HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-01-15 Bd Comm minutes5b 1
MINUTES APPROVED
PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2007
MEETING ROOM A, ROBERT A. LEE RECREATION CENTER
Members Present: Emily Carter-Walsh, Mark Seabold, DaLayne Williamson, Patrick
Carney, Terry Trueblood, Rick Fosse
Members Absent: Emily Martin
Staff Present: Marcia Klingaman, Jeff Davidson
Public Present: Drew Bullman, Kelly Schaffner
CALL TO ORDER
Seabold called the meeting to order at 3:05 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 6. 2007 MEETING
MOTION: Trueblood moved to approve the minutes with minor corrections; Carney
seconded. The motion passed 8:0.
REVIEW OF PROPOSAL BY BAO PRAM -REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIT
GALLERIES DOWNTOWN
Bao Pham submitted a letter addressing the issues brought up in the Request for
Proposals letter of September 20, 2007. Included in this packet was an example of an
image fused to brushed satin aluminum. Marcia presented the electronic version of the
proposal. Carter-Walsh noted that "Bubbles" is atwo-dimensional graphic on sheet
aluminum. Seabold remembered that this piece was considered to be too sparse to fill
the pool wall. He noted that covering more of the wall was one of the requests made of
the artists. It was agreed that the color of the piece was appropriate and that this is a
piece that can be enjoyed without glasses, which is important for swimmers.
Trueblood questioned if the electronic representation was proportional to what would
actually be mounted to the wall. Bao's letter indicates that a total of nine panels would
be mounted, which is not consistent with the electronic representation. The electronic
image shows panels that are divided. It is unclear if each division represents an
individual panel. The committee would like the artist to define what he considers a panel
as well as confirmation of total square footage of the piece. The committee questioned
whether additional panels would provide adequate ventilation for the heating component
behind the pool wall. Marcia indicated that she was under that impression as all of the
artists had been notified of that requirement.
Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes
November 1, 2007
Page 2
Carter-Walsh asked how the piece would be mounted. Seabold indicated that a
common mounting style is a channel mounted to the wall with the aluminum pieces
hanging from that channel. This mounting would make it easier to take them off than if
they were bolted individually to the wall.
Trueblood asked the committee if anyone has seen the artwork by Bao Pham that is on
display at Clapp Recital Hall. No one has seen it. Seabold commented that he had
hoped the submittal would be more refined at this point as they were offered a chance to
revise as well as an honorarium. Unfortunately, the proposal has not been updated.
The committee also noted that they would like to see the artist present the proposal in
person. At this point the artist didn't indicate whether or not he would be coming for the
December meeting. The artist is represented by Chait Galleries, who will also be
fabricating the entire piece as well as installing it. Bao Pham is just the photographer.
Fosse noted that he had missed a couple of the previous meetings and wanted
clarification about where the artist was in the process. Seabold indicated that Bao Pham
had been short-listed to present their proposal in a more complete form. Marcia clarified
that the original request was to respond to the artist's qualifications. Subsequent
requests asked more specifically for a proposal. They had submitted what they thought
was more of a proposal during the first round and the committee decided to include
them. They decided not to expand on their proposal any further. Carter-Walsh noted
that from a maintenance standpoint the proposal looked pretty good. Trueblood noted
that he was concerned about comments in the letter regarding sunlight. The pool wall.
receives a significant amount of sunlight from the southern exposure. Seabold would
also like to be sure that the piece would be able to withstand high humidity. The
committee would like to know more about the sunlight, the definition of a panel, and total
square footage of the piece. Marcia will request that the artist provide this information
for the next meeting.
UPDATE REGARDING IOWA SCULPTOR'S SHOWCASE AND PENINSULA PARK
SCULPTOR'S SHOWCASE
There were no responses for either showcase. Marcia has spoken to Marc Neucollins
about his piece, "Blade", on the Peninsula Showcase and he is happy to keep it there
until he sells it or until a replacement has been found. Marc is also now interested in
submitting a proposal for the downtown showcase now that he is no longer a student.
Marcia plans to send out the calls soon. Brandy has been updating the artist database.
The committee has decided that this will be the last chance in terms of temporary
displays. If it is not successful they will evaluate whether or not they should continue to
do temporary or place permanent pieces on showcase. Carter-Walsh noted that the
temporary displays are particularly nice for out-of-town visitors. She asked what had
become of Gene's piece. Marcia indicated that the artist noticed that it had been
tampered with and has decided to pull it before football season.
ALAN WEINSTEIN'S UNOFFICIAL POOL WALL PROPOSAL
Alan submitted an example of his piece on poster board measuring 10-ft long. He did
not get chosen for the short list; however, he decided to take on this proposal as a
personal challenge. Alan said to Marcia that this piece took him into a whole new realm
and he felt compelled to present this piece. There are two different variations: one more
Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes
November 1, 2007
Page 3
complex and one simpler. The final product will be weather-proof industrial plastic. The
final color can be whatever the committee wants it to be. Alan has not been notified
about the heating tubes issue. The piece doesn't look as though it would negatively
affect the ventilation. The committee was impressed with the interpretation and the look
of the piece. Alan has not offered any indication of cost at this time.
POETRY IN PUBLIC
Poetry in Public is sponsored by the Public Art Committee; it is in the sixth year. This
year we are hoping to add another component - a local artist to teach some classes at
the recreation center. Right now they are in negotiation with Dave Maurice, Dr. ABC.
He has submitted poetry in the past and has also taught classes. Promotion will be
done for him as well as the project in general. The project started as a way to get poetry
into the public. The general public is solicited for participation (adults and children). The
poems are displayed in the kiosks, at the two recreation centers, as well as in the
busses. We work with the school district to get the kids involved. Language Arts
teachers have been very supportive. The submission deadline is February 1St
WASHINGTON HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
Washington Hills Neighborhood Association submitted a draft proposal for a
neighborhood art project. They may present this to the Public Art Committee in January.
The idea is to work with first and second grade students at the neighborhood schools to
come up with sketches that could be constructed into play structures. Marcia did explain
to the neighborhood that play structures will require oversight by the city in terms of
safety requirements and liability. There are no cost estimates or budget at this time.
Terry asked if there were plans to incorporate these structures into an existing
neighborhood park. Marcia indicated that Pheasant Hill is the only park within that
neighborhood.
SAND LAKE PARK CONCEPT PLAN
Terry Trueblood provided an update on Sand Lake Park. A concept plan has been
developed with cost estimates. A grant was prepared and ready to go out for a
Community Tourism Grant; however, one of the board members of Vision Iowa indicated
that an unlisted requirement to the grant is to first obtain cash contributions from the
County and the private sector. They also like to see a public art element incorporated
into these grant applications. A public art element may be requested on behalf of the
Parks and Recreation Division at a future time.
SCHEDULE FOR DECEMBER MEETING
December 6th meeting will be held at 2:00 p.m. to allow enough time for the artist's
personal presentations. If the committee decides to make a decision at that meeting,
they'll need time for discussion. A 5:00 p.m. ending time is more practical than 4:30 p.m.
Fosse noted that he would have to leave at 4:00 p.m. due to a prior obligation. The
meeting will be held in Meeting Room A at the Robert A. Lee Recreation Center.
COMMITTEE TIME/UPDATES
Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes
November 1, 2007
Page 4
None.
ADJOURNMENT
Fosse moved to adjourn; Carter-Walsh seconded. Meeting adjourned at 3:40 pm. Next
meeting December 6, 2007.
Minutes submitted by Brandy Howe
N
c_
m
a~
.~
E
0
U
O
fn
.~
Q
~r
Qo
N
~-
w ~
U E 'r'
~ N N
3 O cv
~za
~.
e
~~
O L
V
U
~~
'~ v O
~ ~ N
'~ C~
Q ~
C
L ~
~.+
V
Q~
~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~
~ o x x x x ~ ~
~ ~ x ~ ~ ~ o ~
~ ~ X ~ ~ ~
O
~ ~ ~ ~
~ 0 O
i
'~
X
~ i
x
N ~ i Q
~ oo O~ 00 O O~
`N k 0
~
~ 0
~
--~ 0
~
--~ 0
~
-, 0
~
-..
W O r
O ,
O .
O .
O
.S:
O
~
~ti ~
3 ~
~ ~
~ ~
rr ~
~ ~
~ s
~
L 3 ~ ~
~
~
~
~ ~
~ ~
~
C~
~
V
... ~
~.,, ,~
z w A w ~ a a H
'~
U
k
W
~ ~+ ~"
N
~ ~ ~
add
II
~ W
.fir ~ ~ 0
.ti
O
O
.~
a~
F-
"C)
C
L
~.
L
0
01-15-08
5b 2
MINUTES APPROVED
IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
NOVEMBER 14, 2007 - 5:00 PM
EMMA J HARVAT HALL -IOWA CITY/CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER: Carol Alexander called the meeting to order at 5:05 PM.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Michael Wright, Edgar Thornton,
Michele Payne
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ned Wood (recused)
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Walz, Norm Cate, Scott Peterson
OTHERS PRESENT: Joe Younkers, Rob Phipps, James Estin, Bu Wilson, Meg
Baron, John Morrison, Esther Baker, Jim Walters, Brian
Mitchell
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL (becomes effective only after separate
Council action):
NOTE: Carol Alexander noted that Ned Wood had recused himself from consideration
of the item on tonight's agenda, due to a conflict of interest. She then read the Board of
Adjustment's standard opening statement.
CONSIDERATION OF THE OCTOBER 10, 2007 MINUTES:
Alexander asked if there were any changes or additions to the above-named minutes.
Hearing none, she asked for a motion to approve.
MOTION: Thornton moved to approve the October 10, 2007 minutes as presented.
Wright seconded the motion.
The motion was approved 4:0.
APPEAL:
APL07-00002: Discussion of an application submitted by Leighton House for an
appeal on a decision made by the building official not to renew a rental permit for
property a,t 923 East College Street.
Walz began with a correction, stating that on the memo she issued to the Board Members
it stated to "Joint Staff," when it was meant to be addressed to the "Board of
Adjustment." Walz then began the Staff Report, stating that this property, in its current
Board of Adjustment
November 14, 2007
Page 2
configuration, is allowed by right thirteen roomers. In September 1997, the Board of
Adjustment granted a variance to this property, subject to a number of conditions in the
plan. One of the main issues was that the Leighton House would provide resident
management for the rooming house. Walz noted that the Board Members have a copy of
the Leighton House Business Plan, which lays out what the owners were to provide and
that the findings of the board that approved the variance had cited the upscale, controlled
business operation as being in the public interest. In April 2006, a new concept for this
property was discussed with City staff. Walz stated that this proposal was for housing the
men's track team and that resident management would be provided by a fellow member
of the track team. The Members also have a copy of this proposal, according to Walz.
Staff at that time noted that this proposal would not meet standards set by the Leighton
House Business Plan, but that a variance could be applied for.
Walz stated that the rental permit expired on August 31, 2006, and was being reviewed
by the Housing Inspection Department when an inspector visited the property. Walz
stated that at that time, an anonymous neighbor notified the building official of an article
in the Daily Iowan that basically suggested that the Leighton House was not being
operated under the terms of the variance-that there was no professional management
service, nor meal service, being provided. The rental permit was held due to this.
In October 2006, a variance was applied for by the Leighton House, asking for up to
twenty roomers. This was ultimately denied. However, prior to this, staff was taken on a
tour of this property, and staff observed during that tour that there was evidence that the
residents in the house were not complying with the Leighton House Plan, nor did the
applicants for the variance or the residents give any indication that the residents were
living in accordance with the terms of variance. The Housing Inspector then notified the
owner that the house was considered to be over-occupied. On November 8, Walz stated
that a letter was sent to the owner about this.
Walz noted that during the hearing for the October 2006 variance, applicants and
residents of this property, both verbally and in writing, defined their living arrangement
as "an intentional community" that was "without supervision" and "transportation, off-
site parking, meal plans" -conditions of 1997 plan, were not in place. Walz provided
copies of those letters, and also portions of the transcript from this meeting, for the Board
of Adjustment Members' review.
Walz then noted that in considering the appeal, the Members need to look at: Did the
Building Official make an error in his determination not to renew the building permit;
and was his decision based on sufficient and substantial evidence. Walz indicated that
the board should consider the information that formed the basis of the building official's
decision.
Norm Cate, Senior Housing Inspector, addressed the Members, reviewing the
information that Walz had presented, citing the specific Codes involved in this case, and
explaining how he arrived at his decision to deny the permit. The rental permit expired in
August 2006 and inspection took place in September for continuation of the rental permit.
Board of Adjustment
November 14, 2007
Page 3
The housing inspector found a few building items that needed improvement. A re-
inspection in October showed that all items with regard to the building itself had been
addressed. In the interim an article that appeared in the Daily Iowan was given to him,
which suggested that the Leighton House Plan was not being adhered to. The article
suggested that there was no on-site management, meal plan, or housekeeping services
provided. These did not match with the conditions of the business plan. Cate stated that
he took the article under advisement and talked to zoning officials regarding the issue and
at a joint staff meeting reviewed with staff what they had seen on their visit. Cate stated
that it was clear that the property was not operating according to the conditions of the
plan. He sent a letter to the owners indicating that the property was considered over-
occupied because the Leighton House plan was not being adhered to and gave them until
the end of the semester to reduce occupancy to 13 residents-the number allowed by
right. Cate reiterated that the article and staff observations formed the basis of his opinion
and that there was no other enforcement avenue but to deny renewal of the permit. Cate
read from the housing code (chapter 17-5-19X-1) indicating that any property that is over
occupied is in violation of the housing code and that the rental permit states that property
must be in compliance with that section of the housing code. The permit has not been
renewed. The property continues to be rented and occupied but the permit has not been
renewed.
In response to a question from Alexander, Walz indicated that the conditions of the
variance were somewhat unusual and were not things that would be easily observed from
the outside. Wright noted that this is an unusual situation, and asked questions of Cate
regarding his determination. Cate indicated that he had not contacted the property owner
in advance of denying the permit to see if professional management was provided but had
relied on information from staff provided at a staff meeting. Walz stated that the variance
was officially applied for on October 12, and that the planning staff review was
happening simultaneously with the rental permit review-the BOA considered the
application in November.
Thornton asked Cate whether he had interviewed residents of the property. Cate
explained the inspection process that would have taken place on this property. Thornton
asked for more clarification on the inspection and the ensuing tour that staff took at 923
East College Street, and whether or not Cate was actually part of the on-site inspection.
Cate responded that he was not, that he reviewed the information from his inspector, the
Daily Iowan and staff. Cate did not verify the issue with tenants or ownership. Board
members continued to ask relevant questions of Cate and Walz, in order to determine
their standing on this matter. Cate indicated that it would not be normal part of the
inspection process to seek out the residents or the owner for additional information prior
to reaching his decision. Cate stated that he had relied on his inspector's observation, the
observation of staff who visited the property and the newspaper article. Cate confirmed
that the on-site inspection happened first and the evidence suggesting non-compliance
happened later.
Walz further explained what took place during the staff tour, stating that it was obvious
that the residents were living in accordance with the Iowa Men's Track House plan and
Board of Adjustment
November 14, 2007
Page 4
that the residents made not attempt during discussions with staff to suggest that they were
living according to the Leighton House plan. Everything the residents presented to staff
indicated that they were not living according to the Leighton House Plan but rather
according to the Track House Plan. Thornton asked whether the Track House Plan
offered to have meal service. Walz responded that it did not. Thornton asked whether it
was normal for the inspection staff to use the media as evidence. Cate responded that they
would use any kind information but would corroborate it with other evidence or
information. Wright asked whether the residents had offered information about their
cooking arrangements. Walz responded that the residents indicated that they would
occasionally cook or eat together as a group.
Alexander asked if the applicant wished to address the Board.
Joe Younker, as Counsel for Leighton House, spoke to the Members, along with Rob
Phipps of Leighton House. Younker stated that this appeal really deals with a narrow
issue-whether HIS has a proper reason to withhold the permit. First of all, Younker
stated that the Housing Inspector (Anderson) initially found the property to be in
compliance with the housing code. He further stated that the reason for withholding the
rental permit appears to be based on a zoning issue. The applicant has sought an
explanation from HIS for 6 months. Younker stated that the Housing Inspection Services
(H1S) does not have the authority to determine whether or not the property is in
compliance with the terms of the 1997 variance, that this is a zoning matter and,
therefore, not under HIS authority. He stated that before such a determination may be
made, Leighton House must be offered a due process opportunity to show that they are in
compliance with the conditions of the variance. Younker stated that the Leighton House
is requesting the Board to take one of two actions -either order HIS to issue the rental
permit for the property; or, if the Board will not order the permit to be issued, that the
Board schedule an evidentiary hearing before the Board to determine whether or not
Leighton House operated the property pursuant to the terms of the 1997 variance. He
further stated that before such a hearing take place, Leighton House requests that the
Board require staff to provide Leighton House with specific notice of any alleged
violations. Younker noted that he outlined Leighton House's position in a brief that was
distributed to Board Members and staff previously and that federal and state laws require
that Leighton House be provided with due process.
