Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-04-2004 Planning and Zoning Commission PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Monday, November 1, 2004 - 7:30 PM Informal Meeting Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center Meeting Room B 220 S. Gilbert Street AGENDA: Thursday, November 4, 2004 - 7:30 PM Formal Meeting Iowa City City Hall Emma J. Harvat Hall 410 E. Washington Street A. Call to Order B. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda C. Historic Preservation Items: 1. REZ04-00026 Discussion of an application from the Historic Preservation Commission for a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) and Neighborhood Conservation Residential (RNC-12) to Medium Density Single-Family Residential/Historic Preservation Overlay (RS-8/0HP) and Neighborhood Conservation Residential/Historic Preservation Overlay (RNC-12/0HP) on approximately 20.8 acres located along Linn Street between Bloomington and Ronalds Streets, and along Gilbert Street between Bloomington and Church Streets. This rezoning is to establish the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District. D. Other Items: E. Consideration of the October 7, 2004 and October 21,2004 Meeting Minutes. F. Adjournment Informal Formal City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Planning and Zoning Commission Shelley McCafferty, PCD October 29,2004 Proposed Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District Please find attached a letter from the State Historic Society of Iowa clarifying their position on the local designation of the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District. Letters submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission at the October 21 meeting are also attached. Oct, 29, 2004 12:01PM No. 0271 p, 1 STATE HISTORICAL IåwX? A Division Of The Department of Cultural Affairs October 28, 2004 Shelley McCafferty Associate Planner City of Iowa City 410 east Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 RE: State review and comment on proposed local designation of t the GilberHmn Street Historic District Dear Shelley: Thank you for submitting the nomination for the proposed Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District. We understand that our letter of October 20 regarding the proposed Linn/Gilbert Street local historic district may have caused some confusion. We concur with the Iowa City Historic Preservation District that the p;roposed local historic district being reviewed by the Plamúng and Zoning Commission complies with the Iowa City and State Code for local district designation. Although we think that the district could reveal its history more fully by induding the 15 commercially zoned properties, nominated for National Register Usting, in March 2004, the State does not require that local historic district boundaries match National Register Historic Districts. If you have any questions or concerns regarding our review and comment, please do not hesitate to contact me at 515/281-6826 or kerry .mc{Çath@iowa.iov. Sincerely, ~~~ Kerry C. McGrath Local Govenunents/CLG Program Coordinator Cc: Barbara Mitchell, SHSI Ralph Christian, SHSI Lowell Soike, SHSI 600 EAsT LocuST S'l'Juœ'r DES MOINES, IA 50319-0290 ¡;>: (515) 281-/i82S, :&wI.: keny.mcgràth@iowa,gov '. , 21 October, 2004 rmr Planning and zoning Carrnission, We are writing to ask you to St.JI:POrt the designation of the Gilbert-Linn arrl RenalCIs Historic Districts as consistent with lOAIa City's general plan for this neighborhood. We ar..n and live m our house at 311 Fairchild Street in lOAIa City. Like rrany of our neighbors, 1.æ are pleased and thrilled that our house and neighborhood have b3en selected to be part of the National Register of Historic Places. We hcpe that will also læd quickly to the designation of a local historic district. Q.rr house is an 1896 single-family haœ m a mixed ar..ner-occupied and rental residential neighborhood. We make an effort to rraintain the prqperty .in good condition, and have recently h3d major renovation w:>rk done on the garage/outJ::uilding to stabilize and paint it. We are long-tirœ lOAIa City residents, and for the past 30 yærs have lived .in various older neighborhoods. We also ar..n a single-unit rental property m the LongfellCM District. Part of what 1.æ enjoy and believe is unique and attractive arout lOAIa City are its older neighborhoods and the well-preser.ved hares available to both renters and potential haœc:w1ers. Designation of a historic district is one of the best ways to preserve the value we have invested .in these properties. We are Ì'Ja!:py to St.JI:POrt the prcposed designation, and believe it will enhance and help to rraintain our historic neighborhood While in no W3Y inhibiting prqperty ar..ners iran using the properties as they w:re intendErl. Please contirnle to St.JI:POrt the recarrœndation of the State and National Register Ncrninations Revi6W Carrnittees, the State Historical Society of lOAIa, and Friends of Historic Preservation, and designate our house and neighborhood as a local historic distdct. 'Thank you for your consideration, and for all of your efforts on behalf of lOAIa City. Sincerely, ~lLliLLJ ~ ~ /1 Susan Futrell and will ~~ . 311 Fairchild St. lOAIa City, IA 52245 319-337-7770 cc: lOAIa City City Council Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commision Civic Center 410 E Washington St Iowa City, IA 52245 Krista Goldsberry 414 N Gilbert Street Iowa City, IA 52245 Hello- I am a long time resident of the proposed district and would like to express my support for the Gilbert-Linn Historic District and my particular concern for the fate of a property neighboring mine, 402 E Davenport Street. I have lived in the house I recently purchased for over ten years. I have been an iowa city resident for over 15 years. I chose to live in this neighborhood and eventually purchase property in this area largely due to the unique demographic mix of students, professionals and families. Our block is just as diverse culturly. I have witnessed the restoration of many houses in the neighborhood, and seen the decline of many areas proliferated with conversion off-campus housing. As far as I can tell, it is primarily the landowners who profit from the resources of our neighborhood it, but do not reside here that stand in strong opposition to this change. It was not my neighbors knocking on my door, offering to bring a notary over to sign a pre written opposition letter. It was someone who does not even live here. I guess they stand to lose a buck. If the restrictions for historical districts in the city needs t6 be re-examined, that is a different issue. Is this neighborhood worth all the effort of creating this district?- I say yes. Specifically concerning 402 Davenport, I understand they are planning on turning the property into a rental house. I am concerned this will create another 'party house' in the neighborhood and perhaps set the trend for the entire block toward more rentals and fewer single family homes, ultimately resulting in a student ghetto of sorts, exploiting properties for their income with no regards for the culture the neighborhood or the condition of the property. It truly is a shame with so many other opportunities for that type of investment in Iowa City today that this historic property could not be spared the fate of so many before it. Thank, yolJ.,/·~ .,' jj.::"¿' /' ...-:=~./'. 'l"/" ·7~7·-?:":T. . ¿' ·····:-T / ¿ / ,,/ / ".~ø""""""'/ /~t~ Goldsberry (// October 21, 2004 Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission Civic Center 410 E. Washington Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Commission, We would like to express strong support for the proposed Gilbert-Linn Historic District. We live at 416 N Linn St, within the proposed district. We believe that the proposal reflects the city's commitment to historic preservation, and we welcome the positive effects it will have on the neighborhood and those who live here. Sincerely, \(j-~ ~ah Buss Paulson ~~.~~ Henry Paulson MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OCTOBER 7,2004 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL DRt~FT MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Brooks, Dean Shannon, Beth Koppes, Jerry Hansen, Benjamin Chait, Donald Anciaux, Ann Freerks, STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Mitch Behr, Shelley McCafferty OTHERS PRESENT: Michael Maharry, Chris Offutt, Jim Buxton, William Lake, Caroline Eldeen, Ginalee Swaim, Scott Palmberg, Jill Gaulding, Tom Nothnagle, Walter Kopsa, Bruce Brechtel, Claire Sponsler, Mike Bretten RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, REZ04-00022 a rezoning from General Industrial (1-1) zone to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone for .33 acres of property located at 611 Hollywood Boulevard. Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, 5UB04-00012 a final plat of General Quarters, a 24.12-acre, 29-Lot single family subdivision located east of Sycamore Street, south of Stanwyck Drive subject to approval of legal papers and construction plans. Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, 5UB04-00029 a preliminary and final plat of Myrtle Ridge Subdivision, a .54-acre, 3-lot residential subdivision located at 211 Myrtle Avenue subject to approval of a special exception to allow a shared driveway and parking areas by the Iowa City Board of Adjustment and approval of legal papers by the City Attorney Office. CALL MEETING TO ORDER Chairperson Anciaux called the meeting to order at 7:38 PM. PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA NONE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ITEMS REZ04-00025 Discussion of an application from the Historic Preservation Commission for a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) and Neighborhood Conservation Residential (RNC-12) to Medium Density Single-Family Residential! Historic Preservation Overlay (RS-8!OHP) and Neighborhood Conservation Residential! Historic Preservation Overlay (RNC-12!OHP) on approximately 14.3 acres located along Ronalds Street between Van Buren and Governor Streets. This rezoning is to establish the Ronalds Street Extension of the Brown Street Historic District. McCafferty said that the applicant, the Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission, is proposing the rezoning of two areas in the north side Neighborhood to Historic Preservation Overlay (OHP) to designate two new local historic districts; the Ronalds Street extension of the Brown Street Historic District and the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District. She mentioned that concern regarding preservation and stabilization of the north side area has been ongoing, and it began in 1970's. However, she said that official policies regarding historic preservation were not established until 1992, and that was when the Comprehensive Plan amended to include the Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan. McCafferty mentioned in 1994 areas of the north side were down-zoned to RNC-12, to help prevent the further loss of historic structures, single-family homes, and the neighborhood's general historic quality. She stated that RNC-12 zone allows legally nonconforming multi family uses to remain, however it does not allow the establishment of new multi family uses, nor does it allow the existing multi family uses to be expanded. McCafferty added that the Preservation Plan was implemented from 1996 to 2000 in the northside when the City Council authorized funds to do four surveys and evaluations, in order to determine if there were areas eligible for the National Register and the local district designation. She said that it was determined that the two areas considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission would be eligible for the National Register. She added that last year City Council authorized funding to prepare Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes October 7, 2004 Page 2 National Registrar nomination for the two specific areas. McCafferty explained that the National Registrar nominations are not required for the local designation, but are an established means through which to determine historic significance, and therefore complying with State Code and Municipal Code for Historic Districts. McCafferty said that at the September 9th meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission the two areas in discussion were determined eligible for designation as local districts, and the designation of local districts requires rezoning of both the Ronalds Street and the proposed Gilbert-Linn Street districts to Historic Preservation Overlay (OHP). McCafferty said that according to the zoning ordinance, the role of the Planning and Zoning Commission is to review historic preservation overlay rezonings based on the relation of such designation to the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, proposed public improvements, and other plans for the renewal of the area involved. She said that in 1997, when the current Comprehensive Plan was adopted, it reaffirmed the 1992 Historic Preservation Plan. According to the Comprehensive Plan, "the City has made a commitment to preserving its historic neighborhoods, and adopted measures such as historic district overly zoning as preservation tools. The Historic Preservation Plan provides further details on neighborhood preservation efforts." McCafferty said that specific goals and strategies of the Comprehensive Plan further support historic preservation. These include: Art, culture, and human deve/opment- document and preserve our cultural heritage; continue implementation of the Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan. Environmental protection - maintain the integrity of scenic and historic vistas; enforce appropriate elements of the Historic Preservation Plan. Housing - preserve the integrity of existing neighborhoods and the historic nature of older neighborhoods, develop neighborhood plans which help to ensure the continuation of a balance of housing types within neighborhoods, particularly in older parts of the city, and support the Historic Preservation Commission's efforts to meet its goals. Land use and urban pattern- protect the historic and natural environment within the city, and continue the implementation of the Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan. McCafferty said that the two proposed historic districts are located in the Central Planning District, and . specifically for this district, the Comprehensive Plan supports preserving the integrity of existing neighborhoods adjacent to downtown and the University, which includes the North side where the proposed districts are located. McCafferty said that although the intent of the RNC-12 zone is to stabilize the neighborhood, the zone does not prohibit physical alterations to properties that may change the historic character of the neighborhood. She mentioned that the RNC-12 zone does stabilize the uses within a district, but it does nothing to protect historic character. The Historic Preservation Overlay zone is used to designate Historic Districts, and that allows for the management of changes to properties which may affect the historic character. She added that this is done by the historic review process, implemented by the Historic Preservation Commission. The Historic Preservation Overlay zone, she said, does not affect the use of properties allowed by the underlying overlay zone, it does not require owners to restore their properties, it does not prevent changes to properties and the neighborhoods, it does not try to fix particular neighborhood in time, or restore it to a particular era, and it does not prevent compliance with housing and building codes. However, McCafferty said, The Historic Preservation Overlay zone requires that any change within Historic Preservation District to the exterior of properties that requires a building permit, be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission through the historic review process. She added that a"nother part of the review process involves the certificates of no material effect. McCafferty said that many projects do not require the historic review; they usually require the certificate of no material effect, which takes two or three days to approve. She mentioned that painting, gutters, reroofing, repairs that do not require a permit. McCafferty said that in terms of the rezoning of the Ronalds Street extension of the Brown Street Historic District, staff believes that it complies with the Comprehensive Plan, and with the preservation policies of Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes October 7, 2004 Page 3 the City, and recommends approval of the district. She added that prior to taking any action a recommendation from the State is required, to confirm that the district is eligible relative to State Code. Hansen asked when the recommendation from the State would be received. McCafferty answered that they expect to receive the recommendation from the State by the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Public Hearinq Opened Michael Maharrv. 903 East College Street, the chair of the Historic Preservation Commission said that he has nothing more to add to the staff report; however, he said that he would be in the room to answer any questions. Anciaux asked what is the purview for this. Behr answered that it has to be determined whether or not it is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, and the general Zoning Ordinances. Public Hearinq Closed MOTION: Freerks made a motion to defer the discussion of Ronalds Street extension of the Brown Street Historic District to the October 21 meeting. Hansen seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. REZ04-00026 Discussion of an application from the Historic Preservation Commission for a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) and Neighborhood Conservation Residential (RNC-12) to Medium Density Single-Family Residential/ Historic Preservation Overlay (RS-8/0HP) and Neighborhood Conservation Residential/ Historic Preservation Overlay (RNC-12/0HP) on approximately 20.8 acres located along Linn Street between Bloomington and Ronalds Streets, and along Gilbert Street between Bloomington and Church Streets. The rezoning is to establish the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District. McCafferty said that the previously mentioned characteristics of the Historic Districts are applicable to this case. Public Hearinq Opened Chris Offutt, 309 Church Street, said that he was a resident of Iowa City for more than fifteen years. He mentioned that he moved and lived in several neighborhoods, and seen a lot of change, destruction, construction, and a lot of preservation. He added that he is in favor of the establishment of the Gilbert- Linn Street Historic District. He said that this will preserve the beauty of the architecture, and increase integrity of the neighborhoods, particularly those were people want to live with families. Jim Buxton, 1811 Muscatine Avenue, said that he owns and manage two properties in the district. He mentioned that he is opposed to the