HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-07-24 Bd Comm minutes
m:
Finale
MINUTES
City of Iowa City Animal Care Task Force
May 24, 2007 - 6:00 P.M.
Meeting Room E -- Iowa City Public Library
Call to Order:
Meeting called to order at 6:07 p.m.
Members Present:
Pat Farrant, Teresa Kopel, Paula Kelly, Lisa Drahozal Pooley
Members Absent:
Jane McCune
Staff Present:
Misha Goodman
Others Present: Trish Wasek of Johnson County Humane Society; Michelle
Hickman of Friends of the Animal Center Foundation; Nyssa Koons, Ali Sadowski,
Laura Wallace of the Farm Animal Welfare Network; Michael Christoffersen of the Farm
Animal Welfare Network and Friends of the Animal Center Foundation.
Citizen Comment:
Citizen Comment was moved to the beginning of the meeting due to visitors.
Members of the Farm Animal Welfare Network attended the Animal Care Task Force
meeting to discuss the GW Exotic Animal Show coming to Sycamore Mall from May 30
to June 3rd. The group asked the task force to recommend to City Council an ordinance
banning such exhibits for the sake of public safety and animal welfare concerns. Misha
Goodman also noted that her staff does not have the expertise nor time to handle
problems that might occur with exotic animals. Misha Goodman also noted that there is
no FDA approved rabies vaccine for wild animals. The Animal Care Task Force agreed
to recommend an ordinance to City Council banning wild animal exhibits as well as
rodeos and circuses for all reasons stated above. Lisa Drahozal Pooley will research
similar ordinances in other cities.
Old Business:
1. April 12, 2007 minutes approved with one minor spelling correction.
2. County meeting follow up
Misha Goodman reported that there is a meeting set up with Iowa City to discuss the
wording and interpretation of contracts the second week of June. She suggests moving
away from the daily calculation of fees, instead basing costs on the last three years' actual
fees. Also Misha Goodman reported that as of July 1,2007, Johnson County will no
longer be paying the bill for the incorporated cities animal services within the Johnson
County area. The areas are to contact Animal Services/Misha Goodman to establish
agreements. North Liberty has already done so.
3. Continue Spay/Neuter Committee discussion - tabled until the June 14th meeting
4. Continue permit and fees discussion- tabled until the June 14th meeting
5. Continue statistics/educational seminars discussion- tabled until the June 14th
meeting
6. Continue Center hours extension discussion- tabled until the June 14th meeting
New Business:
Misha Goodman reported on the pandemic meeting. They are working to obtain pods to
store emergency equipment.
Recommendations to City Council:
Task Force Member Comment:
Staff Comment:
Agenda for June 14,2007
Old Business:
1. Approve Minutes of May 24, 2007
2. Discuss exotic animal exhibit/circus/rodeo ordinance
3. Agreements follow up
4 Continue permit and fees discussion
5. Continue Committee discussions
6. Continue statistics/educational seminars discussion
7. Continue Center hours extension discussion
Meeting was adjourned at
8:00 P.M.
2
I 3b(~)
Finale
MINUTES
City of Iowa City Animal Care Task Force
June 14,2007 - 6:00 P.M.
Meeting Room E -- Iowa City Public Library
Call to Order:
Meeting called to order at 6: 12 p.m.
Members Present:
Pat Farrant, Jane McCune, Teresa Kopel, Paula Kelly, Lisa
Drahozal Pooley
Members Absent:
Staff Present:
Misha Goodman
Others Present:
Roxanne Schomers
Old Business:
1. Minutes of May 24, 2007 approved as amended.
2. Discuss exotic animal exhibit/circus/rodeo ordinance
All Task Force members agreed to recommend to City Council an ordinance banning
circuses, exotic animal displays and rodeos in Iowa City for animal welfare and
public health reasons. Misha Goodman will draft the ordinance.
Misha Goodman also advised updating the current restricted animal ordinance to
include parrots and to require that the restricted animals permit be purchased prior to
the purchase of the animal. This would allow for inspections.
3. Agreements follow up
The Coralville contract will remain the same as last year and will use daily rates.
North Liberty and Solon have contacted Misha Goodman, and she is sending them a
draft of an agreement. Other Johnson County areas have been contacted.
Misha Goodman mentioned that a shelter expansion is being discussed. She also
mentioned that Steve Atkins, City Manager, will be leaving at the end of the summer.
4. Continue permit and fees discussion
Task Force members discussed at length strengthening breeder permits, creating
tiered and escalating fees for owner's animals that roam, and other multi or severe
violations, and requiring pet shops to microchip and spay/neuter animals (dogs, cats,
rabbits, ferrets) and to provide to the Animal Center records of animals sold.
Task Force members will conduct a survey of local vets to determine how many vets
perform juvenile spay/neuters and why or why not; and at what age rabbits are
spayed/neutered. Members will report back at the June 28th meeting.
Members discussed separating pet stores into major and minor entities for fee
purposes. The difference could be based on the number of animals available for sale.
Misha Goodman will draft an anti-tethering ordinance and an exotic animal
ordinance.
Misha Goodman asked members to look at current definitions to see what needs to be
added (such as doggie daycares, pet sitters, trainers, groomers, rescues) and/or updated.
Misha Goodman will write a definition for 'aviary.' Members were also asked to
evaluate the fee schedule for the June 28th meeting.
5. Continue Committee discussions - postponed until the June 28th meeting.
6. Continue statistics/educational seminars discussion - postponed until the June
28th .
meetmg.
7. Continue Center hours extension discussion - postponed until the June 28th
meeting.
New Business:
The June 28th meeting will start at 5:30 P.M. instead of6 P.M.
Recommendations to City Council:
Task Force Member Comment:
The Animal Care Task Force would like to thank Steve Atkins for his years of service as
City Manager and for his dedication and progressive support of animal related issues and
concerns. The Task Force hopes his successor will continue this support.
Staff Comment:
Citizen Comment:
Meeting was adjourned at 8:15 P.M.
2
c::
MINUTES APPROVED
IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, JUNE 4, 2007
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, IOWA CITY CITY HALL
410 E. WASHINGTON STREET
IOWA CITY, IA
MEMBERS PRESENT: Gary Haman, John Roffman, Tim Fehr, Steve Buckman,
AI Gerard, Chad Campion
MEMBERS ABSENT: Doug DuCharme
STAFF PRESENT: Tim Hennes (Sr. Building Inspector), John Grier (Fire
Marshall), Bernie Osvald (Plumbing Inspector), Sue
Dulek (Assistant City Attorney), Jann Ream (Code
Enforcement Assistant acting as minute taker)
OTHERS PRESENT: Jan Adams (public), Brad A'Hearn (A'Hearn Plumbing
& Heating), Eric Brockmire (Nu Flow/Aqua Source)
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: none
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Roffman called the meeting to order at 4:05PM. Dulek reported that
she was still investigating the proposed state licensing for contractors and how
that would effect Iowa City licensing.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES:
Minutes from the March 5, 2007 meeting were reviewed. Haman moved to adopt
the minutes. Gerard seconded. Minutes were approved with a unanimous vote.
Request for a Variance from the Iowa City Plumbinq Code.
Tim stated that the application is actually a request for an alternate design or
method of construction.