Younker then proceeded to give the Board a brief history of the property at 923 East
College Street. The Board of Adjustment granted a variance in 1997 to Leighton House,
and denied two variances, requested in 2005 and 2006. He stated that today's hearing is
in regards to the 1997 variance. This variance allows the property to be used as a
rooming house for up to thirty roomers, subject to three conditions. Younker added that
only one of these issues is relevant to this matter, and that is the issue of resident
management of the rooming house consistent with the principles outlined in the business
plan for Lieghton House LC date July 1997. Younker stated that this variance
established a use right, as long as the property is being operated with those principles.
Regarding the rental permit, Younker stated that the City issued a rental permit allowing
up to thirty roomers on December 21, 2004, and that permit expired the end of August
Board of Adjustment
November 14, 2007
Page 5
2006. The City Inspector Art Anderson inspected the property in 2006 and stated that
the permit would be mailed shortly, as everything passed inspection. The rental permit
was not received after several weeks, and after a subsequent phone call, Leighton House
was told they would be receiving said permit. Throughout September and October 2006,
Younker stated that Anderson continued to state that the permit would be issued. In late
October or early November, HIS told Leighton House that a rental permit would not be
issued. Younker then pointed out Mr. Cate's letters from this time, stating that they do
not provide any explanation, analysis, or argument to support these assertions that 923
East College Street did not pass its inspection. As 2007 began, Mr. Younker stated that
Leighton House did not receive any further information from HIS, and subsequently as
Counsel, he followed up with a letter in April of 2007. A response did not arrive until
May 2007 from HIS. Mr. Cate alleged in this May letter that Leighton House had failed
to comply with the 1997 variance in the following ways: failing to have professional on-
site, adult management; full on-site meal plan; and transportation and shuttle service, and
reserved off-street parking. He said that Cate had indicated that the zoning official made
the interpretation but did not identify the zoning official that made the determination.
Younker stated that Leighton House maintains that it is in fact consistent with the
principles set forth in its 1997 Business Plan and is entitled to a permit for up to 30
residents. He stated again that HIS does not have the authority to interpret the zoning
code.
Younker continued, summarizing the information presented to the Board, stating that if
there is a concern that the property is not in compliance, then federal and state law
require that Leighton House be provided with a notice and a hearing, before any such
determination can be made. It is unfair and illegal, Younker continued, to determine that
the occupancy granted under the 1997 variance no longer applies, without first providing
Leighton House with due process protections. Younker stated that the determination by
HIS is invalid for three reasons: HIS lacks the authority to make such a determination;
the determination was made without adequate due process protections; and the City, in
claiming that Leighton House is not in compliance with the variance conditions, bears the
burden of establishment of non-compliance. Leighton House does not have the burden of
establishing that they are in fact in compliance.
Regarding the authority issue, Younker stated that the Board of Adjustment needs to
make this decision, that HIS does not have the authority to determine compliance with
the zoning ordinance, and therefore, Mr. Cate's determination is invalid. HIS does not
have the right to revoke the variance. He stated that the rental permit itself states that it is
not a determination of compliance with the zoning code. Any determination of non-
compliance must be made by the Board of Adjustment. He stated that HIS never
identified the zoning official or the process by which the determination was made. He
reiterated what Cate had stated in his letters, stating that he does not provide any
information in these letters as to what the issues are, nor did they provide Leighton House
a chance to address these issues. Again, Younker stated that Leighton House should
receive due process protection. Younker briefly discussed the state provisions of due
process requirements for bodies such as the Board of Adjustment. Leighton House was
never given an opportunity to address any concerns before the rental permit, was denied
Board of Adjustment
November 14, 2007
Page 6
by HIS. He stated that Iowa law requires an evidentiary hearing before such a
determination can be made. Zoning boards of adjustment function as reviewing boards
and make administrative adjudications. A decision that the variance no longer applies
because of non-compliance with the variance is a revocation of the variance and triggers
due process protections. Younker referred to Iowa Administrative Procedures Act for
appropriate due process procedures and particularly revocation of licenses with notice of
revocation or allegations of non-compliance and an opportunity for a hearing to
determine non-compliance.
Younker continued, stating the HIS reports refer to the Daily Iowan article, but that Mr.
Cate's letters do not. He stated that the determination should be made on something
more than an article in a local newspaper. Younker referred to the timeline again of when
the rental permit expired in 2006. He stated that he wanted to further review the October
2006 timeframe. Mr. Cate's initial letters made no reference to specific issues of non-
compliance-those did not come forth until six months later when the specifics were
spelled out by Mr. Cate. Younker stated that the staff report seemed to indicate that the
Leighton House was provided due process based on the staff tour of the property in
October 2006. This visit was centered on whether or not to issue the 2006 variance that
Leighton House had requested -not to address the re-issuance of a rental permit.
Younker further stated that even if this visit was a "fact-finding" one regarding issuance
of the rental permit, staff did not ask any questions pertinent to this, nor did they give
Leighton House a chance to address these allegations.
Younker returned to requesting the Board to authorize issuance of the rental permit for
Leighton House, or, again, in the event they do not do this, to schedule an evidentiary
hearing, require staff to provide Leighton House with specific allegations of
noncompliance, and then allow Leighton House to address these issues of alleged
noncompliance.
Thornton asked Younker how many residents were living at the subject property during
either the inspection or the staff visit. Younker noted there have been between eighteen
and nineteen residents consistently living here since fall 2006.
Alexander asked Younker under what conditions is the City able to make a determination
that a property is not complying with the conditions of a variance. Younker stated that
after an evidentiary hearing, if the City feels that Leighton House is not complying with a
certain principle in its Business Plan, then Leighton House should be provided with
notice of that fact, and a hearing should be scheduled so Leighton House can demonstrate
compliance. Wright then asked if the determining factor here is the lack of compliance
with the Business Plan as opposed to just over-occupancy. Younker stated that there are
two levels -one being that HIS determined this and that it is outside of its authority, and
that before this determination can even be made, that Leighton House needs to be
provided with a notice of hearing to address such allegations. Wright then asked if the
key to the argument is the existence of this variance, to which Younker replied that the
fact that HIS does not have the authority to make this determination ,and the fact that the
variance is in place grants a use right- before it can be removed from Leighton House,
Board of Adjustment
November 14, 2007
Page 7
they must receive due process. Wright stated that HIS makes zoning determinations
every day. Younker said that HIS does not make determinations with regard to variances.
Payne stated that almost every resident of Leighton House was present at the variance
meeting last November, telling the City how they lived, and that it did not comply with
the terms of the variance in question. Younker maintained that the variance hearing was
not to determine whether the business was being run according to the terms of the
variance, and the evidence presented by the then applicant did not address those
concerns. He indicated that Leighton House should be able to show compliance with any
violations. Payne reiterated that the residents had explained their living arrangements.
Younker stated that the condition associated with the variance is consistent with the 1997
business plan. He asked in what way the evidence collected at that hearing shows that
business is not in accord with the principles of the variance. Also, that the evidence was
presented in a different context.
The discussion turned to the variances applied for in 2005 and 2006 that were not
approved. Wright stated that the board had decided twice that the business was not
operating in compliance with the variance. Younker disagreed saying that the earlier
hearings were to determine whether a new variance should be granted. He stated that the
$usiness Plan did not change, due to the fact that the variance was not granted. In
response to a question from Alexander, Younker stated that the variance applied for in
2006 was for a different use-the applicants had asked for 20 roomers with no conditions
attached. Their business model was different. That is a separate issue from whether the
current owner is in compliance with the plan. Younker insisted that these were discreet
and separate issues.
Payne reiterated Younker's request for Leighton House, to which he replied that there are
some overlapping issues, but that specific allegations of noncompliance need to be
addressed by Leighton House before any determinations are made.
Alexander stated that she has questions of staff next. She asked Walz to explain how
such determinations are made. Walz stated that Cate would be better able to respond to
such questions, due to his experience. She reiterated that it is the opinion of staff that this
is the due process, that the permit was withheld and not renewed, and the opportunity for
due process is a 90-day period during which an appeal can be filed. She stated that they
used the May 2007 letter as the start of the 90-day period for appeal. Walz also stated
that she wanted to add some clarification to the staff visit in 2006 -stating that staff was
invited by the applicants and residents to this visit. They were asked to observe that the
interior of the building was in good condition, and worthy of contributing toward the
variance they were applying for at that time. However, Walz added that staff was also
present to observe how the residents were living, because the applicants had presented to
staff that they needed the variance in order to continue living in the way they were at that
time. She stated that the Board's decision, at that time (2006), was not about whether or
not Leighton House was operating according to the variance, but whether or not to grant a
variance for twenty roomers. However, the residents and applicants presented their living
Board of Adjustment
November 14, 2007
Page 8
situation as the way the house would operate under a new variance as requested by the
Hudsons.
Alexander then asked Scott Peterson to remind everyone what their purview is in an
appeal, as the Board hears very few of them. Peterson stated that the City's ordinance is
consistent with the State's, in that basically the Board is put into the position of the
administrative official. They can either uphold the position, grant the appeal, or find a
common middle ground. Payne asked if the Building Inspector has the right to determine
if someone is following a variance. Cate responded that the housing officials are the
enforcement tool for the code, including on issues related to variances. He explained
what the inspectors look for and what the HIS department can include in its
determinations, citing various City codes. He stated that occupancy is an issue that HIS
enforces. Petersen explained that the board of adjustment is the board that hears cases in
which someone is appealing a zoning determination made by staff. It was also reiterated
that the May 23, 2007 letter set out the 90-day appeal period, and that this hearing is in
reference to the appeal. Payne noted that Cate's letter does not cite occupancy, just the
variance issues. Cate responded, explaining how his two letters covered all issues,
including occupancy.
Wright asked Peterson about the due process issue, and whether or not this hearing is that
due process established in the code, to which Peterson stated it is. This led to questioning
of when the variance would be considered expired. He stated that the variance continues
so long as the conditions are met and now is the time for Leighton House to make their
case on whether or not they are in substantial compliance with the variance. If they are
not in substantial compliance then the variance is not valid. Alexander asked if anyone
else wanted to speak to the Board.
Younker then addressed the Board, stating that he disagrees with Peterson regarding
whether or not HIS has authority to make this type of zoning determination, and that this
is distinct from a normal occupancy issue. They are appealing the refusal to issue the
permit. They have had no notice as to why they were determined to be in non-
compliance. HIS is taking away a right. He reiterated that they are in front of the Board
asking for them to allow the rental permit to be issued, and that this is not a building code
issue. He again stated that the City needs to satisfy the burden of proof, not Leighton
House, for this so-stated noncompliance. Alexander asked if Younker didn't consider the
various letters to the Board from residents has as evidence. Younker continued, restating
his argument for Leighton House that the letters were evidence in a separate hearing on a
different issue. He stated that a variance does not just disappear the moment non-
compliance occurs, it must move through a process.
Board Members asked for more clarification on what their determination needs to
include, and Peterson gave further detail of such determinations from state law describing
the Board's authority in an appeal. Alexander noted that they could vote to uphold the
original decision, or they could grant the permit, or the board could vote to not uphold the
decision but then make the decision based on their own interpretation. Peterson
responded to the affirmative. Payne clarified that it was the opinion of staff that the
Board of Adjustment
November 14, 2007
Page 9
present hearing was the applicants due process and their opportunity to show that the
business is operating according to the principles of the business plan. Discussion
continued with Petersen advising the board on the specifics of what they need to decide,
what evidence can be used and the various options available to them.
It was reiterated that tonight is Leighton House's due process, and also the time for HIS
to present their evidence. Some of the various correspondence was briefly touched upon,
showing the timeframe for when Leighton House first received correspondence, to the
current time and tonight's hearing. The evidence is all of this correspondence and
materials that have been presented to the Board, which is for them to review and make
their decision. This is what Walz presented to the Board at the beginning of the evening.
Alexander asked whether the applicant wanted to address the issues raised in the May 3~d
letter.
Younker brought up again that the burden of proof is on the City, and that this evidence
from the 2006 variance is not necessarily pertinent to this issue. Payne asked whether the
residents of the house are currently living in the same manner that they claimed to be
living a year ago. Younker responded that he did not know but that Mr. Phipps could
respond. He stated again that the burden was on the city to set forth allegations of non-
compliance. The burden is not on Leighton House to establish compliance. Walz again
gave further detail on the letter from Ms. Franklin regarding Iowa Track House. She
explained that the idea for the track house was presented to staff by an individual before
the variance was ever applied for and that staff had indicated that the track house plan did
not meet the standard of the 2006 conditions. Staff had advised that individual that a
variance would be needed in order for the track house to be allowed more than 13
roomers. The Hudson's applied for a variance later in the fall to allow something similar,
if not identical, to the conditions set forth in the track house plan. Walz explained the
earlier variances that were requested in 2005 and 2006, trying to clarify for the Board the
lengthy time period being discussed, and also the change in people over the years.
Alexander asked what documents were received by the applicant. Walz confirmed that
the two letters from Norm Cate were the only documents sent to the applicant. Alexander
read the issues of non-compliance summarized in the HiS letter of May 2007. Younker
stated that the issue has to do with the phrase "consistent with the principles in the 1997
plan." He asked how they are inconsistent.
The Board again reviewed the specifics of this case, and Younker noted that the
noncompliance has to do with the Business Plan, not the variance.. He stated that Davis
Linden is in fact the on-site manager of Leighton House, and that this part of the variance
did not mean that the original requestors had to remain as the managers. Members asked
specific questions of Younker about this on-site manager, and whether or not the original
concept was still being followed. He stated that this is why an evidentiary hearing is
needed, for Leighton House to address specific issues of noncompliance. Younker then
explained exactly what "evidentiary hearing" means for his client, giving them a chance
to respond to allegations. As Mr. Linden is the on-site manager, and compensation is
Board of Adjustment
November 14, 2007
Page 10
paid to him, the Leighton House believes it is meeting this part of the variance and their
Business Plan, which is what they are following. Younker read from the business plan
that language used in the plan that referred to on-site adult manager. Alexander referred
to the plan and the background and skills of the proposed managers. Payne asked whether
the on-site manager was a student and whether he had skills similar to what the proposed
managers would provide. Younker explained that he is a student.
Alexander asked for an explanation of evidentiary hearing. Younker explained the
applicant would need notice of the non-compliant aspects and why they are interpreted to
be non-compliant. The applicant is struggling with the City's definition of "consistent
with the principles "put forward in the Leighton House Plan and then have an opportunity
to show compliance. Payne referred to the term professional. Younker responded that
professional is not part of the business plan language.
Thornton asked that Younker review the evidence again, the various letters between
Leighton House and HIS, and to show the Board where he feels due process was not
given. Younker explained how in these letters, specifics were not addressed by Mr. Cate,
until the May 2007 letter after the decision had been made. Due process should take place
prior to the decision. A review of the Leighton House Business Plan began next, with
Younker pointing out the specific issues in question. As for dining services, he reviewed
what the Business Plan states and how the need of a professional cook was not needed,
that the residents have different schedules and so a meal plan is not practical. The
residents prepare food in the kitchen. As for parking, Younker stated there are two spots
in the Chauncey Swan ramp available to residents, and transportation is offered to that
ramp, if needed. The business plan anticipates that students may not need cars and the
current situation finds that most residents do not use cars. He again asked how the
Leighton House is not in compliance with their Business Plan, which is what the variance
was based on in 1997.
The discussion turned to Younker stating that, again, the City needs to present specific
evidence of noncompliance on each of these issues, as stated above, in accordance with
their Business Plan. Thornton stated that he feels they need more specific information as
to exactly how this determination was made.
Alexander noted that they have others present who would like to speak, and she asked
that everyone be given a chance to speak this evening.
Jim Estin of 1039 East College spoke to the Board asking them to uphold the HIS
determination, until such time as the owners come into compliance. He noted the thirteen
occupants level, and stated that as neighbors, they have been asked repeatedly to appear
before the Board about the issue of higher occupancy, and that this is inconsistent with
zoning and the area, with increased parking problems being created, among other things.
He also noted that if you walk in this neighborhood in the evenings, you can see the
increased volume in vehicles parked on the street. He noted that when he invested in
property in 2005, he was under the belief that this neighborhood was geared toward
renovating single-family properties and that he expected the zoning regulations to keep
Board of Adjustment
November 14, 2007
Page 11
these investments strong. He feels that the owners of 923 East College Street are
noncompliant, and until they come under compliance, they should not receive a rental
permit.
Meg Baron of 1 I S South Summit stated that every year they come before the Board and
review this property, and that they would like to see their neighborhood remain a
comfortable one, where residents can walk around and feel safe. Jim Walters of 1033
East Washington next spoke to the Board. He stated that they like their mixed
neighborhood of students and single-family homes, and that he lives next door to the
property in question. He states that the big issue in the neighborhood is parking, that
what goes on inside is not their concern, as long as they are not disturbing the
neighborhood. He reiterated that parking is extremely tight in this neighborhood, and
that having company is often difficult with parking blocks away. He stated that if
Leighton House is only providing two off-street parking spaces, then having thirty
residents would definitely put them under noncompliance. Bu Wilson spoke next, stating
that she has also sent correspondence regarding this matter. She asked for some
clarification from Peterson, and then stated that her impression as a resident of this
neighborhood, and in talking with other residents, is that Leighton House is wanting the
City to tell them exactly what they're not doing right as they are not doing anything. She
further reviewed the evidence presented, reading directly from various aspects of the
variance and subsequent Business Plan. She stated that the variance for the thirty
occupancy rate being granted was based on the list of professional positions and
education components that were to go along with that occupancy rate - i.e. the safety
issue, food, transportation, management, etc. She further stated that the Leighton House
has consistently treated the neighborhood with contempt. She then read from a prepared
statement.