establishment of the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District, because this is a taking of the property rights. For example, he said, if someone wants to put vinyl siding on his or her property, that would be strictly prohibited. Buxton said that not everyone in the district was notified about the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. He added that he knew at least two owners that were not notified at all. He also mentioned that all the restrictions that exist in an historic district are mentioned in a handbook and on the Internet. Buxton said that not everybody has access to a computer, and some of the elderly people might not even know how to use a computer. He mentioned that the restrictions handbook is three pages long, and that he brushed on the disallowance of vinyl siding. Buxton stated that if the owners want to go on record officially as being opposed, their letters have to be notarized. He said that this requirement was not mentioned in the notice that was sent out. Buxton asked if the Commission is aware of any letters that were sent in opposition to this, either notarized, or not notarized. Anciaux . answered that the Commission will defer this to the next meeting to give more time for letters. Hansen said that he believes that the Commission has received all pieces of information that the City has received on this matter, and that he counts that there are 35 opposed and 7 in favor. Buxton asked if there are a certain number of people opposed to stop the process. McCafferty said that if owners of 20% of the property within the district protest with notarized letters, when it gets to City Council, a super Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes October 7, 2004 Page 4 majority is required to pass. Freerks said that that requires supermajority of the Council, not of the Commission. Carol Eldeen, 713 South Seventh Street, mentioned that she has three properties in three historic districts, and had a really favorable experience. The porch on one properties was built in the summer, and no one forced her to do something she did not wanted to do. She said that she is completely favorable to this, and that she believes that in the long-term, it is going to preserve the historic areas. William Lake, Flatiron Avenue, said that his concern is that with the prices of utilities going up, the fact that they as property owners will not be able to insulate their homes, and put on vinyl siding, will hurt the students that are renting those homes, who will have to live with limited budgets and pay too much on utilities. He said that there are improvements that could be done to a house, and with the historic districts, it would not be allowed to do that. Ginalee Swaim, 1024 Woodlawn Avenue, said that she lives in a historic district and went to a design change process, and found it an incredible useful process by which they improved their home in ways they would not have thought of on their own. Generally, she said, whatever a person is doing to a home, there is an alternative way of doing it that would benefit the house structurally, and historically, and therefore this would benefit the neighborhood and the property value of all. She said that the north side neighborhood is her favorite part of the town. She added that young people that move in the north side are specifically attracted by the historic qualities. She said that Iowa City should be really proud of having a very large stock of older houses that speak to the history, and is a privilege and obligation to protect it in any way we can. Scott PalmberQ, 322 North Linn Street, said that he is an architect in Iowa City. He said that he is opposed to the establishment of the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District because he believes matters concerning private property should remain with the property owner. He added that it is anti-democratic for Government on any level to dictate to a homeowner, the manner in which the individual's land and home are kept. He said that it is a dangerous notion for any community that claims to be progressive and champion diversity. Palmberg stated that while he agrees with the Historic Preservation Commission that some homes have historic architectural merit, he thinks that is dangerous to impose the will of a few on all homeowners. He added that the choices made about each property are their choice and nobody else's. Jill GauldinQ, 225 East Davenport Street, said that this is not a discussion between 100% fascist control of what people do with their properties, and free community. She said that for example the vinyl siding is a minimum realistic control that deserves thought. She said that minor things like that make a huge difference in terms of how it feels to live in the neighborhood. She said that she doesn't just live on her property, she lives in the entire neighborhood, she walks on the streets everyday, brings her kids to school, walks the dog, picks up trash, and little things help signal that this is a community and not just a place were people live. She said that they recently organized their neighborhood party, which was very successful. She said she was very supportive of the proposed district as a way of improving the neighborhood. Tom NothnaQle, Ronalds Street, said that what neighbors do does impact you. He stated that for the last seven years, he had a construction project going on next-door, and he felt that it is important how the neighborhood is kept up. He said that unfortunately his neighbor is outside of the historic district, while he is right at the border. He added that what people do next to you does affect the quality of your life. Wallv Kopsa, 136 Ashwood Drive, owner of 320 and 324 Davenport Street, said that his sense of community isn't that one group's idea of aesthetics should be the police power to be used to enforce on everybody else. He said that not everyone in this big area should be forced to conform to one specific view of how things should look. Bruce Brechtel, 155 Juniper Court, asked if there is any reason why the Commission would ever oppose the historic district. Miklo answered that there are situations when areas are not historic districts because the Comprehensive Plan of the City proposes redevelopment of such areas. He said that the area south of Burlington Street is an area identified for redevelopment and therefore a historic district would not be likely in that area. Brechtel said that if that would be the case then that the decision would not even have to be public, and the staff would decide that. Miklo said that it is up to the Commission to determine whether or not the proposal meets the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan. Brechtel said that he is Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes October 7, 2004 Page 5 oppos~d to the application. He asked what is the next process. Chait said that the next step is the City CouncIl. Brechtel asked what does super majority mean. Miklo replied that 6 out of 7 Council members are necessary to approve a rezoning. Brechtel said that he was not informed about the meeting, and that he learned about it from a neighbor. McCafferty said that in terms of notification, the staff uses the Johnson County tax records to dêtermine who the owners of the properties are and what their mailing address is. She said that if the property was bought within the past three months, it might not be updated on the property tax records; otherwise, everybody should have been appropriately notified. Claire Sponsler, 413 North Gilbert Street, said that she lived in the neighborhood for 10 years, and she watched families and homeowners move in, struggling to create a sense of neighborhood. She said that the historic designation is an extraordinary opportunity to stabilize the neighborhood, which is a delightful place to live. She mentioned that it is a diverse neighborhood, with homeowners, renters, and they all deserve to live in a vibrant community, with properties that are historically preserved. She said that the most important thing that the designation would offer to the community is the chance to really protect and stabilize the community. Mike Brennan, asked if the public right-of-way counts toward the 20% needed to object the proposal. Behr said he would check on this. Brennan said after 150 years the neighborhood is still historic. He asked if the commission can determine that leaving the district as it is, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He added that if it is not broke, don't fix it. William Lake said that his notification letter was mailed to one of the properties that he owns, and not to his own house, and that he was lucky enough to receive the notification. Maharry said that his comment regarding the notion that if it is not broke, do not fix it is that one reason that the historic neighborhoods are protected is to protect them for the future. He mentioned that there is no guarantee that these neighborhoods will be managed in the future as they have been protected in the past. Offutt said that Iowa City is a town that has a student-driven economy, and the people who are opposing this are mainly people who have rental properties. He mentioned that the majority of people in favor are owners, who occupy the property themselves. He added that if someone lives in the neighborhood he/she would have a greater investment in the personal level and that should be taken into consideration. Public HearinQ Closed MOTION: Freerks made a motion to defer the discussion of the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District to the October 21 meeting. Koppes seconded the motion. Chait asked how would the staff determine the 20% opposition that needs to be met. Behr said that the staff will present a report in the next meeting of the commission. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. REZONING ITEM REZ04-00022 Discussion of an application initiated by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from General Industrial (1-1) zone to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone for .33 acres of property located at 611 Hollywood Boulevard. Miklo said that this portion of the town was zoned M1, which is Manufacturing Zone. In 1983 the City rezoned most of the properties in the area to CI-1, Intensive Commercial, and CC-2, Community Commercial zones. Miklo said that the parcel in discussion housed a snackfood factory and was zoned 1- 1 due to the industrial use present at the time. He mentioned that it- has recently come to the City's attention that this is the only 1-1 parcel in the area, and that rezoning the property would eliminate a spot zoning. It is for this reason that the City is initiating the rezoning request. Staff recommends rezoning to CC-2 which would be compatible to the adjacent properties. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes October 7, 2004 Page 6 Public HearinQ Opened NONE Public HearinQ Closed MOTION: Brooks made a motion to approve the rezoning from General Industrial (1-1) zone to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone for .33 acres of property located at 611 Hollywood Boulevard. Shannon seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. DEVELOPMENT ITEMS SUB04-00012 Discussion of an application submitted by Mike Roberts Construction for a final plat of General Quarters, a 24. 12-acre, 29-Lot single-family subdivision located east of Sycamore Street, south of Stanwyck Drive. Miklo said that this property was rezoned to RS-5, Low Density Single-Family Residential and a preliminary plat was approved this spring. He stated that the applicant is proposing the final plat for the northern portion which will have access to Gable Street. He added that there will be a temporary access for the construction vehicles at the Sycamore Street. Miklo said that the legal papers contain a provision saying that the construction traffic should use Sycamore Street to the extent possible. The staff recommends approval subject to approval of legal papers and construction plans prior to the City Council consideration. Public HearinQ Opened NONE Public HearinQ Closed MOTION: Freerks made a motion to approve subject to approval of legal papers and construction plans. Brooks seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. SUB04-00029 Discussion of an application submitted by Mark Holtkamp for a preliminary and final plat of Myrtle Ridge Subdivision, a .54-acre, 3-lot residential subdivision located at 211 Myrtle Avenue. Miklo said that there was a rezoning application for. the property which was not approved by the Commission, and the applicant is now back with a subdivision that complies with the RS-8 zoning. He said that the proposed subdivision will divide the property into three lots. Miklo said that lot one will contain the existing house, lot two which contains sufficient land for either a house or a duplex, and lot three which also contains sufficient land for either a house or a duplex. He added that the applicant is also proposing a share common driveway for all three properties, which is considered a good thing because there will only be one cut up into Olive Street. He mentioned that normally a sidewalk would be required, but because the grade and the mature trees, the staff believes that it is not appropriate to put a sidewalk on Olive Street. He said there would be sidewalk between lots 1 and 2 to safely direct pedestrians to the public sidewalk on Myrtle Avenue. Miklo said that the staff recommends approval subject to approval of a special exception to allow a shared driveway and parking areas by the Iowa City Board of Adjustment and approval of legal papers by the City Attorney Office prior to the City Council consideration of the final plat. This recommendation, as Miklo said, includes a waiver of the installation of a public sidewalk on Olive Street provided that an alternative pedestrian access route be provided across Lot 2 from Lot 3 to Myrtle Avenue. Public HearinQ Opened NONE Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes October 7, 2004 Page 7 Public Hearinq Closed MOTION: Koppes made a motion to approve the final plat of Myrtle Ridge Subdivision, subject to approval of a special exception to allow a shared driveway and parking areas by the Iowa City Board of Adjustment and approval of legal papers by the City Attorney Office. Freerks seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. OTHER ITEMS Miklo said that a Memo has been written, from the Commission to the Council, outlining the procedures for the remaining of the Code Rewriting, and if there are any revisions, they could still be made. Shannon will not be present at the next meeting CONSIDERATION OF THE SEPTEMBER 16. 2004 MEETING MINUTES MOTION: Hansen moved to approve the minutes as written. Shannon seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Freerks made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:40 pm. Shannon seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. Elizabeth Koppes, Secretary Minutes submitted by Bogdana Rus s:/pcd/mi nuteslp&zl200412004 10-07 -04p&z.doc == o ... rI.2 rI.2 ... S S o u" ~- == 0 ... c:J §~ N ~ ~ ~ ~~ ==" ... == == ~ ==...... ~...... -< ~ è ... u ~ ~ o ~ "'I:t' = = N M ~ ..... QC ~ ..... ..... .., e: ..... ..... ..... M '= ..... r-- ~>< ><>< ><>< ><>< ..... IØ ~>< ><>< ><>< ><>< = M ð ~>< ><>< 0>< >< = .., ¡,e M >< >< ><0 ><>< èõ 0 = 11'1 e: >< >< >< >< ><><>< QC = 11'1 ..... >< >< 0 >< >< ><>< r:: = ..... ¡,e ~ >< >< 0 >< ><>< = 0 r-- ¡,e ..... >< >< >< >< ><>< ìþ 0 = ~ >< >< >< >< >< ><>< = = M >< >< >< >< >< ><>< iì\ = ~ >< >< 0 >< >< ><>< = 11'1 ><ð ..... >< >< >< >< >< ~ = ..... ~ >< >< >< >< >< ><>< = ~ >< >< >< ð >< ><>< = C'I ð ..... >< >< >< >< ><>< M = 11'1 ~ >< >< >< >< >< ><>< ..... = '" E ~ 'D I/') 'D 00 I/') r-- 00 '8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ QQ ~ >< I/') I/') I/') I/') I/') ~ 0 0 0 0 0 00 >< ~ = = ~ ~ ~ c .. - .. = .¡;¡ c .¡; .. = f f .. I = -= ~~ -= -< =:I U ... <:IJ ¡::¡ == == -< ...¡f;I;Î ¡::¡ ~ ¡,e >< 0 ð >< ><>< ..... 0 M e: >< >< 0 >< >< ><>< QC = QC ð ð M >< >< 0 ><>< ìþ = .., ¡,e ..... >< >< 0 >< ><>< ìþ 0 = r-- ð ..... >< >< >< >< ><>< iì\ = ..... ð e: >< >< 0 >< ><>< ..., = M ð ~ >< >< >< >< ><>< ..... = '" E ~ 'D I/') 'D 00 I/') r-- 00 '§ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ QQ ~~ I/') I/') I/') I/') I/') I/') I/') 0 0 0 0 0 00 >< ~ = = ~ = '" c .. - .. .. ; ~ .¡;¡ co .¡; .. '" f .. = ~ = -= .. .. ~æ -< =:I U ... = z ¡::¡ == == -< ...¡ f;I;Ρ::¡ ~ Z ..... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ Z ..... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ z ..... .", <1.) ... '" <1.) ô bO-E ~.§ <1.) -_~~:E !:i !:i !:i ::E os tr.Iv;¡OO ... £«~~ .. II II II .!k II ~ ¡,e", ~><ooz MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OCTOBER 21, 2004 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL DRÞ,FT MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Brooks, Ann Freerks, Don Anciaux, Jerry Hansen, Beth Koppes, Benjamin Chait MEMBERS EXCUSED: Dean Shannon STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Mitch Behr, Shelley McCafferty OTHERS PRESENT: Michael Maharry, Wayne Osborne, Wally Plahutnik, WiIJ Jennings, Michelle Higley, Catherine Schneider, Jill Gaulding, Krista Goldsberry, Judith Pascal, Amy Baum, Wallace Kopsa, Claire Sponsler. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, REZ04-00025, a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) and Neighborhood Conservation Residential (RNC-12) to Medium Density Single- Family Residential/Historic Preservation Overlay (RS-8 OHP) and Neighborhood Conservation Residential/Historic Preservation Overlay (RNC-12/0HP) on approximately 14.3 acres located along Ronalds Street between Van Buren and Governor Streets. This rezoning is to establish the Ronalds Street Extension of the Brown Street Historic District. . Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, SUB04-00023, a preliminary plat of J.J.R. Davis Second and Third Addition, a 19.81-acre, eleven-lot commercial subdivision located east of Mormon Trek Boulevard, south of Highway 1, subject to escrow funds being required with the final plan for future reconstruction of Dane Road adjacent to Lots 4 and 8, and Federal Aviation Administration approval of the infrastructure prior to final plat approval. Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, SUB04-00030, a preliminary plat of Saddlebrook Meadows Part 1, an 8.95-acre, 47 -lot residential subdivision located south of Whispering Meadows Drive and west of Pinto Lane subject to correction of technical deficiencies identified by the City Engineer. CALL TO ORDER: Anciaux called the meeting to order at 7:34 pm. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON AGENDA: None HISTORIC PRESERVATION ITEMS: REZ04-00025, discussion of an application from the Historic Preservation Commission for a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) and Neighborhood Conservation Residential (RNC-12) to Medium Density Single-Family Residential/Historic Preservation Overlay (RS-8/0HP) and Neighborhood Conservation Residential/Historic Preservation Overlay (RNC-12/0HP) on approximately 14.3 acres located along Ronalds Street between Van Buren and Governor Streets. This rezoning is to establish the Ronalds Street Extension of the Brown Street Historic District. McCafferty she had provided the Commission with copies of additional correspondence relating this historic district including the ordinances adopting the districts and comments from the State Historic Society of Iowa. She said the State concurred with this proposal and with the boundaries of this district. Public discussion was opened. Michael Maharrv, Chairperson of the Historic Preservation Commission, said he would comment on items REZ04-00025 and REZ-00026 at the same time. The Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission was ready to move forward if the Planning and Zoning Commission finds it complies with Comprehensive Plan. He said that this is the purview of the commission. Planning and Zoning Commission October 21, 2004 Page 2 Wavne Osborne, 630 North Van Buren Street, said he was in favor of historical preservation. They had moved back to Iowa City when their children were in school. At that time they would drive through the near Northside neighborhood and marveled at the houses there. He'd worked downtown for 33-years and had lived a block from the campus. His former house was now a six-story apartment building, which he had been aware was going to happen. Osborne said he'd always lived among students and had had good experiences with them. He saw it as a mixed neighborhood. He felt historical preservation really enhanced Iowa City and made it a place that persons wanted to come for a variety of reasons. In their neighborhood a number of young couples had moved in, purchased and restored houses or purchased previously restored homes and they had student housing as well. He felt it was quite compatible. They'd had good relationships with the Northside neighborhood, which had held events to which they'd invited the students including block parties. Osborne said he felt historical preservation and putting some limitations on changes, keeping them in character with the area was entirely valid and actually enhanced and improved the value of all properties, not just those owned by private owners. He urged the Commission to give the idea their full support. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Hansen made a motion to approve REZ04-00025, an application from the Historic Preservation Commission for a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) and Neighborhood Conservation Residential (RNC-12) to Medium Density Single-Family Residential/Historic Preservation Overlay (RS-8/0HP) and Neighborhood Conservation Residential/Historic Preservation Overlay (RNC- 12/0HP) on approximately 14.3 acres located along Ronalds Street between Van Buren and Governor Streets. This rezoning is to establish the Ronalds Street Extension of the Brown Street Historic District. Freerks seconded the motion. Freerks said she was very much in favor of this proposal. It supported the goals in the Comprehensive Plan, and the Historic Plan which was adopted in 1992. She said that the neighborhood was downzoned to help stabilize the Northside and she felt this proposal would aid that. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. REZ04-00026, discussion of an application from the Historic Preservation Commission for a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) and Neighborhood Conservation Residential (RNC-12) to Medium Density Single-Family Residential/Historic Preservation Overlay (RS-8/0HP) and Neighborhood Conservation Residential/Historic Preservation Overlay (RNC-12/0HP) on approximately 20.8 acres located along Linn Street between Bloomington and Ronalds Streets and along Gilbert Street between Bloomington and Church Streets. This rezoning is to establish the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District. McCafferty said she would like to address a few issues that had arisen at the last meeting. One of the comments that had been made was that given the number of the contributing properties in this district, if an area is not broke, why fix it, implying that this area was quite intact so why was there a need for additional regulations on it. McCafferty said historic preservation was preventative. She presented a power-point slide presentation of homes in various states of alteration that would be considered to be 'contributing' to better illustrate the purpose and intent of historic preservation. Generally speaking, contributing properties may be restored or rehabilitated pristine properties or they may be properties that have had incremental changes over time such as siding, windows, changes to the porches, but were not beyond salvation in terms of a historic sense. It would still be feasible to rehabilitate the properties for either multi- or single-family use. Non-contributing properties consisted of those whose incremental changes over time had been so substantial that it would be very difficult to rehabilitate the properties. Architectural features and the original architectural character were no longer evident. McCafferty said these were the types of changes that historic preservation is intended to prevent. Historic preservation was also intended to protect property values, protect the value of the investment into this type of properties and to prevent this type of 'thing' from happening next door to properties whose owners had invested in their properties. McCafferty said historic preservation was not intended to prevent creative, quality solutions. Historic preservation was meant to ensure that changes to a particular property were relative to the neighborhood and to the property. Planning and Zoning Commission October 21,2004 Page 3 McCafferty said comments from the State had also been received and forwarded to the Commission as well as a number of letters both pro and con relative to the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District. The Commission's purview is very narrow, they needed to look at it relative to the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. The Recommendation from the State said that it did not concur with the boundaries. The State wished to see 15 additional properties included with-in the boundaries. This had been originally proposed in the district for the National Register, which the State had previously reviewed. These 15 properties had been zoned for commercial use. Historically it had been a residential use but currently is zoned commercial. The Historic Preservation Commission concurred that when the area was reviewed for the Central District planning process, this area should be looked at more carefully before preservation is proposed in this particular vicinity. The ordinance does not require that the Planning and Zoning's recommendation concur with the State recommendation. It was simply there for their consideration, but did not limit them in any way with regard to their recommendation to City Council. Hansen asked why Staff was moving ahead on this. McCafferty said the Historic Preservation Commission had chosen to move ahead on the proposal. She suggested Mr. Maharry might prefer to address Hansen's inquiry during public comment. McCafferty said this was in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Historic Preservation Plan was adopted in 1992, there were a number of neighborhoods that had been recommended for survey and evaluation. This had originally been the third area on the list, but it had actually become the last one on the list to be undertaken, just behind the downtown area. This was the last residential district that was outlined by the Historic Presrvation Plan, it was in compliance with the Plan and the Commission had determined that they should proceed with this. Freerks said she felt that the confusion stemmed from having just sat down and received these letters, confusion as to what the letters meant. The Commission had previously felt that they needed the State's approval, but perhaps that was not the case and that they just needed their comment. Miklo said that was correct. The èommission did not need their approval but they could not vote until they had received comment from the State. They could take the State's comments into account in their recommendation to the City Council. . Hansen asked if the rezoning that was before the Commission complies with the Comprehensive Plan. McCafferty said in Staff's opinion, yes. Hansen said now they were going to be offered a new plan that was going to be submitted to the State. McCafferty said that was not correct. The National Register district might be getting confused with the Local district. The Planning and Zoning Commission did not review the National Register. A National Register district had been submitted to the State which had included the commercial properties. The Historic Preservation Commission had decided to recommend that that portion be removed and a second nomination had been sent to the State. The State was making their comment based upon their preference for seeing the original district protected. Given that part of it was zoned commercial and that there would be a planning process undertaken in that area in 2005, the Historic Preservation Commission felt that at this time it was best not to include the commercial area given various issues politically. Miklo said the Central Planning District would address the commercial area so there would be more information about that and their might or might not be a forthcoming historic district in the area that would include the commercial properties. Anciaux asked what was located in that