Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-04-16 Bd Comm minutes FINAL FEBRUARY 2007 em: MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2007 205 SENIOR CENTER Meeting called to order at 3:4 PM Robert Engel, David Gould, Jay Honohan, Betty Kelly, Sarah Maiers Nancy Wombacher Michelle Buhman and Linda Kopping Charles Felling, Anna Cigrand, Larry Meyers Call to Order: Members Present: Members Absent: Staff Present: Others Present: RECOMMENDA nONS TO COUNCIL None APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: To approve the January minutes as distributed. Motion carried on a vote of 5-0. KeIlylEngel PUBLIC DISCUSSION None COMMISSION ASSIGNMENTS Maiers agreed to write the web article for today's meeting and report on it to the City Council. Kelly volunteered to write the web article summarizing the March 2007 meeting and report on it to the City Council. MARCH MEETING DATE In order to accommodate staff absences, the March and May 2007 Commission meetings were rescheduled for Monday, March 19 and Tuesday, May 22 respectively. STAFF RECOMMEND A nONS FOR REALLOCATION OF BUILDING SPACE - Kopping A Senior Center Space Use and Reallocation Committee was formed to identifY a location for new weight training equipment. In addition to numerous participant and visitor requests for this type of equipment, research has shown that the benefits of weight training include: increased strength and mobility, reduction in the frequency of falls, an increased metabolic rate, increase in bone density and reduced rate of depression. Rae Blanchard, Irene Bowers, Ken Fearing, Jo Hensch, Sally Jablonski, Wally Johnson, June Maluchnik, Gerry Nordquist, and Dawn Rogers served on this committee. Staff ..~-~---_._---~----_. -_._-----_._~-_._--_._~---_._-'_.~_.-------_._.~.._~_.~._._-,-,._------_._------_.---_._--_._._._-_. .. _..--...~.._.._-_._--- FINAL FEBRUARY 2007 support was provided by Susan Rogusky, Craig Buhman and Linda Kopping. In addition to finding space for the new equipment, the goals of the committee were to have all fitness facilities on the same level of the building and to maintain all current activities. Kopping presented a power point presentation outlining the pros and cons associated with each of the recommended room changes that were developed and considered by the committee. Proposed Room Changes: Room Current Use Proposed Use G08 Classroom Strength Training Equipment Room G02 AARP Office Shared office: AARP. SHIIP, Trips and Tours 103 Gift Shop Elder Services, Inc. Office Mezzanine Office Area Desktop Publishing Desktop Publishing, Students Desks 209 Computer Lab ElderCraft Gift Shop 208 Elder Services, Inc. Office Classroom 201 Shared Office Computer Lab Commissioners discussed the proposed changes and decided to move forward with the recommendations. Motion: To approve the Committee's proposal as presented. Motion carried on a vote of 5-0. EngellMaiers. Kelly opposed FY08 BUDGET REPORT Honohan reviewed the Fiscal Year 2008 proposed budget. He reported that the City Council did not approve the request for additional staff. Johnson County approved a $75,000 grant to support Center operations. STANDING COMMITTEE STATUS REPORT Promotion Committee- Gould Gould reported on the progress of the Legacy Letters project. He distributed copies of the press releases announcing Legacy Letters and said KGAN/Fox 28/40 is interested in promoting the project. Gould asked Commissioners to participate in the program by writing and submitting a letter. OPERATIONS - Kopping The Assembly Room renovation project is moving forward. Sample chairs are being tested in the Assembly Room. 2 FINAL FEBRUARY 2007 Kopping and C. Buhman are working on a Capital Improvement request. Kopping distributed copies of the quarterly report submitted to Amy Correia, Johnson County Social Services Director. Kopping announced that First American Bank contributed $3,000 to the support the scholarship fund. Cigrand reported on the progress of the Memory Training program. She also indicated that she will be conducting focus groups to gather input from participants on the possible merger of the Center and the Parks and Recreation Department. COMMISSION DISCUSSION-Honohan Honohan reported to the City Council and the Board of Supervisors. Motion: To adjourn. Kelly/Maiers-Motion carried on a vote of 6-0. 3 FINAL FEBRUARY 2007 Senior Center Commission Attendance Record Year 2007 Name Term 1/16 2/20 EXDires Bob Enael 12/31/08 X X David Gould 12/31/08 X X Jav Honohan 12/31/07 X X Betty Kelly 12/31/07 X X Sarah Maier 12/31/06 X X Nancy Wombacher 12/31/06 OlE OlE Key: X= 0= O/E= NM = Present Absent Absent/Excused No meeting Not a member 4 lOW A CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION FINAL MONDAY, FEBRUARY 26--5:30 P.M. CITY CABLE TV OFFICE, 10 S. LINN ST.-TOWER PLACE PARKING FACILITY C[ MEMBERS PRESENT: Saul Mekies, Nicholas Parker, Margaret Wieting, Gary Hagen, Brett Gordon MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Drew Shaffer, Dale Helling, Bob Hardy, Mike Brau OTHERS PRESENT: Beth Fisher, Alex Johnson, Susan Rougsky, Jon Koebrick, Josh Goding, Laura Lowe, Cameron Coker RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL None at this time. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION Mekies reported he made a presentation to the City Council at their budget session to encourage them to restore the $ 100,000 subsidy to the general fund from the franchise fee to the Cable TV Division. Some members of the Council asked if the community needs as many access channels it has. Mekies said this makes the best utilization of the channel~, particularly the school channel, that much more important. Koebrick reported that the ice storm caused outages for less than 1000 subscribers. All outages have been corrected but there are still about 25 individual drops that are down and they should be connected tomorrow. Hagen asked about the Sinclair dispute. Koebrick said essentially Sinclair got want they wished for. Mediacom basically gave in to their demands. Given the difference in the two company's sizes Mediacom could not hold out forever. The outcome will have negative consequences for consumer rates. Rogusky and others from SCTV will be attending and giving a presentation at the National Conference on Aging on the streaming video web site and their relationship with the University. Lowe reported that the local option sales tax passed and the school district channel has received authorization to purchase significant equipment upgrades. Mekies asked when those purchases would be made. Lowe said she was informed that it would be after the first check from the increased sales tax is received in September. It is anticipated a video server will be among the first purchases. Mekies said he was skeptical of the school district's commitment to making improvements and said any movement by the school district is the result of efforts by the Commission. Many improvements don't have to do with technology upgrades but rather with developing content for the channel. These types of improvements need not wait until after September when funds may be available for equipment upgrades. Lowe said that content development for the channel does not fall within anyone's job description at the school district and asked that program ideas be forwarded to her. Hardy reported that the first phase of the wi-fi database on the citychannel4 website showing the location of free and some pay hotspots is now available. Additional features, including a mapping tool, will be added. A survey feature that will enable the gathering of user input will be added to the website shortly. Shaffer reported that he and Brau attended the Iowa Senate Commerce subcommittee dealing with the proposed legislation that would initiate a statewide franchising system. Shaffer, officials from the Iowa League of Cities, and lobbyists from the phone companies spoke. The Iowa League of Cities is working on amendments to the bill. _.N_~____~___"___~_'~___._._~____'_'_~_____'_'___"___-------- Shaffer and Brau have been working closely with the League. Shaffer said it is quite likely some form of the bill will pass. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Hagen moved and Parker seconded a motion to approve the corrected January 22, 2007 minutes. The minutes Were approved unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMISSIONERS Mekies reported he made a presentation to the City Council at their budget session to encourage them to restore the $100,000 subsidy to the general fund from the franchise fee to the Cable TV Division. Mekies said the Cable TV Division has been well managed and that is the reason it had the reserve funds it did. Some members of the Council asked ifthe community needs as many access channels it has. Mekies said this makes the best utilization of the channels, particularly the school channel, that much more important. The performance of anyone access channel reflects on how all the access channels are perceived and how the city is perceived. SHORT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS None. CONSUMER ISSUES Shaffer referred to the complaint report in the meeting packet and noted there were 19 total complaints. The Sinclair/Mediacom dispute was the origin of many complaints. All the complaints that could be resolved have been. Parker said that Mediacom's web site is unclear and confusing. Mediacom could do a better job listing their rates and options for Iowa City. The only place Parker could find Mediacom's rates was on the citychannel4.com website. MEDIACOM REPORT Koebrick reported that the ice storm damage had less impact than in other communities. All outages have been corrected but there are still about 25 individual drops that are down and they should be connected tomorrow. Koebrick said less than 1000 subscribers were affected by the storm. Koebrick said he will look into the web site and noted that there are some difficulties in maintaining sites for as many communities as Mediacom serves. Hagen asked about the Sinclair dispute. Koebrick said essentially Sinclair got want they wished for. Mediacom basically gave in to their demands. Given the difference in the two company's sizes Mediacom could not hold out forever. The outcome will have negative consequences for consumer rates. Pressure for retransmission consent regulations at the federal level may result from the dispute. During negotiations Sinclair continually increased their demands. IfMediacom would be able to import a channel outside the market broadcast channel in all areas, as they were able to do in the Iowa City area, then Sinclair's claim that this was just a dispute over price might be valid. However, Sinclair received a license to broadcast for free and exclusive rights in certain markets. Parker said he expects other broadcasters to seek the same fees as Sinclair when their retransmission consent contracts expire. UNIVERSITY OF IOWA REPORT No representative was present. . ._---------_._-----,----,~--,.__.._---~._---~_._--_.__.. PATVREPORT Goding reported that P A TV will be hosting six students from Kirkwood Community College who will be job shadowing P A TV employees. The studio class will be held at 6 p.m. on Feb. 28, the guidelines workshop March 4 at 12, and the board will meet March 15 at 7 p.m. PATV will hold a chili cook-offfundraiser at Old Brick March 22 at 5 p.m. KIRKWOOD COMMUNITY COLLEGE REPORT Shaffer said O'Brien contact him to inform him he would be unable to attend. SENIOR CENTER REPORT Rogusky distributed the SCTV program schedule. Rogusky reported 2 new Intermedia students from the University of Iowa are working with SCTV. Rogusky and others from SCTV will be attending and giving a presentation at the National Conference on Aging on the streaming video web site and the Senior Center Television's relationship with the University. IOWA CITY COMMUNITY SCHOOLS REPORT Lowe reported she and Hoyland have been working on eliminating some audio problems on the school channel. The local option sales tax passed and the channel has received authorization to purchase significant equipment upgrades. The first funds from the tax will be available in the middle of September. It is anticipated a video server will be among the first purchases. Lowe said Kevin Hoyland has been pushing for video upgrades for some time. Mekies asked when the purchases might be made. Lowe said that she was told the first check from the increase in the sales tax will be made in September and the purchases will be made after the school district begins to see that revenue. The timing of purchases will be according to a priority schedule yet to be determined. Lowe said she is hoping to have a video server within a year. Mekies said he was skeptical of the school district's commitment to make improvements and said that any movement by the schools at making improvements are the result of the efforts of the Commission. Mekies asked if Lowe had a chance to meet with Hardy. Hardy said they will be meeting next week. Mekies said that many improvements don't have to do with technology upgrades but rather with developing content for the channel. These types of improvements need not wait until after September when funds may be available for equipment upgrades. Mekies noted that there was some questioning from some members of the City Council as to whether the community needs all the access channels and if there is enough content to justify the number of access channels. Given the value of an access channel in the channel line-up it is an open question if the community is getting the value from all the channels. Lowe noted that the school channel does carry a large number of repeat programs and said that the channel could benefit from suggestions for what the public would like to see. Mekies said there are many activities and events taking place in the schools that could provide content. Mekies said he is skeptical of the school district's commitment to the channel given that at least three letters from the Commission, including individual letters to members of the school board, have all gone unanswered. Hagen said that it is important for all the access channels to create value in their channels particularly at this time given the threats posed by pending legislation that could undermine financial support provided to them by the cable company. Gordon said that the P A TV guidelines workshop offers a good overview of copyright law that the schools might find instructive. There are a number of outlets such as NASA or archive.com that provide copyright free programming that would likely fit the school's mission for the channel. Parker said that community members would most likely want the school channel to cablecast school-related activities. Cablecasting school activities would bring a real value to the community and is probably what the public anticipates on the channel. Gordon said that if a channel cablecasts primarily a message board, the public perceives that as indicative of all the access channels. Lowe said that content development for the channel does not fall within anyone's job description at the school district and asked that program ideas be forwarded to her. Hagen said that he was surprised to learn that Lowe's job description divided her job duties as 90% web and 10% video. Given previous representations he said he assumed it would be closer to 50-50. Lowe said that her duties are 90-10 right now due to the need to migrate web information, which will probably take her until September. Hardy said he will assist Lowe with connecting with other educational programmers and programs around the country. Wieting said that high school students could be a good source of volunteers who could produce content for the school channel. LIBRARY REPORT Fisher reported that the migration of current programs from the old to the new server is now complete. It will be some time before all the old programs can be converted. All the equipment in the meeting rooms is now working well. Parker commended the library for ajob well done month after month and said this is due to the dedication of staff to operate the channel and the will to make the channel as valuable to the community as possible. CITY MEDIA UNIT REPORT Hardy reported there have been some technical problems with the !NET, which sends the access channel's signals to Mediacom's head-end for distribution. Hardy has been working with Mediacom technicians to resolve the problem which appears to be related to the weather. The first phase of the wi-fi database showing the location of free and some pay hotspots is now on the City Channel website (citychanneI4.com). Additional features, including a mapping tool, will be added. A survey feature that will enable the gathering of user input will be added to the website shortly. The streaming video component of the website served a gigabyte of video last month. Video streaming use continues to increase. The Community Television Service has programs planned for the Shelter House, the Compeer Program, and the Johnson County Heritage Trust. Mekies suggested sending the wi-fi sites to the Iowa City web site for possible addition to their web site. Mekies acknowledged the work done by Kevin Crawley on the wifi project. Hagen said that wi-fi seems to be developing quickly and widespread availability seems to be inevitable. Parker noted that the next jump in wireless technology, wi-max, will become available over the next few years and could challenge the role taken by traditional broadcasters. CABLE ADM!NISTRA TOR REPORT Shaffer reported he was on a show produced by the Senior Center on the proposed cable TV legislation in the Iowa General Assembly. The City Channel will be submitting programs to the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors video contest. Mekies asked about the budget. Helling said that the City's budget has been published and the $100,000 subsidy from the franchise fee to the general fund is in the budget. The budget will be voted on next Monday. Mekies asked if the City has discussed the Kragnes lawsuit, which challenges the legality of use of franchise fees for anything other than management costs. Helling said the City Council is aware of the suit but has not specifically discussed it. Hagen thanked Mekies for his efforts regarding the presentation to Council regarding the Cable Division budget and said he would like the City to have a sense that they are behaving unethically in regards to using franchise fees as a subsidy to the general fund. ____.,__.