Esther Baker addressed the Board next. She brought up the issue of the Leighton House
Business Plan, and how things change and how can the compliance stay within the rules,
if things are always changing. The idea that constant, adult supervision of the tenants
would be provided, and that by having a student provide that supervision, Ms. Baker
stated, does not meet this stipulation. She noted that during the summer a swimming
pool was set up on the front lawn, as an example, with no fencing around it. She stated
that she also submitted a letter to this issue.
Brian Mitchell addressed the Board. He stated that he worked on renovating Leighton
House with his father, and stated that the neighbors of this property don't understand
what this property used to be, prior to their extensive renovation. He stated that by
performing this renovation, it has increased the value of this neighborhood. He feels
Leighton House is performing a good service to the community. John Morrison spoke
next, stating that he has lived in this area since 76. He agreed that this property was at
one time in extremely poor condition. He also reiterated the parking problems that have
been ongoing in this neighborhood.
Payne then asked Mr.Younker about the concrete "basketball" area of this property and if
it had not been removed. He stated that this is where they park the motorcycles and
Board of Adjustment
November 14, 2007
Page 12
mopeds. Rob Phipps, one of the owners of Leighton House spoke next. He stated that
the basketball hoop was to be removed, not the concrete slab. He said they talked to the
City about using this as a patio, and they were told that if they landscaped around it, it
could be a patio area. He stated that they did do this. Walz stated that this occurred
before she was part of this situation. Payne again stated that she thought this was actually
a condition of the variance.
John Morrison returned to state that the motorcycles are also ridden on the sidewalk, and
he stated that landscaping isn't motorcycles. Phipps returned to the microphone to state
that in regard to parking, only a few of the Leighton House residents have vehicles, and
that just because there are cars on this corner, they are not necessarily from those at
Leighton House. He stated there are other rental properties in the area where these
vehicles could be from. He stated that there are two spots on the property, and then the
two spots at Chauncey Swan, totaling four available spots for residents.
Members asked questions of Walz about the other properties in this neighborhood, and
how many are rental versus single-family. Walz stated that there were other multi-family
buildings in the immediate vicinity. Alexander then asked if there were any other
comments before she closed the public hearing. Hearing none, she closed the hearing.
The Board then entered into discussion, with Thornton stating that he has some concerns
about the issue of the inspection process, that he would like to hear more from City staff
at how they arrived at their decisions, and that he feels he does not have enough
information at the current time. He would like to hear more from HIS especially, and that
he feels they should review further and reconvene to make an adequate decision. Wright
asked about deferment, and if they would have to open the public hearing again in order
to do that. Peterson responded to such legal questions, stating that they could reopen at
the next meeting and continue with the hearing.
Discussion continued, with Thornton stating his concerns further. He again stated that he
would like for Mr. Cate to provide more information, as well as the Leighton House
owners. Alexander stated that if they were to reopen the hearing, she would want to hear
further from Leighton House. She noted what the 1997 Board of Adjustment was
granting, and in keeping with that Business Plan as was stated at that time. Payne stated
that if the Board feels they do not have enough information to render a decision, then
they need to defer. Wright stated that he feels he has enough information to go forward.
Alexander then stated that their concern as a Board is to give the citizens every
opportunity to present their side.
MOTION: Thornton made the motion to table this matter until the December 12, 2007,
meeting to allow the applicant and the Inspection Services enough time to provide
information, based upon the Business Plan, and also based upon the information provided
in the May 23, 2007, letter, as well as from the HIS in order to provide information on
their findings, and how they arrived at their determination to deny the renewal of the
permit. No second was heard for this motion.
Board of Adjustment
November 14, 2007
Page 13
The discussion then turned to the various aspects of voting on a motion, and affirmative
voting and what it is that upholds this decision, or grants the permit.
MOTION: Wright moved to uphold Appeal 07-00002 and to issue the rental
permit; seconded by Payne.
Wright started the conversation, saying that he is having difficulty with the logic that was
presented by the appellants. He spoke of the May 23, 2007 letter that states that the
permit is denied due to "not operating under the condition of the 1997 variance". The
rental permit occupancy limit is based on compliance with the conditions of the variance
agreement. Failure to meet this was based on lack of professional on-site, adult
management. Wright noted that just paying someone to live at Leighton House does not
fit the "professional on-site management" that was described in the business plan. He
noted that the plan describes the manager's background and ability to provide academic
support. The current manager is a student and there is no evidence of academic support
being provided, nor on-site food preparation, as was in the 1997 variance conditions.
Wright stated that there were possibly two off-street parking spaces on site and two
provided in the ramp. There has not been an effort to provide adequate parking for the
current number of residents nor the 30 potential residents. There are other issues that had
not been addressed: housekeeping and complaints about noise. He stated that he does not
see any reason to not uphold the decision of the Building Official and to deny the appeal,
based on the evidence presented to them this evening. The issues that have been raised,
he stated, have been technicalities. Wright indicated that this hearing is an evidentiary
hearing and that it provides due process.
Payne stated that she agrees with Wright's statements, and she briefly addressed her
concerns with the issues that have been raised. May 23 letter used the word
"professional" stands in place of the experience of the proposed managers. Payne stated
that the building official has the same responsibilities as the board and that he did have
the right to consider the terms of the variance as part of his job. Should his interpretation
be questioned, the Board decides whether there has been an error. She stated what her
interpretations are of the case. The current situation is not in the spirit of the plan. She
noted that both sides need to remember to watch what they ask for in cases like this.
Thornton stated that he does not have the same background knowledge of this case, and
that his concern was that both parties had an opportunity to speak to the case. He stated
that he believes the case could have progressed in a more timely manner, and that some
more facts would be helpful, but that in looking at the Business Plan, it's obvious that the
current situation does not meet the spirit of the plan. He also reviewed the "professional
staff' issue, and that he agrees the current setup is not in the original spirit. As for the
on-site meals, he stated that it appears this is also not happening, and he agreed with the
other members of the board on the parking issues. He stated that as the applicants are not
operating in the spirit of the continual plan, he would have to agree with those before
him.
Board of Adjustment
November 14, 2007
Page 14
Alexander stated that she would make this a unanimous decision with her vote. She
reviewed the past correspondence and findings on this case briefly. In reviewing the
business plan and findings of the 1997 BOA that referred to upscale, controlled business
operation, she said that all of the details contributed to an overall tone of what the
business was supposed to be and that was what led to that prior decision. Without all the
pieces that the business loses its meaning. The Building Inspector made his decision
based on the conditions of the business plan.
The motion was declared denied 4:0.
OTHER:
None.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION:
Alexander stated that she spoke with Holecek on Thursday, and there still is no decision
on the Shelter House issue.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION: Wright moved to adjourn, seconded by Payne.
Alexander adjourned the meeting at 7:30 PM.
Board of Adjustment
Attendance Record
2007
NAME TERM
EXP. 1/10 3/28 4/11 4/28 5/9 6/13 7/11 8/8 9/12 10/10 11/14 12/12
Carol Alexander 01/01/08 X X O/E X X NM X X NM X X
Michael Wright 01/01/09 X X X X X NM X X NM X X
Ned Wood O1/O1/10 X X X X X NM O/E X NM O/E O/E
Michelle Payne O1/O1/11 X X X X X NM X X NM O/E X
Edgar Thornton 01/01/12 X X X X X NM O/E X NM X X
KEY: X =Present
O =Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
--- = Not a Member
5b 3
MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2007
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL -CITY HALL
APPROVED
MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Brennan, William Downing, Pam Michaud, Jim Ponto, Ginalie
Swaim, Tim Toomey, Alicia Trimble, Tim Weitzel
MEMBERS ABSENT: Esther Baker
STAFF PRESENT: Karen Howard, Sunil Terdalkar
OTHERS PRESENT: Roger Anderson, Mary Bennett, Mike Haverkamp, Mike McLaughlin,
Marybeth Slonneger
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Weitzel called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
ITEMS OF CONSIDERATION:
Recommend Approval of 935E Market Street as a Historic Landmark. Terdalkar said a landmark
designation can be based on any historical, architectural or archeological significance. He said
the Commission can also consider significant historical events or personalities related to the
property.
Terdalkar said there have been some developments since the previous meeting on October 24`h.
He said the applicant and Friends of Historic Preservation have been working with the property
owner to find a solution. Terdalkar said the goal of the landmark designation is to secure the
property so that the house can be moved to a location where it can be restored. He said the State
Historical Society has been approached regarding the eligibility of the Wetherby House. He said
in their preliminary review they have determined that the property is eligible based on the fact that
it is associated with Isaac Wetherby and it is the only known extant building with a connection to
Wetherby. Terdalkar said the State Historical Society also believes that the house may still retain
its eligibility after it is moved to an appropriate location. He said the applicant and owner are
suggesting that the application be deferred. He said there has been a private agreement between
Friends of Historic Preservation and the owner to delay the demolition.
Weitzel asked what the private agreement is. Terdalkar said the agreement is to wait until
November 15`h to allow a decision regarding the move, if the application for landmark designation
is deferred. He said the owner is willing to work with Friends of Historic Preservation.
Weitzel asked if the agreement is conditional based on the Commission's deferral tonight.
Terdalkar said that is how the owner of the property has approached staff.
Weitzel asked if after the Commission voted on the issue Planning and Zoning would have one or
two public hearings. Terdalkar said one hearing at the Planning and Zoning Commission. Weitzel
asked if there would be two or three hearings at City Council. Howard said City Council could
hold one meeting, but would have to vote on the application three times. Weitzel asked if there
was any legal way to fast track the application. Terdalkar said there would be some flexibility in
arranging the public meetings and there could be some expedited action. Howard said that
because the property can be designated a landmark after it is moved, the long process could take
place after it is moved.
Historic Preservation Commission
November 1, 2007
Page 2
Weitzel asked if the Commission would have to open the public hearing if they decided not to
defer at this point. Terdalkar said the Commission could get some input from the applicant and
the owner, and then proceed with further discussion. Weitzel said it would be helpful for the
owner and applicant to restate their agreement for the record.
Weitzel said he would like to read the guidelines for landmark status. He said historic landmarks
are buildings that are individually significant for their architectural and/or cultural merits. Like
historic districts, theses properties are typically listed on the National Register of Historic Places,
or are eligible for listing on the National Register. He added that the State Historical Society and
architectural historians that the Wetherby House is eligible. Weitzel said landmarks are properties
that are individually significant because of their architectural quality, integrity and historical or
cultural significance. Weitzel said the Commission isn't here for debate, but instead for fact
finding.
Swaim asked how deferring the application works on behalf of the owner and applicant. Terdalkar
said the owner is willing to work with the applicant and Friends of Historic Preservation on moving
the property. He said there is a 60-day moratorium period if a public hearing is set by the City
Council and the owner would like the City to not set a public hearing. Swaim asked if nothing
could be done to the house during the 60-day moratorium period, including moving it. Terdalkar
said nothing could be done during that 60-day period unless an official action after a public
hearing has taken place.
Weitzel opened the public hearing.
Mike Haverkamp introduced himself as the President of Friends for Historic Preservation. He said
Friends has been talking to Mike McLaughlin, the owner of 935 E. Market Street, about the
possibility of moving the Wetherby House. Haverkamp said there is a possibility of moving the
house to Reno Street Park. He said that the Parks and Recreation Department and City Council
said there need to be support from the Goosetown Neighborhood. He added that a long term plan
needs to be developed for the maintenance of the property. Haverkamp said Friends has been
looking at the possibility of getting HRDP grants and local donations to move the house. He said
Friends came to an agreement with McLaughlin to hold off on the demolition until November 15t''
to give Friends enough time to have a rational idea on what it would take the save the house.
Haverkamp said he thinks Friends and the owner have come to a voluntary agreement and
recommends deferral of the application.
McLaughlin said he is the owner of 935 E. Market Street. He said he has been approached by
Marybeth Slonneger and Haverkamp regarding the preservation of the Wetherby House. He said
hat he must demolish or remove the two structures on the property before obtaining a plat survey
to split the existing lot down the middle. He said his plan is to construct two separate structures
on each of the two lots. McLaughlin said there is a garage on the property, but there has only
been interest in the preserving the house. He said it has been worked out over the phone that he
would give the house to Friends of Historic Preservation and they would be responsibly for the
structure. He added that the where the property could be moved still needs to be ironed out.
McLaughlin said he has talked to the City Attorney's about what will happen to his demolition
permit with all of the various scenarios. He said if there would be a recommendation from this
commission or the public to the City Council for a public hearing, then the demolition permit would
be stayed. McLaughlin said he draws the line at the point of a public hearing and does not want to
lose his demolition permit. He said he is willing to deal with this issue privately with Friends of
Historic Preservation. He added that his contractor has no problem waiting until November 15tH
for a decision, and might be flexible beyond that. McLaughlin said that losing his demolition
permit would cause a considerable financial burden.
Historic Preservation Commission
November 1, 2007
Page 3
McLaughlin said the request for deferral is preferred because it will allow for a deal to work out
privately and avoid time constraints. Weitzel said the Commission's intent is never to cause
unnecessary delays or expense to a property owner.
Marybeth Slonneger, the applicant, said Carl Klaus and herself are the co-representatives of the
Goosetown Neighborhood Association. She said Klaus cannot attend the meeting tonight, but
strongly recommends the Reno Street Park as a location for the Wetherby House. Slonneger said
a vacant lot left by a demolished house was given to the Reno Street Park by the City and still
has water and gas lines. She added that those water and gas lines could be used to hook up to
the house. Slonneger said Heritage Trees and other local organizations have shown interest in
donating money to restore the house.
Slonneger said a lot available on Prairie du Chien Road and Hickory Hill Park are other options
for the location of the Wetherby House. She said Hickory Hill Park would provide less protection
to the house than Reno Street Park.
Weitzel asked if a vote has been made by the Goosetown Neighborhood Association. Slonneger
said she was supposed to receive a-mails from the other representatives. Weitzel said that it
sounds like there needs to be more time for the association to make a decision. Slonneger said
she sent out the notices about moving the house to Reno Street Park the previous night, so no
one was prepared.
Roger Anderson said that his property is adjacent to the Reno Street Park and does not support
moving the Wetherby House to the park. He said the property should be left where it is. He added
that he objects to losing the park. Anderson said the homes on the south side of the park are
setback quite a distance from other homes in the city, so the further the house is set back, the
less park space there will be left available.
Mary Bennett, an employee of the State Historical Society, said she would like to see the
discussion on the Wetherby House done a public manner. She said that two weeks isn't enough
time to make sure the evaluations are done properly. She added that if private discussions
continue, the threat of a demolition is held over our heads of those trying to save the property.
Bennett said the economic pressures and the private negotiations have not exposed all of the
angles that can be taken. Bennett said she would like to see the property preserved at the current
location.
Weitrel closed the public hearing.
Weitzel said the Commission can now discuss and entertain motions. He added the main concern
is to determine if the Wetherby House is eligible for landmark designation.
Ponto said this is a bad situation because ideally the whole process for designating a landmark
should have started a long time ago. He said the cost of moving it may meet or exceed the
amount the property could be sold at. He added that at this point, private discussions would be in
the best interest of the public. Ponto said he would support deferral of the application.
Michaud asked if a representative from Parks and Recreation would be there during private
discussions. Haverkamp said Friends has talked to Parks and Recreation and will be giving a
presentation to them at their next meeting on November 15`h. He added that Parks and
Recreation would be willing to schedule an earlier meeting, if needed.
Swaim said it sounds like if something is going to be worked out, it is going to happen in the next
two weeks.
Historic Preservation Commission
November 1, 2007
Page 4
Toomey asked if approval by Parks and Recreation and the house needs to be moved in two
weeks. McLaughlin said he would be willing to give Friends until 6 p.m. on the 15"' of November
to have the structure moved. He added that there may be some flexibility beyond that.
McLaughlin said his contractor that will head up the demolition is willing to be flexible about the
date.
Toomey said that if the house is moved to a city-owned park, it becomes city property. Weitzel
said it depends on what kind of agreements are made.
Weitzel asked what an adequate time frame would be to receive grants for the property. Bennett
said 30 days.
Michaud asked what the time frame is on the demolition permit. McLaughlin said 60 days. He
added that he is trying to complete his project in July 2008 and cannot wait a few months to start
the project. He said he does not want to continue to monitor a request for a public hearing with
the City Council. McLaughlin said a public hearing would be giving up too much of control of the
project.
Michaud asked Slonneger if Plum Grove was an option. Slonneger said Plum Grove is not an
option. She said the Butler property and Wetherby Park are other options. She added that Parks
and Recreation did not recommend Wetherby Park due to the high rate of vandalism. Michaud
asked if Slonneger is looking at creating a trust fund for the house. Slonneger said that is the
goal, but will not set that up personally. She said an endowment fund would likely be set up by
Friends. Slonneger said Friends has also considered having alive-in caretaker.