Eric Brockmire from Nu Flow Technologies presented information on the product
that was in question. Basically, it is a structural pipe reinstatement product that is
cured in place. He handed out written materials for the Board's information. He
said the product reinstates the flow rate through a pipe (of just about any
material) to exceed what it was before when it was in a state of disrepair. The
product has been extensively tested and is listed with IAPMO - International
Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials. He asked for questions.
Brad Ahearn wanted to address the Board before it was opened to questions. He
said that this system gave property owners more options for the repair of sanitary
sewers and storm drains. He thought it would be a better repair and less
expensive because the sewer line would not have to be dug up. He said that the
system could also be applied to pressure water lines without having to tear out
walls.
Brockmire explained that the company had over 300 franchisees all over the
country. Their product is a structural reliner that not only repairs sewer lines but
prevents future clogs by restoring flow rates. It also prevents infiltration to ground
water. He explained how the process works. A camera is used to find all of the
problem areas in a pipe. The pipe is cleaned and then the product is introduced
to the damaged pipe through existing clean outs and/or manholes. It is a cured in
place product that is very controllable. They can precisely line a pipe to 1/16 of
an inch. He explained that this same system can be used in potable (pressure)
systems as well. For potable systems it is not a structural product -just a barrier
product - very good for repairing pinhole and joint leaks without having to tear
out walls. All of these repairs can be inspected with cameras to make sure the
repair has been done correctly.
Roffman asked that if there was a clay pipe that had separated would the product
be able to bridge that void. Brockmire responded yes -that was one of the
advantages of the product -it can recreate a pipe within a pipe. The transition
between the new repair and the old pipe is feathered so there is no raised edge
or lip that can affect flow rates.
Brockmire stated the significant difference between this product and other CIPP
products was the application process -no other company has their unique and
precise application. Also all of the clean out and application is done while
watching with a remote camera and it is videotaped. So the client gets a before
and after tape of the repair. This could be made available to the permitting
jurisdiction if they wanted it.
Buckman asked what was required of the vendor to become a franchisee.
The company trains employees of franchisees for 4 weeks at their facility in San
Diego to make sure that they know exactly how to use the product. They also
have a 24/7 help line that vendors can call if they have a problem. An installer
from the company also works the new vendor for the first week back in their own
market.
Fehr asked if this product could also be used for underground air ducts.
Brockmire responded yes but there are some application issues to be worked
out.
Osvald asked if chemicals affect the product. Brockmire responded no -it is an
epoxy product -nothing affects it.
Buckman asked if the request on the appeal was just for sewer and potable
water repair or if it was also for air ducts. Since air ducts are covered by the
Mechanical Code, Dulek said this appeal could not be applied -it was just for the
Plumbing Code. Osvald stated that potable water was already approved by
IAPMO - that this application was to allow the use of the product for drainage
systems- sanitary and storm.
Roffman asked if the motion to grant the appeal should be product specific or if it
should cover the whole CIPP industry. He did not feel that any particular
manufacturer should be singled out -that it should be approved for the entire
industry. Dulek said the building department could ask for specific requirements,
such as the video tape, as a matter of department policy.
MOTION: Buckman moved that the CIPP (Cured in Place Product) technology
be approved as an alternate method of construction for the repair of sanitary and
storm drainage systems. Haman seconded.
VOTE: The motion passed unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Bernie Osvald gave the Board an updated report on waterless urinal systems. He
stated that he had one pulled at the alternative high school that had been in use
for a year and it was clean and in good shape. As a result of that, waterless
urinals were approved for Willowwind School. Osvald said that as long as the
urinals were in a situation with good guaranteed maintenance, they seemed to
function well. He said that maintenance people found that the cartridges needed
to be replaced more often than originally thought. Hennes asked that the
waterless urinal installed in the old Neumann Monson office be checked. He
wondered how they held up with a change in tenants.
The next meeting was scheduled for July 2, 2007.
ADJOURNMENT:
Haman moved to adjourn the meeting. Gerard seconded. The meeting adjourned
at 5:03 PM
John Roffman, Board of Appeals Chairperson
Date
NAME TERM EXPIRES Jan-07 Feb-07 Mar-07 Apr-07 May-07 Jun-07
Gary Haman 12/31/2007 x x x NM NM x
Steve Buckman 12/31/2011 x x x x
Doug DuCharme 12/31/2009 x x OlE 0
Tim Fehr 12/31/2008 x x OlE x
John Roffman 12/31/2007 x x x x
Chad Campion 12/31/2008 0 0 x x
AI Gerard 12/31/2010 x x x x
KEY
X = present
o = absent
OlE = absenUexcused
NM = No meeting
_ = not a member
c::
MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
THURSDAY, MAY 31,2007
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
APPROVED
MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Brennan, Esther Baker, Pam Michaud, Ginalie Swaim, Tim Toomey,
Alicia Trimble, Tim Weitzel
MEMBERS ABSENT: John McCormally, Jim Ponto
STAFF PRESENT: Sunil Terdalkar
OTHERS PRESENT: Helen Burford, Shelley McCafferty, John Roffman, Tyler Rozinek
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Weitzel called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m.
AFTER-THE-FACT APPLICATIONS:
Weitzel said that when dealing with after-the-fact applications, the National Trust Forum List Serve query
provided responses from cities about how they review projects, Many Commissions treat the work as if
you haven't seen it before and don't take into account anything that has happened before the actual
application was filed. Terdalkar said that the goal is to be fair to all applicants.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA:
Burford said that Friends of Historic Preservation held a Parade of Historic Homes on May 20th. She said
the event had 303 paid attendants and received a lot of good feedback from the community. Buford
added that the community would like to see this as an annual event. Weitzel said that in the past, Friends
of Historic Preservation has held many open houses to display renovation work and well kept old houses.
He said making the tours an annual event would be a great idea. Buford said that the tour was done in
conjunction with National Historic Preservation Month.
CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS:
923 Iowa Avenue.
Terdalkar said this is a project that the Commission reviewed last year for a new construction of a multi-
family building. He said the Board of Adjustment has already approved a Certificate of Appropriateness
for the multi-family building. He said the applicant is now seeking approval of a handicap accessible ramp
for the primary entrance of the building. Terdalkar said the applicant has provided some material samples
for the retaining wall. Terdalkar said that it is important to make sure the material of the ramp is in some
way integrated with the foundation of the structure.
Weitzel asked Terdalkar to remind the Commission what the guidelines say for ramps and similar
structures, Terdalkar said in Section 5.2, the guidelines were likely written for ramps attached to decks
and porches, He said the guidelines recommend landscaping around the ramp, locating the ramp on the
side of the building, and looking at the historic character of the house and making sure the ramp does not
detract itself from the nature of the streetscape.
McCafferty, the consultant for the applicant, said she has looked at other means for getting handicap
accessibility, but the ramp was the best alternative because there must be accessibility from the sidewalk
to the front door. She said they would like to do a flat face retaining wall system that simulates limestone.
McCafferty added that it will be problematic to match the retaining wall exactly to the foundation of the
building because the materials are completely different. She said that it would require adding a veneer to
the foundation and the retaining wall. Terdalkar said the previous application made no mention of texture
or finish of the concrete foundation. He said the guidelines require the foundation to have some type of
masonry or stucco; it cannot be just plain concrete. Terdalkar suggested that, as the foundation surface
needs to be treated, so it is possible use a similar treatment for the retaining wall.