____.._____.~._._____....,..___. ____.__....__.,.,,_______.._.._..._..__._..___.__'__._._.M..________." LEGISLATION AND FCC UPDATE Shaffer reported that he and Brau attended the Iowa Senate Commerce subcommittee dealing with the proposed legislation that would initiate a statewide franchising system. Shaffer, officials from the Iowa League of Cities, and lobbyists from the phone companies spoke. A Qwest lobbyist said that their biggest concerns are forced build-outs (requiring the phone company to be able to provide service to everyone) and providing !NETs. The other issues, such as access channel capacity, is less of a concern. The Iowa League of Cities is working on amendments to the bill and Shaffer and Brau have been working closely with them. A compilation oflanguage seen as least harmful to cities on particular items in similar legislation from around the country has been compiled by NA TOA is being drawn upon as are the services of a prominent law firm in Washington DC, Miller Van Eaton. A concerted effort to effect the legislation in the House will be undertaken by cities, access centers, media reform groups, and concerned citizens. Brau reported that a meeting with area legislators following the League of Women Voters Legislative Forum was scheduled but the ice storm prevented Shaffer and Helling from attending. Brau did have an opportunity to discuss the bill with them and they seemed receptive to the perspective put forth. Shaffer said it is quite likely some form of the bill will pass. Koebrick said that Mediacom's position is that there is no need for a bill, but ifthere is going to be legislation it must be competitively fair. WI-FI Mekies said that the this item was essentially covered previously in the meeting. ADJOURNMENT Parker moved and Gordon seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment was a 7:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Drew Shaffer Cable TV Administrator TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 12 MONTH ATTENDANCE RECORD 01/01/03 to CURRENT Meeting Kimberly Saul Meikes Brett Castillo Terry Smith Jim Pusaek Date Thrower 6/2/03 x x x x x 7/28/03 x x x x x 8/25/03 x x x x ole 9/22/03 x x x x o/c 10/27/03 x x x x o/e 11/24/03 x x ole x x 12/15/03 o/e ole x x x 1 /2/04 x ole x x x 1/26/04 x x x x x 2/23/04 x ole x o/c x 3/22/04 x x x x x 4/ 26/04 x x x x O/C 5/24/04 x x OIC x x 6/28/04 x x x ole x 7/26/04 ole x x x x 8/26/04 did not meet did not meet did not meet did not meet did not meet 9/27/04 X X X X X 1 0/25/04 X X 11/04 Did not meet Did not meet Did not meet Did not Did not meet meet X X X X X 12/20104 1/24/05 X X X X X 2/28/05 X X X X Garv Hao:en 3/8/05 X X X X X 3/25/05 X 0 X X X 4/25/05 x o/e X X X 5/23/05 X 0 x yaeanev X James X ~ Bebe x Ehrmann Balantyne 6/27/05 X x X X X x Michael Chritians 7/25/05 0 X X X X 9/26/05 0 X X 0 X 10/31/05 X X o/c X X 11/28/05 X X X X X 1/23/06 ole X X 0 X 2.27/06 X X X 0 X 3/27/06 o/c X X John X Weaterson X -_..._-_._.._...._-~----,._--,,---...-------_..._- -- _._,,-------~._--._._._....__._---_. 4/24/06 X X X X x 5/22/06 0 x x/a 0 X 6/26/06 0 x Vacant 0 X Nick Parker 7/24/06 x x x X 8/24/06 X x M. Wieting: o/c X 9/25/06 x x x O/c X 10/23/06 x X x olc X 10/30/06 x x x vacant X 11/27/09 x x x X 12.18/06 X X X X Brett Gordon 1/22/07 X X X X X 2/26/07 X X X X X 3/26/07 Vacant x olc x x (X) = Present (0) = Absent (O/C) = AbsenUCalled (Excused) C[ MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2007 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL APPROVED MEMBERS PRESENT: Esther Baker, Michael Brennan, Richard Carlson, Michael Gunn, Pam Michaud, Jim Ponto, Ginalie Swaim, Tim Toomey, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: John McCormally STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo OTHERS PRESENT: Helen Burford CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Weitzel called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: Burford stated that she wanted to report a few things to the Commission and thought that the Commission should invest some time in these issues. She said that one of the commission members Jim Ponto and one of the members of Northside Neighborhood Association Claire Sponsler attended the first of two meetings regarding the Northside Marketplace and surrounding area. Burford said that there is a great interest in retaining the pedestrian orientation and balance and scale of this neighborhood. She said there was some discussion about the benefits of designating the area as a historic district. Burford said this would be an opportunity for the Commission to find a way to speak with the property owners and the business people to do an educational effort and explain the economic benefits of both a national historic district designation and a local historic designation. Burford said the eclectic nature and the uniqueness of the area were also discussed. She said this is also an opportunity to talk about the Main Street program, as well as federal and state tax credits. Burford said this is also a chance to reach out into the community and talk to architects, the Chamber of Commerce, and other groups. Secondly, Burford said that the budget notes discuss the funding of the brick paved streets, which are not just in Iowa City's historic districts but other parts of the city. She noted that they are funded by the capital improvements budget, and this comes up annually for review. Burford said the budget for this line item is $20,000. Burford said that the cost of repairing a square yard of a brick street is roughly $125, and the cost of repairing concrete is roughly $65. She added, however, that a well-maintained brick street can last over 100 years, but a concrete/asphalt street is expected to last 15 to 20 years. Burford said that brick streets also add to the value of a community. Burford said that she did some research and found that Davenport, Iowa is considered one of the examples in the country of how to handle brick-paved streets. She said that Davenport actually has a simple ordinance that reads, "Streets and alleys shall be maintained as brick streets and alleys. This list shall be subject to revision from time to time. No other type of repair shall be allowed to these streets and alleys other than that described under this section." Burford said the ordinance gives detailed instructions on how to repair a brick street. Burford pointed out that Coralville just constructed a huge brick street for its riverfront. She said that having an ordinance for something like this wouid protect the brick streets. Third, Burford pointed out that the Friends of Historic Preservation Board is asking to postpone the preservation awards until the fall. She said that this would give people in the community more time to work on their projects. Burford said she talked to the Chair of the Johnson County Historic Preservation Commission, John Christiansen, who has asked to be involved in the preservation awards. ___.____~~"_,__"_" ______M"___.___.,.,.."___.___'. n_______.'.___..._____ Historic Preservation Commission February 8, 2007 Page 2 Miklo stated for consideration that there were a few years in which the preservation awards were a joint effort with the County. He said because of the number of projects that the program went on very long and some attendees started to leave before the program was over. Burford discussed Glenda Castleberry's lecture on the economics of historic preservation in which Castleberry referred to a model showing the impact both direct and indirect of historic preservation in a community. Burford said that she went to that website and then suggested to Sunil Terdalkar that every time there is an application that it be entered into the model in order to start building some numbers to show the impact of historic preservation on the community. Weitzel said the Commission has discussed applying for a CLG or HRDP grant to have an economic impact study done. He said it has also been suggested by members of the City Council that this be done at some point. Burford said that the model can be found online under "Preservation Economic Impact Model." ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION: November 21. 2006. Carison stated that he had typographical corrections to submit. Weitzel stated that if there are no corrections of substance, then the Commission can agree to file the minutes by consensus. It was the consensus of the Commission to do so for these minutes. December 14. 2006. Swaim stated that on page twelve, in the second to last paragraph, the last sentence should read, "...there would not be much depth between the buildings." Carlson said that on page eight, in the second to last paragraph, it should be corrected to show that Weitzel voted no instead of Gunn. He added that he also had typographical corrections to submit. MOTION: Carlson moved to approve the December 14, 2006 minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission, as amended. Baker seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 9-0. DISCUSSION ITEMS National Preservation Awards Miklo said that he and Terdalkar thought that the tornado recovery efforts of the Commission, Friends, and the community in general might be a good project to consider for this. Miklo said that the Iowa Chapter of the American Planning Association gave the community an award for its efforts, so that is an indication that this is an award for the effort. He added that the National Trust did provide some funding for some of the repairs. Miklo asked if the Commission would be interested in nominating that process/project. He said that a nomination was compiled for the Iowa Chapter of the American Planning Association Award, and that could be amended to meet these criteria. Miklo asked if anyone on the Commission would be willing to spend three to four hours on the nomination. He said that the nomination deadline is March 1", and the award announcement would be in September. Weitzel agreed that this is a great idea for a nomination. Miklo said that another project would be the Englert Theater. He said that is a worthy project but is not as timely nor as dramatic. Miklo said that the requirements would include a 7S0-word maximum description, letters of recommendation, and before and after photographs, which are already available. He said that it would be a matter of just compiling the information; the only new requirements would be to update the letters of recommendation and to update the text. Swaim volunteered to work on the project. Weitzel informed Swaim that she could have access to all of his photographs. Miklo said the application would not be for any specific buildings but would refer to the overall effort. Weitzel stated that this entire effort has received a lot of attention, and the Johnson County Historical Society is looking at doing an --,--~-----,",---,--,-,----,._,---'---"-'-'---- _."-_.._----_._-_.__._._-~-",.._.._.-.-,-_.__._.._----- Historic Preservation Commission February 8, 2007 Page 3 exhibit, perhaps a permanent display, regarding this. He said he would be working on that. Miklo added that this is an opportunity to show the results of the Commission's efforts and the possible effects that the Commission's work had on Iowa Avenue and other damaged areas. The consensus of the Commission was that this project would make for a great application. Trainina OpPortunities. Miklo said that Preservation Leadership Training (PL T) is a program that some members of the community have attended. He said that it is several days in length, usually in a historic community. Miklo said the training is pretty in-depth, including technical aspects of preservation, economics, the politics of preservation, and the regulatory aspect. He said that if there is a commissioner or two interested in attending, particularly someone who would be on the Commission for a while, the City might be able to find some funding. Perhaps Friends of Historic Preservation might help pay some of the expenses. Weitzel said he believes the conference lasts for three to four days. Miklo said he would e-mail the details to Commission members. Weitzel commented that this is a great chance for someone who plans to be on the Commission for a number of years and is an excellent opportunity to bring more training and skills to the community. Preservation Plan Uodate. Miklo said that Marlys Svendsen was in Iowa City last month for a meeting of downtown business and/or property owners. He said that the meeting concluded the public input phase of the Preservation Plan. Miklo said that Svendsen has prepared a rough draft that will be amended and presented to the Commission within the next few weeks, hopefully in time for the March agenda. Burford asked about the meeting on Friday morning at 9:30 regarding the downtown area. Miklo replied that there is a meeting of the City's Economic Development Commission. He said the City Council wanted a market analysis done of the downtown area and put out a request for proposals for consulting firms for this purpose. Miklo said the City Council is seeking advice as to what can be done to improve the downtown, keep it economically viable, to improve the mix of businesses, and decide what the City should be looking at in the next five to ten years. He said preservation should be one aspect of that. Weitzel commented that things the Commission has talked about in the past include fayade improvement and revolving loans. Regarding the Preservation Plan, he said the Commission had hoped to have it before the City Council by now, the project was delayed due to the tornado. Update on 923 Iowa Avenue and 411 South Governor Street Proiects Miklo said that the Commission's decision to deny a certificate of appropriateness for the replacement building at 923 Iowa Avenue was appealed to the Board of Adjustment. He said that the Board's initial review of the appeal in November resulted in a tie vote. Miklo said the applicant requested reconsideration in January, and at that time the majority of the Board felt that, based on the discussion in the minutes and the references to density and zoning matters, the decision of the Commission was not based on design or scale and bulk issues but on density. Miklo said the Board had to rely on the minutes in making its decision. He said therefore there may be a lesson here that in the future, on very significant projects like this, the Commission members should refer ciosely to the guidelines and Secretary of the Interior Standards and iterate how the project does or does not meet them. Weitzel said that the Commission could probably have done a better job of articulating what is already in the guidelines when discussing the issues, including some of the neighborhood concerns. He said that because the Commission didn't cite any other relevant guidelines, the Board of Adjustment was restricted to Sections 10.1 and 10.2 in its deliberations, which left a lot of the discussion out of the picture. Weitzel said the Commission should also have made it clear when discussing some of the other underlying issues whether they were being used as items for consideration or not. He said the Commission can talk about those things but needs to make it clear that that is not what the decision is being based on. Historic Preservation Commission February 8, 2007 Page 4 Miklo added that the decision of the Board of Adjustment is appealable. He said that a neighboring property owner could appeal the decision, as could the Commission. Miklo said that the next level of appeal is the District Court. He said that there would be a difficulty there in terms of the Commission making the appeal in that the City Attorney's Office represents the Board of Adjustment