Michaud asked if the Wetherby House could be moved to a different location on the lot while the
foundation is being built for the duplexes. Terdalkar said that may not be allowed because a lot
must be clear to have it split and to get a building permit for future buildings as the owner is
proposing. Weitzel asked how long those processes typically take. Terdalkar said staff has not
received any plans and cannot give a definite time frame. He added that Housing & Inspection
Services might have more information. Howard said the design review process generally takes
longer than a week, and depending on complexity of the project it may take longer. Weitzel said
he asked about the building permit and design review process to find out if there are other time
restrictions outside of landmark designation.
Weitzel asked McLaughlin how long it would take to demolish the building. McLaughlin said it
would take less than a day.
Howard said Council needs 24 hours notice before setting a public hearing. She recommended
that the applicant and the owner talk to the Council and let them know that a private agreement is
going forward. McLaughlin said regardless of what they would say to Council, they could decide
otherwise and set the public hearing. Howard said the Council has to motion to set a public
hearing, so it is up to the discretion of the City Council to set a public hearing. Weitzel said a
request for a public hearing doesn't necessarily mean the demolition permit will be lost.
McLaughlin said there is always a chance that they could vote in the affirmative and that would
jeopardize the permit.
Toomey asked what effect the Commission would have from voting tonight. He also asked if
voting to designate the Wetherby House as a historic landmark would prevent the demolition from
happening in two weeks. McLaughlin said that recommendation to the City Council would then
have to vote on setting a public hearing. Howard said what the Commission has in front of them is
a request from the applicant to defer to allow private negotiations to continue.
Historic Preservation Commission
November 1, 2007
Page 5
Slonneger asked if the Wetherby House could be moved to some location as a holding place.
Weitzel said since the Historical Society of Iowa said that its eligibility does not suffer from the
location of the building, so a deferral is in order.
MOTION: Ponto made a motion to defer the application. Michaud seconded the motion.
Brennan said he will be voting to defer. He said the current plan is to demolish the structure. He
said deferring the application will allow time to move the building. Brennan said a vote tonight
would put more pressure on McLaughlin to exercise his right of demolition or risk losing his
permit. He said the better decision is to defer.
Swaim said she will be voting to defer. She hopes that the extra time will give the applicant more
time to work on moving the building. She said that she hopes the owner will be flexible about the
moving date.
Weitzel said the applicant should make all due haste to move the building and worry about the
rest later.
Motion carried on a vote of 8-0.
Meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Doug Ongie.
s/pcd/mi ns/hpG2007/11-0 t -07.doc
c
0
.N
.~
E
0
U
c
0
d
N
L
0.
V
O
N
0
m
m~
V ~
~o
~ N
d
w+
Q
o x x ~ ~ x x x x x x
o x o ~ x ; x x x x x x
o x x
, x ;
„ x x x x x x
x x ;
, x x x x x x
,
°-' x x w
o x x w
0 x x x
,
N
x
x i i i W
~
O
x
x
x
x W
~
O
x
~
`~ X O w
O X X X X X X
<o
N
m
X W
O
~
~
~ W
0 W
0 X X X X X
M
i X X ; ` ;
, `-"
O X W
O X X X X
n , ,
x W
0
~
~ w
O X X W
O X X X
a
v X X X ~ X X X X X
,
X X O O X X X ~ X ~
M O
o
r X X X ~ X W
O X X X X X
~
y
~m rn
o o
o ~
o o
~ n
o o
o rn
o n
o rn
o o
r- rn
o oo
o
F W rn
N rn
N rn
N rn
N rn
N rn
N rn
N rn
N rn
N rn
N rn
N rn
N
M M M M M M M M M M M C7
T
m
~
iC
~
~
y
~
•=
~ i0
€
c
7
~
°
E
d
a
y
E
~
~
c~a
z ~
m ~
m ~
c~ o
o ~
c7 ~
~ ~
~ 0
a 3
~n ~
r•- o
r- °'
3
a
~ L
~ ~
7 ~
a1
X C
W ;_, N
~ ~ ~ N
C
~ ~ ~
N~QZz
a Q II II II
>+ II II W_ ~ i
YXOOZ i
Sb 4
MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2007
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL -CITY HALL
APPROVED
MEMBERS PRESENT: Esther Baker, William Downing, Pam Michaud, Jim Ponto, Ginalie
Swaim, Tim Toomey, Alicia Trimble, Tim Weitzel
MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Brennan
STAFF PRESENT: Sunil Terdalkar
OTHERS PRESENT: Mary Bennett, Jackie Blank, Carl Klaus, Mike Haverkamp, Ken
Slonneger, Marybeth Slonneger
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Weitzel called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
ITEMS OF CONSIDERATION:
Setting a Public Hearing to Designate 935E Market Street as a Historic Landmark. Terdalkar
said that tonight's special meeting is intended to evaluate preliminary eligibility of the house at
935 E. Market Street and to consider setting a public hearing to designate the property as a local
historic landmark. He said at least seven days notice is required prior to a public hearing for
considering landmark designations. Terdalkar said November 151 is the earliest day the
Commission could hold a public meeting on the issue. He said that depending on the discussion
and public input during the public hearing, the Commission could request the City Council to set a
public hearing on November 5.
Weitzel said the Commission has the letter that was sent to City Council and photos that
accompany it. He said 935 E. Market Street is the Isaac Wetherby House and a demolition permit
was taken out by the land owner. He said the land owner does not plan on saving the building,
but is negotiating with Friends of Historic Preservation. Weitzel added that the waiting period for
demolition has expired. Weitzel said the Commission hearing is necessary to for the application
for a Historic Landmark to be considered by the Council. He said nothing can be done about
staying the demolition until the item reaches City Council. Weitzel said that the Commission is
determining tonight whether or not the Wetherby House should be granted a public hearing to be
considered a registered historic landmark.
Marybeth Slonneger, the applicant, said that she was accompanied by Carl Klaus, a retired
professor and a co-representative in the Goosetown Neighborhood, Jackie Blank, Ken Slonneger,
and Mike Haverkamp, President of Friends of Historic Preservation. She added that Mary Bennett
from the State Historical Society of Iowa might be joining the meeting later.
Marybeth Slonneger said the Wetherby House was sold on October 18, 1858 by Patrick Doyle
and his wife Ann. She said Wetherby painted about 1,000 oil paintings and his works are
displayed in museums in Boston, Des Moines, Davenport, and Iowa City. She said Wetherby was
also a photographer and purchased a camera within two years of the camera becoming available.
She said the State Historical Society has 1,450 glass plate negatives of his work. Slonneger said
he took the first pictures of the Old Capitol dating back to 1854 when it was still the state capitol.
She said the 935 E. Market Street house is the only house left in the United States with a direct
connection to Wetherby. She said he lived there from the 1860 to around the 1900s.
Historic Preservation Commission
October 24, 2007
Page 2
Weitzel said tonight the Commission is only establishing merit to hear the significance of the
property at a public hearing.
Bennett said the Wetherby house qualifies for National Register status. She added that the
property would continue to be eligible even if it is moved. Weitzel asked if it based on criterion B,
significant persons. Bennett said it does meet criterion B because it is the only property left that is
associated with Wetherby. Weitzel said that criterion B allows a property to become a landmark
based on the person that lived there, not the historical architecture.
Bennett reiterated the State Historical Society has found that the house qualifies on a preliminary
basis. Weitzel said there has been no formal survey done on this house.
Downing asked how long it has been known that 935 E. Market Street was Wetherby's property.
Bennett said the State Historical Society has had records since the 1970s. Downing asked if the
owner of the house has ever been approached about preservation or registry status. Slonneger
said she approached the former owner of the house and didn't feel that she wanted to sell the
house at the point. She said that she missed her chance to purchase it. Slonneger said the
current owner bought the property on October 4'h, 2007. Downing asked what the current owner
intends to do with the property at 935 E. Market. Slonneger said the property will be a four unit
duplex as a rental property. Downing said it is zoned for single family in an RNS-12 zone.
Michaud asked if it was currently a duplex. Weitzel said it is not a duplex. Terdalkar said duplex
structures are allowed in RNS-12 zones.
Michaud asked if the Commission should talk about what has been changed on the house.
Weitzel said the Commission should determine if a property deserves a public hearing. Michaud
asked if the front door has been relocated. Slonneger said pictures suggest that the entry was
moved to the side of the house.
Weitzel said there has been a lot of community support for moving the house. He said date needs
to be determined when to move it.
MOTION: Swaim moved to set a public hearing to establish 935 E. Market as a local
landmark. Downing seconded the motion.
Ponto said he thinks the house is potentially eligible and would like to have a public hearing.
Baker said there is no reason not to have a hearing.
Motion carried on a vote of 7-0.
Terdalkar suggested that the date for the public hearing should be part of the motion.
MOTION: Swaim moved to amend the motion to have the hearing on November 15S at 6:00
p.m. Downing seconded the motion.
Motion carried on a vote of 7-0.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 6:23 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Doug Ongie
s/pcd/mi n s/h pc/2007/10-24-07. doc
C
O
.y
.~
0
U
c
0
R
d
N
L
Q.
V
.O
i+
L
0
m
m ~`'
V O
=o
~ N
C
~+
~.+
Q
2
o X ~ ~ X ~ ~ X X X X X X
o X X X ~ X X X ~ X X
X X ~ ; ~ ~ X X X ~ X X
°' x x W
0 x x w
0 x x x
.
x x ~ w
0 x x x x w
O x
~
N X O
~ W
O X X X X X X
co ~ ~
p
X W
O
i
i
i W
0 W
0 X X X X X
c
'"'
i X X
~ w
O X W
O X X X X
n ~ ~
X 0 O X X p X X X
X X ~ X ~ X X X X X
ey O x x ~ O O X X X ~ X ~
o
c• x X X ~
~ X w
O X X X X X
ti
£ d O
0 a0
0 r
0 O ~
0 O
0 6~
0 r
0 O
0 O O
O a0
O
F W ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N m
N ~
N
M M M M M M M M M M M M
T
N
L
c
~
N
~
_
~ R
~
o
~
~
o
'
E
.-oa
E
~
d = t +
Z m m U O t7 ~ ~ a ~ H F ~
~ `
~ ~
~ ~
X ~
W ;_, N
C ~
C C N ~ N
~ ~ ~
~~QZZ
d Q II II II
~' II II W ~ ~
YXOOZ
FINAL /APPROVED
5b(5)
POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES -October 16, 2007
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Michael Larson called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Elizabeth Engel, Loren Horton, Donald King
MEMBERS ABSENT: Greg Roth
STAFF PRESENT: Staff Kellie Tuttle, Legal Counsel Catherine Pugh
STAFF ABSENT: None
OTHERS PRESENT: Captain Tom Widmer of the ICPD; public, Caroline Dieterle and Dean Abel
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
None.
REPORT FROM NOMINATING COMMITTEE
Roth and Engel were appointed to the nominating committee at the September 11th
meeting. Engel reported that the committee had met and would like to nominate
Michael Larson for Chair and Elizabeth Engel for Vice-Chair.
CONSIDER MOTION TO FIX METHOD OF VOTING
Motion by Horton, seconded by King to prescribe the method of voting by a voice
vote and use majority vote for the basis for decision. Motion carried, 4/0. Roth
absent.
NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICE OF CHAIRPERSON
Motion by Horton, seconded by King to close nominations.
Motion carried, 4/0, Roth absent.
Nomination of Michael Larson for office of Chairperson as selected by the
nominating committee.
Motion carried, 4/0, Roth absent.
NOMINATIONS-FOR OFFICE OF VICE-CHAIRPERSON
Motion by Engel, seconded by Horton to close nominations.
Motion carried, 4/0, Roth absent.
Nomination of Elizabeth Engel for office of Vice-Chairperson as selected by the
nominating committee.
Motion carried, 4/0, Roth absent.
CONSENT
CALENDAR Motion by Horton and seconded by King to adopt the consent calendar as presented
or amended.
• Minutes of the meeting on 09/11/07
• ICPD General Order 05-01 (Persons With Mental Illness)
• ICPD General Order 07-02 (Detainee Processing)
• ICPD SOG #01-15 (Criminal Investigations)
• ICPD Quarterly Summary Report (Quarter 3) - IAIR/PCRB, 2007
PCRB
October 16, 2007
Page 2
Engel had questions regarding General Order 05-01 (Persons with Mental Illness)
page 3, item B regarding the directive "should" in the first paragraph and "always do
so" in B(1 ). Widmer explained that "should" means the officer has the option on calls
if they are familiar with the individual and there's no danger to call off the backup, but
when an individual is taken into custody it is always with a backup.
Larson wanted to know in regards to the same general order on the last page
regarding training, what kind of training is provided. Widmer stated in the past
various methods of training have been provided from Alzheimer's Association to
agencies that work with mental illnesses come in and give in service training at the
yearly MATS training. Officers have also been sent for specialized training for 2-3
days for special populations.
Horton asked if this general order pertained to only those 18 and over rather than
juveniles. Widmer said that they do not differentiate between the two when an officer
recognizes a mental illness. It is also made sure that officers have the training to tell
the difference between mental illness and intoxication or other things.
Larson inquired about General Order 07-02 (Detainee Processing) on page 4, under
Item B. (Emergnecy Alarms) what a DataMaster was. Widmer explained that the
DataMaster is the device they have that is hard-wired into the State of Iowa where
the intox machine is. With the possibility of radio frequencies interfering with the
reading, the policy is that radios are shut off and a fixed alarm button is used in the
detention rooms if assistance is needed.
Motion carried, 4/0, Roth absent.
OLD BUSINESS None.
NEW BUSINESS None.
PUBLIC
DISCUSSION Abel wanted to know when the Board asks questions referring to a general order,
who answers those questions. Widmer explained that he discusses questions that
come up with the Chief. The Chief is required to sign off on all the general orders.
Widmer explained the re-evaluation dates and the color codes associated with the
general orders. Abel confirmed that the general orders were available on-line.
Widmer directed him how to get to them. Abel complimented the Board, the City,
and the Police Department for having an open policy on making information available
to those who want to search it out.
BOARD
INFORMATION Horton and Engel both informed the Board that they had been contacted by a DI
reporter who had questions regarding the annual report. Dieterle stated she was the
archivist for the DI and that the story had been published and she could drop a copy
off in the Clerk's office for the Board.
STAFF
INFORMATION Pugh received a phone call on September 17th from Ken Hawes who is the
Chairperson for the Johnson County Republican party and he wanted to understand
the ramifications of the proposed ballot language to the Board.
PCRB
October 16, 2007
Page 3
Tuttle asked Board members to review the contact list that was in the packet and
inform her of changes and reminded them that information given to her was public.
TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change)
• November 13, 2007, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Room (CANCELLED)
• December 11, 2007, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Room
• January 8, 2008, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Room
• February 12, 2008, 5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Room
Horton announced he would not be available for the December meeting and Engel
stated she would not be in town for the February meeting.
Motion by Horton, seconded by Engel to cancel the November 13 meeting due to
lack of Board business.
Motion carried, 4/0, Roth absent.
ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by King and seconded by Engel.
Motion carried, 4/0, Roth absent. Meeting adjourned at 5:53 P.M.
~°o~c
u n ii ii ii
zz~~b
o c ~c~,
~ ~
~~ c
-~
a.
d r~ G~ xr ~r~ ~~
~
fD o
~ ~ ~
~ m ~ ~
~ o
z
~
a ~
~ ~ v
a ~ ~ ~ ~ ,
~ `~ ~
-
o
~ ~ .r ~
~
vc
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
o
0
0
0
o
b
~
.~
~ x ~ x ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
z z z z z N
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w
~ N
>C yC ~C ki 1~ N
~ ~ ~ ~i ~ ~ W
i 0 W
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
i A
0 ~ ~ ~ J
i
~ a ~ a ~ a N
l h
yC >'C >'C X ~
t o
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A
i ~
yC
?C
~
~C
~C
~ ~+
o
y
M"3
d
~ ~ l l
TQ
d o ~
~ ~
...i I~
O
b
r
F^
l 1
^~
l l
ICI
H
C
Youth Advisory Commission
November 6, 2007
Lobby Conference Room, City Hall
Members Present: Bleam, Green, Keranen, Nelson, Segar, Weeks
Members Absent: None
Others Present: City Clerk Karr
Call to Order: Meeting was called to order at 5:33PM
Approve Minutes: Motioned by Segar, seconded by Keranen. Approved 6-0.
Report from Website Subcommittee: No update.
FINAL
5b 6
Report from Grant Proerammin~ Subcommittee: Keranen reported that she announced the
Youth Empowerment Grant at the Student Citizenship Awards ceremony held during the Council
meeting on November 5. She also reported that she would be posting Facebook ads shortly.
The timing for the ads was discussed. It was agreed that the holiday season was not a good time to
promote the grant due to the hectic nature, so another major advertising push would begin after the
holidays in 2008.
Green reported that she had given flyers to student group leaders at Regina High School.
Nelson reported that he emailed information about the Youth Empowerment Grant to leaders of
University of Iowa student groups that were interested in community service.
Public Discussion: None.
Vacancies: Applications are being accepted for two positions for ages 18 to 21. One of the 18
through 21 positions is immediately open, while the remaining open on January 1, 2008.
Funding Request for Fiscal Year 2009: The fiscal year 2009 budget discussion from October 22, 2007
was reviewed. The following funds were decided upon to be requested:
• Summer of the Arts Global Village: $500
• Website and Advertising: $500
• Youth Empowerment Grant: $2000
Keranen and Nelson agreed to produce a document to be included with the budget request form
describing the rationale behind the budgeted amounts requested.