commercial area. McCafferty said an allergist's office, the gas station, the house where Psychiatric Associates was located, a parking lot for Mercy Hospital, the Foxhead, and some residential houses. McCafferty said the issue with commercial and historic preservation was that historic preservation prohibited the demolition of historically significant structures if locally designated. Value of the property is based upon the highest and best use. What was there as a historic structure might not necessarily be the highest and best use. The concern was that by disallowing demolition in commercial areas, it could actually be diminishing property value. The preference of the Historic Preservation Commission was to only designat residential zones and not venture into the commercial until policy regarding commercial was clearer. Brooks asked for a clarification regarding the two districts and their boundaries. McCafferty said the State had reviewed two district nominations. The Commission was voting on the local district, the State's recommendation was based upon the boundaries defined historically in the original National Register District. The State had said that they wished to defer the decision regarding the National District. Behr Planning and Zoning Commission October 21, 2004 Page 4 said he the National Register designation would include the area that is being proposed for local designation. Hansen said the Commission did not and could not know that for sure so what was being asked of them was to vote on a district that they didn't know what the next.plan coming to them would include. Miklo said that was not true. The State had received two nominations from the City. The first one had included the commercial properties. The City Council had asked the Historic Preservation Commission to review the boundary, they had done so and decided to remove the commercial properties until a later time. Based on the second meeting, the Historic Preservation Commission had sent a nomination that included the area that the P&Z Commission was being shown as a National Register District. They Historic Preservation Commission had asked the State to disregard the previous nomination, the State was reluctant to do so. Miklo said under local jurisdiction the P&Z Commission was not obligated to follow the boundaries of the National Register district whether there was or was not one. They are obligated to review this proposal to determine if it is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan based on the recommendation of the Historic Preservation Commission, which had the expertise to set the boundary. Freerks said it was unfortunate that the Commissioners had not received the letters until just a few minutes before the meeting began. The negative sounding language was really based on the fact that they would like to see more rather than less in the proposal, not that they didn't feel that the area was not worthy of historic designation. McCafferty said that was an appropriate interpretation. Public discussion was opened. Maharry said City Staff had stated the situation well. The Historic Preservation Commission had removed the commercial district from the proposal because they knew that in the future the central business district was going to be reviewed again. The residential district was a cleaner district and that in the future commercial districts would be considered. Behr said the City Code provided that the Commission's purview was that they make recommendations to City Council based on the relation of the designation to the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, proposed public improvements and any other plans there may be for the renewal of the area involved. Anciaux said for persons who might wish to oppose the proposal if they obtained 20% of the land owners signatures within the District, it would take a super-majority of the City Council to approve it. Behr said that was correct. McCafferty said relative to the Zoning Ordinance and the National Register issue it was not required to be on the National Register to be a local district. The boundaries did not have to correspond and it did not have to be on the National Register, it was just a process to determine historic significance. In the past, typically a proposal went through the local process before it was actually listed on the National Register, but they basically proceeded simultaneously. Wally Plahutnik, 430 N. Gilbert Street, said the City had recently spent a lot of money on the Peninsula looking to create a front porch neighborhood. Throughout the 1970's and early 1980's a lot of front porch neighborhoods had been lost on South Lucas and South Johnson Streets. Houses had been torn down and apartment buildings constructed, it now had a very different character. He and his neighbors currently resided in what is still a front porch neighborhood with students and families. Without spending any money at all, the City could help maintain the front porch character of the neighborhood. The nature of a historic district was not draconian; there is no complete imposition that something will happen. Things go through a review process and the past review process seemed to have been pretty reasonable. The Commission and the City could help in a very hands-off way to keep the front porch neighborhood quality in the northside. He urged the Commission to vote for the proposal. Will Jenninas, 311 Fairchild Street, said he and his wife Sue resided in this property. He wished to speak in favor of the proposal, he saw it as being clearly in line with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan to preserve stability and character. He and his wife are property owners and landlords of a property located in the Longfellow District. They wished to speak in support of this proposal as residents of a mixed area and as property owners in a mixed area. They felt it was a good, solid move and was clearly in line with Planning and Zoning Commission October 21,2004 Page 5 the wishes and the intent of the people who resided in and owned property in the area. He submitted two additional letters to Staff for the Commission's consideration. Michelle HiQley, 414 N. Gilbert, said she and her partners resided in and had recently purchased this property. She was present to urge the Commissioners to yote in favor of the proposal. She was originally from New Orleans, Louisiana. One of the things that had attracted her to Iowa was the neighborhoods. One of the reasons she had chosen to purchase a house on the north side was the mix of the neighborhood and the front porch neighborhood. She urged the Commission to keep the neighborhood at the nice balance that it currently is at. The house next to her at 402 Davenport Street had recently been purchased. That particular space was proposed to have only two parking spots. It was her understanding that it was to be turned in to a rental property. She was concerned about the future of this property. Catherine Schneider, 317 Church Street, said she'd owned a house there for over 20-years. She saw the downtown creeping north toward them, she'd like to see the neighborhood preserved. She'd seen too many old houses torn down around Mercy Hospital and other areas. She asked the Commission to vote for the proposal. Jill GauldinQ, 225 E. Davenport Street, said this was at least the eighth meeting on this issue. She wished to address Hansen's comment. She said with all due respect, it seemed like a funny question to ask, 'Why move forward at this time". The original plan for the District had been very carefully laid out by persons who were experts in historic district evaluation and designation. The decision to get rid of the commercial properties was a compromise in order to allow the residential part of the neighborhood to move forward. The State wished that they would not compromise, they wished to see more. The fact that the State wished to see more at the National Historic Register level, which was all they had control over, should have nothing to do with whether they moved forward in terms of a local district for the compromised area which everyone agreed from the Historic Preservation Commission to the State to the persons speaking at this meeting was a neighborhood that deserved this label and the protection. She said it would make no sense at all to her to make them wait in the residential part of the district until the issue with the original commercial part of the proposed district was resolved. It appeared that all the little districts that made up the northside would not have to wait for some comprehensive district. Her understanding of the history of this district was that it would have been too hard to make the entire northside all one district so people had agreed to do it piece by piece. It was a strategy that made sense but to make them wait until some unforeseeable future when the City reached a decision about some other area would really be unfair and would be a disservice to all the work that had gone on so far and to all the people who had worked so hard to preserve this neighborhood. Krista Goldsberry, 414 N. Gilbert Street, said she recently purchased their property and they were renting out two units on the second story. She was a landlord, resident and property owner. Goldsberry said she supported this district and urged the Commission to support it too. She submitted her letter to Staff. Goldsberry said she had been unaware that this was being held up, it seemed to be a no brainer that since the State the thought that the historic district should be bigger, didn't that call for