and would therefore not be available to make the case on behalf of the Historic Preservation Commission. Miklo said that therefore to appeal the decision would require the Commission to seek funding from the City to hire an outside attorney. Miklo stated that the Board of Adjustment is a semi-judicial body and by law has to come to findings of fact to state very clearly how their findings meet the law. He said that the Commission can consider whether or not to appeal this decision, but he thought it would be a difficult task. Miklo said that this was a difficult case and added that the Board of Adjustment was split three to two on the decision. Weitzei asked if any Commission members would be interested in appealing. Swaim said that it speaks both about physical mass and visual mass. She said that physical mass would certainly seem to have something to do with visual mass. Weitzel said that when the Commission next revises its guidelines, that definition should be made very clear. He said he did not think there was a clear definition provided. Weitzei said the Board did not really come to a consensus on what that meant either. Carlson said that he believes there are Secretary of the Interior Standards for reconstruction as well as for rehabilitation. He suggested that the Commission look at those and cite them in the guideiines for new construction. Miklo said that physical mass is something that can be defined, and the guidelines do that but limit it to single-family homes and duplexes in that there are actual figures or percentages. He said that the way the guidelines evolved - the fact that there were guidelines written for the districts and also guidelines for apartment infill that were drafted by another committee - would indicate that the Commission's overall intention was that the overall dimension parameter should have applied to multi-family. Miklo said it was qualified to apply only to single-family houses and duplexes at some point when the other guidelines for apartment infill were put into place. He said that the others are more subjective in terms of the visual mass, and that is where there is a lot of gray area that can be argued either way. Weitzel said that one of the things the Commission is always going to have trouble with is that when one comes to something involving findings of fact, there is so much that is personal opinion. He said that it is necessarily subjective, and that's why Commission members need to be clear when it comes to citing the qualities that lead to their decisions. Toomey said that the house on the corner of Iowa Avenue and Dodge Street with the large apartments next door is an example of visual mass and how the mass of the apartment building overwhelms the house. He said that would apply in this case, where something that was once a home is to be replaced with something that will result in a dramatic change in the neighborhood. Michaud said that the 923 Iowa Avenue and 411 Governor Street projects were very simiiar, because the owners of both wanted to build deeper. She said that both applications had very emotional presentations. Weitzel said that at some point, the Commission may make a questionabie decision, and that's why there is an appeal process. He said the Commission should learn from the experience, go forward from this point and be prepared to be diligent in the future. Swaim said that during this coming spring and summer there should not be the same large number of applications that the Commission had last year. She said that when there is a large number of applications to get through, the Commission has to feel comfortable in tabling something for further study. Swaim said that even though postponement may be frustrating, it's better to make the right decision over two meetings. Weitzel agreed and said that is particularly true when the Commission needs more information. Miklo said that there is some question as to whether the Commission's guidelines require a vote at the meeting at which it considers an application. He said that the Planning and Zoning Commission handles Historic Preservation Commission February 8, 2007 Page 5 that situation by having a 45-day time limit for a vote. Miklo said that when the Planning and Zoning Commission is in a situation in which there is new information, not enough information, or some doubt as to whether the project complies with a rule or regulation, it will tell the applicant that if he wants a vote the Commission will vote, but the Commission will have to vote against the project because more details are required. He said the Planning and Zoning Commission informs the applicant that it would like to work with the applicant by deferring the application to the next meeting in order to have adequate information. Miklo said that there are a couple of letters from the State Historical Society regarding the application approval for 411 South Governor Street. He said that when Terdalkar first reviewed the project, he had the sense that it would not comply with the Secretary of the Interior Standards. Miklo said that Terdalkar therefore referred the project to Jack Porter, the architect at the State Historical Society. Miklo said that Porter, after a cursory review, gave an initiai indication that there were some problems with the project meeting the Secretary of the Interior Standards, so that would have been grounds to defer the application until the issues could have been delved into more thoroughly. Miklo said that 411 S. Governor Street went on to the Board of Adjustment agenda. He pointed out that this particular property and the zoning in that area is such that this building could not expand and nothing could be done to this property as a religious institution because of the overall zoning requirements. Miklo stated that there is a bonus in the zoning ordinance for historic buildings that allows the Board of Adjustment to waive almost any zoning requirement if it is determined to be necessary to preserve a historic site or structure or cultural asset. He said that because this is a National Register building, that allowed the church to make an application to the Board of Adjustment, but it also required a certificate of appropriateness, which it would have required anyway because it is in a conservation district. Miklo said, however, that the level of scrutiny that the Commission was allowed, because of the zoning issues, was greater than that required for the typical certificate of appropriateness. He said that in fact, because of the historic sanctuary, the issue of breaking up the interior of the building is pertinent to the discussion, and that perhaps was not emphasized enough in the discussions. Brennan said that certificates of appropriateness, by definition, are for material changes to the exterior appearance of a building, so by the ordinance, review is restricted to the exterior. Miklo stated that the ordinance that the Board of Adjustment operates under for a special exception refers it to the Historic Preservation Commission to evaluate the effect on the historic features, so it's broader; it's not a typical certificate of appropriateness. Miklo said the point of the special exception is to allow something that would otherwise not be allowed in order to save a historic landmark or feature. He said that in this case, the sanctuary is a historic feature. Miklo said the original buiiding is the historic feature, the building as a whole. Miklo said that when the church went on to the Board of Adjustment with an application, there were several other issues with the project in terms of parking, drainage, one of the neighboring property owners being affected, and setbacks that were problematic. He said the zoning ordinance ties the special exception allowing the waiver of some of the other requirements to preserving the historic structure. Miklo said when the letters came in from the State Historic Society indicating how the changes to the building would actually detract from its historic significance, it was clear that the Board would have a difficult time granting a special exception for the parking waivers, setbacks, etc. Miklo said that at this point, the church is rethinking how it will approach this application. He added that Friends of Historic Preservation has offered to provide some funding for design assistance by hiring an architect with some expertise in adding on to historic buildings. Miklo said that hopefully the church will come back with a new design, including a substantial breezeway between the original building and the new building and with the roofline of the new building not overwhelming the roofline of the old. Brennan asked Miklo for an explanation of the procedure. Miklo replied that it is a two-step process in that the application has to receive both Historic Preservation Commission and Board of Adjustment approval. Brennan said that the last time this was considered, the Commission was operating under its ordinance that prohibits consideration of the interior. Miklo said that was incorrect - that the application was to the Historic Preservation Commission February 8, 2007 Page 6 Board of Adjustment for a special exception using the historic building status. He said that the church could not have even come to the Commission for additions to the building without that status, because zoning wouidn't have allowed it. Miklo said that this building, because of zoning, is pretty confined; it has no parking and doesn't meet the setbacks. He said there is a relief valve, however, that is an incentive to preserve the historic resource. Regardiess whether the interior is regulated or not, it appears that the exterior alternatives proposed by the church do not meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and could result in it losing its Nationai Register status. The National Register status is necessary for the Board of Adjustment to waive zoning requirements. Gunn asked if the Commission ever had the right to override any other zoning. Miklo said the Commission does not. He said the Board of Adjustment does, and the Commission is a partner in that in that the Commission has to find that what's being done would preserve the historic resource. Miklo said that the Board of Adjustment also has to consider whether a historic resource is being preserved, taking the Commission's recommendation as part of that but also looking at how it will affect the neighborhood in terms of traffic, parking, etc. Gunn asked if the Commission's vote in any way takes away all of the zoning considerations from some other body. Miklo said they aren't taken away, but the Board of Adjustment could consider waiving the other requirements, given that the Commission voted in favor. He said the Commission's vote is one factor in the Board's decision. Swaim asked about the procedure when the church reworks its plans. Miklo replied that the church will have to bring the application back before both bodies. He said that an example of this would be the Preucil School of Music. Miklo said it is in a residential zone but had no parking. He said that this pertinent clause was written into the zoning ordinance a number of years ago in order to encourage the preservation of buildings like this. Miklo said that Preucil was relieved of some of its parking requirements through this clause and was required to preserve the building. Weitzel said this is obviously for significant buildings, not for any residential building that is old. He said the Commission needs to be clear in these types of questions that it is enabling a special exception based on the decision that it is not negatively affecting the historic integrity. Miklo said there have only been two cases that have used this provision: the Preucil School and the Bethel AME Church. He said this is a way of encouraging the reuse of the building and therefore its preservation. Brennan asked if the church was a locai landmark. Miklo said that the church is a National Register building but is not a local landmark. Miklo said that in 1996, all buildings listed on the National Register were nominated as local landmarks. He said that with exception of the Davis Hotel Building (the property owner objected), they all were listed as local landmarks. Miklo said that since that time, buildings have been added to the National Register, and the City has not necessarily followed through to have them added as local landmarks. Miklo pointed out that it doesn't matter in this particular situation. He said the Board of Adjustment considers this clause in relation to a building that is on the National Register, is a local landmark, or is in a historic or conservation district. Brennan asked if any other building in that district could use the provision to propose a similar expansion. Miklo said that theoretically it could be done, but because most of the historic buildings in Iowa City are residences, there isn't much that would need to be waived in order to make them work or function. He said that a single-family residence only requires one parking space, and a zone allowing multi-family usually has enough room on the site to allow additional parking. Miklo said that when this provision is used it will mostly be for commercial or institutional buildings. Miklo said that the idea is to preserve the building in the long-term. He said that the point of the ordinance is to preserve the historic resource by granting waivers of certain other regulations in order to do that. Gunn said that the issue of mass and scale is obviously difficult. He said that the Commission has tried to write the guidelines to address that. Gunn said the Commission came up with the street elevation, coupled with the zoning guidelines, to regulate scale to a degree. He said that is objectively about as far as the Commission could get. Gunn said that it is very difficult, when people are passionate about their ~~__.",..____,_____._.~_~_._,__"_.______",,.____.__...~._ _____,,___....~__..__~__.n" Historic Preservation Commission February 8, 2007 Page 7 projects and when the lawyers get involved, to make the Secretary of the Interior Standards enforce mass and scale guidelines. Carlson said that until the City allows the Commission to regulate square footage or side elevations of additions, it is forcing the Commission to stick with its current subjective system. Miklo said that with the special exception process, the Commission has the tools to regulate this building to allow an addition of an appropriate size. Carlson said that is true in this particular case but is not true for any addition in any district or for any landmark property. Regarding the appeal for 923 Iowa Avenue and some of the other cases cited, Mikio said that the Commission h.as done a very good job over the years. He said that some of the smaller houses have actually doubled in size, but those were done at the rear and the roofline was not higher than that of the original structure itself. Miklo said they were very sympathetic in design in most cases. He said the Commission has not approved anything that is really out of line with the guidelines. Miklo said the Commission has approved additions that have made very small houses viable for continued use, given what people expect in a home today. Miklo advised the Commission, in a situation like this, to ask the applicant for consent to defer to another meeting and let staff do some more research. He said that without enough information, the Commission can always go to outside experts, such as the State Historical Society as in this case. Michaud pointed out that the December meeting was almost five hours long, and there were a lot of applications to consider. Weitzel said that the Commission tries to accommodate people when it can, but one thing the Commission could do would be to ask applicants if they would be willing to come back for a special meeting to review their applications. Miklo said that Svendsen's draft of the Preservation Plan recommends streamlining the application process in that there are more activities that could qualify for certificates of no material effect in which applications could be reviewed by staff and the chair, such as replacement stairways, railings, windows if from an approved list of window types, etc. He said then not every detail would have to go before the Commission, allowing it to focus on more significant projects. Weitzel said that in the past year, the Commission reviewed 120 to 130 applications. He said the Commission was extremely accommodating to people but doesn't want to burn out. Miklo said that through some reworking of the requirements, the process could be streamlined, and the Commission will have to put some faith in staff and the chair for some of these minor projects. Michaud suggested some type of time limit for application presentations. Miklo said that if the discussion goes over 20 minutes on one item, it is probably not a complete or solid application. Gunn said that the most difficult issues aren't necessarily the incomplete applications. He said that 923 Iowa Avenue and 411 Governor were complete enough, but the issues were difficult, although