Meeting Schedule: The next meeting is set for December 3 at 7:OOPM.
Adjournment: Adjourned at 5:52PM. Motioned by Segar, seconded by Bleam. Approved 6-0.
Minutes prepared by Nelson.
Z
O
N
O
Q
2
H
O
O
wti ~
w N ~
U ~ c
~ } ~
W
H
H
Q
X X X X X X
N
c
X
X
0
X
X
X
~-
N X ; X X O ~ X X
Q1
N
N O p X X X ~ X
N X X X X O ~ X
ti
X X ~ X X 0 X
ti
M X X X X 0 X
N X X 0 X 0 ~ X
r
N X O X ~ X O X ;
M
N X X X X ~ X X
N
~
_
, X X X X X X X
0 0 0 0
0
~ 0
~ 0
~ 0
~ ~ ~ ~
~ a _ _
w X M M M c~ (~ c\ c~ M
I- w N N N N N N N N
L
w O Y ~ = N
,
Q y 0 O O N O 7 ~ O T
~
R O
~
~
N~ <4
N C
C
Z L
~ as ~ s d
C
QY in N ~ o ~ m ~ cis ~z =C7
m
N i
O d
V ~ ~
x ~ ~
w .~ ~
~ ~ m ~ ca
~ rn
a`aaZZ°
II II II II II
X O W ~
O z
w
Y
01-15-OS
5b 7
MINUTES
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
November 14, 2007
FINAL
MEMBERS PRESENT: David Bourgeois, Craig Gustaveson, Margie Loomer, Ryan O'Leary,
Matt Pacha, Jerry Raaz, John Watson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Phil Reisetter, John Westefeld
STAFF PRESENT: Mike Moran, Terry Robinson, Terry Trueblood
GUESTS PRESENT: Roger Anderson, Mary Bennett, Helen Burford, Abby Harvey, Ann
Haugland, Bob Hibbs, Margaret Hibbs, Del Holland, Kathy Janz, Carl
Klaus, Marybeth Slonneger, Linda Stipe, Florence Stockman, Megan
Threlkeld, Jim Wells
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
Moved by Bourgeois, seconded by O'Leary, that based on comments/concerns from the
Reno Street Park neighborhood that the Commission does not support the request to
relocate the Isaac Wetherby House currently at 935 Market Street to Reno Street Park
either on a temporary or permanent basis. Unanimous.
Moved by Gustaveson, seconded by O'Leary, to move the Isaac Wetherby House, currently
at 935 Market Street, to upper City Park with the condition that a written agreement be
entered into stating that funding will be in place for relocation, restoration and ongoing
maintenance, and other stipulations to be determined by Parks and Recreation Staff.
Unanimous.
Moved by Gustaveson, seconded by Bourgeois, to approve the capital improvement
priorities presented by staff with the exception of moving item #11, North Market Square
Re-Development to position #8 on the list while moving the rest of the priorities down the
list by 1. Unanimous.
OTHER FORMAL ACTION TAKEN
Moved by Bourgeois, seconded by Gustaveson to approve the minutes from our regular
Commission meeting of October 10, 2007 as well as the minuets from the special meeting of
November 7.2007. Unanimous.
PUBLIC DISCUSION
No public discussion.
Parks and Recreation Commission
November 14, 2007
Page 2 of 9
CONSIDER RENO STREET PARK OR ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS FOR
WETHERBY COTTAGE:
There were 15 guests in attendance, most of them from the Goosetown/Reno Street Park
neighborhood. Several of them spoke to the issue, some in favor of the house being moved to
the park, and others opposed to such a move.
Pacha asked that one representative speak to the Commission and public present giving a
summary and update on the progress of the Wetherby Cottage. Marybeth Slonneger, on behalf of
the Committee to Save the Wetherby Cottage, addressed the Commission. She discussed some
of the other possible locations and the reasons that these areas would not be feasible for the
placement of this house. Locations included North Market Square. It was determined that there
was not enough room in this park for the house and there are too many trees that would be
affected by the move. Happy Hallow was determined not a feasible choice due to the ball
diamonds and a major sewer line in the park. Hickory Hill is surrounded by modern homes so
this house would not fit into this neighborhood. Therefore, the committee comes before the
Commission asking for their approval to move this house into Reno Street Park.
Robinson talked with the house moving contractor with whom the committee had been working,
and met at the site with Slonneger and Klaus. It was determined that if the house were to be
moved to Reno Street Park it would be best located in the back of the park.
Pacha reviewed the special meeting of November 7, 2007 with the public present, explaining that
it was Commission's desire to hear from the neighbors in the area of Reno Street Park. At this
point he asked members of the audience to speak to the Commission.
Kathy Janz expressed her appreciation to the Wetherby Cottage Committee and other groups
involved, and applauded the efforts to save the house. However, she also stated at this point she
does not have an opinion about the Reno Street location as sufficient details were not provided in
the mailing that was sent to the neighborhood. Her concerns include traffic issues, what will be
done to deter vandalism, etc.
Pacha reported that to date there are not a lot of details available. There is still a need to discuss
and finalize a maintenance agreement, funds to do so, etc.
Slonneger noted that it is the agreement of Friends of Historic Preservation to take care of the
renovation of this house and that the Johnson County Historical Society is investigating options
for continued maintenance and operation of the house for public use.
Carl Klaus suggested that it would not be the neighborhood's responsibility to care for the house,
reiterating Slonneger's statement that the Johnson County Historical Society would be taking
care of this. He also stated that while he feels this house would be an attractive enhancement to
Reno Street Park, he does ask that if it is placed in this park that it not impede on the play area or
Parks and Recreation Commission
November 14, 2007
Page 3 of 9
other social areas of the park. He also feels that rather than a concrete trail to the house, it would
be better to have a path constructed on the south side of the house.
Bob Hibbs spoke to the Commission stating that he lives approximately one block away from the
park. He understands that the Commission has a difficult task ahead of them. He feels that the
house deserves to be saved and renovated; however, he does not view Reno Street Park as a
permanent location. He recommends that the house be moved to this park, but only on a
temporary basis, then move it to a permanent location within three to five years.
Pacha stated that the Commission is not inclined to consider a temporary location for the house,
as this could be wrought with issues, and it would have to be moved twice.
Linda Stipe spoke of her concern with traffic problems, however, feels that the placement of this
house in Reno Street Park would fit in with the neighborhood, and feels that it just further
highlights the fact that Iowa City is a great place to live. She does have concerns about the width
of Reno Street and how that will affect the move of this house into the park.
Florence Stockman, who is an owner of a few properties in this neighborhood, was present on
behalf of her tenants. Overall they feel that this park is too small to accommodate the house.
They are also concerned about traffic. They also asked if the Commission has considered
Wetherby Park. Pacha reported that Wetherby Park is on the list of possible locations.
Roger Anderson asked if all of the land within the park is dedicated parkland. Trueblood stated
that it is. Anderson said that he would like to see it stay that way. He asked what the plan was for
a budget for continued care of this house. He asked why not buy the property where it is
currently sitting. Slonneger reported that this is not an option as Mr. McLaughlin is planning to
build two duplexes on the property.
Mary Bennett from the State Historical Society stated that the City Planning Department has
been aware of the historic value of this house for several years. She feels that Isaac Wetherby is
an important figure of Iowa City and should be considered as much so as Grant Wood. She
thanked the Commission for their consideration.
Anderson asked if the City had property available that they would be willing to give the Mr.
McLaughlin in trade for the property that the house is currently on. Staff is aware of none.
Pacha asked that discussion be restricted to the Commission at this time.
Gustaveson stated that he sees this as a no-win situation. He feels that it is not the charge of the
Commission to make such a decision as far as what becomes of the house, stating that it is the
mission of the Parks and Recreation Commission to preserve parks. He is not in favor of using a
large portion of a small park for this purpose. He did express his appreciation for all of the work
this committee has done in such a short time period.
Parks and Recreation Commission
November 14, 2007
Page 4 of 9
Bourgeois expressed his desire to find some way to save the house. However, he also feels that it
is important that the City be free of any maintenance or liability on the house, and that money
needs to be present to take care of these needs.
Pacha again stated that moving the house on a temporary basis is not financially feasible as it
would cost twice to move it and it would not be a good idea to renovate a house and then move it
again. He feels that it would be better placed on some county land but not in a city park.
O'Leary is proud of the group for their efforts. He would like to further investigate the
availability of vacant lots. He feels it is difficult to ignore the concerns mentioned by both
neighbors and the Commission. He also feels that there are a lot of conditions that need to be
ironed out before approving such a move.
Raaz noted that he has worked for a house mover in the past and that homes are never the same
after being moved, agreeing with Pacha that a temporary move is not a wise choice. He asked
Committee and staff if anyone has asked Mr. McLaughlin what his price would be to sell the
house and property as it sits. Slonneger answered that he owns four lots and his desire is to build
multiple duplexes; that this is his livelihood and would not be willing to sell.
Loomer asked what damage would there be to the trees if this house is moved. Robinson
reported that there may be one elm tree to be removed but otherwise no other trees would be
affected by the move. He also stated that the difference between the street and park height is
32", making it necessary to cut the slope and that this is usually done by cutting down the soil.
Watson asked for more discussion on how the house will be used. Slonneger reported that it is
the intent of the Johnson County Historical Society to provide living history type activities dating
to the time period of the house.
Bennett stated that the hope is also to use it as a learning lab, i.e., the renovation process would
provide a learning opportunity. She also reminded everyone present that while all of the details
are not available yet, it is the Committee's desire to save the house from destruction at this point.
Pacha asked Commission that in order to consider Reno Street Park if there was more
information needed. O'Leary indicated that alternative locations need to be considered.
Slonneger reported that they were notified on October 10 of this impending demolition of the
house. At that time she began contacting real estate agencies and Bob Miklo with the Iowa City
Planning Department. They noted that there are two vacant properties in Iowa City -- one on
Hotz Avenue in which the .owner never responded to calls, and another property on Prairie Du
Chien Road, and it was determined that this house would not fit in well with the other homes in
the neighborhood.
There was some discussion about contacting the Hayek family regarding the possibility of them
selling their property adjacent to Happy Hollow Park to the City. Trueblood will follow up with
them.
Parks and Recreation Commission
November 14, 2007
Page 5 of 9
Moved by Bourgeois, seconded by O'Leary, that based on comments/concerns from the
_Reno Street Park neighborhood that the Commission does not support the request to
relocate the Isaac Wetherby House, currently at 935 Market Street, to Reno Street Park
either on a temporary or permanent basis. Unanimous.
At this time there was further discussion about other possible locations, including Wetherby
Park, Hickory Hill Park, Happy Hollow Park, Oak Grove Park, Upper City Park, and private lots
including property adjacent to Happy Hollow Park, and the possibility of purchasing the house
and lot where it currently sits. Both Commission and staff indicated their preference that the
house be saved on private property, but also realize the urgency of the situation, which is why
they are willing to consider a park location for the house. Upon staff's recommendation they
considered and discussed the possibility of recommending that the house to be moved to Upper
City Park, and to have it located in place of one of the existing log cabins (the smaller one of the
two). This particular log cabin is in very poor shape, and either needs to be demolished and
rebuilt or demolished and removed. Of the various park locations considered, this is the one staff
would prefer. After considerable discussion, the Commission determined they could support this
location, but they need assurances that the City will bear no financial burden relative to moving,
restoring, maintaining or operating the Wetherby House, and that the house will not sit in a park
for a lengthy period of time before restoration is completed. Their conditions for supporting the
City Park location include, but may not be limited to, the following:
• A written agreement must be entered into between the City and the appropriate
organization(s).
• This agreement must include an appropriate timeline for restoration.
• The Committee to Save the Wetherby Cottage and their supporters must ensure that all
necessary funding is in place to cover the costs of the relocation, the restoration and
ongoing maintenance.
• The Committee or a supporting organization must assume responsibility for, and costs
associated with, operating and/or programming the house.
• The City will be allowed to sponsor programs, events or meetings in the house, on a
space available basis, at no charge.
Moved by Gustaveson, seconded by O'Leary, to support moving the Isaac Wetherby
House, currently at 935 Market Street, to upper City Park with the condition that a written
agreement be entered into stating that funding will be in place for relocation, restoration
and on~oin~ maintenance, and other stipulations to be determined by Parks and
Recreation Staff. Unanimous.
Parks and Recreation Commission
November 14, 2007
Page 6 of 9
CONSIDER PRIORITIES FOR PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS:
Trueblood presented the Commission with last year's priority list of the Parks and Recreation
Department Capital Improvement Pro~eCts, including a brief status report, aS follows:
1. Iowa River Trail Bridge -Rocky Shore to Peninsula Park - $1,300,000
Currently shown in FYI I -requested for FY08, but council moved it back.
2. Mercer Pool Roof Repairs - $425,000
In progress
3. Mercer Park Ball Diamond Upgrades - $100,000
In progress
4. Sand Lake Recreation Area Development -- $5,000,000+
Multi year budget (FY07-FYIl). Current cost estimate is $6,100, 000 which includes
$350, 000 for new land acquisition, but does not include the initial $1, 000, 000 paid for
the original land acquisition.
5. Willow Creek Trail West - $1,400,000
Currently on the unfunded list
Revised cost estimate is $2, 500, 000
6. Napoleon Park Restroom/Concession Building - $225,000
In progress
7. Soccer Park Improvements - $250,000
Currently shown as budgeted in FY09
8. Peninsula Park Development - $250,000
Currently shown as budgeted in FYIO
9. Sand Prairie Enhancement & Preservation - $250,000
Currently on unfunded list, but we do have $38, 000 REAP Grant to get started on
tree removal.
10. City Park Sidewalk Replacement & Trail Lighting - $260,000
Currently on unfunded list; new cost estimate is X300,000
Following is a list of proposed capital improvement priorities for FY09 and beyond for the
Commissions' consideration:
1. Replace Recreation Center roof ($330,000)
2. Rocky Shore/Peninsula Pedestrian Bridge ($1,300,000)
3. Sand Lake Recreation Area Development ($6,100,000)
Parks and Recreation Commission
November 14, 2007
Page 7 of 9
4. Willow Creek trail, West -under Highway 218 ($2,500,000)
5. Wetherby Park Splash Pad ($200,000)
6. Recreation Center Improvements ($225,000)
7. Soccer Park Improvements ($650,000)
8. Sand Prairie Development ($258,000)
9. Peninsula Park Development ($300,000)
10. City Park Trail Lighting ($200,000)
11. North Market Square Re-Development ($280,000)
12. Napoleon Softball Field Renovation ($180,000)
13. Waterworks Park Hospice Memorial ($115,000)
14. Hickory Hill Park Bridge ($50,000)
15. Frauenholtz-Miller Park Development ($280,000)
Moved by Gustaveson, seconded by Bourgeois, to approve the capital improvement
priorities as submitted with the exception of moving item #11, North Market Square Re-
Development, to position #8 on the list and move the rest of the priorities down the list by 1.
Unanimous.
Trueblood briefly discussed preliminary fees and charges with Commission noting that pool fees
will be increasing. He asked Moran to discuss how the minimum wage increase affects the
budget. Moran reported that this increase will affect wages across the board and this will make it
necessary to increase the wage portion of the budget by approximately $50,000 for the year.
COMMISSION TIME:
O'Leary noted as a point of discussion that certain items that serve the larger population need to
be moved to the top of the priority list.
Raaz asked if there was any more development with the Elks club. Trueblood understood that
they were to provide a list to the Commission members. Raaz indicated that he thought the Elks
Club might be waiting on some information from the department. Trueblood will follow up.
Bourgeois noted that he would like to follow-up with those who purchased golf passes to get
their thoughts on the program. Tammy Neumann will provide Bourgeois with a roster.
Watson reported that the Wetherby House has provided an excellent history lesson to all
involved and can provide an opportunity to continue this in the future.
CHAIR'S REPORT
Pacha thanked everyone for their time and patience on the Wetherby House project.
Pacha reported that Veridian Credit Union has donated $2000 toward the Parks and Recreation
Foundation. A thank you letter will go out to them soon.
Parks and Recreation Commission
November 14, 2007
Page 8 of 9
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Trueblood noted that there is a special meeting of the Council scheduled for Thursday,
November 15 at 5:30 to discuss the Wetherby House.
Trueblood reported that the survey component of the master plan is completed, but it has been
decided, in discussions with Leisure Vision, that it would be best to wait until after the holidays
to mail it.
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Raaz, seconded by Gustaveson to adiourn the meeting at 7:10 q.m. Unanimous.