stronger support of the district and residential area. Judith Pascal, 311 N. Linn Street, said she was there on behalf of the Iowa City monthly meeting of Friends. They had a Quaker meeting house at 311 North Linn Street, which had been there for 40 or 50 years. She hoped it would be there for a long time to come. They were strongly in favor of the proposal. Amy Baum, 419 N. Gilbert, resided there with her husband Mike Singer. She said she'd like to strongly encourage the Commission to support the proposal, along with all of her good neighbors who were in attendance at the meeting. Walter Kopsa, said he owned property at 320 and 324 Davenport Street. Kopsa said he remembered from the last meeting that the vote on the Ronalds Street district had been deferred until receipt of approval of the National Register. McCafferty said that was incorrect. It had been deferred until comments were received from the State and they have been received. Kopsa asked if approval of that district by the National Register had been received. McCafferty said Staff had received comments from the State Historic Society, which acted as agents of the National Register. Planning and Zoning Commission October 21,2004 Page 6 Kopsa asked if that had or had not been approved for National Register status. McCafferty said it had gone forward and was in the process of being registered right now. The original nomination had been approved by the State. Kopsa asked what was the status of this district? McCafferty said actually having a district on the National Register was not a requirement for local designation. It had been determined to comply with the Comprehensive Plan. There were two districts nominations for the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District sitting at the State, two proposals. It had not been determined which one would be forwarded to the National Register for this particular district. Kopsa asked if it was not possible that National Registry might not be approved. McCafferty said given that the State had already said that one district was eligible and should be forwarded to the federal level, it was unlikely that the second district would not be accepted. Kopsa asked what would happen if over 50% of the property owners in the National District sent notarized letters stating that they did not want it to be in the National District. McCafferty said in that case it would go on to the Feds and would be listed as eligible but would not actually be listed as a district. Freerks said just to be clear, the Commission was not voting on national district, it is a local district that is being discussed. Behr said this Commission's action did not wait on official action for the National Register, it waited on comment as to the local designation from the State. Clair Sponsler., 413 Gilbert Street, said she had spoken at the previous meeting, was a strong supporter of the proposal and was a wonderful way to stabilize the neighborhood and keep it a viable place to live for all the property owners in the neighborhood both resident occupants and renters and those who owned property there. She wished to address that perception that things were moving forward to hastily. The state that they were at now was the end point of a long process that had begun in 1992 with a historical survey of the City. It had gone through the City's Comprehensive Plan, the City had stated that its goals for the Northside neighborhood included historic preservation and measures to preserve and stabilize the architectural integrity of the neighborhood. It seemed to her that this process was not coming too soon, but too late. Higley said she'd be hard pressed to believe that there would be 50% of the property owners in that district that would vote against or not be in favor of the proposal. She had gone to great lengths to make sure that nothing had changed on her property, it was very easy to follow the guidelines. She wanted the Commission to know that there were property owners and landlords who were very willing to make sure that their houses remained in the up most and very pristine condition. Public hearing was closed. Motion: Chait made a motion to defer REZ04-00026, an application from the Historic Preservation Commission for a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) and Neighborhood Conservation Residential (RNC-12) to Medium Density Single-Family Residential/Historic Preservation Overlay. (RS-8/0HP) and Neighborhood Conservation Residential/Historic Preservation Overlay (RNC- 12/0HP) on approximately 20.8 acres located along Linn Street between Bloomington and Ronalds Streets and along Gilbert Street between Bloomington and Church Streets. This rezoning is to establish the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District. Koppes seconded the motion. Chait said he felt the Planning and Zoning Commission had demonstrated a commitment to take the time that they required to give everyone an opportunity to speak their mind and to have as much information as they could on any issue. That was why their policy was to take at least two meetings on rezonings. In this particular case, he wished more time to get more information. Chait said he was a supporter of preservation and restoration. What concerned him tonight was the process that he was hearing and the feeling that they had to hurry up and do something. He didn't have the comfort level of having the information to do that. His concerns were not with the commitment to do the work which most of the proponents wanted, he wished to be more clear about the items that they were being told were not in their preview that had to do with the politics of this proposal. It didn't feel right at this. point and he wished to feel a little bit better about it. Miklo said unfortunately a lot of those items had been covered at the two informal meetings that Chait had been absent from. Planning and Zoning Commission October 21,2004 Page 7 Koppes said she had a problem receiving the letter immediately before the meeting. Staff were verbally telling them the rules, but she preferred to go back and review herself. She'd known they had been waiting on the State's letter, but they had received it just before the meeting and she was not ready to vote. She wished to do more research. Freerks said she was not sure what needed to be ironed out. This had been going on for quite some time, they'd had all kinds of survey information. She felt the rules and what they needed to address were very clear. What they needed to see was whether or not the proposal complied with the Comprehensive Plan. The comments were something that they were required to get from the State. Beyond that there was nothing that they needed from the comments that had to connect with what they had outlined. She felt it was past due and they needed to move forward. It was not a very comfortable situation for anyone, but it wasn't something they should wait on. It had been deliberated for quite some time and it was their obligation to move on to the next step which was the political venue and that was City Council. Brooks said he had to agree with Chait although he didn't wish to delay. They had received a lot of information at 7:30 pm that evening. They'd received the information from the State and a copy of the Ordinance, two things that they were supposed to evaluate and consider before voting. To that extend he agreed with Chait. At the same time their purview in this matter was very limited - did it comply with the City's Master Plan. If they felt that was the case, then he agreed with Freerks that the item should be kicked up to the Council to let them deal with the politics of it. Brooks said he was torn, he was frustrated that at the last minute they received information that was confusing, that they didn't have time to digest it, didn't have time to work through with Staff and feel comfortable, yet they were being asked to keep things moving and vote right now on something. Brooks said he knew it had been a long time coming, but the two things that the Commission needed to decide its vote had been given to them at 7:30 pm that evening. Brooks said in a sense he agreed with Chait, but he didn't know what they would accomplish by waiting two weeks. He'd prefer to consider if it complied with the Comprehensive Plan - Yes or No - and get it to the City Council to let the audience and the opponents have their time in court. Behr said there was a 60-day time limitation. He asked what the date was on the State's recommendations. Freerks said the letter was dated October 20. Brooks said it looked like the letter had been faxed earlier in the day. There was a fax date and time, 10:14 am, October 21. Miklo said one of the things that was frustrating for Staff as well was every time that they'd needed something that had gone through the State, it was always received at the last minute. It was just a fact of dealing with State bureaucracy. Freerks said as she could remember on this Commission they usually received the State's letters on the day that they were to vote. Miklo said they practically had to drag it out of the State. Brooks said then the agenda was being scheduled inappropriately. There was no reason that the Commissioners should receive that type of information when they walked in the door. Freerks asked what type of bearing did this type of information have? Brooks said he did not like receiving this type of information when he walked through the door. If it had been cut, dried and stamped, all okay, that was one thing. But when there were issues that were raised that might enter into their