over four hours is too long for a meeting. Gunn said that the applicants could be directed more ahead of time toward something that the Commission is more likely to approve. Weitzel agreed that perhaps some applications could be screened ahead of time as a potential problem. He also said that the Commission might want to make better use of small committees. Gunn commented that if an applicant wants the project before the Commission as it is, there is not much staff can do about it. Miklo said that was the case for 411 Governor Street. Ponto commented that oftentimes an applicant will ask for something additional to be reviewed while they are at the meeting. He said the Commission tries to be accommodating, but in some cases people are trying to take advantage. Weitzel said that some other issues for the Commission to consider include election of officers and the work plan. He suggested that the Commission look at its two or three big priority items. Weitzel asked Commission members to consider what those items will be for the next meeting. He suggested that Historic Preservation Commission February 8, 2007 Page 8 updating and acceptance of the Preservation Plan might be one of those priorities, and another might be the Preservation Awards. Weitzel discussed the National Register of Historic Places workshops to be held on April 27'h in Washington, Iowa and on May 11 and October 26 in Des Moines. He said they are really good opportunities to see what it takes to register a building on the National Register. Miklo stated that if someone wants to attend a conference or workshop, he can work to reimburse that member for travel expenses. Carlson said that the survey that was not funded for the Near South Side and Manville Heights might also be considered as a priority. Weitzel said it was recommended by the Historical Society panel that reviewed the application that the two areas be taken apart and considered separately. Miklo said that another approach might be to ask the Manville Heights residents for funding. Carlson suggested that the Near South Side seems more critical at this point. Weitzel said that grant was written very quickly, because the Commission is reviewing so many applications and is missing out on opportunities like this. He said that streamlining the process will allow the Commission to do more edifying and fulfilling things. Miklo stated that the Commission receives a lot of grief because of its regulatory nature. He said, however, that the Commission can be proud of what it has done and the effects of its work to preserve historic structures and neighborhoods, especially when looking at Iowa Avenue. He said that it's important that the Commission be recognized for the positive things it has done for the community. Regarding Iowa Avenue, Swaim said that the third house from Evans on the north side no longer has a for sale sign. Miklo said the house changed hands, and the buyer has hired an architect to prepare plans to restore the house. He said the new owner plans to use an appropriate roof pitch and reconstruct the porch. Burford complimented Swaim and the State Historical Society on its presentation for its 150lh anniversary. She said that the Society has developed an architectural library that is open stack. Burford said there Is no other library in Iowa City that has as much detail as the one that the State Historical Society has. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:27 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte Pcdlminslhpc2007 f2-8-7. doc Historic Preservation Commission Attendance Record I 2007 Term Name Expires 2/08 Baker 3/29/09 X Brennan 3/29/08 X Carlson 3/29/07 X Gunn 3/29/07 X McCormally 3/29/08 OlE Michaud 3/29/09 X Ponto 3/29/07 X Swaim 3/29/09 X Toomey 3/29/09 X Weitzel 3/29108 X Key: X = Present o = Absent OlE = Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting -- -- = Not a Member r:(~) MINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS JANUARY 10TH, 2007 - 5:00 PM EMMA J HARVAT HALL -IOWA CITY/CITY HALL APPROVED CALL TO ORDER: Carol Alexander called the meeting to order at 5:00 PM MEMBERS PRESENT: Michelle Shelangouski, Ned Wood, Michael Wright, Carol Alexander, Edgar Thornton MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Waiz, Sarah Holecek OTHERS PRESENT: John Beasley, Shelley McCafferty, Jim Enloe, Jim Esten, Tim Weitzel RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL {become effective onlv after separate Council actionl: None ELECTION OF OFFICERS MOTION: Michael Wright moves to nominate Alexander. Shelangouski seconds the motion. The motion is approved: 5:0 MOTION: Ned Wood moves to nominate Michael Wright for Vice Chairperson of the Board of Adjustments. Shelangouski seconds the motion. The motion is approved: 5:0 CONSIDERATION OF THE DECEMBER 13TH. 2006 MINUTES MOTION: Shelangouski moves to accept the minutes for the December 13th, 2006 Board of Adjustment meeting. Wright seconds the motion. The motion is approved: 5:0 SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS EXC06-00020 Discussion of an application submitted by Bethel A.M.E. Church for a special exception to allow the expansion of a religious institution in the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS- 12) zone at 411 S. Governor Street. As part of the special exception, the Church is requesting a Historic Preservation Exception to allow a reduction in the required number of off- street parking spaces, reduction of all required setbacks for churches located in the RNS-12 zone and to allow a waiver from the maximum building coverage. Sarah Walz says the applicant requested that the Board defer the case to the February 141h, 2007 Board of Adjustment meeting. Applicant said they would like additional time to address some of the issues raised in the staff report. MOTION: Wright moves to defer EXC06-00020 to the February 14th, 2007 Board of Adjustment meeting. Wood seconds the motion. The motion is approved: 5:0 APPEALS APL06-00004 Discussion of an application submitted by John Roffman for an appeal of the decision made by the Historic Preservation Commission to deny a Certificate of Appropriateness _.______~__,____._..~___._______.._"_..._..,_________'____..__''''_______.____._________._w_.'______......___'_0_ Board of Adjustment January 10, 2007 Page 2 for a proposed building to be located in the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-20) zone and Conservation District Overlay (OCD) zone at 923 Iowa Avenue. Sarah Walz says that the Board originally denied APL06-00004 at its November 161h, 2006 meeting. There were only 4 Board members present at that meeting and the tie, 2:2, resulted in the appeal being denied. The applicant has requested a re-consideration in front of the full Board. Walz said this issue of constructing a buildin~ to replace the previous structure that was destroyed in a tornado originally came up in a September 28 ,2006 Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) meeting. Walz says that although the HPC denied the Certificate of Appropriateness citing the mass and scale of the proposed structure, the appellant believes that the denial was actually based on the density of the proposed building. The original building on this property had 9 one-bedroom units. The applicant was proposing a new apartment building with 6 three-bedroom unit apartments. Walz says that the HPC design guidelines that apply to the proposal for 923 Iowa Avenue may be found in section 10.0 of the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook, which she has provided the Board. Walz says that she realizes this is all new territory for the Board. Walz says it should be noted that the proposed building meets the requirements of the Zoning Code, including the density of the underiying zone. Walz says it should be noted that the HPC has no authority to regulate density because density is regulated through the Zoning Code. The only criteria cited in the denial were scale and mass; all other criteria for the building design met with approval. Walz says that the Board has had time to review the minutes from both September 14th and September 28th HPC meetings as well as the November 16th BOA meeting. Walz says that at the first HP meeting, the HPC deferred the application because they sought further information from the Zoning Interpretation Panel. Walz says that the subject property is located in the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-20) zone. Walz says a lot of this size in the RNS-20 zone is allowed up to 7 units, and each unit is allowed a maximum of 4 bedrooms. Walz says that this number may be limited b the amount of off-street parking that the owner is required to provide. The property is also located within the College Hill Conservation District. Walz says that she has explained this further in her memo to the Board. Walz says that the original building at 923 Iowa Avenue had at one time been a single-family home but in more recent years it had operated as a 9-unit, 9-bedroom apartment. Over the years, the original building, before the tornado, had been adapted such that it was designated a non-contributing structure-a structure that is not considered an integral part of the historic context or character of the district. Walz says that the final proposal submitted by the applicant at the September 28th, 2006 meeting showed a building measuring 52 feet wide by 69 feet deep, with a roofiine just under 28 feet. The original 3-story building being replaced had a footprint of 42 by 40 feet and a roofline of 38 feet and 10 inches. Walz refers to the visual aide projected on screen. Walz says that the authority of the HPC extends only to the overall compatibility of that design with the surrounding neighborhood and district as described in section 10.0 of the handbook. The issue of scale and mass require interpretation based on the facts specific to the application under consideration. Walz says that the Board must decide the following: 1. Were the criteria regarding scale and mass applied appropriately? 2. As explained in the City Attorney's memo, if you should decide that the HPC acted in error, you may overturn the decision or, by acting in the role of the HPC, you may render a new decision based on the facts presented in the attached documents or any additional testimony given at this meeting. Wood asks Walz to explain the role of the College Hill Conservation District. Woods asks how much the Conservation District can limit what can be built. Holecek says the Conservation District is developed to maintain the architectural standards for a given district. Holecek says that a Conservation District's function is to preserve the styles of a district and to protect those properties that have certain architectural characteristics. Holecek says a Conservation District protects the architectural elements that are found in any given neighborhood. Board of Adjustment January 10, 2007 Page 3 Walz says that if one chooses to build something new, that person must meet certain criteria filling with whatever the guidelines are that have been set by that particular Conservation District. Wood clarifies that those guideiines for this particular appeal are 10.0. Holecek says yes. Alexander notes that the building proposed is actually somewhat shorter than the original building. Walz says yes, although the applicant can explain it further in detail. Holecek says that density is set by the base zone and the guidelines are meant to preserve architectural features for the district. Public Hearina Open John Beaslev. attornev speakina on behalf of John Roffman in support of his appeal. Beasley asks for any question from the Board regarding his exhibits. Beasley says that the proposed building is bigger. It's a little bit bigger from the front, he says, and from the North and South, the building is a little bit wider. Beasley says that the increase in the size is due to the depth. Beasley says that he does want to show some materials to the two members who were not present at the November 16th BOA meeting. Beasley shows visual aides of what Roffman proposes. The overlay shows the building in relation to what was there previously (looking from the South). Beasley shows an overlay depicting the West elevation. Beasley says the issue is whether the HPC acted arbitrarily and capriciously. Beasley says if you conclude that the HPC denied the Certificate based on density concerns, that "ends it right there", and that reflects an arbitrary and capricious decision because density concerns are not governed by the HPC. Beasley puts forth the question, Did the HPC follow the guidelines set forth in chapter 10? Did they exceed their authority? Beasley puts forth the question, Did the HPC have the authority to deny Roffman's application simply because the building is "bigger"? Beasley notes chapter 10 doesn't give the HPC this authority. Beasley says the issue is that the HPC denied the application on the basis of density. Beasley says that the case history is significant. Beasley reads the staff report that refers back to the first HPC meeting, September 14th Beasley points out the staff that reviews these cases issues a report, which the Board has with them. Beasley reads the staff report verbatim: The design guidelines and zoning code contain mandatory requirements that all projects must meet. Unless otherwise noted below the applicant's proposal appears to meet the mandatory requirements. Staff comments pertain to requirements where there is a need for more information or there is a question regarding compliance. Beasley then points out that Roffman's proposal has met all of the Zoning Code requirements, including Lighting, Parking, Building Materials, and then Height. Beasley says that Height isn't "listed in of itself' in the staff report, but instead in relation to a setback requirement with the single-family resident to the West. Beasley says the architect addressed each of the issues raised by staff. Beasley says that McCafferty, the architect, addressed the height issue by stating the building width has been reduced by one foot, thus providing for a 15 foot setback along the west property line. Beasley says his interpretation of the staff report is that mass and size are a non-issue, with respect to chapter 10. Beasley says that the focus of the September 14th HPC meeting is the front fayade, because is chapter 8 there are some subjective standards. Beasley asks whether this even applies to a multi-family residence. The report stated that no, it did not apply. Beasley says that the September 28th HPC meeting shifted concerns to overall depth of the building. Beasley refers to a letter dated September 20th, 2006-a petition against Roffman's proposal that Beasley says actually supports Roffman's claim that the HPC acted on density issues above all else. Beasley highlights one particular part of the letter that reads: "This increased size is to enable the property owner to double the number of tenants, and although this last point is not within your purview, we trust that you will understand our further concern about this." Beasley says that these issues of density are further spoken about in the HPC meeting. Beasley asks whether these 10.1 and 10.2 guidelines allow the HPC to deny to a Certificate simply because a building is larger due to depth. Beasley says he's provided materials to show how the HPC has acted in the past, where the HPC has approved applicants where increased mass is a result of increased depth. Beasley refers to the Bethel A.M.E. Church application that was deferred at the beginning of this BOA meeting. Beasley says that the HPC, soon after Roffman's appeal, approved a building proposal that increased the mass and size of a national historic site from 600 sq. feet to 2700 sq. feet-four times as large, Beasley says. Beasley says this is only further evidence that the HPC acted arbitrarily and Board of Adjustment January 10, 2007 Page 4 capriciously when denying Roffman's application. Beasley says that the HPC has no authority to deny Roffman's application. Beasley says that according to the guidelines, "measures must be taken" to reduce visual mass and overall height. The criteria requires that design measures be incorporated, which the architect, McCafferty, has done. Thornton asks Beasley to repeat the architect's attempt to address the height issue. Beasley says that there are design guidelines for multi-family buildings and those are broken into 10.1 and 10.2. Beasley says that section 10.2 brings objectivity to 10.1 by having a point system. 