Historic Preservation Commission
May 31,2007
Page 2
Weitzel asked what was written on the application regarding the foundation. McCafferty said the
application said that the foundation will be painted. She added that it is to her understanding that the
building is approved as proposed,
Weitzel asked if the approval by the Board of Adjustment included the design of the foundation. Michaud
said the foundation was fine because the building had already been approved. Toomey agreed that
because the plans have transpired, the foundation was approved.
Roffman, the applicant, said he was concerned that the plan only shows a 12-inch deep block and doesn't
know if that is deep enough for the height the wall needs to retain. He added that he has no problem with
the face of the wall.
Weitzel said that the best way to move forward would be to specify something of a traditional character.
Michaud said that the samples look traditional. Swaim asked what the difference was in the patterns.
Toomey said that one pattern had uniform stones and the other did not. McCafferty said that the sample
with different sized stones would be considered an Ashlars pattern.
MOTION: Swaim moved to approve uniform sized blocks with a simulated stone face on the
retaining wall at 923 Iowa Avenue. Toomey seconded the motion.
The motion carried on a vote of 7 -0.
Weitzel said that Swaim did not move to approve the full application. He added that design of the
retaining wall and the accessible ramp itself still needs to be considered.
Baker asked if there is any information on the proposed landscaping. McCafferty said it would be very
difficult to landscape. She said the retaining wall is on the back side of the ramp. She added the only
possible landscaping is something that hangs over the edge. Terdalkar asked about the landscaping in
front of the ramp, McCafferty said she doesn't want to be held to specific type of landscaping. Weitzel
said the Commission cannot consider trees and shrubs as a way to conceal the ramp. He added that it
will be landscaped and will probably look good. Swaim asked how tall the retaining wall will be.
McCafferty said that she estimates the wall will be four to five feet high.
McCafferty said that the easement was the only way to solve this issue. Weitzel said that the Commission
could make a recommendation to other departments to not have the ramp come from the front. Terdalkar
said that it is a health and safety matter to enable disabled persons a way to access the building.
Toomey said the position of the sidewalk being up so far from the street makes the accessibility difficult.
Terdalkar agreed and said a person would have to go to Governor Street to access the sidewalk. Weitzel
said the ramp is not a practical solution to accessibility. McCafferty agreed and said that it would be more
practical to have handicap access from the back. Weitzel said the Commission could defer the application
and see if the authorities would change their mind on the requirement of the ramp to come from the front
of the building.
Terdalkar said the Commission should be reviewing the design and determining whether it is approvable
in terms of design or not. Weitzel said he believes they need to find a solution to the problem. Terdalkar
said the applicant could approach the building official and if it is denied they have an option appeal it to
the Board of Appeals. Weitzel said that because the Commission is not getting any other options, they
feel compelled to approve the project and that is not a fair position to be in. Terdalkar said that this is not
the commission to approve a modification of the ramp. He said the Commission should look at how the
design of the ramp fits into the guidelines and the historic character of the neighborhood.
Swaim said the majority of the ramp will be in front of the brick apartment building to the east. She said
the ramp will be more visually associated with the brick apartment next door and not the proposed multi-
family building. Michaud agreed that the ramp and asked if the retaining wall should match the brick
apartment building. Toomey asked how much of the ramp is on the neighboring property. McCafferty said
about seven or eight feet.
Historic Preservation Commission
May 31,2007
Page 3
MOTION: Swaim moved to rescind the motion of the approval of the materials for further
discussion. Brennan seconded the motion.
Terdalkar said if the Commission feels that more information is necessary to make a decision, the
Commission should wait and ask the applicant for alternatives or clarification. Baker asked if it would
make sense to table the discussion until the applicant can get more details on other options for the
project. Toomey asked if the Commission can make a motion of support for the exemption of the ramp.
Weitzel said the Commission can make a resolution of support, but it wouldn't be binding. Weitzel said a
tabling would be in order.
MOTION: Baker moved to table. Swaim seconded the motion.
Weitzel said the Commission is in doubt and recommends tabling the discussion,
The motion carried 7-0
938 Iowa Ave.
Terdalkar said the property is a contributing structure in the College Hill Conservation District. He said the
applicant is seeking approval of the installation of two new widows and two new skylights. He said on the
one window will be placed on the west fac;:ade between the gabled roof, one window on the north fac;:ade,
a skylight on the north pitch of the roof, and a skylight on the west pitch of the roof. He said both skylights
have already been installed, but the windows have not. He stated the applicant would install a window
similar to the existing one in the front dormer. He said it would be an egress-sized window. Terdalkar
added the applicant plans to use metal-clad wood windows that would be consistent with the character of
the house.
Toomey said he cannot see the standard 4-inch trim around the window on the south dormer. He said the
trim should match all of the windows on the house. Rozinek, the applicant, said he could add trim to the
egress window on the dormer,
Terdalkar said the applicant should apply before doing work on the house. He added that applying after-
the-fact is a problem and delays the process.
Rozinek asked if there were any other red flags the Commission saw on the property. Weitzel said the
house will need skirting and a railing, but the window issue should be solved first.
Weitzel said skylights are allowed in Conservation Districts in non-visible areas. He said the new widows
on the west and north gables should match the window on the front dormer and the trim on the new
windows should match the trim on the rest of the house. Weitzel said the windows that are recommended
are metal-clad wood. Baker said it seems a casement window has already been installed on the east
side of the house. Weitzel said because it is an after-the-fact case, the Commission may want to consider
it as if it never happened and use the recommendations. In the guidelines to review the change, He
added that casement windows are not allowed unless it was part of the house's style. Rozinek said the
problem is that there are not enough photographs of the fac;:ade. He said the decisions are being made
based on the one photograph that he obtained. Weitzel said the Commission has guidelines, and they
must follow the guidelines. He said if the applicant had a photograph showing a casement window on the
east fac;:ade, then the Commission would allow it. He added that the Commission generally does not allow
casement windows.
Terdalkar said the window on the east fac;:ade is not the right type or size. He said it should be a
horizontal window and as seen in the photographs should match the width of windows below it. Michaud
said she has vertical windows on the third story of her house. Terdalkar said that a vertical window does
not fit the fenestration scheme on the applicant's house. Michaud asked if the window would be a double-
hung. Weitzel said it should be a single-hung window, but rotated 90 degrees.
Weitzel said the Commission shouldn't get bogged down in the original. He said what is being installed
should be sympathetic to the style of the house and the character of the neighbor. He added that every
Historic Preservation Commission
May 31,2007
Page 4
project cannot be treated as a restoration. Terdalkar said the Commission approved the dormer to look
like the one in the original photograph.
Michaud said one of the recently reviewed applications the Commission approved casement windows
with simulated artificial mullion. Weitzel recalled that it was an egress window. Rozinek said the windows
in his photograph show a stained glass pattern. Terdalkar mentioned that the original windows do not
have stained glass but colored glass is used with a divided light pattern. Weitzel said you can have a
simulated divided window with nine-over-one panes.
Terdalkar clarified that the applicant is not asking for casement windows in the attic; he has applied for
two double-hung windows to be installed on the west and north gables. He said however, a new
casement window has been installed on the east gable that was not included in the application previously
approved. Terdalkar said the Commission approval is required for this casement window.
Michaud asked if a hopper style window would work on this project. She said a hopper style window is
hinged on the bottom and opens inside. Michaud said it is horizontal and won't stick out like a casement
window.