Parks and Recreation Commission
November 14, 2007
Page 9 of 9
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2007
NAME
EXPIRES
~
~
~
N
M
o
~
~
~
~
\
r`
~
~
O~ o
c r`
o
~+ ~
David
Bour eois 1/1/11 X O/E O/E X X O/E X O/E X X X X
Craig
Gustaveson
1/1/11
X
O/E
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Margaret
Loomer
1/1/08
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
Ryan
O'Lear
1/1/10
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Matt
Pacha 1/1/09 X X X X X X X X X X X X
Jerry
Raaz
1/1/08
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
Phil
Reisetter
1/1/09
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
O/E
John Watson
1/1/11 X O/E O/E X X O/E X X X X X X
John
Westefeld
1/1/10
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
KEY: X =
0=
O/E _
NM =
LQ =
Present
Absent
Absent/Excused
No meeting
No meeting due to lack of quorum
Not a Member
5b 8
MINUTES FINAL
Iowa City Airport Commission
November 8, 2007
Iowa City Airport Terminal - 5:45 PM
Members Present: Howard Horan, Chair; Randy Hartwig; Janelle Rettig; John Staley
Members Absent: Greg Farris
Staff Present: Sue Dulek, Michael Tharp
Others Present: Jim Meade, Terry Edmonds, Jay Honeck, David Hughes, Herrel
Timmons, John Yoemans, Joe Merschman, Turk Regennitter, Skip
Long, Peggy Slaughter
DETERMINE QUORUM:
The meeting was called to order at 5:47 P.M. by Horan.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE OCTOBER 11, 2007 MEETING:
Horan asked Members if they had any changes, corrections for the minutes. Rettig
moved to accept the October 11, 2007 minutes as submitted; seconded by Staley.
Motion carried 4-0, Farris Absent.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION:
None.
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION:
a. Aviation Commerce Park -Peggy Slaughter addressed the Members, stating
that she cannot give any names, but that there is a lot of activity currently.
She noted that there is a Letter of Intent on Lot 6, and that she has met with
the City regarding this. She stated that the interested party is still asking for
incentives. She further stated that Harry Wolfe is working with this party to
try and get a formal agreement going. Slaughter then noted that they also had
a meeting regarding Lots 17, 16, 15, and 14, in which a couple businesses
would possibly be building together. She gave the Members a brief overview
of the two meetings concerning these four lots. Slaughter continued, stating
that the group interested in Lots 1 through 4 that requested a meeting with the
City some time ago has been somewhat in limbo as the lead person just gave
Airport Commission
November 8, 2007
Page2of10
birth; however, they are planning to start meeting again regarding these lots.
Slaughter noted that she has two builders that have asked for follow-up
information, and also a local contractor has been in touch, looking for ten
acres. Rettig asked for some clarification on the outlots, to which Dulek
responded, stating that the Commission could decide to lease them for
something such as leased storage space. Slaughter then asked the
Commission if they knew when the south lots would be available, as she
wants to keep the party that is seeking ten acres interested in the Airport
Commerce Park. Horan stated that it could be around eighteen months to two
years before a decision is reached on the south lots, and Rettig followed up
that she is not interested in the south lots being developed yet either.
The discussion turned to Yeomans, the farm manager for the Airport land,
stating that currently they lease this land to Williams as long as they mow and
hay it. He asked the Commission if they would like to permanently terminate
agricultural activities on this land and have the City maintain it instead, which
he further noted would eliminate any agricultural leases. Rettig noted that
they do this at their own risk, and if land sells, that ends the agreement
anyway. She further stated that it saves the Airport from having to mow.
Members noted that after the first of the year they should have a better idea on
where the development is headed. Slaughter then wrapped up her
presentation, stating that the amount of development in the area is a good sign.
b. Farmers National Company -
Merschman Seeds -Yeomans noted that they were still awaiting Joe
Merschman 's arrival. Members decided to go on to Item c.
Hangar #56 -Terry Edmonds -Hartwig excused himself due to conflict of
interest. Edmonds addressed the Members, stating that he and Tharp have
discussed the options available for the extra space in Hangar 56. He noted
that they were not able to come up with anything very practical, but that they
did discover that Jet Air would like to sublease the hangar during the winter
months. Edmonds stated that this works for him as he does not fly much
during the winter. The Members then discussed the proposal in front of them.
Horan stated that it sounded like a good arrangement, as did Rettig. Rettig
asked for some clarification of the agreement that they were presented with,
and Tharp responded. Staley moved to approve the proposal as outlined by
Terry Edmonds; seconded by Rettig. Motion carried 3-0; Hartwig
recused himself due to conflict of interest, Farris Absent.
d. National Guard -
i. Consider a Resolution Setting a Public Hearing fora 5-Year Lease
with the Army Reserve -Tharp noted, first of all, that there is a
typo - it should be the Army Reserve, not the National Guard. He
stated that this lease is up, and the Army Reserves would like to
2
Airport Commission
November 8, 2007
Page 3 of 10
sign another five-year lease. Tharp stated that he gave them a
price that included a CIP inflator and they tentatively accepted this,
pending the public hearing. Hartwig moved to consider
Resolution A07-30, setting a public hearing for December 13,
2007, regarding a 5-year lease with the Army Reserves;
seconded by Staley. Motion carried 4-0, Farris Absent.
b. Farmers National Company -
Merschman Seeds -Yeomans addressed the Members, stating that he
needs to get some agreement on leasing the remaining farm ground at the
Airport. He noted that at the last meeting they had an in-depth
presentation from Merschman's about creating a test plot site and he
reiterated how interested Merschman Seeds is in the Airport's farm
ground. He asked if Members had any questions, to which Horan asked
what would need to happen after two or three seasons that would make
him feel this was not a good idea. Merschman noted that they already do
this type of activity and that moving it to the Airport makes it a unique
location. He also noted that moving it to Iowa City is also a plus for them.
Regennitter joined Merschman in explaining to the Members why they
would like to use the farm ground at the Airport, and how they can work
together.
The conversation continued, with Hartwig noting that his big concern is
that they don't yet know what they want to do in the south area, and he
also noted the wildlife mitigation issues for the Airport. Basically, he
stated, if they could afford to not have agricultural products on the field,
they probably would not, just from the standpoint of trying to alleviate
wildlife hazards from the runways. Staley asked if they would be content
with a shorter lease, such as a 3- or 5-year lease. Merschman stated that
they could work with that, that ashort-term lease gives them the
opportunity to see if it will work for them, as well.
Rettig asked for some clarification on this agricultural proposal. She
asked if the seed was genetically modified, to which Merschman
responded that 80 to 85% of all seed are modified now in the U.S. Rettig
stated that there are political ramifications locally to allow something like
this to occur on public land at the Airport. She noted that she is not
comfortable taking on this type of situation. Merschman explained that in
order to do what they want to do, they need the hard surface/pavement.
Staley noted that this project would not be a change in what is already
being done with the farm ground. Yeomans noted that he is trying to get
more money for the Airport, with fewer acres, by proposing this project.
Regennitter addressed the genetically modified seed issue somewhat,
noting that most all of the seeds are modified in this day and age. Rettig
noted again that this is a political issue in Iowa City, and that she does not
3
Airport Commission
November 8, 2007
Page 4 of 10
care to get involved in something like this. She noted that she is also
concerned about safety issues with something like this going on at the
Airport, with so many people coming and going. Hartwig asked what the
timeline is to get back with Merschman, and they noted that the sooner the
better, so they could arrange things on their end, as well.
Horan then asked for some clarification on the genetically modified seeds,
to which Merschman and Regennitter responded briefly. They noted that
European companies are already using these seeds aggressively.
Merschman then talked to the Members about the "gene shuffling" process
and the tolerance that is produced. Rettig noted, again, that they are an
Airport - not a farm. She noted that people are against these modified
foods, and she feels that this could be a liability for the Airport. She noted
that she was a little taken off guard last month when this was brought up,
and that she is not comfortable with the whole issue. Staley noted that he
feels differently -that he feels this is a great thing, and that it fits with one
of the missions of the University. He asked what kind of terms they
would be looking at if they did go ahead with something like this.
Yeomans noted that the total for this year will be a little more than
$16,000, and that the proposal he has discussed with Regennitter was for
$25,000. Dulek noted that as far as terms, if they want three or more
years, they would need to stop discussion and have a public hearing on it.
If they can come to an agreement tonight on terms, it would have to be for
under three years. Merschman noted that they would help fund the
entryway that they would need to add. Timmons stated that he was the
Airport Manager in Galesburg for 20-some years, and that a large part of
their budget came from the farming operations. He noted that there is a
research farm close to the Airport, and that Monsanto is one of their
biggest customers because of this. He stated that he feels it would be
prudent to look at using their assets (farm ground) as best they can.
The conversation turned to Staley noting what they would be looking at in
terms of revenue and economic impact for the area. It was noted that this
would be around $80,000 the first year alone. Rettig turned the discussion
to the usage at the south end of the Airport, and the various liability issues
they could encounter. Merschman and Regennitter confirmed that they
would also be very concerned about safety concerns and liability issues.
Regennitter reiterated that they would only want to proceed if everyone is
one the same page -that they would like to pursue along-term plan, but
only if all concerns are taken care of. Tharp noted that he feels that until
the study of the south area is completed, it maybe next year before they
can address this with Regennitter and Merschman Seeds. Staley noted that
he believes they should take advantage of whatever they can for this area,
at least until they have firm decisions on what they want to do with the
land. Horan said atwo-year proposal would be agreeable with him, to
4
Airport Commission
November 8, 2007
Page 5 of 10
which Staley agreed. Horan suggested they put their proposal together
and distribute it to the Members prior to next months' meeting. Yeomans
asked if they could negotiate terms now, to which Rettig stated she would
have to have the details first. Dulek noted that there are several issues,
including the culvert, and they should come up with a proposal and offer a
contract. Staley moved to consider a proposal from Merschman Seeds,
and that the Commission meets as soon as this proposal is ready;
seconded by Hartwig. Horan then suggested that as they are working on
their proposal, that they contact any of the Members as needed, so they
could get this process going. Rettig stated that she feels they should not
proceed with this, and that she is unwilling to defend GMO. Regennitter
stated that perhaps they should withdraw their proposal and find someone
who wants to work with them. Horan and others called for a vote.
Motion carried 3-1; Rettig in the negative, Farris Absent. Regennitter
asked if they wanted to pursue this, and Yeomans stated that the lease is
open and he won't be doing anything right away. Merschman noted that
the local farmer is growing GMO seeds currently -that this is no different.
Staley stated that he is glad to see these developments happening with
farming.
Hangar Expansion -Building H
ii. Consider a Resolution Approving Engineering Services Contract
for Expansion of Hangar and Office Space -Tharp noted that they
had anticipated having an engineering agreement to approve, but
that it is not ready. He further stated that they would need to defer
this to next month's meeting. Staley moved to defer Item e,
consider a resolution approving engineering services contract
for expansion of hangar and office space to the December 13,
2007 meeting; seconded by Hartwig. Motion carried 4-0,
Farris Absent.
f. FAA/IDOT Projects -Earth Tech -David Hughes
iii. Runway 7/25 -Hughes noted that they have had a very busy
month with construction. They are about 90% done with paving,
with just a small piece between the old and new runways that they
need to complete. They are about 80% done with grade on that
end of the project, with paving most likely being done in the
spring. He responded to Members' questions concerning this small
portion. Hughes continued, stating that electricals are now in and
they will be starting on runway closures next week on 7-25. This
involves moving the runway lights. He then responded to
Members' questions regarding how the electrical fixtures will be
installed. Rettig then asked Hughes for clarification on the
daytime closing of the runway. Hughes explained how this would
work, and that it covers from 7:00 A.M. until approximately 4:30
Airport Commission
November 8, 2007
Page6of10
or 5:00 P.M. This could take up to two weeks to complete this part
of the project. Rettig then stated that for Tharp's monthly
newsletter, she would like to see a "factoid" about how many loads
of concrete it took to pave the runway. Hughes stated that he could
get information like this for Rettig.
iv. South Aviation Development Study -Hughes stated that they did
get comments back finally on the Willow Creek study. They will
now finalize their report on the south area of the Airport, and will
get this information out as soon as they can.
v. South Taxilane Rehab -Hughes stated that they are working on
the drainage problem and met with Ron Knoche earlier today.
vi. Jet A Fuel System / AvGas Upgrade -Hughes stated that the
contractor has ordered his materials, and is awaiting those. He is
also working with Jet Air on credit card information and that type
of thing, before he can proceed. There is no definite delivery date
on this.
vii. Terminal Apron Rehab -Hughes said that as of today, this is
90+% complete. He said there's some cleanup to do and some
seeding, and a small amount of paving yet to do.
viii. Obstruction Mitigation - MidAmerican has agreed to this, and
Hughes stated that they have been working with Dulek on finishing
up the easement issues. Once this is completed, he stated that they
would then move forward. Hartwig asked when they expect this to
be completed, and Dulek responded.
ix. United Hangar -Hughes stated that they are in the process of
finalizing specs and hope to have something ready for review
before Thanksgiving. Rettig asked if they would be recycling the
steel when they bring this hangar down, and Hughes stated that it
is entirely up to the contractor what he wants to do with it.
Members asked miscellaneous questions of Hughes on some of the
above projects, to which he responded.
x. Runway 7-25 Overlay -Hughes noted that they have prepared this
contract for the next phase of the project. He briefly explained
what this contract entails. Hartwig asked when this has to be in to
the FAA, and Tharp stated that they wanted something by mid-
month, but after talking to the current Grant Administrator, he is
now aware of where the Airport is with this and said it should not
be a problem. Rettig asked for clarification on having the 7-25
runway project and the 12-30 crack sealing project being rolled
into one. This was explained by Tharp and others, who stated that
they are trying to get some pavement improvements done yet this
winter. Tharp then explained to Members that they need to either
approve this tonight, which he recommends, and let the Chair sign
it when it is ready, or they will need to defer.
6
Airport Commission
November 8, 2007
Page 7 of 10
i. Consider a Resolution Approving Engineering Services
Contract for Runway 7-25 Overlay and 12-30 Crack
Sealing Project -Staley moved to Consider Resolution
A07-31, approving engineering services contract for
Runway 7-25 Overlay and 12-30 Crack Sealing Project;
seconded by Hartwig. Motion carried 3-1; Rettig in the
negative, Farris Absent.
g. Airport "Operations": Strategic Plan-Implementation; Budget; and Airport
Management - Horan asked if members had any questions about these.
Rettig asked about the $14100 deposit and Tharp responded that it was the
receipt from the easement that Larson had been seeking. Rettig asked about
the plans for that money, and related during budget discussions this money
was going to be used to accelerate some driveway maintenance. Tharp
confirmed that is still the plan. Rettig asked about the credit to the bike racks
noting that the bike racks cost $900 instead of $2100. Tharp commented that
he would have mentioned that at the last meeting, but didn't have that
information. Rettig asked about $1300 that was in the Minor Office
Equipment /Furniture line. Tharp responded that this was the conference
room chairs and had not been coded correctly, and he would talk to
accounting to fix it. Tharp commented that he and Horan had met with the
City Manager and presented the FY2009. Tharp said that so far the budget is
being presented as the airport request. Tharp stated they had also discussed
the Capital Improvement projects with the department head's and city
manager and that the proposed hangar they will be seeking funds from the
state for is set to be included in the plans.
xi. Consider a Resolution Authorizing the Operations Specialist and
Chairperson to Make Purchases and Sign Contracts -Horan began
the discussion by stating that he believes the existing Resolution
A06-21 should remain in effect for now. Staley noted that the
proposal seems realistic to him, that Tharp would have the same
level of authorization as the A06-21 Resolution, as would the
Chair, to make certain decisions on items. Horan and Rettig asked
some procedural questions of Dulek, to which she responded.
Rettig noted again that she does not see a need to change this right
now, and that if there is an emergency, the Members should all be
contacted. Tharp noted that he usually speaks to the Chair at least
weekly, if not daily at times, so he feels the communication is
there, and that by doing this it would make the daily operations
easier for him. Members asked questions of Tharp, trying to get a
better understanding of whether or not they need to consider this
resolution. Members discussed the chances of getting the 3
members necessary for quorum together on short notice. Members
felt that if 3 couldn't be there that a conference call could be made.
Dulek stated that a member could participate by speaker phone but
7
Airport Commission
November 8, 2007
Page8of10
the meeting cannot occur by conference call. Members asked
Tharp if they could do that at the airport. Tharp responded that
they would have to move to one of the offices for a speaker phone,
but that they could do that from the airport.
Hartwig moved to defer Item g, consider a resolution
authorizing Operations Specialist and Chairperson to make
purchases and sign contracts to the December 13, 2007
meeting; seconded by Staley. Motion carried 4-0, Farris
Absent.
h. FBO Staff Report -Timmons stated that they are busy getting ready for
winter. Last week they purchased a snowplow truck, which will help to clean
their area faster. They are now atwo-thirds Iowa, one-third Illinois company,
having just taken over the Burlington Airport. He noted that on November 15
they are having an FAA safety seminar in the hangar. There could be
upwards of 100 people. The FAA will be here to participate, and they usually
get a good turnout. He invited everyone to attend, if they would like. Tharp
noted that it runs from 7:00 to 9:00. He noted that they hired two more
mechanics recently, and they now exceed a half million dollars a year on their
payroll in Iowa City. They have two jets based here currently. Timmons
noted, again, how important the farming was to the Airport in Galesburg, and
how it could be of benefit here, as well. A brief discussion ensued about Jet
Air doing so well, and Timmons stated that you have to be willing to be there
all the time and you have to think positively. Rettig noted that she had asked
Woolford about their sale of planes and how this affects the tax issue.
Timmons stated that he has not figured it out yet, as Iowa has a different tax
arrangement than Illinois. Rettig noted that she would like to have the
information in order to show how this is contributing to the overall tax base
for the economy. Timmons noted that they recently sold two airplanes to the
State Police. He also noted that Jet Air is doing most of the major
maintenance, and some of the routine maintenance, for the Civil Air Patrol for
the entire Midwestern area.
i. Subcommittees' Reports -Tharp noted that the viewing area has been started.