10.2 is not an issue. Beasley says that once you meet the minimum point requirements, "they quit counting." Beasley repeats the architect's incorporation of the criteria that states design measures "must be taken to reduce visual mass and height". Shellev McCaffertv. architect for 923 Iowa Avenue buildino, speaking in support of Roffman's application. McCafferty says that she was the HPC planner for four years before going into her own private practice. She says she is very familiar with the guidelines. McCafferty says that the issue is whether or not measures were taken to reduce the visual mass and height of the building. McCafferty says there are multiple approaches an architect can take when developing a building design. She says that this particular guideline tells her that she has to take the approach of reducing the mass. She must incorporate measures. McCafferty says she will demonstrate that she in fact has done this. McCafferty shows the BOA an aerial view of the building. She says that the building is shaped as an "H" to meet the criteria to reduce the visual mass. She says that if she had scrunched this building into a single block, then she would have had a roofline that would have been much taller in relation to the residential neighborhood. McCafferty says that she chose the "two-form" concept joined by a stairway in the middle so that building looked like a duplex, or two separate houses connected. This reduces it from being a single block to something more residential. McCafferty says that the stairwell is also recessed, creating a front appearance that "bumps in and out" instead of a single block. She shows the front fa9ade in another visual. She notes the horizontal lines on this particular drawing. She says this indicates the floor and ceiling structures. She notes that the third floor wall is much shorter, which makes the buiiding a two-and-a-half story building. She says this allows her to take advantage of the room underneath the roof and lowering it, which lowers the overall height of the building. McCafferty shows the Board an example of the elevation deception. She shows another building, not the proposed sight, and shows how perspective can mislead the eye when it comes to building designs on paper. She compares a drawing to an actual photograph and notes the difference between the drawing and the photograph, in relation to mass. McCafferty says that her goal with 923 Iowa Avenue was to reduce the visual mass by making the building appear as two smaller buildings, hence the stairwell recess. McCafferty shows the side of the proposed building (West view) and highlights her architectural efforts to break up the broad walls in order to reduce visual mass. McCafferty notes the extra windows as well. McCafferty shows a house on South Gilbert Street. She notes the side bays of the structure. She says that this blocks the eye from viewing the back of the house. McCafferty says she has done this with the 923 Iowa Avenue structure to divert the eye from the back of the structure, another attempt at reducing visual mass. McCafferty shows the elevation of the 923 Iowa Avenue building. She says that most of the roof that is shaded is going to disappear. As visual mass, you will only see the two side gables and the front porch. Walz asks McCafferty to clarify what certain lines on the architectural drawing indicate. McCafferty says that the lines she speaks of indicate the base of the back of the building. McCafferty says she also used color and materials to reduce visual mass. The colors she chose would also diminish the size of the building. She has chosen darker colors so the building appears less massive. The coior, the textures, the windows, the shape, all of these things, she says, plays into trying to meet the 10.1 criteria. Shelangouski asks McCafferty to define the difference between architectural mass and visual mass. She refers to the HPC minutes from a previous meeting and asks McCafferty whether she thinks they meant Board of Adjustment January 10, 2007 Page 5 the same thing. Shelangouski read the statement from the transcript. McCafferty says to ask Weitzel. She does say that the two terms are different, from her approach. She says that section 10.1 deals with visual mass, or the perception of mass (colors, textures, shape, etc), which she says is different than actual physical mass. Jim Enloe. resident of CoUeae Street, speaking against Roffman's application. Enloe reads from the HPC handbook, emphasizing their function and authority. He highlights their authority to make sure a structure is "compatible with the size, scale, and architectural pictures in order to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment". Enloe says that mass, size, and scale are important parts of every HPC decision. In terms of 10.1, Enloe says that while McCafferty has attempted to meet criteria, the HPC must decide whether her attem pts are sufficient. Enloe refers to some of Beasley's visual aides. He notes the large areas of roof that are substantially larger. Enloe says the structure is very "dominating". From an aesthetic perspective, he says, this visual mass is much more imposing than the previous structure. Enloe says the HPC acted within its purview and he asks the Board to have faith in the HPC's decision. Enloe says the HPC works based on a lot "looser" conversations, unlike the Board, but decision are made on evidence and the decision to deny Roffman's application was based on visual mass and overall height, which is in their purview. Jim Esten, resident of 1039 CoUeae Street, speaking against Roffman's application. Esten says there are two points he wants to make about visual mass. The first is that the requirement is not to just put in feature to soften visual mass but to put in sufficient features. Esten says one of the biggest variables is the literal mass of the building, which has the greatest impact on the visual mass. The second point is that the notion of gables is admirable but not sufficient. Esten says whether or not the structure looks like a duplex, as the architect stated, is irrelevant when looking at the building from the side. Esten says he is speaking on behalf of a friend who lives on the west side of the structure and who also had to rebuild after the tornado. Tim Weitzel. HPC member, speaking against Roffman's application. Weitzel addresses the difference between architectural and visual mass. Weitzel says that transcripts often chop up what people are trying to say. He says he doesn't have anything to add from what he said last time. He restates the HPC majority's opinion on the size of the building. Weitzel refers to the petition Beasley read and said that the letter also stated size and scale of the building, not just use. Wood asks about the next largest building on the block. Weitzel says that the building sits in a valley, so its height is lower. Weitzel says that the HPC looks at surrounding buildings when making decisions, which was a factor in approving the Bethel A.M.E. Church proposed increase in square footage. Weitzel says that there are "problems" with the Church decision that he thinks the HPC should investigate further. Wood asks about the point system. Weitzel says that section 10.2 has to do with mandatory requirements that buildings must meet. John Beasley, attorney on behalf of John Roffman, speaking in favor of Roffman's application. Beasley say,s that Weitzel indicated that the HPC's decision was based on size. Beasley reads from September 28 h, 2006 HPC transcripts. Beasley says that the application was denied based on density, which is arbitrary and capricious. Walz reminds the Board that their decision will be based on the HPC's decision as it was rendered. Walz asks Holecek to elaborate on the decision of the Board. Holecek says that the Board must decide whether or not the HPC appropriately applied the guidelines and facts of this case. Or did they exceed their authority and were arbitrarily and capriciously in applying those guidelines. If you find that they were not acting arbitrarily and capriciously, then "we're finished". However, if the Board finds that the HPC acted inappropriately, the Board steps into the shoes of the HPC. They can either approve a Certificate of Appropriateness or they can this with modifications. They can also defer if they thought there are design elements they would like to further see taken. Enloe says that the Board also has the option of denying a Certificate of Appropriateness. Holecek says she already said that. Walz clarifies Enloe's point and says that even if the Board finds that the HPC acted arbitrarily and capriciously, they can render a new decision that has the same results of denying a Certificate, based on findings a fact. Holecek says this is correct. Board of Adjustment January 10, 2007 Page 6 Public Hearina Closed MOTION: Shelangouski moves to approve the appeal from John Roffman for APL06.00004 for a decision made by the Historic Preservation Commission to deny a Certificate of Appropriateness for a proposed building to be located in the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-20) zone and Conservation District Overly (OCD) zone at 923 Iowa Avenue. Wood seconds the motion. Thornton asks Shelangouski to repeat the original motion. Holecek repeats the motion as stated by Shelangouski (see above). Shelangouski says that she hasn't changed her mind from the last meeting. She finds that the HPC always went back to density in rendering its decision, according to the minutes and transcripts from both HPC meetings, which is not in their purview. Wright says that after rereading the HPC minutes from both meetings, he found a mix of argument. Some of which was germane and some not. Wright says that he understands depth is part of the mass of the building and quotes to statements made by the commissioners that refer to visual mass and architectural mass. Wright refers to various moments in the transcripts (as previously brought up by Shelangouski and Weitzel) from the September 14th and September 28th HPC meetings and notes that there is no firm definition of architectural mass and visual mass. Wright calls 10.1 "tremendously subjective" and reads that measures should be incorporated to reduce visual mass and overall height. Wright reiterates that he doesn't really know what visual mass is-is it perception or what is actually there. Wright notes section 3.4 in the Historic Preservation manual. He reads this section out loud notes how the "size of buildings, lots and yards, as well as architectural characteristics of a building varies by district". Wright says that while measures were incorporated into the design of the building to reduce the visual mass, there is a point at which the structure takes up "just plain mass". Wright says that the HPC did not act capriciously but in fact acted within their purview. Wright says he will vote to deny the appeal. Wood says that from his reading of the minutes, he feels that there was considerable discussion of mass. The terms use varied-scale, height, depth-but the majority of the HPC were speaking about mass, size, and depth. Wood says that with the College Hill Conservation District the HPC has a difficult job. Wood says that the HPC has to apply very broad criteria to individual properties and the neighborhood and this takes a lot of interpretation. Wood feels that both considered that the HPC worked hard to act appropriately. While he admires McCafferty's design, he says that when a large building is made even larger, there must be more drastic steps to reduce the mass to make it fit the buildings around it. He believes HPC considered mass in its decision. Wood says that he will vote to deny the appeal. Thornton says that he understands the HPC has an important and a difficult job in evaluating this proposal. Thornton says that looking at the HPC regulations that "measures should be incorporated" into the design of a new building to reduce the visual impact, and seeing that the previous building was the largest on the block, he has trouble understanding how the HPC came to its findings. The proposed structure looks like it is taking into account the character of the neighborhood. There is a very large building on the other side of the block that doesn't look anything like the rest of the neighborhood. decision. He said that the applicant has made extraordinary attempts to reduce the visual mass of the proposed building. With such attempts to meet the criteria of 10.1 and 10.2, Thornton says he has trouble understanding how the HPC came to its decision. Thornton says that he will vote in favor of the appeal. Alexander reiterated that density concerns were a part of the HPC discussion and that is not within their authority. Alexander refers to Beasley's concerns of a denial based on size. Alexander says that in her reading of the minutes she has concern that the HPC made a decision based on physical mass and not visual mass. She thinks the job of the HPC is hard here because these aesthetic issues must be taken into consideration. These are issues that are not often within the purview of the BOA. The HPC's looser discussion style that Weitzel talked about becomes an issue when it comes to an appeal. Alexander says as longs as things go smoothly that style is fine, but when an appeal occurs and the Board only has the transcripts and minutes of past meetings, then that's all they can use to make a judgment. She says while some have asked us to have faith in the HPC, it cannot be blind faith or it renders the appeal process meaningless. Alexander says that visual mass was hit on at various times, but the pervasive reasons that she read in the minutes were in fact density, the nature of the population of the people who would live in Board of Adjustment January 10, 2007 Page 7 the building, and the number of people who were speaking against the building. Alexander says she understands what a difficult decision this was, but the decision should not be done on the basis of a vote by those who come to testify. Alexander will vote in favor of the appeal. The motion is approved: 3:2 Holecek informs the Board that the next step is to decide on an appropriate remedy given the facts before the Board. Holecek tells Alexander that the motion can be to issue a Certificate of Appropriateness, to deny a Certificate, to defer for more design information, or modify the decision. MOTION: Shelangouski moves to approve the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for a new building to be constructed at 923 Iowa Avenue per the plans presented. Thornton seconds the motion. Wright says that in terms of other remedies to reduce the visual mass, he doesn't feel qualified to make those recommendations. Wood agrees. Wood says that he feels the architect took admirable steps but he still isn't sure. Holecek says that as far as the remedy, the Board is now applying the guidelines discussed to this particular structure. Holecek says that if the Board feels adequate attempts to reduce the visual mass and overall height have been taken, then that would support Shelangouski's motion. Wright says that the southern third of the West elevation is quite "bothersome" and "slab-like". He would like to see something to break that up. Wright is concerned about the residential lots to the rear. Wood says that if there are concerns about noise, maybe small windows are fine. Wright asks if there is a screening standard that comes into play. Holecek says yes but she doesn't know what that is. Shelley McCafferty says that there is a screening standard for the multi-family use-a 15 foot setback from the lot line. She is voluntarily adding additional screening so there will be an evergreen screen. This screen is an S-2 standard, which she doesn't know offhand. Walz says that S-2 is a screening standard that uses distance and low-level screening to separate uses from the public right away and other zones. Walz says the S-3 is when there are bright lights or a need to screen to a greater height. Walz says S-2 would range between 2 and 4 feet. Holecek says that the HPC has no jurisdiction over landscaping. Weitzel says the HPC usually refers to the S-2 standard. Thornton asks if there was a question about screening. Holecek says no, since the HPC doesn't address screening. Shelangouski asks Wright to clarify his concerns. Wright says that his concerns are primarily with the west side of the building; however he doesn't have any suggestions. Walz says that the Board doesn't need to recommend a specific change to the structure but more of a broad outlining of what the applicant must address-the visual mass of the rear portion of the building. But, Walz says, that change will come back to the Board anyway in the future for approval. Alexander asks for such suggestions from the Board in order to amend the motion. Holecek says the Board can do a "friendly" withdrawal of the motion rather than amending the present motion. Wright asks for Board's feelings. Wood says that he feels "very much out of place" in making such a decision. Thornton says that he feels comfortable in expressing his position. Holecek suggests to the rest of the Board to ask the architect further question about how the issue of the rear portion of the building might be addressed. Wright asks about the depth of the rear portion of the building. McCafferty says that it's about 14 feet from the bay to the rear of the building. The bay juts out about 3 Y, feet. Shelangouski asks if she can reduce the visual mass of the 14 feet. McCafferty says she can't answer that without her floor plan. Shelangouski asks about additional windows to break up the West side of the