discussion or into their vote, he did not like receiving it at the last minute. Freerks said she didn't like it either, she'd much rather have some time. She understood what was necessary from this was the fact that the State had sent Comment. It was only because she had done this before that she knew that, otherwise she would not. Brooks said that was why he would prefer to get it out of their hands where they had no control over a lot of the issues that everyone was bringing up. Their only question was, did it fit the Comprehensive Plan or didn't it. He agreed with a lot of what Chait said and had strong disappointment in the way some of the process had been handled from the very beginning and the controversy that there seemed to be within the District and that it hadn't been resolved by the time it got to them, the Commission's questions was did it fit the Comprehensive Plan or not and then move it on to the Council where everyone could battle it out there. Planning and Zoning Commission October 21,2004 Page 8 Chait said he would repeat his point. He was in favor of the purpose but it was the process that disturbed him. The letter and the comments from the audience had not been available Monday evening. The commitment of the Planning and Zoning Commission had always been to defer something or to give the constituents, the citizens, plenty of time to research and do what ever they were going to do to get comfortable with and understand something. He was simply claiming the right to have that same opportunity as a Commissioner. He would prefer to defer for the purpose of being more comfortable and understanding things. At the previous meeting when Staff had said they were waiting on Comment from the State, it had not been explained in any way, shape or form that that information had no bearing on their vote. It was simply a technical thing. Hansen said he too was disturbed by receiving the information late. He'd complained about it before. The Commission was bombarded with public comment on the different aspects of the historic preservation districts, they received written comments about those things but it was actually totally irrelevant to what was germane for the Commission. That was Comprehensive Plan. He was going to vote to defer because he wanted to send a clear message to Staff about getting the Commissioners information in a timely manner. He didn't feel that waiting two weeks would make that much of a difference. He had never voted against a historic preservation proposition. He was strongly in favor of them but he was very disturbed about the process that they had gone through. Anciaux said he was concerned too. He didn't see that much problem in waiting just another two weeks. There had been a lot of opponents to the proposal at the previous meeting that were not in attendance and they did not have the new information either. They might wish to make comments regarding the rezoning pertinent to the State's comments. It seemed that the State was withholding their blessing due to the exclusion of a couple of things but he felt two weeks would not be that much of a problem as this proposal had been going on for twenty-years. The motion passed on a vote of 4-2, Freerks and Brooks voting in the negative. DEVELOPMENT ITEMS: SUB04-00023, discussion of an application submitted by James Davis for a preliminary plat of J.J.R. Davis Second and Third Addition, a 19.81-acre, eleven-lot commercial subdivision located east of Mormon Trek Boulevard, south of Highway 1, subject to escrow funds being required with the final plan for future reconstruction of Dane Road adjacent to Lots 4 and 8, and Federal Aviation Administration approval of the infrastructure prior to final plat approval. Miklo said the plat as submitted was in order. Staff recommended approval subject to escrow funds being required with the final plan for future reconstruction of Dane Road adjacent to Lots 4 and 8, and Federal Aviation Administration approval of the infrastructure prior to final plat approval. Public discussion was opened. There was none. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Freerks made a motion to approve SUB04-00023, a preliminary plat of J.J.R. Davis Second and Third Addition, a 19.81-acre, eleven-lot commercial subdivision located east of Mormon Trek Boulevard, south of Highway 1, subject to escrow funds being required with the final plan for future reconstruction of Dane Road adjacent to Lots 4 and 8, and Federal Aviation Administration approval of the infrastructure prior to final plat approval. Brooks seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. SUB04-00030, discussion of an application from Saddlebrook Meadows L.L.C. for a preliminary plat of Saddlebrook Meadows Part 1, an 8.95-acre, 47-lot residential subdivision located south of Whispering Meadows Drive and west of Pinto Lane. Miklo said as noted in the Staff Report recommendations there had been a few technical deficiencies at the time it was reviewed last week. A new plat had been received earlier in the day but City Engineers had not had time to complete their review. For the most part the technical deficiencies were minor so the Commission had the option of deferral or recommending approval to the Council subject to the deficiencies being resolved prior to Council vote. If the deficiencies were significant, Staff would have recommended a deferral. Planning and Zoning Commission October 21,2004 Page 9 Public discussion was opened. There was none. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Brooks made a motion to defer SUB04-00030, a preliminary plat of Saddlebrook Meadows Part 1, an 8.95-acre, 47 -lot residential subdivision located south of Whispering Meadows Drive subject to correction of technical deficiencies Freerks seconded the motion. Anciaux said the deficiencies were minor, he'd personally prefer to vote on the application and move it along. Hansen said normally he'd defer as well, but since they had already looked at it in a detailed overview he'd prefer to vote and get it moving. Chait said the Commission had a history of approving applications 'subject to' which addressed the concerns so he'd prefer to dispatch this item. Koppes said her preference was not to defer as they'd already reviewed it in detail. The motion was denied by a vote of 1-5. (Koppes, Freerks, Hansen, Anciaux, Chait voted in the negative). Motion: Freerks made a motion to approve SUB04-00030, a preliminary plat of Saddlebrook Meadows Part 1, an 8.95-acre, 47-lot residential subdivision located south of Whispering Meadows Drive and west of Pinto Lane subject to correction of technical deficiencies identified by the City Engineer. Hansen seconded the motion. The motion Dassed on a vote of 6-0. OTHER: Miklo said at the Commission's request, Staff had researched electronic changeable copy signs for a possible amendment to the current sign ordinance. It turned out not to be as simple a matter as they had thought. One of the things about changeable copy signs was that they were not as restrictive on the area of the sign as they were on other signs. There were not that many changeable copy signs because they were so difficult to change. Staff's concern was that if they allowed changeable electronic copy signs but didn't implement size restrictions, they would get a proliferation of them and they would be much larger than those currently being used in the City. In their research Staff had also found out that there issues of brightness of the signs and other related issues that communities controlled. So Staff requested more time to continue their research. CONSIDERATION OF THE OCTOBER 7.2004 MEETING MINUTES: Minutes unavailable. ADJOURNMENT: Motion: Koppes made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:42 pm. Brooks seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. Elizabeth Koppes, Secretary Minutes submitted by Candy Barnhill s:/pcd/minutes/p&zl2004/2004 10-21-04p&z.doc c o ïjj .~ E E o U 0> .S c~ 00 No -eN c - CO""" N 0>.....0 .S Q) ...... c.cQ) cEo> ~(.)CO a.. 0 a.. = o ... fI} fI} ... S S o U'C ~- = 0 ... ~ = ~ ~~~ ...';;l ~ 0 .....,,=0 ~~N ='0 ... = = ~ =...... ~...... -< ~ è ... u ~ ~ o ~ ~ Z """'" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ M ~ .... CIC ~ .... .... ..,. s;: .... .... r::>< >< >< >< >< ><f:!! 2; .... 0 I"- ~>< >< >< >< >< ><>< .... \0 ~>< >< >< >< >< ><>< C> M ~ ~>< >< >< ô 0 ><>< C> ..,. f:!! ¡¡¡;>< >< >< 0 ><>< C> 0 If) ~>< >< >< >< >< ><>< C> If) ~>< >< 0 >< >< ><>< C> .... ð ~>< >< 0 >< ><>< C> ~f:!! >< >< >< >< ><>< ~o ..., ~>< >< >< >< >< ><>< C> C> ~>< >< >< >< >< ><>< C> ~>< >< 0 >< >< ><>< If) C> If) ><ð ~>< >< >< >< >< C> .... ~>< >< >< >< >< ><>< C> ..,. ð ~>< >< >< >< ><>< C> ØI ð ~>< >< >< >< ><>< C> If) 5><: >< >< >< >< ><>< C> '" \0 co 5~~ ~ I£) I£) I"- co >2 >2 >2 >2 QQ I£) I£) I£) I£) I£) I£) E-<~ 0 0 0 0 0 00 >01 ~ = = = ~ ! C> .. .... .. OJ = 'C C> .. OJ '" = E OJ = .. ~~ -= .. .. ~ -= =:I U ""= {/J '" . =I =I <..; r-i ~ z¡:¡ ~ Z """'" ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ z """'" CIC ><f:!! .... ><>< 0>< >< 2; 0 .... ~ f:!!>< of:!! >< ><>< .... 0 0 M s;: ><>< 0>< >< ><>< CIC C> CIC of:!! f:!! SS ><>< ><>< C> 0 0 ..,. ð .... ><>< 0>< ><>< ìè C> I"- ><ð .... ><>< >< ><>< if¡ C> .... °ð ~ ><>< >< ><>< C> M f:!! ~ >< ><>< >< ><>< .... 0 C> '" ê ~ ~ I£) \0 co I£) I"- co <>~~ >2 QQ >2 QQ I£) I£) I£) I£) I£) I£) I£) E-<~ 0 0 00 0 00 >01 ~ = = ~ = ! i .. .... .. OJ 'C C> .. OJ '" = E .. OJ = .. <> = -= .. .. ~ -= s< =:I U"" = {/J '" . =I =1< ..; r-i ~ z¡:¡ "0 ~ !J 8 bJ)'E &j'B <> d-15~::S <> ¡¡ <>::S '" tI;I rI'J t1.) 0 ....... J:~~zz >. II II ~ ~ II ::¿><oôz