Weitzel said the Commission should look at approving the proposed double-hung windows on the north
and west gables. He asked if the Commission would approve double-hung windows in these two
locations. Toomey asked if the Commission is looking at two double-hung windows on the two gables to
match the front window. Weitzel agreed.
MOTION: Toomey moved to approve the trim around the window on the front dormer to match the
rest of the trim on the house, the two proposed windows on the west and north gables to meet
egress; with the trim matching the rest of the house, and the installed casement window to be
rotated 90 degrees; with trim to match the rest of the house. Brennan seconded the motion.
Trimble asked what the original request was for the casement window. Toomey said it wasn't in the
application. Rozinek asked if it would be okay to remove the casement window on the east fa<;:ade, and
install four windows on the attic level to match. Terdalkar said there might not be enough room for a
double-hung window of the size. Weitzel said the gable on the east side is smaller than the other two
gables.
Michaud asked if the window on the east fa<;:ade could match the square window on the west side of the
porch, and it could be a hopper style window. Terdalkar asked if Michaud is saying that the window east
fa<;:ade should be the same size as the square window on the west side of the porch. Michaud said it
would be similar to some other elements of the building. Rozinek said the window the west side of the
porch is not operable. Michaud said it could be a hopper style window.
MOTION: Michaud moved to amend the previous motion to have a hopper style window on the
east gable to match the size of the window above the porch on the west facade. Baker seconded
the motion.
The motion failed to carry on a vote of 3-2-1 (Brennan and Toomev opposed. Swaim left prior to
vote).
Toomey said if the casement window was rotated 90 degrees, it would be difficult to tell the difference
between a casement and hopper style window. He said the only way you could tell that it was a casement
is if the window was open. Weitzel said casement windows are only allowed if the style of the house
allows it. Terdalkar confirmed that the guidelines disallow casement windows if they are not original to the
house.
Weitzel asked for an argument for and against the project. Brennan said he doesn't see how the window,
as it is, detracts away from the appearance or character of the house. Toomey said that if the window
was rotated to be horizontal, there would be no way he could not tell that the window wasn't original.
Historic Preservation Commission
May 31,2007
Page 5
Weitzel said when the casement window guideline was put in, it was debated extensively, and the
argument was when the casement window is open; you can tell it is a completely different window from a
completely different era. He said that was the argument behind it, and that is why it was disallowed.
Weitzel said certain houses from the 1920s on had casements, but others did not ever have them and the
Commission took a very strong line that they did not want that. He added that is what the City Council
approved, and the Commission should have a real good reason to approve it if the Commission is not
going to follow the guidelines. Michaud said because it is a vented bathroom and the window will not be
open. Weitzel said that is a use consideration, not a visual design consideration.
Terdalkar said the basis for allowing alternative designs, not exceptions, is in 3.6 of the guidelines gives
the Commission flexibility in exceptional circumstances. He said the reasoning for allowing casement
windows in the guidelines is for egress windows where there are bedrooms. He added that this is not a
bedroom; this is a bathroom and the Commission should discuss why there should be an exception.
Weitzel said it is possible to grant an exception if the Commission has a clear reason. Toomey said
because it is a bathroom, an exception could be noted as a safety reason not to have a window that folds
back into the room.
Weitzel said the motion is to approve the two windows in the west and north dormer to match the front
dormer and to put on trim that matches the rest of the house on the front dormer and the other two
windows. Weitzel asked if the motion specified anything about the divided lights. Toomey said to match
the front dormer, so they would just have to be double-hung windows. He said the second part of the
motion is to approve a window in the east dormer of the same size that has been installed, but rotated 90
degrees and have trim around the window to match the rest of the house. He said for safety and design
reasons it would be an awning window that opens to the outside. Toomey said in a bathroom, for safety
reasons, you do not want a window to open to the inside.
Motion carried 5-0 (Swaim left prior to vote).
Michaud said the applicant is still concerned about the railings and skirting. Terdalkar said the previous
certificate the applicant applied for the porch to match what it looks like in the photograph; it has already
been approved. He added that if the applicant makes any changes in material, size, or dimensions they
need to be reviewed and approved by the Commission. Weitzel said the applicant should talk to Terdalkar
immediately if he has any questions.
Rozinek said that he would like to alter the back stairwell. He asked how long and how it would take to get
this project approved, Weitzel said the Commission would be able to review the project at the next
meeting on June 12th if a completed application is submitted before the deadline.
MINUTES FOR MAY 17, 2007.
Baker asked if on page three, third paragraph, last sentence if the second reference to wood should say
"aluminum." Terdalkar confirmed, Weitzel stated that the part where Pam is speaking should say "would
qualify" and not "would work qualify."
MOTION: Baker moved to approve the May 17, 2007 minutes, as amended. Trimble seconded the
motion.
The motion carried on a vote of 3-0 (Swaim. Brennan, Toomey, and Michaud left prior to the vote).
Buford said she had a problem with casement windows and is something you have to work out with HIS.
She said she ended up having to put a casement window one her own house. She said the brick opening
was only so big and had to make a custom casement window. Terdalkar said Buford had a requirement
for egress
PRESERVATION PLAN:
Weitzel asked how detailed the discussion should be. Terdalkar said the Commission should get a head
start on the discussion, so they don't have to wait until June 1 ih when Marlys Svendson will be present.
Historic Preservation Commission
May 31,2007
Page 6
Weitzel said the Commission should discuss anything that needs to be clarified before Svendson is
present.
Weitzel said there should be an executive summary. Terdalkar said it is already in the works. He added
that the executive summary will be limited to ten pages.
Michaud said there seems to be quite a bit of repetition. She said that there could be a summary for all of
the goals. Michaud added it is tedious for anyone to approach. Weitzel agreed with Michaud and thinks
there should be universal goals that apply to all neighborhoods, and then have separate goals for each
individual neighborhood.
Buford said the problem in Iowa City is that most of the historic areas are residential. She said that affects
how people view historic preservation. Weitzel said it would be good to have a specific section addressing
preservation concerns in a commercial district. He said adding a section that outlines specific advantages
through preservation would give commercial property owners an incentive for considering preservation.
Buford said when Glenda Castleberry came to Iowa City and talked about what happened in Sioux City,
she was very specific and direct about what could be done with historic properties and incentives
available to them. She said the Preservation Plan isn't clear about the incentives available to commercial
properties.
Michaud asked if College Green was part of the 1992 districts. Weitzel said East College Street and
College Green was considered part of College Hill, but was split up later due to rental concerns.
Michaud said that it shouldn't be too hard to get the sorority and fraternity institutions to see the benefits
of historic preservation.
Weitzel asked how much power the Commission has in rewriting the Preservation Plan. Terdalkar said
staff and the Commission has power to revise the entire plan. He said that much of the plan has already
been cut down.
Trimble said the Commission needs to be careful because not everyone is going to read the entire plan,
especially if the person is looking at a specific district.
Weitzel said he is concerned about losing content during the skimming process. Michaud said the full
plan doesn't need to be cut down because the executive summary will be distributed to the residents.
Weitzel said the full plan would be at the public library for reference.
Buford asked how the Commission will handle questions about the sample size from public meetings.
Weitzel said Melrose had about 30 people, Terdalkar said Marlys will do a public hearing open to the
entire public.