They have six support beams up and are waiting for the rest of the structure to
arrive.
j. Commission Members' Reports -Horan stated that he has taken a lot of
pictures of the construction. Rettig noted that JCCOG met to prioritize trails
recently, and that she heard that they were told that no one would use a trail
out by the Airport. She believes they need to continue pushing for a sidewalk
by the Airport. Hartwig congratulated the new City Council Members who
won in this week's election. He also noted that in regards to the booklet for
hangars, Jan Nash sent him a letter in the summer about some thoughts on
8
Airport Commission
November 8, 2007
Page9of10
this. He suggested they meet with her to see what she has in mind. Staley
asked if anyone had seen the Corridor Business General, and he noted an
editorial on making the corridor better. One issue was to change the name of
the Eastern Iowa Airport, and another is to create a regional airport authority.
k. Staff Report -Tharp noted that he has drafts of the Forecast Study, as
requested at the last meeting. He also gave the Members a draft of the 2007
Annual Report, and asked to get feedback by the next meeting from Members,
stating that he would like to get this in by the end of the year.
SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR:
December 13, 2007 at 5:45 P.M.
ADJOURN:
Meeting adjourned at 8:51 P.M.
Chairperson
Date
9
Airport Commission
November 8, 2007
Page 10 of 10
Airport Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2007
Meetin Date
NAME TERM
EXP. 1/11 2/8 3/8 3/28 4/12 5/10 5/15 6/7 6/8 6/28 7/9 7/19
Randy Hartwig 3/1/09 X X X X X X O X X X X X
Greg Farris 3/1/13 O/E X X O/E X X X X O/E X X X
John Staley 3/1/10 X X X X X X O X O/E O/E X X
Howard Horan 3/1/08 X X X X X X X X X X X X
Janelle Rettig 3/1/12 X X X X X X X X X X O/E O/E
NAME TERM
EXP. 8/1 8/9 8/13 9/5 9/13 9/24 10/11 11/8 12/13
Randy Hartwig 3/1/09 X X X X X X X X
Greg Farris 3/1/13 X X X X X X X O/E
John Staley 3/1/10 O/E X O/E O/E O/E O/E X X
Howard Horan 3/1/08 X X X X X X X X
Janelle Rettig 3/1/12 O/E X O/E O/E X X X X
KEY: X =Present
O =Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
10
FINAL/APPROVED
September 2007
5b(9)
MINUTES
SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 21, 2007
ASSEMBLY ROOM
Call to Order: Meeting called to order at 3:30 PM
Members Present: Robert Engel, Jay Honohan, Betty Kelly, Sarah Maiers and Nancy
Wombacher
Members Absent: Chuck Felling and David Gould
Staff Present: Michelle Buhman, Linda Kopping
Others Present: Eve Casserly and Lynn Campbell
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
None
APPROVAL OF MINUTES-Honohan
Motion: to be accepted as distributed. Motion carried on a vote of 5-0. Engel/Kelly.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-Honohan
None.
COMMISSION ASSIGNMENTS-Honohan
Kelly agreed to write the web article summarizing today's meeting for posting on the
Center's website. Maiers will report on today's meeting to the City Council and Honohan
will visit the Board of Supervisors.
Maiers volunteered to write the web article summarizing the October 2007 meeting and
Kelly volunteered to report on the October meeting to both the City Council and Board of
Supervisors.
EXTENDED HOURS OF OPERATION COMMITTEE REPORT-Maiers
Maiers reviewed the committee's discussion of staff coverage during extended hours of operation
noting that multiple solutions, including the use of existing staff, hiring temporary employees,
securing volunteers, and eliminating extended hours of operation had been discussed. Maiers
presented the recommendations of the committee noting that given current staffing and financial
constraints they appeared to be the best options for insuring the safe and secure after hour use of
the facility.
FINAL/APPROVED
September 2007
Motion: To adopt the following recommendations in order to provide staff coverage
during extended hours of operation:
1. Eliminate all member access to the computer lab, exercise room and pool room on
weekdays between 5 - 7 PM and on Sundays between 10:30 AM - 1:30 PM
2. Identify volunteers to staff the fitness room, computer lab and pool room on Saturdays
between 10:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. If possible, this could be extended to include Sundays
as well.
3. Post signage in the fitness rooms to indicate that the person is using the equipment at
ones own risk and ask all users to sign a release of liability.
4. Identify one person (instructor or participant) in each group that meets during
extended hours who will assume responsibility for turning off lights, closing the room
and responding to emergencies. The person will receive a brief orientation to
familiarize him or her with safe areas of the building, fire exits and the location of first
aid kits and emergency phones. This would apply to all after hour classes and programs
as well as rentals.
5. Staff members will continue to attend the first session of each new evening and weekend
Center sponsored and organized class to orient participants.
6. Special event programming (e.g. Gallery Walks, Skin Cancer Screening) will continue
to be covered by staff.
7. The Maintenance Worker I (MWI) will do a minimum of one building walk-through
each weekday between 8:30 and 9 PM. Because only one person fills this position, this
would not be done when the MWI is sick or on vacation.
8. Continue to document after hour programming and building use and submit this
information along with the new staff request for FY09.
Maiers/Engel
Discussion: Wombacher asked how staff would get participants to sign a release of
liability specific to the exercise room. Buhman responded that the front desk staff is
already asking members to sign a general release of liability form when they join the
Center. An additional form specific to the fitness area could easily be included. Engel
asked if the general release forms used now would be sufficient. A copy of the current
release was distributed. There was general agreement that the form was not sufficient,
even as a general release, and suggested it be reviewed by the City Legal Department.
The suggestion to have volunteers to staff the pool room, exercise room and computer lab
was discussed at length. Questions related to this recommendation included: Will the
room remain closed if a volunteer does not show up to work? How will the door
programming system accommodate something like this?
Honohan expressed his concern that the Commission originally entered into this
discussion with the idea to extend the current hours of operation and we are now
recommending a curtailment. He would like to see a volunteer system in place if the
right volunteers could be identified.
Engel suggested that the Commission could accept the committee's recommendation to
implement a volunteer staffing program with the addition of a sunset clause requiring that
the program be evaluated for effectiveness three months after it is implemented.
Engel asked if any of the funds currently allocated for temporary staff could be used to
hire a temporary worker to staff the building after hours and on Saturdays. Kopping
indicated that the funding available was calculated based upon the anticipated salaries of
FINAL/APPROVED
September 2007
the part-time temporary workers who staff SCTV. She said she would review the FY08
funding allocated for part-time temps and work study wages to see if it could be
reallocated to accommodate this position. She will report her findings at the October
Commission meeting.
Kelly suggested the Center apply for a grant to fund the position.
Move: To defer the motion until the October meeting. Engel/Kelly motion carried
on a vote of 5-0.
REQUEST FOR FUNDING TO UPGRADE EQUIPMENT IN THE COMPUTER LAB-
Kopping
Kopping reported that she has received numerous complaints from users of the computer
lab regarding the computers and their functionality. She shared a letter from a group of
regular computer lab users that expressed their frustration with the outdated computers
and the inability to upgrade the systems any further.
Kopping provided the Commission with a cost estimate for a comprehensive computer
lab upgrade. The estimated cost for equipment and lab set-up is $13,797. Kopping
indicated that the new computers would be Macs, but that a software program is now
available that will allow the Macs to look and operate like PCs. This would allow us to
offer classes in both formats.
Casserly suggested the Center apply for a grant to fund Computer lab improvements.
Kopping endorsed the suggestion and recommended that funds be made available
through Senior Center Fund Inc only if grant support was not available.
ADJOURN FOR A MEETING OF IOWA CITY SENIOR CENTER FUND, INC
RECONVENE THE SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION MEETING
OPERATIONS -Kopping
The Commission reviewed the year end Gift Fund Report for FY07. The report shows an
account balance of $15,196.09 with donations of $935 earmarked for the Scholarship
Fund, $3,065 earmarked for the Senior Center Endowment Fund, and $350 earmarked for
the Charitable Giving account, leaving $10,846.09 in non-designated donations.
Motion: To transfer $15,196.09 from the Gift Fund to Senior Center Fund Inc.
Motion carried on a vote of 5-0. Engel/Kelly
Kopping reported that the showers that were included in the ADA bathroom upgrade
project are incorporated with the construction of two additional rest rooms. Because the
two additional restrooms are required, the total cost for the showers is a relatively small
add on of approximately $6,000. The entire bathroom renovation project will be
presented to the Council for final approval at the October 2 City Council Meeting.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION-Honohan
Honohan reported his visit to the City Council.
Motion: To ask the City Attorney to review the current release of liability form.
Motion carried on a vote of 5-0. Kelly/Engel.
Motion: To adjourn. Motion carried on a vote of 5-0. Kelly/Wombacher
FINAL/APPROVED
September 2007
Senior Center Commission
Attendance Record
Year 2007
Name Term
Expires 1 / 16 2/20 3/ 19 4/ 17 6/ 19 7/ 17 8/21 9/21
Bob Engel 12/31/08 X X O/E X X X X X
David Gould 12/31/08 X X X O/E O/E X X O/E
Chuck Felling 12/31/09 N/A N/A X X X X X O/E
Jay Honohan 12/31 /07 X X X X O/E X X X
Be Kell 12/31/07 X X X X X X X X
Sarah Maier 12/31/06 X X X X X X X X
Nancy Wombacher 12/31/06 O/E O/E O/E X X X X X
Key: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E= Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
-- = Not a member
Final Approved 5 b (10
October 2007
MINUTES
SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION
OCTOBER 16, 2007
ASSEMBLY ROOM
Call to Order: Meeting called to order at 3:30 PM
Members Present: Robert Engel, Chuck Felling, David Gould, Jay Honohan, Betty Kelly,
Sarah Maiers and Nancy Wombacher
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: Michelle Buhman, Linda Kopping
Others Present: Lynn Campbell
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES-Honohan
Motion: To accept the minutes as distributed. Motion carried on a vote of 6-0. Engel/Gould.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-Honohan
Campbell reported that people who attended the Membership Appreciation Dinner enjoyed the
event and music.
COMMISSION ASSIGNMENTS-Honohan
Maiers volunteered to write the web article summarizing this meeting and Kelly volunteered to
report on this meeting to both the City Council and Board of Supervisors.
Felling volunteered to write the web article for the November meeting.
EXTENDED HOURS OF OPERATION COMMITTEE REPORT-Kopping
Kopping reported that the FY08 Operational budget is 26% spent in the areas of work study and
part-time temporary wages. Unless the number of work hours allocated in one or both of these
areas is lowered to reduce current expenditures, funding is not available for additional evening
and weekend staff in the current FY08 budget. The estimated cost of a part-time temporary
employee to cover evening and weekend hours is $8,000.
Liability issues for people using the building nights and weekends are a primary concern.
Honohan suggested that staff investigate the possibility of starting a volunteer program to staff
the building evenings and weekends. ,Commissioners agreed that unless written job descriptions
were provided for clarity, it would be hard to evaluate the probability of success for a volunteer
program.
The idea of using student volunteers to staff the building was proposed. Gould discussed a
partnership with the Interdepartmental Studies students; however, it was noted that these students
would need supervision.
Motion: To withdraw the motion from September meeting. "To adopt the following
recommendations in order to provide staff coverage during extended hours of operation:
Final Approved
October 2007
1. Eliminate all member access to the computer lab, exercise room and pool room on
weekdays between 5 - 7 PM and on Sundays between 10:30 AM - 1:30 PM
2. Identify volunteers to staff the fitness room, computer lab and pool room on Saturdays
between 10:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. If possible, this could be extended to include Sundays
as well.
3. Post signage in the fitness rooms to indicate that the person is using the equipment at
ones own risk and ask all users to sign a release of liability.
4. Identify one person (instructor or participant) in each group that meets during
extended hours who will assume responsibility for turning off lights, closing the room
and responding to emergencies. The person will receive a brief orientation to
familiarize him or her with safe areas of the building, fire exits and the location of first
aid kits and emergency phones. This would apply to all after hour classes and programs
as well as rentals.
5. Staff members will continue to attend the first session of each new evening and weekend
Center sponsored and organized class to orient participants.
6. Special event programming (e.g. Gallery Walks, Skin Cancer Screening) will continue
to be covered by staff.
7. The Maintenance Worker I (MWI) will do a minimum of one building walk-through
each weekday between 8:30 and 9 PM. Because only one person fills this position, this
would not be done when the MWI is sick or on vacation.
8. Continue to document after hour programming and building use and submit this
information along with the new staff request for FY09."
Maiers/Engel" Motion carried on a vote of 7-0. Maiers/Engel.
Motion: To have Kopping draft a preliminary job description for volunteers who would
provide staff coverage during extended hours of operation for review at the next meeting.
Maiers/Wombacher Motion carried on a vote of 7-0.
FY09 OPERATIONAL BUDGET REQUESTS-KOPPING
Kopping reported that the FY09 proposed budgets have been submitted. Capital improvement
requests were kept at a minimum. They included replacement entrance and exit doors on Linn
Street, redesign of the Linn Street building sign, and a designated computer for the HVAC and
door program software. Kopping requested two part-time temporary staff, each working 9 hours
a week, to cover the extended hours of operation.
OPERATIONAL OVERVIEW- Kopping
The project for the ground floor rest room rebuild, ground floor shower installation and ADA
upgrades to all public restrooms was approved by Council. Work started on Monday and was
quickly stopped after discovering some issues that needed to be addressed prior to moving
forward.
Kumi Morris, City Architect, will be meeting with staff, participants and in-house agencies to
discuss the project and let people know what to expect during construction.
Kopping prepared and submitted a grant to the Community Foundation requesting funding to start
a new volunteer program at the Center. This program has been successful in attracting younger,
highly skilled volunteers in other parts of the country.
Final Approved
October 2007
Kopping reported that the cameras currently being used in Senior Center Television have been
malfunctioning. Specifically, the sound input crackles when external microphones are connected
to the cameras creating poor sound quality on SCTV productions.
Motion: For the Commission to request $10,000 from Senior Center Fund Inc. to purchase
two additional cameras. Motion carried on a vote of 7-0. Gould/Wombacher
Motion: To accept the letter from Ms. Reese. Kelly/Gould Motion carried 7-0. (attached)
COMMISSION DISCUSSION-Honohan
Motion: To adjourn. Motion carried on a vote of 7-0. Wombacher/Engel
Final Approved
October 2007
Senior Center Commission
Attendance Record
Year 2007
Name Term
Ex Tres 1/16 2/20 3/19 4/17 6/19 7/17 8/21 9/21 10/16
Bob En el 12/31/08 X X O/E X X X X X X
David Gould 12/31/08 X X X O/E O/E X X O/E X
Chuck Fellin 12/31/09 N/A N/A X X X X X O/E X
Jay Honohan 12/31/07 X X X X O/E X X X X
Betty Kelly 12/31/07 X X X X X X X X X
Sarah Maier 12/31/09 X X X X X X X X X
Nanc Wombacher 12/31/09 O/E O/E O/E X X X X X X
Key: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E= Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
-- = Not a member
5b 11
~=~ ~~. ~
IOWA CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ~'
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 2007--5:30 P.M.
CITY CABLE TV OFFICE, 10 S. LINN ST.-TOWER PLACE PARKING FACILITY
MEMBERS PRESENT: Saul Mekies, Gary Hagen, Hans Hoerschelman, Brett Gordon,
Margaret Wieting
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Drew Shaffer, Mike Brau, Bob Hardy
OTHERS PRESENT: Lee Grassley, Tad Davis, Beth Fisher, Susan Rogusky, Craig
O'Brien, Michael McBride, Laura Lowe
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL
None at this time.
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION
Grassley reported that Mediacom is willing to participate in any debate with the Big Ten
Network (BTN), however, the decision has not yet been made if Mediacom will cablecast the
program on their state-wide Connections Channel as some Mediacom officials wish not to give
BTN any exposure on their channel. Rogusky reported two Senior Center TV volunteers are
working on a program interviewing World War II veterans as part of an archival project of Iowa
Public Television. Lowe reported the Iowa City Community School District has submitted a
proposal for funding a teacher advisor for a video club, a camera, and editing software to the
Iowa City Community School District Foundation. Hagen asked about progress being made to
get kids involved in producing programs for the channel. Lowe said the request to the
foundation for $2000 for a faculty advisor is a first step but funds would not be available until
Fall of 2008. Mekies said the schools needs to establish benchmarks to measure progress.
Documenting what has been accomplished with the funding, particularly from the CTG, is
needed. Shaffer reported he has been in discussions with Mediacom officials regarding
providing access programming for distribution by Mediacom on their channel statewide. Shaffer
said that he did contact BTN regarding a program that would feature Mediacom and BTN
representatives about their current dispute. Shaffer forwarded a copy of the Sinclair Mediacom
carriage issue debate taped by City Channel 4 as an example of the proposed program and awaits
their response.Shaffer reported the result the FCC Second Report and Order on Franchising is
not totally clear. The Order applies franchising rules applicable to new entrants to incumbent
cable operators. The Order states a concern with abrogating existing contracts and indicates a
process would be needed but provides little insight as to what that might be. There is some
concern that if the Order were to be implemented in Iowa City there is the possibility that the
funding for PATV and the pass-through fund could be in jeopardy. A coalition of organizations
and municipalities are exploring the possibility of appeals and/or lawsuits to prevent
implementation of the Order.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Hagen moved and Hoerschelman seconded a motion to approve the October 22, 2007 minutes.