structure. McCafferty says that would be an option to consider without looking at the floor plan. McCafferty says that the location of the back is 6 feet higher than the front. So the foundation is going to be a lillie bit higher than what is shown. Board of Adjustment January 10, 2007 Page 8 Wright says that if something could be done to break up the west side of the structure, then he would feel comfortable. Shelangouski indicates that the exterior board and batten treatment used on the bay could be repeated on the rear portion to break up the rear mass. Wright indicates that this would take care of his concerns. Alexander refers back to the state of the motion. Walz suggests amending the motion if the Board is comfortable with the architect's suggestions to address with the Board's concerns. Board decides that the motion must be amended. MOTION: Wright moves to amend the original motion to request that the "southern third" of the side elevation of the building be "broken up" per the suggestions of the architect so that it receives the same treatment as the large bay of the structure and hence reduces the visual mass. Shelangouski seconds the motion. Shelangouski says that she believes that the architect has met the guidelines as set forth by 10.1 of the handbook to reduce visual mass of a building. Shelangouski says she will be voting to approve the motion as amended. Thornton says that the applicant and architect have adequately addressed the guidelines of section 10.1. Thornton says that he will vote in favor of the motion as amended. Wright says that the concept of visual mass in a structure that large takes a fair amount of attention from the architect and any efforts to break up the mass is valid. Wright votes in favor. Wood says he has concerns about the visual mass but the measures that have taken place are admirable. He will vote in favor. Alexander will also vote in favor for the reasons stated. The motion is approved: 5:0 Other: None Board of Adjustment Information: Shelangouski will not be at the February 14th meeting. Wood will not be at the meeting in March. Shelangouski says she might not be able to make it either, but she's not sure. Walz advises the Board to start thinking about an alternate date. Adjournment: Meeting is adjourned at 7:05 PM sfpcd/minsfboaf2007/1-20-07.doc i I Board of Adjustment , i Attendance Record I 2007 I I TERM I I NAME EXP. 1/10 Carol Alexander 01/01/08 X I Michael Wright 01/01109 X Ned Wood 01/01/10 X M. Shelangouski 01/01/11 X Edgar Thornton 01/01/12 X I , , I I KEY: X = Present o = Absent I OlE = AbsentlExcused I NM = No meeting , I --- = Not a Member I ! i ! , ! ! 1 i I ; , I i I I I i I I I CIr MINUTES PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 1,2007 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL FINAL Members Present: Mark Seabold, Terry Trueblood, DaLayne Williamson, Chuck Felling, Emily Carter-Walsh (tardy) Members Absent: Emily Martin, Rick Fosse Staff Present: Marcia Klingaman, Brian Boelk, Karin Franklin Others Present: Rod Lehnertz, Gene Anderson, Bob Brooks CALL TO ORDER Seabold called the meeting to order at 3:34 PM. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL Recommend to remove the Grand Avenue Roundabout site from further Public Art placement consideration. Motion passed 4:0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 5. 2006 MEETING MOTION: Felling moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Williamson seconded the motion. Motion passed 4:0. DISCUSSION OF GRAND AVENUE ROUNDABOUT PROJECT Bob Brooks supplied a report from the University regarding the project. A graphic layout of the utility tunnels and underground infrastructure was presented to the group. A major tunnel with 12-foot mains and steam lines is present under the proposed site. Brooks explained they believe most of the lines are 4 foot below the ground. Rod Lehnertz noted the section of tunnel underneath the proposed site has not been rebuilt, and the main concern is with a 15 KU line that's marginally in the area proposed. A concern Hospital Emergency Room staff have with the proposal is the flow of incoming emergency room patients or visitors and the possible confusion or line of sight visitors may have with a large structure on the roundabout. Utility personnel are concerned with not having immediate access to the underground utilities for maintenance. Lehnertz stated that they would not be willing to have to move part of the structure to gain access. There is also concern by the University of this being a prime target for graffiti. Gene Anderson asked if the tunnel was a walk-through tunnel. Lehnertz and Brooks answered that it was. Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes August3,2006 Page 2 Seabold added that the tunnel's presence made it a big concern to know the precise weight of the sculpture. Anderson said that he could make some suggestions as how to straddle the pipes economically if the city believes this site is a major purview for enlivening the passage to the Hospital and Colloton Pavilion. He proposed augered caissons could be a reasonable solution to accomplishing this artwork. He noted that one of the items of the format of the competition was that the DOT preferred no visual access of the thoroughfare thru the roundabout. He applauded the idea of something going there and shared his appreciation to the committee for their consideration. Terry Trueblood stated that both he and Rick Fosse were of the opinion hat the site is more suitable for landscaping and that he was sorry the discussions had gone on so long with regards to Anderson's commitment to the project. He stated they are impressed with Gene's work and hope that his proposal could be placed somewhere more suitable. Seabold reiterated to Anderson the committee's interest in his work and asked about the possibility of placing it elsewhere. Karin Franklin shared that site selection is ongoing. MOTION: Seabold moved to remove the Grand Avenue Roundabout site from further Public Art placement consideration. Trueblood seconded the motion. Motion passed 4:0 Anderson, Rod Lehnertz and Bob Brooks left at 3:51 P.M. Emily Carter Walsh arrived approximately 3:55 P.M. Discussion continued about the landscaping responsibility as members exited with the understanding that the responsibility would be collaborative and discussion would resume at a later date. Karin Franklin noted the lesson learned with this project is to get engineering information early in the consideration process. DaLayne noted that all of the artwork submitted was very large. DISCUSSION OF THE "ART ON THE WALLS" PROJECT FOR ARTSFEST 20TH ANNIVERSARY IN COOPERATION WITH SUMMER OF THE ARTS Klingaman discussed DaLayne Williamson's suggestion of debris artist David Williamson. She poke with him and he appreciated the offer, but will not be available this summer. He may be able to participate in the future. The idea being that this committee would sponsor an event or event artist as part of Artsfest. She spoke a number of times with Katie Roche, director of Summer of the Arts, and she suggested the idea of projecting art on the walls as an art project. Roche underlined that she herself would not be able to put the time needed into this type of project, but there was a possibility of two artists on the Artsfest committee getting involved. Klingaman noted her involvement would be more on the administrative side, and perhaps help select a theme. All images would be digital photographs that would be projected on walls downtown. Some of the thematic ideas presented were Children's Art, Faces of Iowa City, Historical Art or Architecture of the City. The Faces of Iowa City idea, would involved setting up 3-4 Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes August 3, 2006 Page 3 photography locations downtown where the public could have their photos taken a few weeks prior to the festival, and subsequently project those images. Franklin offered the possibility to project images from the Senior Center across the street to Dawn's Beads building. And Walsh offered the idea of projecting on parking structures. Klingaman noted that the images would be projected in the evening, from approx. 8-10 P.M. and that the approval from the building owners would be necessary. Seabold asked if a series of screens could be used in the high traffic area, hung from the tops of buildings to offer art above the heads of viewers. Walsh said any gauze-like lightweight material would be economically acceptable. Klingaman said that a screening process would need to be developed. Franklin suggested using art classes for the material so that they could engage the public and prescreen the art (by teachers) at the same time. Chuck Felling suggested the Alternative High School. Klingaman said the nex1 step would be getting a call for art out and work out the logistics of the project. Franklin noted the time frame is tight for getting the logistics of the scrims and permission from both sides of the street, projectors and how all the art will be reviewed, and time for publicity. Williamson suggested a one-week or short time frame that pictures would be taken to limit the amount of time spent collecting photographs while still engaging the public. Klingaman and Seabold noted two projectors are currently available for use, and more could be leased for the project. Providing security for the projectors would also be part of the consideration. Walsh suggested projecting on the pole banners, but placement for the projector may be a problem. Klingaman noted that the surface doesn't have to be fiat. Many communities have projected on uneven surfaces and it only added to the artistic element of the project. Klingaman asked who would be interested in being a part of the project. Emily Walsh consented to involvement. Chuck Felling said he would be available for specific tasks, but not organizational involvement. Mark Seabold moved discussion to a potential public art project involving young people. The suggested project would be similar to one he experienced 25 years ago as a child that made a big impression. The proposal was to ask Artsfest Artists to contribute works to a reduced price booth that would offer art for sale to kids only at the $5-10 range. Franklin said they could send a letter to the artists telling them this project was the way they were trying to engage kids, asking them to submit a small work with a price limit of $5. Felling noted the Senior Center might also have some pieces to offer. Klingaman said she would speak with Katie Roche about their options. Franklin noted it would be a great way to engage kids, and offered to administer the partnership. Seabold mentioned their involvement would be renting the tent and saying 'sponsored by the public art committee.' DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL PUBLIC ART PROJECTS FOR THE REMAINDER OF FY07 Franklin explained the current state of the public art budget and distributed a project list. Currently $93,870.34 is available with another $50,000 earmarked for July 07. She suggested Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes August 3, 2006 Page 4 the committee think about a project or projects that might encumber this money since removal of the roundabout project from consideration. Any neighborhood projects would be subsequent. Trueblood had two suggestions, one being something highlighting Creekside Park visible from Muscatine Rd, and asked about the current state of the alleyway art project possibilities in the Ped Mall. Franklin explained the discussion with the owner of the current Wells Fargo building, and the one across the alley downtown. The owner is very interested in this idea, but the timeframe would be according to the redevelopment schedule, which is 2 years away. Felling suggested consideration of a project in the Chauncey Swan Park. Trueblood said now that the new windows at the Rec Center are installed, the east or west wall of the swimming pool are prime visual areas for a mural of some kind. The mural would be seen from the interior and exterior of the building. One factor to consider is the acoustic material on the upper areas of the wall. Another suggestion he had for a project is something involving park signage. He highlighted Chauncey Swan among other parks that could use more artistic signage. Emily Carter Walsh feels the focus should be maintained on the parks and moving away from the down town area. Seabold really liked the idea of the mural at the Rec Center. Franklin summarized that the Alleys Downtown would be the hardest to attack right now. When the redevelopment happens in a few years, it may be easier. Creekside and Chauncey Swan would be part of (art) commissions and the call would go out. Creekside would probably involve that neighborhood association. Chauncey Swan would be mostly involving this committee and the Pool project would be collaboration with Parks and Recreation. Park signage would also be collaboration between the Parks and Rec commission and this body. Franklin stated that with the monies available, 2 projects might be possible. Discussion of the mural possibility continued with a focus on understanding the needs of the materials in the humid environment, and a consultation with a muralist may be necessary to understand if the acoustic panels need to be removed, or if they could be painted over, and what materials would provide good protection from the environment. The committee decided on pursuing the mural project at the Recreation Pool wall, and something at the Chauncey Swan Park. Next meeting will focus on creating parameters for the call to artists. PUBLIC AWARENESS Klingaman discussed the Public Art in Private Spaces project. She noted it didn't get much publicity from the press. She suggested they would go ahead with another press release and noted the deadline of April 30'h with the idea of committee reviews taking place in May. Those selected would receive a certificate from the City of Iowa City in recognition of their displaying of art. Walsh suggested rotating pictures of the private art on the city website. The rotating sculpture downtown is part of this. Seabold noted out of order that Mark Newcollins is a video artist, and he would be a good contact to speak with about the art on the walls. Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes August 3, 2006 Page 5 COMMUNITY SURVEY Franklin noted the problem is that the focus of the survey is not apparent. What we want to achieve with the survey seemed to be, 1. How much people know about the public art program, and 2. If they have any thoughts or preferences as to where/what the focus of public art is. Glimpse has been very popular, and another idea is doing a scavenger hunt during Arts Fest to highlight the locations of public art. Trueblood asked if the survey would be done in-house or by another group. Franklin stated it would be in house, and probably appear on water bills or online, and would be non-scientific. Trueblood explained that the Parks Department is on the verge of a large-scale community survey and a few questions about public art could be added to the survey. Franklin also stated that an interactive element to the website is in development, and this would be very useful for this type of engagement. Klingaman said she needed more direction on the information the committee wants, and Seabold directed her to awareness, understanding people's level of awareness of public art, possibly fund raising, and more engagement. Committee Time Klingaman noted the deadline for Poetry in Public is Feb. 2'd and the grade school and junior high submission quality seems higher than last year. Franklin said that John Beasley came in and asked about the relocation of Irving Webber statue. He suggested a site closer to the library. The committee directed her not to pursue relocation of this statue, as it seems unnecessary. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Walsh moved to adjourn, Felling seconded, the motion passed 5:0 Meeting was adjourned at 4:57 P.M. Minutes were submitted by Elizabeth Kennedy. sfpcd/minutes/pubart/2-0 1-07paac.com Public Art Advisory Committee Attendance Record 2007 Term Name Expires 2/1 Emily Carter Walsh 01101108 X Charles Fellin!! 