Terdalkar said Marlys has extended the survey beyond the 50-year mark. He said buildings built prior to
1960 qualify as historic. Brennan asked if 1960 far enough or should it be moved to 1965 due to the 15-
year lifespan of the Preservation Plan. Brennan said on page 36 there are, several concrete proposals
and several speculative proposals for new historic districts, but there is no discussion on what additional
resources will be required to facilitate implementation of these proposals.
Buford said the Preservation Plan doesn't give enough community analysis of the Northside
Neighborhood. Weitzel said it is a very public document, so you have to be careful about naming too
many names, He said Mercy Hospital's plan for growth is much different than the Commission's.
Terdalkar said he will ask Marlys about it.
Brennan asked at what point the public should be notified that a the plan recommends historic district
designations for some areas. Terdalkar said the plan recommendations at this point only identify areas
eligible for further survey. This plan is part of the Comprehensive Plan the update is a process for the
amendment of the Comprehensive Plan, so it will be in front of the Historic Preservation Commission and
Planning and Zoning Commission as a public meeting, Weitzel said an open procedure would be a good
idea. He said when a district is being considered by the residents of a district, a public announcement is
Historic Preservation Commission
May 31, 2007
Page 7
in order. Terdalkar said the position of the Commission has been to notify the public once they are
notified by the residents of the district.
Buford said the Commission would have to help residents propose a new historic district. She added that
people don't have the time or energy. Terdalkar said that is where educational perks will help. Buford said
the economic benefits would be a catalyst for a lot of changes. She said there is not body of evidence.
Weitzel said the Commission would be getting a CLG to look at the market analysis.
Buford said the building that holds the Antique Mall is for sale. Weitzel said he doesn't know what to do
about it. He said the Commission would have to get a survey done on the building.
Weitzel said the Commission should have specific comments for Marlys on the 1 ih of June, Terdalkar
said to e-mail comments to him.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 8:06 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Doug Ongie
PCD/mins/hpc/5-31-07,doc
Historic Preservation Commission
Attendance Record
2007
Term
Name Expires 2/08 3/08 4!l2 5/17 5/31
Baker 3/29/09 X OlE X X X
Brennan 3/29/08 X X X OlE X
Carlson 3/29/07 X X -- -- -- -- -- --
Gunn 3/29/07 X OlE -- -- -- -- -- --
McCormally 3/29/08 OlE OlE X OlE OlE
Michaud 3/29/09 X X OlE X X
Ponto 3/29/07 X X X X OlE
Swaim 3/29/09 X X X OlE X
Trimble 3/29/1 0 -- -- 00.. __ X X X
Toomey 3/29/09 X X X X X
Weitzel 3/29/08 X OlE X X X
Key
X = Present
o = Absent
OlE = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
= Not a Member
rn::
MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
TUESDAY, JUNE 12, 2007
EMMA J, HARVAT HALL
APPROVED
MEMBERS PRESENT: Esther Baker, Jim Ponto, Ginalie Swaim, Tim Toomey, Alicia Trimble, Tim
Weitzel
MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Brennan, John McCormally, Pam Michaud
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Sunil Terdalkar
OTHERS PRESENT: Dave Amelon, Mark McCallum, Mark Norton, Mike Oliveira, Marlys Svendson
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Weitzel called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA:
Mike Oliveira, owner of 617 Ronalds Street, said the Commission recently reviewed a window
replacement for 617 Ronalds. He said the original motion stated that all the windows at 617 Ronalds
would be the same height. He added that the window width was not in the revised motion, which was
approved. Oliveira said the Commission's discussion emphasized the windows being consistent all the
way around the house. He said the Commission's decision will make the front and side windows different
widths; today all of the windows are the same width. He asked the Commission to revise the wording of
the motion, so all of the windows will be the same width. Weitzel said the Commission would most likely
have to revisit the application. Miklo said procedurally, if the intent was wider windows, then you would
just acknowledge that, but if there would be debate or discussion it would have to go on as a separate
item.
Toomey asked if there was a conflict with windows of the same size. Oliveira said the first motion included
the width of the windows and the second motion did not. Terdalkar said the motion by Toomey was never
seconded. He added the windows in the east and west gable need to be egress size and the other
windows that do not need to be egress, don't need to be changed, Oliveira said he had a different
interpretation of the minutes.
Weitzel said he thinks the Commission should revisit the application and do a full review. Miklo said if
there is a clear majority in the Commission that recalls that the intent was to include the width in the
motion; then the certificate could go ahead and amend it. Toomey said the Commission did not dictate
the size because it is determined by the egress. Terdalkar said egress is required in the bedrooms.
Toomey asked if the windows are consistent right now. Oliveira said all of the windows are consistent
right now, Weitzel said because all of the windows have termite damage, he doesn't think the
Commission would have a problem with changing all of the window widths at once. He said the previous
discussion on this project was about making things match. Miklo said the width of the windows on the
front of the house would increase 4 inches to match the egress windows on the side of the house.
Ponto said he recalls discussion of the first and second floor windows matching. He added that on the
front egress windows are not required, so those windows should remain the same width. Oliveira said the
symmetry would be thrown off if the windows on the house are different sizes. Ponto said there should
have been discussion on the impact of the door if the windows in the front were changed to meet egress.
Miklo said the certificate is as written and it needs to be on an agenda if it is going to be revised.
Terdalkar said the Commission could have a special meeting on the fourth week of June.
Historic Preservation Commission
June 12, 2007
Page 2
CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS:
705 S. Summit Street and 811 E. Colleoe Street.
Terdalkar said these are routine projects that can be approved by consent. He said the Commission
should ask questions if they have any concerns.
MOTION: Ponto moved to approve the Consent Calendar. Swaim seconded the motion.
Motion carried on a vote of 6-0.
923 Iowa Avenue
Weitzel said the application for this project was deferred. Terdalkar said there are questions regarding the
necessity of the guard rail, which would change the requirement for the height of the railing and the
requirement of balusters. He said the applicants also need to figure out the grading requirement for the
ramp.
Terdalkar said the Commission asked about other alternatives that could be explored instead of the ramp.
He said there is no provision for variance or exception for handicap accessibility. He added that handicap
accessibility must come from the primary entrance. Weitzel asked if other alternatives are acceptable.
Terdalkar said it doesn't have to be a ramp.
919 and 923 E. Washinoton Street
Terdalkar said that these are contributing properties in the College Hill Conservation District. He said the
applicant is seeking a demolition of a garage that is shared between the two properties. Terdalkar said
the applicant has not stated why the demolition is needed or what will replace the structure, He said the
guidelines state the Commission should look at the condition of the garage, the architectural significance,
and its integrity. Terdalkar said he has been to the site and believes it is possible to fix the garage. He
said it is a modest structure and does not have any architectural significance, but was a typical structure
for that time period.
Weitzel said the duty of the Commission is to review applications that are complete. Terdalkar said he
informed the applicant on how demolition applications are reviewed for accessory structures. He added
that he talked to the applicant about what the Commission is looking for on the application.
Dave Amelon, the applicant and contractor, said the back of the garage has ship lap siding. He said the
windows are about two inches out of the square in the back and doesn't know how he would get them
back into place.
Amelon said he didn't know the application was incomplete. Terdalkar said he went over the requirements
when he met with the applicant. Miklo said there needs to be evidence the garage is damaged beyond
repair. Amelon said he doesn't know how the back of the garage would be able to move over two inches.
Toomey asked if the back of the building is racked. Amelon said the back of the building is racked.
