County's. Eastham asked if the County was
expanding the Commission's scope of consideration with this request for input. Greenwood
Hektoen said she did not think so; rather, they were just acknowledging that the City Council can
have input on this application within the framework of the design standards.
Eastham asked about the non-compliance issue and received clarification from Howard that the
County had amended their zoning ordinance to allow for the consideration of asphalt and concrete
recycling as a temporary conditional use.
Koppes opened the public hearing.
Tom Hobart, 122 Shinn, spoke on behalf of S&G. He explained that the County had amended their
code to allow for temporary asphalt and concrete recycling operations. Hobart explained that there
was no such thing as a "permanent" permit for these operations in Johnson County. He explained
that S&G had not been aware that they were in violation of their conditional use permit. He said
that the minute they found out they were in violation they stopped those operations and applied for
the appropriate permit. He explained that their operation is good for the environment because it
keeps these materials out of the landfill and recycles them back into use. He said there is a large
market for these services as there are companies looking to get rid of the materials as well as
companies looking to acquire the finished product. Hobart explained that the sand and gravel plant
is still in full operation; this use had simply been added to the operation. DNR has approved the
conditional use, as have all property owners within 500 feet of the property line; a soil sample is
being analyzed for approval. Hobart said that this is a good location for the use, and there are
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 21, 2010 -Formal
Page 8 of 9
several projects lined up and ready to go.
Craig Albrecht spoke on behalf of Metro Pavers. He said that he is one of the customers who is in
need of this product for projects that are ongoing. He said that timing is a big issue for him and he
hoped that the decision would be made in a timely manner.
No one else wished to speak to the issue and the public hearing was closed.
Payne asked if the motion should include a specific date. Greenwood Hektoen said the date
should probably be something the County decided.
Payne motioned to recommend that the City Council forward a letter to the Johnson County
Board of Adjustment recommending that a conditional use permit be approved subject to:
1) An expiration date of the conditional use permit that corresponds to the end-date of
the current recycling operation;
2) The County requiring any improvements that are necessary as determined by the
County Engineer.
Weitzel seconded.
Weitzel noted that the applicant is seeking the necessary permits and permissions as well as the
opinions of the neighboring landowners. He said that the use is broadly consistent with the
allowed uses so he thinks it is an appropriate use for the property.
Eastham said he agreed with Weitzel, adding that the environmental impacts are being considered
and managed to the extent possible. He said road access is also being considered by the County.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5-0 (Busard abstaining; Freerks absent).
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: OCTOBER 4 AND OCTOBER 7, 2010:
Eastham motioned to approve the minutes.
Weitzel seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0 (Freerks absent).
OTHER:
Eastham said he had attended the last City Council meeting where Julie Tallman presented on the
Floodplain Management Ordinance. He said that Council Member Mims had complimented staff
and the Commission on the amount of time and work that had been put into the ordinance.
ADJOURNMENT:
Weitzel motioned to adjourn.
Payne seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 6-0 vote (Freerks absent).
z
O
~o
~~
00
~ W
Z W o
N Z N
a
z°z
aw
z_Q
Z
Z
J
a
o X X X X X X X
o X X X X X X X
r
X X X X X X X
X x X O X X X
X X x X X x X
~ X X X X X X X
o X X X X X o
o x x x o X X
~ X X X X X X X
x X X O X x X
X X X X X X o
M X X X X X X X
N X X X X X X X
r
N
X
X
X
X
x
X
x
r
N
~W ~ ~ M N In LC) M
~ ~
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
HX
w
w
J ~
W }
J
Q W
J Q
2 Q Z Q
Q
tn 2
V Z
a _ = ~
~ W C~ Y ~
Q Y ~ H J
~
a
w y
a
z
= w
w H ~
~ cn cn w a ~ a -
z m w ~ Y a a ~
z
H
W
w
0
o X X ~ X ~ X X
T
~ X X X X O X X
X X X X X X X
N X X X O X X o
ti
~ o X X X X X X
o X X X X X o
~ X X X X X X ~
~ o X x o o x X
N X X x X O X o
M
N
~W ~ ~ M N ln ln M
wa ,
~n ~
~n
~ „
~n ~
~ ~
~n ~
~n
~X o o o o o 0 0
W
W ~ ~
~ ~ m J J
a
2 a z Q ~ j
N = Z N 2 ~ ~
~ V a W C> >G F
~ v~ ~ z
~ Q
~ Y
w W W ~ W
W a a z = ~
~ cn cn w a ~ a -
W
Q
z ~
m Q
w ~
w O
Y Q
a J
a ~
z
F-
W
W
0
z