01101109 X DaLavne Williamson 01101/09 X Emilv Martin 01101108 OlE Mark Seabold 01101110 X Rick Fosse OlE Terry Trueblood X Key: X = Present 0 = Absent OlE = Absent/Excused c:: MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION EMMA J. HARVAT HALL March 15, 2007 APPROVED MEMBERS PRESENT: Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Bob Brooks, Wally Piahutnik, Beth Koppes, Dean Shannon MEMBERS EXCUSED: Terry Smith STAFF PRESENT: Robert Miklo, Sarah Walz, Sarah Holecek OTHERS PRESENT: Martha Greer, Suzanne Bentler, Marianne Mason, Charlie Drum, Ben Galluzzo, Brent Freerks, Mike Moriarity, Steve Long, David McCoid RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 5-0 (Smith absent, Freerks recused), REZ07-00002, an application submitted by Martha Greer and Suzanne Bentler for a rezoning from Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone to Medium Density Single Family (RS-8) zone of approximately 5.75 acres of property located on South Governor Street. CALL TO ORDER: Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: No Discussion. REZONING ITEM: REZ07-00002, discussion of an application submitted by Martha Greer and Suzanne Bentler for a rezoning from Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone to Medium Density Single Family (RS-8) zone of approximately 5.75 acres of property located on South Governor Street. Freerks announced she owns property in this area and recused herself from discussion. Freerks yielded chair duties to Eastham and left the room. Walz said that a recently completed study of housing issues In the Central Planning District indicates that single family homes are being converted to duplexes and the right of home ownership has decreased slightly in most of the RNS-12 zones. She said there is a great variety of housing available in the rezoning area, which is typical near the downtown area. The lack of owner-occupied housing on Lucas Street compared to the cluster of owner-occupied in the proposed rezoning area suggests there is a tipping point In the housing market. When the density or proportion of the rental housing gets to a certain point, the housing market tips and there is very little owner-occupied housing. A concern over affordable housing for famiiies was brought up in the March 1 Planning and Zoning meeting. There was a concern that a zoning change to an RS-8 zone would reduce the opportunity for duplexes and opportunities for families to rent in this area. Waiz said that due to the close proximity to the university, the rezoning area is likely to be marketed to student renters. Students are often able to outbid families because of their ability to pool together money. The Housing Authority has submitted a letter indicating that the experience that they have had with rental properties in the area is that the high proportion of student renters may discourage families from renting in the area. The lifestyles of families and students is sometimes in confiict. They have different schedules and expectations regarding property upkeep and noise. The applicants are seeking a housing balance. A group of home owners in the rezoning area have invested time and money into their neighborhood. They want assurance that their time and money will lead to greater Planning and Zoning Commission March 15, 2007 Page 2 stability of the neighborhood. The applicants have consciously decreased the requested rezoning area to inciude only the properties that would not become non-conforming in the RS-8 zone. Walz said Staff recommends approvai of the application because the Comprehensive Plan encourages reinvestment in oider neighborhoods and the preservation of the historic character of older neighborhoods. Staff does not believe there wili be a negative impact to housing affordability. The rezoning has the support of most of the property owners in the area. Koppes asked if 615 South Governor is included as non-conforming. Walz said that 615 South Governor is currently non-conforming and will not change in the RS-8. Eastham clarified that in RNS-12 and RS-8 zones multi-family building types are not allowed. Walz added that when the area was rezoned to RNS-12 from RM-12, if the multi-family properties were conforming in RM-12 they were conforming in the RNS-12; if they were non-conforming in the RM-12 they were non-conforming in the RNS-12. As a non-conforming use they cannot expand nor can they rebuild if 75% of the value is destroyed. All of the multi-family in the proposed area came into the RNS-12 as non-conforming. Eastham asked if there would be any additional multi-family development. Walz said there could be no new multi-family development. Eastham asked if any of the 12 converted multi-family properties found In the RNS-12 study area became duplexes. Miklo said there may have been multi-family properties that were converted to single family or duplex. Eastham said we don't have sufficient data to suggest what a reasonable balance of building types is appropriate. Mlklo said the map is illustrative because all of the properties on the map were at one time single family. Through zoning practices, almost all of the properties on Johnson and Dodge Street have been allowed to covert to multi-family or duplex. If this area isn't rezoned to RS-8, past experience would indicate that single family homes would continue to be converted to duplexes. Plahutnlk said many properties that are currently single family rental are owned by persons that live in this rezoning area. The owners are not looking to convert their properties, they are looking to stabilize and maintain the current housing balance of the neighborhood. Miklo said rezoning this area to RS-8 is a good tool for stabilization and given the current uses and desires of the property owners it would be an appropriate zone for the area under consideration. Walz added this area is challenged by its proximity to downtown. It creates an intense rental market primarily for students and families that want to live and work close to downtown. The applicants are seeking a level playing field for students and families that want to rent or own property in this area. Public discussion was opened. Martha Greer, 530 South Governor Street, said she has lived at her home for eight years and purchased the home after it was on the market for six months. The price of the home was affordable and allowed her to use the extra money to renovate the home. She said a lot has changed in the last eight years. The last downzoning and the nuisance ordinance allowed for a transformation of the neighborhood. She added she is the owner of 517 South Governor, a single family rental property, and the co-owner of 436 South Governor, a duplex that was converted from a single-family house before the purchase. Her investment in the houses wasn't to make money, but to fix up the house and spruce up the neighborhood. She believes a downzoning to RS-8 would further stabilize the neighborhood. Suzanne Bentler, 520 South Governor Street, said she moved to the neighborhood because of its uniqueness and proximity to downtown. She put together a PowerPoint slideshow to display the recent changes the neighborhood has gone through. The duplex at 436 South Governor had a lot of money put into it to strip and paint the siding. Her house at 520 Governor also had the siding stripped and painted. The duplex at 527 South Governor was repainted by the neighbor as a service project. It was once owned by a non-profit housing agency. The multi-family property at 433 South Governor, the rooming houses on Lucas Street, and the Sorority Houses on Burlington Street show the diverse housing stock of the area. Planning and Zoning Commission March 15, 2007 Page 3 Bentler said there is concern over the further duplex development due to the additions that envelop the yard. More duplexes that envelop yards could lower property values for neighboring properties, lower quality of life for neighbors' privacy, and create more parking lots in backyards. Bentler added the owner at 416 South Governor wrote an opposition leller to the rezoning. The owner asked to not be included in the rezoning. She believes it should be included in the rezoning and preserved because was owned by Irving Weber's. She said the Housing Authority provided rental information for a city-owned duplex on Lucas Street. The Housing Authority sent a letter back and indicated that they have had trouble renting this property to single families. Marianne Mason, 640 South Lucas Street, said there are three owner-occupied properties on Lucas Street. She supports the zoning change because she likes an area with a diverse population. The parking on Lucas Street has become a problem due to the large number of student-occupied houses. She doesn't want to see the remaining single family homes be converted to a duplex or multi-family use. Charlie Drum, 1136 Franklin Street, said he lived from 1989 to 1998 on the 300 block of South Lucas Street. He left his house before the nuisance ordinance and the downzoning to RNS-12. When he lived there, there were many single family homes on Lucas Street. He believes the downzoning stopped the neighborhood from sliding away. He said when there is a combination of single family renters and owner-occupied properties it prevents the area from slipping. Ben Galluzzo, 904 Bowery Street, said he grew up at 910 Bowery and his parents still live there. The neighborhood has changed since he was a child because the student rental market has widened. The house he currently lives in was left to his parents. He enjoys the mix of housing and would like to see it maintained. He said he supported the rezoning. Brent Freerks, 443 South Governor Street, said his family bought the house about 14 years ago. He said the current zoning has the potential for larger structures and paved backyards. He likes the diversity of housing in the area and lives next to a single family rental. There has been a variety of people living in the rental property, families and students. He has put a lot of time and money into rejuvenating his house and is planning on building a front porch in the summer. It is not about keeping the students out, because they are welcome in the neighborhood; it is about keeping larger structures out and preserving the green space. Mike Moriaritv, 506 South Governor Street, said he lives next to 426 South Governor, a rental property. The rental property was run-down and very unpleasant to live next to when it was owned before Steve Long, Suzanne Bentler, and Martha Greer bought it. It almost made him not buy his current house. Now, it is fixed up and is occupied occupants who respect the neighborhood. He thinks the downzoning would bring more responsibility to the neighborhood. Steve Lona, 520 South Governor Street, said he has lived in Iowa City since 1993 and moved to Governor Street in 2002. After the downzoning to RNS-12, he felt comfortable making an investment in the neighborhood. He likes the idea of having tenants and landlords on the same block. He did not intend on becoming a landlord, but whenever a house went on the market, a sense of fear went through the neighborhood. The neighborhood came together to buy properties and helped stabilize the area. Long said he has worked as a community development planner specializing in affordable housing for 15 years. The Governor Street neighborhood is a textbook example of what a neighborhood should be. There is a variety of income, housing options, ages, and buildings. One of the biggest influences on the price of housing is location. The area under consideration is near employment, education, and shopping. When renting out a property near the downtown area, the taxes and age of the house will make it difficult to be affordable. The property taxes on 433 South Governor cost about $6000 dollars per year. David McCoid, 922 Bowery Street, said he moved here about 18 months ago from Minneapolis. He moved to Bowery Street because it reminded him of the south side of Minneapolis. He supports the rezoning because he wants the neighborhood to stay as it is. Large structures should be kept out of the area. ---,--_._--_._---,._------_._.._..__._,_._._._._.._--~......-- - .-.._--~----_.._._..__.,-- -. .--.-,.--.---- Planning and Zoning Commission March 15, 2007 Page 4 Eastham closed pubiic discussion, Motion: Plahutnik moved to approve REZ07-00002, Brookes seconded the motion, Koppes said she wonders if the Historic Preservation Commission knows about the historic information about Irving Weber in the area. She supports the rezoning, Plahutnik said he also supports the rezoning. He asked Eastham to sum up his concerns about the affordable housing issue in the area, Brooks said he likes what this neighborhood has accomplished and their vision for the future, This neighborhood is a prime example of how to take back the neighborhood. Eastham said he likes that the neighborhood offers rental units to students and families, He is concerned the zoning change will limit the number of duplex homes in the area, He thinks the City does not have the appropriate tools to create the kind of balance that is needed for affordable housing, Eastham said this is a great example of a neighborhood taking responsibility for their properties and coming together for the good of the area, He is willing to support the downzoning, The motion passed on a vote of 5-0 (Smith absent, Freerks recused), OTHER ITEMS: Mikio said he wanted to point out the memo that was distributed for City Council meetings, It is the new rotation schedule, Miklo said there will continue to be plats and other items that aren't subject to the recent Supreme Court ruling on informal meeting agendas, These plats are routine and there will not be a need for a commission member to be present. Miklo said Eastham will be attending the National APA Conference in Philadelphia next month, The others in line were not able to go. CONSIDERATION OF 3/2/07 MEETING MINUTES: Motion: Brooks made a motion to approve the minutes as typed and corrected, Koppes seconded. Motion passed on a vote of 6-0 (Smith absent). ADJOURNMENT: Motion: Plahutnik moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:37 pm. Koppes seconded, Motion carried on a vote of 6-0 (Smith absent). Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission Attendance Record 2007 FORMAL MEETING Term Name Expires 1/18 2/01 2/15 3/01 3/15 Brooks 05/10 X X X X X Eastham 05/11 X X X X X Freerks 05/08 X X X X X Koppes 05/07 X X OlE X X Plahutnik 05/10 X X O/E X X Shannon 05/08 X X 0 X X Smith 05/11 X X X X OlE INFORMAL MEETING Term Name Expires 1/29 2/26 B. Brooks 05/10 X X C. Eastham 05/11 X X A. Freerks 05/08 X X E. Koppes 05/07 X OlE W Plahutnik 05/10 X X D.Shannon 05/08 OlE X T. Smith 05/11 X X Key: X = Present 0 = Absent OlE = Absent/Excused POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - March 13, 2007 FINAL/APPROVED em: CALL TO ORDER: Chair Michael Larson called the meeting to order at 5:31 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Candy Barnhill, Loren Horton, Greg Roth MEMBERS ABSENT: Elizabeth Engel STAFF PRESENT: Staff Kellie Tuttle, Legal Counsel Catherine Pugh STAFF ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Captain Tom Widmer of the ICPD; and public, Dean Abel RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL (1) Accept PCRB Report on Complaint #06-05. (2) Recommend change to City Code section 8-8-6(E) CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by Barnhill and seconded by Horton to adopt the consent calendar as presented or amended. . Minutes of the meeting on 02/22/07 . ICPD General Order 99-02 (Alarm-Open Door Response) . ICPD General Order 01-05 (Officer Involved Shootings/Lethallncident Investigations) . ICPD General Order 01-05 (Officer Involved Shootings/Lethallncident Investigations) . ICPD General Order 04-01 (Personnel Early Warning System) . ICPD SOG 01-15 (Criminal Investigations) . ICPD Department Memo 07-08 Motion carried, 4/0, Engel absent. Horton stated that on the February 22nd minutes, Horton's name should be changed under Executive Session. Barnhill asked Widmer regarding General Order 99-02 (Alarm-Open Door Response) the difference between a key holder, business representative, building representative, and a property representative. Widmer said they would take a look at property representative, business representative and a building representative. He believes that they were meant to mean the same thing, but would look in to it. Widmer explained a key holder can be a property owner, maintenance person or a tenant. Barnhill also suggested looking at General Order 04-01 (Personnel Early Warning System). Under purpose, the first sentence has "outline identify". She would like to see the wording cleaned up. Also under Procedures (IV), Personnel Early Warning Review (D), Barnhill wanted clarification when the supervisor prepares a written PCRB March 13, 2007 Page 2 OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS PUBLIC DISCUSSION summary of the meeting. Widmer confirmed that the written summary is done post meeting. Barnhill asked the Board to recap the discussion from the February 220d meeting regarding in-car recording devices. Larson reported that Chief Hargadine had contacted him regarding requests for in-car recordings. There was concern due to the amount of time it takes to mask the officer's identity and the process is extremely problematic, in the end it rendered the in-car recording unusable. The Board had discussed that it generally does not request the in-car recordings and shouldn't be an issue. Barnhill wanted to make sure that audio would still be available to the Board. Barnhill was concerned that the Board was giving up the right to request the in-car recordings. Larson stated that the Board was not giving up the option to request the in car recordings, but that it would be on an as-needed basis. The Board asked Widmer to follow up with the Chief to be sure everyone was on the same page and that the Board still has the