Toomey said that nailing or screwing in plywood on the corners will straighten out the garage. He said if
the plywood isn't enough, using a come along from corner to corner will pull it up. He added that these
garages are not difficult to straighten out.
Ponto asked what the applicant intends on building if the garage is demolished. Amelon said he intends
on turning it into surface parking.
Weitzel said for the Commission to issue a demolition certificate, the guidelines state that plans must be
submitted for what will replace the existing structure. Terdalkar said future plans are required for primary
buildings, but accessory buildings are reviewed on a case-by-case basis and do not require future plans.
Miklo said these garages usually serve as a buffer between lower density housing and apartments. He
said these garages have a role in this neighborhood and should be preserved.
Historic Preservation Commission
June 12, 2007
Page 3
Swaim asked if there would be a change in parking availability between surface parking and if the garage
was functioning as a place to park cars. Amelon said the garage is hardly wide enough to park a car in.
Miklo asked how wide the garage is. Terdalkar said about 16 feet. He added that the garage wasn't
designed to fit two modern vehicles.
Swaim said her main concern is that if the garage is repaired, will it still function as a garage for today's
cars. Weitzel said the main reason for garage demolitions is that they are too small for a modern car to fit
in, He said the Commission typically needs to have evidence of damage beyond repair before a
demolition permit is issued.
Miklo said the garage is certainly large enough for one car. Ponto asked if the applicant owns both
properties. Amelon said yes. Ponto said sharing the garage isn't an issue. Amelon said there is a
concrete wall going down the middle of the garage. Miklo asked how tall the wall is. Amelon said it is
about six inches tall and is not structural.
Weitzel said the guidelines do not cover the issue of garages as a buffer. He said what the Commission
should be looking at is if the garage is repairable, if it is significant enough to retain, and what the effects
on the neighborhood will be if a demolition is allowed. Miklo said there isn't enough evidence right now to
know if it is repairable or not, so it would be best to defer the application. He added that an inspector
should go out and look at the garage. Weitzel said a site visit is in order, as long as the Commission has
permission from the property owner. Amelon said the Commission has permission.
Weitzel asked Toomey if he would give a report on the garage. Toomey said he would.
MOTION: Swaim moved to table discussion to the next meeting. Ponto seconded the motion.
Ponto said it would be wise to get more information.
1025 E. Burlinqton Street
Terdalkar said the property is a contributing structure in the East College Street Historic District. He said
the applicant is seeking a replacement of a metal roof. Terdalkar said last year the applicant applied for a
CMNE to repair the metal roof. He added the applicant decided it was too expensive to repair, so now the
applicant would like to replace the roof with shingles.
Terdalkar said he suggested to the applicant that he use a material, such as Acrymax, to paint the roof.
He said this all depends on the condition of the roof. Weitzel said Acrymax is not the only option; there
are other liquid membrane materials. Norton, the applicant, said he is okay looking into the Acrymax
option. He said he is looking into repairing the roof.
Toomey said the Vonnegut House was coated with the Acrymax product and has held up for over five
years. He said if there is any damage or holes in the roof, you can put on a coat and then put down a
nylon-type fabric before the second coat; that will patch up the holes. He said the finished product looks
good as new.
Terdalkar asked if the Commission is now looking at the application as a repair, instead of a replacement.
Norton said he would like to look at the cost of repairing the roof.
Weitzel said the Commission should table until they hear back from the applicant.
MOTION: Swaim moved to table discussion. Baker seconded the motion.
Motion carried on a vote of 6-0
PRESERVATION PLAN:
Historic Preservation Commission
June 12, 2007
Page 4
Miklo said staff wanted to make sure the Commission is comfortable with the Preservation Plan before
releasing it to the public.
Svendson said it is the longest plan in generation she has ever been involved with. She said that the
format is similar to when the previous plan was done in 1992, She said that the final version is still in the
works and will include about 25 photographs. Svendson said Iowa City has one of the most complex
preservation programs in the state of Iowa. She said the plan is a community plan. Svendson said she
believed it would be worthwhile to keep the general format the same, so there could be a comparison
over time. She added that she did not see any new initiatives that showed the need for new goals, but
rather new objectives within the goals. She said she talked about the importance of communication
through the growth of the Internet. Svendson said she would like to hear what the Commission has to say
about the neighborhood sections and the appendix.
Miklo said spelling corrections and comments need to be submitted in writing. Svendson said the
members should turn the entire document in with their corrections.
Weitzel said other than typos and formatting concerns, it seems the concept of neighborhoods was
becoming confused between preservation discussions and City neighborhoods. For example, he said the
area in the guidelines marked as Longfellow Neighborhood had many districts in it, but its outline may not
exactly follow that of, say, Longfellow Neighborhood Association,
was getting overlapped due to all of the historic and conservation districts within it. Svendson said she
tried to call it the Longfellow Historic District wherever she could. She said she would go back and make
sure she was consistent with the language. Svendson asked if there were any specific areas Weitzel
noticed. Weitzel said at one point there was a reference to the "Dearborn Neighborhood". Svendson said
if she talked about neighborhoods as a variation in language, then she tried to put it in lower case.
Weitzel said somewhere there should be a definition of Historic District, Conservation District, and City
Neighborhood. Svendson said she could do expanded footnotes. She added that people in Iowa City like
to read footnotes. Swaim said we think of them as potato chips.
Weitzel said the Preservation Plan is very detailed and does a good job of updating the goals. He said it
should last for at least 15 years.
Swaim said on page 85 there is a chart with completed objectives and future objectives. She said
Woodlawn doesn't have a newsletter. Svendson said she thought it was part of the Longfellow
Newsletter. Svendson said it should be an open zero. Swaim said there probably won't be a newsletter,
so it should be blank.
Ponto said the definition between a City Neighborhood and a Historic District doesn't always match. He
said on Brown Street there is a newsletter for the Northside Neighborhood Association, but it is not the
Brown Street Historic District Newsletter. Svendson said it should be a solid circle in the chart.
Swaim said the Preservation Plan is difficult to critique because there is so much detail. She said in the
recommendation memorandums is where the Commission has a lot to talk about. Svendson said she
wanted the Commission to see the raw recommendations that came from Clarion Associates. She said
she took whole sections of the Clarion recommendations were put in the document in Appendix F.
Swaim asked about how the Commission should be rethought in composition. Svendson said information
came from interviews and discussion than from Clarion's recommendation. Svendson said those are
specific things to do to advocate change at the state level, so the Commission has more flexibility at the
local level. Marlys asked about circulating the plan to the state office. Sunil said it has circulated at the
state office and there weren't too many comments that came from the state office. Marlys said her
recommendation was to make the Commission smaller with four at-large members and five from a
Historic or Conservation District. She said section D is a summary of A, B, and C. Weitzel said it can be
difficult to get representatives from each district.
Historic Preservation Commission
June 12, 2007
Page 5
Ponto said he likes a smaller main document, but with very specific appendices. Weitzel said the lighter
main document or executive summary should be distributed widely, but with the appendices at the Public
Library. Svendson said the idea of creating two lists of Certificates of Appropriateness in the appendices,
one by district and the other by sequential awarding, could not have been done 15 years ago.
Ponto said on page D15, he is a little concerned about individually listing the names of the people
interviewed, and not just the title or position of the person. Svendson said the comments would remain
unattributed. Svendson said people made comments that were community-wide. Svendson said she
didn't interview everyone, but still had a pretty good cross section. She added that Clarion thought she
had too many interviews, but she wanted to be as inclusive of as possible in the plan.