option to request audio andlor video. Widmer said he would discuss it with the Chief and follow up with a memo to the Board. City Code Section 8-8-6(E) 1 Policy & Procedure for extension requests - Barnhill would like to have the wording changed in Section V. (E) where it says, "The Board mav grant extensions from this deadline for good cause shown." to "The Board will grant extensions from this deadline for good cause shown." Pugh stated she could not think of anytime an extension would not be granted by the Board with good cause shown by the Police Department. After Board discussion, it was recommended to request the change to Council. Motion by Barnhill, seconded by Roth to recommend the change wording in City Code Section 8-8-6 (E) from "may" to "will" to the City Council. Motion carried, 4/0, Engel absent. None. Abel asked what the ICPD General Orders were. Widmer explained that the General Orders are the orders issued to the officers. They are different from the rules and regulations which are thou shalt. The General Orders are guidelines. Because of the accreditation process the General Orders are to be reviewed in a timely fashion. After Police reviews the General Orders they are furnished to the Review Board so that they can see the current guidelines that the officers are following. Abel also asked about executive session aUdio tapes and minutes and if any minutes are taken for executive sessions. Tuttle explained minutes and audio tapes are kept for one year from the date of the meeting, and are not available to the public. Pugh stated for the record that the Board does not have any power or authority over the Police Department in terms of the writing of the general orders. Any comments or recommendations by the Board are just that, which any citizen could also do. PCRB March 13, 2007 Page 3 BOARD INFORMATION STAFF INFORMATION EXECUTIVE SESSION REGULAR SESSION Abel also asked about the meeting packet items and where they could be found. Tuttle explained that the items are available for review on the City website and to call if he had questions. Abel inquired about the report that the Board makes regarding a complaint and who gets to see the report. Horton responded that the report is a public document that goes to the City Council after the Board finalizes it. None. None. Motion by Horton and seconded by Barnhill to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5(1 )(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. Motion carried, 4/0, Engel absent. Open session adjourned at 6:05 P.M. (Roth left the meeting due to a conflict of interest regarding #06-05.) (Larson left the meeting due to a conflict of interest regarding #06-03.) Returned to open session at 7:44 P.M. Motion by Horton, seconded by Barnhill to forward the Public Report as amended for PCRB Complaint #06-03 to City Council pending the name clearing hearing or waiver there of. Motion carried, 3/0, Engel absent, Larson abstaining. Motion by Horton, seconded by Barnhill to forward the Public Report as amended for PCRB Complaint #06-05 to City Council. Motion carried, 3/0, Engel absent, Roth abstaining. PCRB March 13, 2007 Page 4 Motion by Horton, seconded by Barnhill to set a name clearing hearing for PCRB Complaint #06-03 on March 29th, 2007 at 5:30 P.M. Motion carried, 3/0, Engel absent, Larson abstaining. MEETING SCHEDULE . March 29, 2007, 5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Room . April 10, 2007, 5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Room . May 8,2007,5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Room . June 12, 2007, 5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Room . July 10, 2007, 5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Room Barnhill will not be available for the April 10th meeting. ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by Barnhill and seconded by Horton. Motion carried, 4/0, Engel absent. Meeting adjourned at 7:49 P.M. POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2007 (Meetinl! Date) TERM 119 1116 2/13 2/22 3/13 NAME EXP. Candy 9/1/07 X X NM OlE X Barnhill Elizaheth 9/1/08 X X NM X OlE Engel Loren 9/1108 X X NM X X Horton Greg Roth 9/1/09 X OlE NM X X Michael 9/1109 X OlE NM X X Larson KEY: X = Present 0 = Absent OlE = AbsentlExcused NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240-1826 (319) 356-5041 March 7, 2007 ~.-n To: City Council Complainant Stephen Atkins, City Manager Sam Hargadine, Chief of Police Officer(s) involved in complaint C0 '..' :;; - ---1 U1 W From: Police Citizen's Review Board Re: Investigation of PCRB Complaint #06-05 This is the Report of the Police Citizens Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of Complaint PCRB #06-05 (the "Complaint"). BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Section 8-8-7B (2), the Board's job is to review the Police Chiefs Report ("Report") of his investigation of a complaint. The City Code requires the Board to apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review to the Report and to "give deference" to the Report "because of the Police Chiefs professional expertise", Section 8-8-7 B (2). While the City Code directs the Board to make "Findings of Fact", it also requires that the Board recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify his findings only if these findings are "unsupported by substantial evidence', are "unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious" or are "contrary to a Police Department policy or practice, or any Federal, State or local law", Section 8-8-7 B (2) a, b, c. BOARD'S PROCEDURE The Complaint was received at the Office of the City Clerk on November 3, 2006. As required by Section 8-8-5 (B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation. The Chiefs Report was due on February 1, 2007, and was filed with the City Clerk on January 25,2007. The Board met to consider the Chiefs Report on February 22,2007 and March 13,2007. The Board, by a vote of 3-0 with two members absent, voted to review the Chiefs Report in accordance with section 8-8-7, B (1) (a), "on the record with no additional investigation." FINDINGS OF FACT The Complainant was stopped on August 18, 2006 by Officer A for a traffic violation on Interstate 80. Subsequently, the stance of the K-9 Officer led the officer to a non- consensual search of the vehicle driven by the Complainant. All incidents relating to the stop, the search, and other issues brought forward in the Complaint, were recorded on the Officer's in-car camera. The Complainant. accused Officer A of taking too long to accomplish the ticketing, of using a harsh tone of voice, of whistling during the encounter, of glaring at her and the other occupant of the vehicle, and of using disrespectful language on at least two occasions. The Complainant also accused Officer A of taking too long to search the vehicle, of a delay before a Supervisor arrived, of questioning the other person in the vehicle, and "completely insulted, degraded, and took the job beyond reasonable limits for no reason", as well as showing prejudice. CONCLUSIONS After reviewing the Complaint, and the Chiefs Report, the Board concluded that the complaints were not substantiated. The evidence per the Chiefs report from the in-car camera recording did not uphold the Complainant's version of events. It is difficult to list all of the allegations made by the Complainant in this case, because they were so numerous and overlapping. Therefore we take the Chiefs Report numbering of thirteen (13) separate Complaints, and consolidate them into two (2) inclusive and general allegations, for purposes of our Report. Allegation # 1 - Unwarrantable delay in accomplishing the ticketing and searching tasks. NOT SUSTAINED. The evidence per the Chiefs report does not support the accusations of any delays in performing these duties. o -- ~::::r~ :::.:: Allegation # 2 - Use of harsh tone of voice, of glaring at the Complainant~.Of ~ng-lI disrespectful language, of insulting and degrading the Complainant, C!!itf.. sho:<l(ing -=:::: prejudice - NOT SUSTAINED. The evidence per the Chiefs report does nQC$ppponthe---n accusations of any inappropriate words or actions by Officer A. _ r . - ::" <..J COMMENTS ~ J> --..; (Ji - We commend the Officer involved in this case for activating the in-car camera. The evidence from the recorded video made it possible for the investigating officers to compare the accusations received from the Complainant with what was captured by the in-car camera. This Complaint demonstrates the value of consistent use of the in-car cameras when there is need for later review of actions. CALL TO ORDER: MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: STAFF ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - March 29, 2007 FINAL/APPROVED G[ Vice Chair Elizabeth Engel called the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. Candy Barnhill, Loren Horton Michael Larson, Greg Roth Staff Kellie Tuttle, Legal Counsel Catherine Pugh None None RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL (1) Accept PCRB Report on Complaint #06-03. NAME CLEARING HEARING Tuttle announced that the Chief indicated the Officers had waived the hearing and would not be held. However, there was a need to go into executive session. EXECUTIVE SESSION REGULAR SESSION ADJOURNMENT Motion by Horton and seconded by Barnhill to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5(1 )(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communic.ations from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. Motion carried, 3/0, Larson and Roth absent. Open session adjourned at 5:37 P.M. Returned to open session at 6:33 P.M. Motion by Barnhill, seconded by Horton to forward letter to the Chief of Police. Motion carried, 3/0, Larson and Roth absent. Motion by Horton, seconded by Barnhill to forward the Public Report as amended for PCRB Complaint #06-03 to City Council. Motion carried, 3/0, Larson and Roth absent. Motion for adjournment by Barnhill and seconded by Horton. Motion carried, 3/0, Larson and Roth absent. Meeting adjourned at 6:34 P.M. POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2007 (Meetinl! Date) TERM 119 1116 2/13 2/22 3/13 3/29 NAME EXP. Candy 9/1107 X X NM OlE X X Barnhill Elizabeth 9/1/08 X X NM X OlE X Engel Loren 911/08 X X NM X X X Horton Greg Roth 9/1109 X OlE NM X X 0 Michael 9/1109 X OlE NM X X OlE Larson KEY: X = Present 0 = Absent OlE = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240-1826 (319) 356-5041 Q "",,. ,'~ To: City Council Complainant Stephen Atkins, City Manager Sam Hargadine, Chief of Police Officer(s) involved in complaint .. .' 1-' , ,c..,) ~.." ::~., '1'] .~~ .-"-1 ,. I -.....-' .. co -., 5> !'_,) C> From: Police Citizen's Review Board Re: Investigation of PCRB Complaint #06-03 Date: March 29, 2007 This is the Report of the Police Citizens Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of the Complaint PCRB #06-03 (the "Complaint"), Board's Responsibilitv Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Section 8-8-7-B-(2), the Board's job is to review the Police Chiefs Report ("Report") of his investigation of a complaint. The City Code requires the Board to apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review to the Report and to "give deference" to the Report "because of the Police Chief's professional expertise", Section 8-8-7-B-(2), While the City Code directs the Board to make "Findings of Fact", it also requires that the Board recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify his findings only if these findings are "unsupported by substantial evidence", are "unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious" or are "contrary to Police Department policy or practice or any Federal, State or Local law", Section 8-8-7 -B-(2)-(a)-(b )-( c), Board's Procedure The Complaint was received at the Office of the City Clerk on August 4, 2006, As required by Section 8-8-5-(B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation, The Chief's Report was due November 2, 2006; the Report was filed with the City Clerk on October 19, 2006, The Board met to consider the Chief's Report on November 14, 2006, The Board voted to review the Chief's Report in accordance with Sections 8-8-7-(B)-(1)-(b); 8-8-7-(B)-(1)-(c); 8-8-7- (B)-(1 )-(d); 8-8-7-(B)-(1 )-(e), The Board met December 5, 2006; December 18, 2006, January 9,2007, March 13, 2007, and March 29, 2007 to consider the Chief's Report. Due to the complexity of this incident which included conflicting information provided by the on-scene officers as reported in the Internal Investigation; the Board's desire to adequately review and comprehend the thorough Chief's Report; and the possibility of the Board either requesting additional investigation by the Chief or performing its own additional investigation, the Board had requested a 60-day extension. FindinQs of Fact The complainant alleges that her 17-year old son was stopped, handcuffed, told that he was under arrest, and subjected to discourteous remarks. Interviews were conducted with the juvenile, his father, officers present at the initial scene, and officers directly involved with the juveniles. A second juvenile who was also detained, handcuffed, searched, field interviewed, given an "eye test" and a PBT, placed in a squad car, and ultimately released, declined to participate in the Chief's investigation as did his father. The in car camera system was checked and found to be functional however none of the officers either at the scene or involved in the detention of the juveniles had activated their in car recording devices. The report of the incident, dispatch logs and dispatch tape were reviewed. The ICPD received a report of a vacant house possibly being burglarized. Five patrol officers, the Watch Supervisor, the Watch Commander and two SCAT officers responded. An individual was seen fleeing the area by an officer but was not pursued or apprehended. Two juvenile males walking in the area were detained, field interviewed together and separately, given PBT tests, searched, handcuffed and ultimately released. r-::) Conclusion 2 , ~ ..,:- CJ -"-- Board concluded that the findings of the Chief's Report are not unreasonable,=~rbitfi!'ry oril capricious, See Comment section. -, C,) co Allegation #1: Personal Conduct - Not sustained. Allegation #2: General Conduct on Duty - Not sustained. ~n ._, ...1 Comment :}o: o rJO '_1 ,;-::I~J,; ,{i-'; The Board wishes that the Chief had addressed formally the allegations of handcuffing and alleged arrest of a juvenile as listed by the complainant and as stated by the Chief in his cover letter and his Report to the Board. The Report included investigation regarding these allegations but did not issue Findings. Handcuffing and Arrests of Juveniles: The Board recommends a review of OPS-19.1, Juvenile Procedures, with emphasis on handcuffing of juveniles and arrests of juveniles. In Car Recording Device Activation: The Board does not concur with the internal investigation conclusion that no policy violation occurred when no officer activated an in car recording device. OPS-12, In Car Recording Devices [effective 8/4/1999], section IV, states, "In addition to traffic stops, officers should manually activate the recording equipment on calls for service and on self initiated field activity." According to Merriam-Websters Collegiate Dictionary, 11th Edition the operant, "should", is "used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory" and placed an obligation on the officer(s) at the scene and involved in the field investigation to activate their recording device(s). The existence of a visual/audio documentary of the events which transpired during the detention of the juvenile(s) would have been an invaluable tool for the resolution of PCRB #06-03, if after viewing the recording of the incident, a complaint had transpired at all. Disrespectful Commentary: The Board suggests that consideration be given to additional training and a review of Leg-01, Civil Rights, 1I1-(D)-(2), "Act, speak and conduct themselves in such manner as to treat all persons with courtesy and with that respect due to every person as a human being." In the Investigator's Report, it was acknowledged by officers at the scene that certain officer(s) did not exhibit the consummate level of professionalism that is typically exhibited by the members of the ICPD. Officer Communication at the Scene: The Investigator's Report documented conflicting information among the officers who had direct contact with the juveniles. The Investigator's report detailed multiple incorrect assumptions made by officers at the scene due to a lack of communication between the lead officer and those detaining the juvenile(s). i.e.: "Officer II said he had assumed that Juvenile 2 (Juvenile 1) had been arrested by Officer I, and he searched him incident to the arrest." Incident Documentation: The Board concurs with the Chiefs assessment that a review of reporting requirements is necessary. The Board suggests a review of OPS V., Reporting Use of Force, and review of LEG-03, Field Interviews and Pat Down Searches, be included in the additional training.