Swaim said other university buildings were tracked up until the 1960s, but Greek houses were only
tracked up until 1940. Svendson said VVVVII seemed to be the cut off point for new fraternities and
sororities. Swaim said if all university components were tracked until 1960, then the Greek buildings
should go up to 1960 as well. Svendson said she can extend the period for Greek houses up to 1960.
Terdalkar said Brennan made a comment at the last meeting about planning for the next 15 years after
1957. Svendson said there is usually a lag time. She said it is very difficult for people in the preservation
movement to look back a full 50 years. Svendson said an exception would be Dr. Van Allen. She added
that we don't know which building to associate him with. Weitzel said the Van Allen Building on campus
was built after he discovered the Van Allen Belt. Svendson said the National Park Service won't consider
the building as a national landmark.
Svendson said the University of Iowa's Master Plan shows that the university is well on its way to a
commitment towards historic preservation. She said the university's consultant encouraged historic
preservation when a case could be made for economic benefit. She added that the university currently
has potential for historic preservation, which she couldn't have said 15 years ago.
Baker asked why some of the objectives do not specify who is responsible for carrying out that certain
objective. Svendson said the last Preservation Plan included tasking abbreviation at the end of each
objective. She added that she did not include tasking abbreviation because there is a staff person for
Friends and the City's staff member has been raised from quarter time to half time, so there is more
capacity for completing the objectives. Weitzel said, as a community, Friends of Historic Preservation
should help out more with these objectives. Miklo said the Preservation Plan should be sent to Friends.
Terdalkar said Helen Burford has a copy and some comments ready for Svendson.
Svendson said she knows this is volunteer time, but would appreciate any comments the Commission
could give. Weitzel said this is the Commission's chance to impact preservation for many years.
Svendson said Miklo suggested that at the end of the introduction, there should be five important points to
summarize what document is all about. She said the fives points are: tell the good news, streamline the
process, focus on neighborhood preservation, tap into the economic development of the city resources,
and learn from ourselves. She said there is a need for neighborhoods to talk among one another.
Svendson said that it would be good for the Commission to go to the City Council and heighten the image
and role of preservation. She added that the Commission needs to keep the good news in front the
Council as much as possible,
Miklo asked when the public forum should be for the Preservation Plan. He said the report will go on as
an amendment to the comprehensive plan. Weitzel said they should come back in week or two and
decide then.
Minutes for Mav 31, 2007
Swaim said on page three on the very top line "resend" should be changed to "rescind."
Historic Preservation Commission
June 12, 2007
Page 6
Weitzel asked if Swaim approved a "material traditional" on the previous motion. Terdalkar said because
the Commission is going to revisit the minutes, it would be a good idea for each commission member to
varify the language of their own motion. Weitzel said he doesn't remember Swaim saying material
traditional. Swaim said she probably said a traditional-like material. Weitzel said he doesn't remember
anyone saying material traditional. Terdalkar said there were two materials being discussed, ashlar sized
blocks of different sizes and uniform sized blocks, Swaim said traditional should be taken out of the
motion. Terdalkar confirmed that it should be uniform sized blocks instead.
Toomey said on page four, the reason to grant an exception for a casement window is not in the minutes.
Weitzel said there is some funky stuff in the language of the minutes.
Weitzel said the Commission had a discussion about turning the casement window into an awning
window, and he did not see that discussion in the minutes. He said he doesn't feel comfortable approving
the minutes tonight.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 8:41p.m.
Minutes submitted by Doug Ongie
PCD/mins/hpcl6-12-07,doc
Historic Preservation Commission
Attendance Record
2007
Term
Name Expires 2108 3/08 4/12 5/17 5/31 6/12
Baker 3/29/09 X OlE X X X X
Brennan 3/29/08 X X X OlE X OlE
Carlson 3/29/07 X X -- ..- -- -- -... -... -- --
Gunn 3/29/07 X OlE ..- -- -- -- -... -- -- --
McCormally 3/29/08 OlE OlE X OlE OlE OlE
Michaud 3/29/09 X X OlE X X OlE
Ponto 3/29/07 X X X X OlE X
Swaim 3/29/09 X X X OlE X X
Trimble 3/29/1 0 -- -- -- -- X X X X
Toomey 3/29/09 X X X X X X
Weitzel 3/29/08 X OlE X X X X
Key:
X = Present
o = Absent
OlE = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
= Not a Member
CALL TO ORDER:
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
STAFF ABSENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES - May 7,2007
FINAL/APPROVED
C[
Chair Michael Larson called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m.
Candy Barnhill, Elizabeth Engel, Loren Horton
Greg Roth
Staff Kellie Tuttle, Legal Counsel Catherine Pugh
None
Captain Tom Widmer of the ICPD; and public, Nick Petersen
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
(1) Accept PCRB Report on Complaint #06-06.
CONSENT
CALENDAR
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
Motion by Horton and seconded by Engel to adopt the consent calendar as
presented or amended.
. Minutes of the meeting on 04/10/07
. ICPD General Order 99-03 (Prisoner Transport)
. ICPD General Order 99-04 (Canine Operations)
. ICPD General Order 99-05 (Use of Force)
. ICPD Department Memo 07-23 (January-February Use of Force Review)
Motion carried, 4/0, Roth absent.
Barnhill had an amendment to the April 10lh minutes. Barnhill also asked Captain
Widmer for clarification on General Order 99-03 (Prisoner Transport) regarding the
definition of "Prisoner" and/or if it was meant to be the same as "Arrestee". Barnhill
also asked how often the ICPD transported "Prisoners" or if the majority of the
transports were "Arrestees". Widmer stated that the majority of their transports
would be "Arrestees" going to the Johnson County Jail and that "Arrestees" are
covered under "Prisoners" for this General Order.
Barnhill asked the status of the change in the City Code recommended by the Board.
Tuttle informed her that it had been passed by the City Council at the May 1 sl
meeting.
Use of Force Reports - The Board wanted clarification as to when a Use of Force
gets put on the monthly report that is received from the ICPD or if ill! Use of Force
get put on the report. Widmer explained that if a Use of Force report is filled out by
an officer, it will be added to the monthly report that goes to the Board. The Board
asked Widmer to check into a Use of Force that did not show up on a monthly report.
Widmer speculated that it may have inadvertently been left off. The information is
compiled manually, but that there are cross-checks and it should not have been left
off.
PCRB
May 7, 2007
Page 2
PUBLIC
DISCUSSION
BOARD
INFORMATION
STAFF
INFORMATION
EXECUTIVE
SESSION
REGULAR
SESSION
None.
Horton notified the Board that he had an interview with Nick Petersen, a UI
Journalism Student. Engel also stated that she had interviewed with him.
None.
Motion by Barnhill and seconded by Horton 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, Roth absent. Open session adjourned at 5:42 P.M.
Returned to open session at 6:07 P.M.
Motion by Engel, seconded by Barnhill to forward the Public Report as amended for
PCRB Complaint #06-06 to City Council.
Motion carried, 4/0, Roth absent.
MEETING SCHEDULE
. June 12,2007,5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Room (CANCELLED)
. July 10, 2007, 5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Room
. August 14, 2007, 5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Room
. September 11,2007,5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Room
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Barnhill, seconded by Horton to cancel the June meeting due to the lack of
Board business.
Motion carried, 4/0, Roth absent.
Motion for adjournment by Horton and seconded by Barnhill.
Motion carried, 4/0, Roth absent. Meeting adjourned at 6:09 P.M.
x = Present
o = Absent
OlE = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
= Not a Member
KEY
, ,
TERM 1/9 1/16 2/13 2/22 3/13 3/29 4/10 5/7
NAME EXP.
Candy 9/1/07 X X NM DIE X X DIE X
Barnhill
Elizabeth 9/l/08 X X NM X DIE X X X
Engel
Loren 9/l/08 X X NM X X X X X
Horton
Greg Roth 9/l/09 X DIE NM X X 0 X 0
Michael 9/1/09 X DIE NM X X DIE X X
Larson
(M
POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2007
D
)
POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD
A Board of the City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240-1826
(319) 356-5041
May 7,2007
To: City Council
Complainant
Stephen Atkins, City Manager
Sam Hargadine, Chief of Police
Officer(s) involved in complaint
From: Police Citizen's Review Board
:r>
C,)
Re: Investigation of PCRB Complaint #06-06
This is the Report of the Police Citizens Review Board's (the "Board") review of the
investigation of Complaint PCRB #06-06 (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 12-14-06. 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 03-14-07, and was filed with the City Clerk on 03-13-07.
The Board met to consider the Chiefs Report on 04-10-07 and 05-07-07. The Board
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
A charge of excessive use of force by an ICPD officer at the complainant's residence
on 10-23-06 led the Complainant to file a complaint to the ICPD. The complaint was
assigned to Internal Affairs, who investigated and exonerated the officer's actions. The
Board reviewed that report, including the Complainant's and the Officer's accounts of
the incident. The Board did not receive a complaint regarding use of excessive force.
On 10-24-06, officers were granted a warrant for the search of the complainant's
residence. The search was conducted on 10-25-06. In the complaint to the Board on
12-14-06, the Complainant alleged the search was done in retaliation of filing the
complaint to the ICPD regarding an officer's behavior, and that in the process of the
search, the investigators "trashed" the residence.
CONCLUSIONS
After reviewing the Complaint and the Chiefs report, the Board concluded the
allegations were not substantiated. The search warrant was file stamped at 1 :56 P.M.
on 10-24-06, and was part of an on-going investigation. The complaint against the
officer's actions was not received until 2:10P.M. on 10-24-06. Because the search
warrant was filed before the subject's complaint, the search warrant could not have
possibly been issued in retaliation of the complaint against an ICPD officer.
Photos taken of the interior of the residence showed the apartment to be in disarray
prior to the search by the police.
Allegation #1 - Retaliation - NOT SUSTAINED
Allegation #2 - Destruction of Property - NOT SUSTAINED
COMMENTS
None.
C)
j b (7)
MINUTES
Youth Advisory Commission
May 30, 2007
Lobby Conference Room, City Hall
FINAL
Call to Order:
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Others Present:
Meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M.
Keranen, Segar, Stubbers, Weeks, Ziegenhorn
Bleam, Nelson
Marian Karr, City Clerk; Amy Correia, City Council Liaison
Approve Minutes:
Stubbers motioned to approve the minutes, Ziegenhorn seconded. Approved 5-0.
Report from Summer of the Arts / Global Villa2e Subcommittee:
Ziegenhorn reported that almost everything was ready to go for the Global Village. She
said that she would be making the beverage/ food item, since it would be cheaper. The
subcommittee decided to make a pineapple juice with ginger on their own, with a total
cost of no more that $70. Ziegenhorn asked Karr to purchase 300 Dixie cups in a three-
ounce size. Karr said that she would provide coolers to put the juice in that would hold
900 ounces. Ziegenhorn stated that two members of the subcommittee would be picking
up items from Ghana by June 2nd. Keranen said that she could provide a summary of the
grant program to be displayed on a poster at the Global Village. Karr gave Ziegenhorn
500 pencils and two flags that she had ordered to be displayed at the Ghana booth.
Ziegenhorn wondered if the subcommittee was within the budget for their event and Karr
said they had spent well under the allocated $500.
Ziegenhorn said that there were seven volunteers scheduled to work in the morning and
nine were scheduled for the afternoon. Bleam said via e-mail, as communicated by Karr,
that he would work from 2-4. Stubbers stated that she would be available to volunteer
from 9-1. Correia suggested having a volunteer sign in sheet so that volunteers could be
sent thank you notes for helping with the event.
Ziegenhorn said the event would take place in the pedestrian mall in downtown Iowa City
and that ifit rained the event would be moved inside the children's room of the Iowa City
Public Library.
Karr said that she would have cups, bungee cords, and a banner waiting in her office for
Ziegenhorn to pick up on Friday afternoon.
Report from Website Subcommittee:
Keranen stated that the members of the website subcommittee were not present, so there
were no new updates. Keranen also wondered when the web site calendar would be ready
and when events could begin being submitted to it. Karr stated that the City Webmaster
had created a mock-up of the calendar. The calendar would look similar to the city's
online calendar. When a certain date was selected, a template would open in a new
Youth Advisory Commission
May 30, 2007
Page 2
window and a person could enter information about an event. This information would
then be sent to a member of the commission, who would review the information and then
forward it to Karr, who would post the submission. Karr asked if all members of the
subcommittee should be trained to filter calendar events, or if only one subcommittee
member could be trained. Keranen suggested that one member, either Bleam or Nelson
be trained.
Report from Grant Pro2rammin2 Subcommittee:
Keranen stated that she had made the changes to the Grant Program application form, as
suggested in the last meeting. She said that she would send the form to Karr by June 1,
who would review the application and send it to be printed. The application will be sent
out and applications will begin being accepted shortly.
Public Discussion:
Correia encouraged the commission to participate in a Downtown Market Analysis
survey. The city is interested in having youth input in the survey, which Correia said
could be found on the city government web site (www.icgov.org). The survey results will
be used to understand what changes may need to be made to the downtown.
Announcements / Invitations:
There were no announcements or invitations brought to the attention of the commission.
Meetin2 Schedule:
The commission decided that the next meeting would be held on July 18th at 4:30.
No meetings could be held in June because Ziegenhorn, Keranen, Weeks, and Segar all
stated that they would be out of town for the second half of June.
The commission decided that they would discuss the issue of attendance and absence
notification at the next meeting so that the member replacing Ziegenhorn could be
present.
Citizenship Awards:
None presented until the new school year.
Meetin2 Ad1ournment:
Motioned by Stubbers, seconded by Ziegenhorn. Confirmed 5-0.
Meeting was adjourned at 7:30 P.M.
Minutes prepared by Ziegenhorn.
x = Present
o = Absent
OlE = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
KEY
,..._-_...~ ---
TERM 1/17 2/21 3/21 4/25 5/30
NAME EXP.
Audrey 12/31/07 X X X X X
Keranen
Sarah 12/31/07 X X OlE X X
Ziegenhorn
Un Weeks 12/31/08 X X X OlE X
David Segar 12/31/08 X X OlE X X
Maison 12/31/07 X OlE X OlE OlE
Bleam
Jacqueline 12/31/07 X X OlE OlE X
Stubbers
Michael 12/31/08 X X X X OlE
Nelson
YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2007
Youth Advisory Commission
May 30, 2007
Page 3