The minutes were approved unanimously.
ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMISSIONERS
Mekies said that Shaffer was working to arrange a debate between representatives of the Big Ten
Network and Mediacom to help inform viewers of the situation. The failure of the Big Ten
Network to participate should not prevent the Commission from going forward and informing
the public or coming to a recommendation. Hoerschelman commended Shaffer for assisting
individuals in Washington, Iowa who are interested in making use of their public access channel.
SHORT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
KIRKWOOD COMMUNITY COLLEGE
O'Brien reported that Kirkwood will be running a number of Christmas programs taped last year.
CONSUMER ISSUES
Shaffer referred to the complaint report in the meeting packet. There were a total of 7
complaints. All complaints that could be resolved have been or are being worked on by
Mediacom.
MEDIACOM REPORT
Grassley reported that Mediacom is willing to participate in any debate with the Big Ten
Network (BTN), however, the decision has not yet been made if Mediacom will cablecast the
program on their state-wide Connections Channel as some Mediacom officials wish not to give
BTN any exposure on their channel. A decision should be made within a week. Grassley said
the BTN wishes to be on the basic tier but may be open to an offer to be on the analog Family
Package. The issue is basically about how much money the BTN is demanding. Hagen said the
issue of carriage of the BTN on Mediacom is getting hotter as the basketball season gets
underway and the situation is much like that of the NFL Network. Hagen asked how South
Slope and other small Iowa cable companies are able to negotiate a deal. Grassley said that
small systems have a smaller footprint that covers just Iowa while Mediacom is nationwide.
Mediacom would have to carry and pay for the BTN across all their systems including those in
which there would be little interest in the BTN. Grassley said negotiations are at an impasse.
The BTN has not been responsive to Mediacom's most recent proposals. This may be because
BTN is 49% owned by FOX who has guaranteed the Big Ten schools a certain level of funding
regardless of carriage. Other major college conferences are also forming television networks.
If cable companies were to permit carriage of many of the conference networks on analog tiers
the costs for those tiers could be considerably higher. Cedar Falls recently added the BTN and
announced rates would go up $4 in January. Hagen asked about the development of high
definition television. Grassley said Mediacom will be offering as many HDTV signals as are
available when the transition to digital is complete in Feb. 2009. It is anticipated that around 25
HD carriage agreements can be reached and placed on the system by the end of 2008. Mediacom
expects to broadcast ESPN and ESPN2 in high definition on the Family Package in January.
Consumers without HDTV televisions will see those channels as an analog transmission.
UNIVERSITY OF IOWA REPORT
McBride said he will have an annual report available for the next meeting. UI TV will be
covering many of the commencement ceremonies. The installation of new UI President Sally
Mason at Rancher Auditorium will also be covered. The Mexican foreign language
programming has been dropped because it includes ads for alcohol.
PATV REPORT
Davis reported that Goding was unable to attend and he is representing PATV. Davis reported
the next guidelines workshop will be Sunday, December 2 at 12. The next studio workshop will
be Dec 2 from 2-4 and the next digital editing workshop will be Dec. 9 from 3-9. The next
board meeting will be Dec. 13 at 7 p.m., which is a week early due to the holidays. PATV will be
closed from December 24-January 1. Programming will cablecast but the office will be closed.
SENIOR CENTER REPORT
Rogusky reported that three new producers have joined SCTV. They have been interviewing
presidential candidates but have not been able to reach most of the republican candidates. A
program about the caucuses has been finished and is airing now. Two volunteers are working on
a program interviewing World War II veterans as part of an archival project of Iowa Public
Television. A program interviewing organizers of Project Holiday is also in the works. Holiday
concerts from last year will be cablecast on the City Channel.
IOWA CITY COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT REPORT
Lowe reported 7 new programs were cablecast in October including three episodes of Education
Exchange, 2 school board meetings, a DPO meeting, and a forum with City Council candidates.
Four training videos not for cablecast were shot. Weber school's UN Day celebration was taped.
The bids for the school equipment proposed to be funded by the Community Television Group
(CTG) were distributed. The total is around $9,000. A proposal for funding a teacher advisor for
a video club, a camera, and editing software has been submitted to the Iowa City Community
School District Foundation. Proposals are considered in January and made available in April.
About $45,000 in funds for improvements to the board room has been allocated by the district
administration.
Hagen asked about progress being made to get kids involved in producing programs for the
channel. Lowe said the request to the foundation for $2000 for a faculty advisor is a first step
but funds would not be available until Fall of 2008. Wieting said developing a strategy for
student involvement should be a part of the channel's strategic plan and mission statement.
Mekies said the schools need to establish benchmarks to measure progress. Documenting what
has been accomplished with the funding, particularly from the CTG, is needed. The Commission
needs to receive reports and monitor progress. If the Commission were to go before the City
Council with a request to return the $100,000 taken from the cable TV franchise fees there will
likely be questions regarding the need for these funds. One of the questions might be how the
Commission is able to award grants to other organizations and access channels if the Cable
Division needs funding returned. These kinds of questions make accounting for what was
accomplished with those funds important.
LIBRARY REPORT
Fisher reported that December will be a slower month for the library channel. Six children's
programs and one adult program are planned.
CITY MEDIA UNIT REPORT
Hardy reported that Katie Roche, producer for The Community Voice, has finished production
and is now cablecasting a program on Art Pennington, one of the last black baseball players from
Iowa who played in the Negro Baseball League. The Community Television Service remains
busy. Two addresses by presidential candidates Biden and Edwards will taped at the Iowa
Foreign Relations Council. Chris Dodd was taped earlier. A program titled Labor and the Global
Economy will be sponsored by the University of Iowa Obberman Center for Advanced Studies
and the Iowa City Human Right Commission. City Channel 4 will be taping the City Council
budget meetings.
CABLE ADMINISTRATOR REPORT
Shaffer reported he has been in discussions with Mediacom officials regarding their carriage of
Cable Division produced programming. This could involve Mediacom cablecasting such
programming statewide. Mediacom has expressed interest in carrying such programming and is
currently reviewing the Art Pennington Community Voice program. Shaffer noted the email in
the meeting packet from Mediacom indicating the access channels would not need to purchase
digital transmission equipment. Shaffer said he attended PATV's annual membership meeting
and was impressed with the large turnout. Hoerschelman asked what the cost of the digital
equipment might be given the cost will likely have to be borne at some point. Shaffer said
estimates typically run between $15,000-$20,000. Grassley said they will be providing an
analog signal unti12012. Mekies asked about Shaffer's efforts to get the BTIrT to participate in a
taped debate. Shaffer said that he did contact BTN about a program featuring Mediacom and
BTN representatives and has forwarded a copy of the Sinclair/Mediacom carriage issue debate
taped by City Channel 4 as an example and awaits their response.
Mekies suggested that if Shaffer doesn't get a response that he inform BTN officials that he
inform them that the program could proceed without them. There are local experts who could
provide insight and a good discussion. Shaffer said that if Mediacom will commit to carrying the
program statewide the BTN would likely be more likely to participate. Grassley was
noncommital and expressed Mediacom's reservations about distributing such a program.
BIG TEN NETWORK
Mekies said the Commission should decide if they wished to take a position on the impacts of
carriage of the BTN on Mediacom's basic tier.. Mekies noted that carriage would likely involve a
price increase for all consumers. Hagen said he doesn't think it is appropriate for the
Commission to take a position on a dispute between different parties. Consumers have a choice
in that they can subscribe to a satellite service. If the Commission were to take a position on this
issue then they should also take a position on the carriage of the NFL Network and other
disputes. Hoerschelman and Hagen said the Commission could facilitate a distribution of
information but not take a position between parties.
LEGISLATION AND.FCC UPDATE
Shaffer reported the result the FCC Second Report and Order on Franchising is not totally clear.
The Order applies franchising rules applicable to new entrants to incumbent cable operators. The
Order states a concern with abrogating existing franchise agreements and indicates a process
would be needed -but provides little insight as to what that might be. If the Order were to be
implemented in Iowa City there is concem that the funding for PATV and the pass-through fund
could be in jeopardy. A coalition of organizations and municipalities are exploring the possibility
of appeals and/or lawsuits to prevent implementation before the Order goes into effect.
Gordon said it is imperative to keep funding for PATV as it is the public's channel.
CABLE TV DIVISION BUDGET
Shaffer noted the proposed cable division budget is in the meeting packet and that it is very
similar to past years. There is no room for growth. The budget assumes the City Council will
again take $100,000 in franchise fees to subsidize the general fund. Mekies said that showing
Council how the funds would be used if they were returned could be productive and asked
Shaffer how these funds might be needed. Wieting asked if there might be areas for funding that
would benefit all the access channels or if there was something such as hiring an expert in
strategic planning which would have a common denominator for all channels. Shaffer said that
specific justifications for funds is generally more effective with the City Council. Mekies asked
about the impact of the recent Iowa court cases on franchise fees. Shaffer said that as of this
time they will have no impact on Iowa City, but that could change. There is one lawsuit which
would prohibit municipalities from collecting cable franchise fees and another lawsuit concerns
the collection of cable franchise fees retroactively. The pretext for both suits is that cable
franchise fees are an illegal tax.
DECEMBER MEETING
Hagen moved and Gordon seconded a motion to move the December 2007 meeting to Dec. 17.
The motion passed unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
Gordon moved and Hagen seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously.
Adjournment was at 7:34.
Respectfully submitted,
~l
' - ~,
Drew Shaffer
Cable TV Administrator
~~i~~8_.
5b 12
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 15, 2007 - 7:30 PM
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL -CITY HALL
APPROVED
MEMBERS PRESENT: Wally Plahutnik, Terry Smith, Ann Freerks, Charlie Eastham, Bob Brooks, Dean
Shannon
MEMBERS EXCUSED: Beth Koppes
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Doug Ongie
OTHERS PRESENT: Jeanne Archie, Corey Proctor, Denise Wheatley
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0 (Koppes absent), CZ07-00003, that Council forward a letter to the
Johnson County Board of Adjustment recommending that the application by Alliant Energy for a conditional
use permit to allow an electrical utility substation, be approved subject to general compliance with the
submitted plans.
CALL TO ORDER:
Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM:
Consider a motion setting a public hearing for December 6 to amend the Comprehensive Plan to include the
2007 Historic Preservation Plan.
Motion: Eastham made a motion to set a public hearing for December 6. Brooks seconded the motion. The
motion carried on a vote of 6-0 (Koppes absent).
CONDITIONAL USE ITEM:
CZ07-00003: Discussion of an application submitted by Alliant Energy to Johnson County for a conditional
use permit for an electrical utility substation on a 3.18-acre property located in the fringe area at 4872 340`h
Street NE.
Miklo introduced Doug Ongie, an Urban and Regional Planning graduate student, who is working as an
intern in the Planning Department.
Ongie stated that the applicant, Alliant Energy, wishes to construct an electrical utility substation in the Rose
Hollow Substation. He said the substation will include a 195 foot self-supporting tower and a 12 by 15 foot
communications building. He said the proposed substation will be located on 340"' Street, which is northeast
of Iowa City and outside of the Iowa City Growth Area.
Ongie stated that the Johnson County Unified Ordinance allows public utility facilities to be approved in
agricultural zones. He added that approved of public utility facilities are subject to any conditions to mitigate
harmful effects and promote public health, safety, and general welfare. He stated that the Johnson County
Unified Ordinance does not give specific requirements regarding utility substations. Ongie said that staff
looked at the Iowa City Zoning Ordinance for guidance. He stated that when public utility substations are
located in an Industrial Zone, the Iowa City requires a 200 foot buffer and include landscaping that meets the
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 2
S3 requirement. Ongie added that the S3 screening requirement is the highest screening requirement in the
Iowa City Zoning Ordinance. Ongie stated that the property to the east of the proposed substation is 200
feet away, which meets the Iowa City buffer requirement. He stated that the landscaping would extend 100
feet to the east of the substation containing a mix of deciduous and evergreen trees. He said the screening
would mitigate the visual impact of the substation and the 8 foot security fence. Although neighboring
properties will not be able to see the proposed substation from the north; west; or south, landscaping will be
included around the entire substation.
Ongie stated that visual impact of the communications tower will be difficult to avoid due to the height. He
added that the City Ordinance requires towers in commercial zones to be camouflaged to reduce the visual
impact. Ongie stated that Iowa City also looks at the safety of structures located near towers. The proposed
tower will be in the northwest corner of the substation, which is 700 feet away from the nearest property to
the east. He said staff does not believe there will be a safety hazard.
Ongie stated that although the substation is close to Iowa City, the topography, street network, and I-80
isolate the substation from areas of growth. He said that the long-term plan for Oakdale Boulevard is to
connect with Scott Boulevard about '/z mile to the west of the proposed substation. Ongie stated that the
substation would be outside of the Iowa City watershed and any potential for growth would have very high
infrastructure costs.
Ongie stated that staff recommends that Council forward a letter to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment
recommending the conditional use permit be approved subject to general compliance with the submitted
plans.
Eastham asked if there is more than one residence to the east. Ongie said there is only one residence east
of the substation. Ongie said the substation will be located in a land depression, so the substation would be
out of the view from any other neighboring properties.
Eastham asked if it would be necessary to realign any of the existing high voltage transfer lines for the
substation. Miklo said the applicant will be able to answer that question.
Eastham asked if the substation would be lighted 24 hours a day. Ongie said the application did not specify
the lighting. Miklo said the applicant should be able to answer his question. Eastham asked if there are
provisions within the Iowa City Zoning Ordinance that would allow the Commission to suggest a lighting
standard. Miklo said lighting is a concern, and if the substation is to be lit, then the Commission could
recommend the lighting be downcast so it minimizes light pollution and glare for nearby property owners.
Freerks asked how the tower would be lit. Smith said it would have to meet FAA requirements.
Brooks asked how the tower height relates to the tower near Bristol Drive. Miklo said he isn't sure how tall
that tower is, but the proposed tower would be equivalent to an 18 or 19 story building. Shannon said it
would be at a comparable height.
Public discussion was opened
Denise Wheatley said she is representing the applicant and will answer any questions or concerns the
Commission might have. She added that there are many subject matter experts from Alliant Energy are
available, as well.
Wheatley said as far as the substation being lit, there will be one security light and it will be downcast.
Wheatley said because the tower is under 200 feet, it does not require additional lighting.
Eastham asked if the security lighting will be maintained 24 hours a day. Corey Proctor, the substation team
leader for Alliant Energy, said the security light comes on at dusk and turns off in the morning. Eastham
asked if the light would be downcast. Proctor said Alliant Energy adheres to Dark-Sky recommendations, so
all of the lights have the proper downcast shielding using a flat refractor. Eastham asked if there could be a
conditional requirement that the substation would agree to meet Iowa City's light pollution standards. Miklo
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 3
said it sounds like the plan would currently meet the Iowa City requirements because the City Code is based
on the Dark-Sky requirements. Freerks said it might be something to pass on to Council. Smith asked if
there would be one light fixture. Proctor said there would be one security light and there would also be
emergency lights for maintenance.
Smith said there was a question by Eastham about transmission line modifications and asked if Proctor could
address the issue. Proctor said because the substation will be placed in a land depression, two structures
will have to be modified. He added that one pole will be removed and two poles will be added.
Smith asked if the substation will be a single transformer installation. Proctor said it is currently designed to
have a single transformer, but there will be room for a second transformer.
Eastham asked if there is a rational for the height of the communications tower. Jeanne Archie, employee of
Alliant Energy, said the reason for the height of the communications tower is because the microwave dishes
must be in the line of sight of other communication towers. She said it is less than 200 feet, so no additional
lighting will be necessary.
Freerks asked if the amount of screening at the proposed substation is the typical for Alliant Energy
substation. Wheatley said the high level of screening came from another conditional use permit request to
Johnson County in 2002. She said the neighbors to the east were concerned about the visual impact of a
substation. She added that the screening is above and beyond any screening Alliant Energy has done with a
substation.
Public discussion was closed.
Motion: Smith made a motion to approve CZ07-00003. Shannon seconded the motion.
Freerks said an approval would be a recommendation for Council to forward a letter to the Johnson County
Board of Adjustment to allow the conditional use permit.
Freerks said she is happy to hear lighting will be kept to a minimum.
The motion carried on a vote of 6-0 (Koppes absent).
DISCUSSION OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
Miklo said every March the City Council prepares a budget for the following year that also includes a Capital
Improvements Plan, which is a 5-year budget. He said typically the Commission has been concerned about
street construction, water and sewer lines, park construction, and streetscape projects. Miklo added that
these types of projects affect future growth, providing service to existing growth, or quality of life. He said
staff is currently in the process of looking over the 5-year program and moving projects around on the priority
list. He said the City Manager has asked that all departments give a top 10 to 12 list of projects that should
be in the 5-year budget.
Miklo said he would like to point out the Sycamore Street improvements. He said the street improvements
would go from about Burns Avenue to the city limits. He said this is a priority of staff and is currently in the
plan for 2009. He said this has been a priority in the past for the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Eastham asked if the extension of Sycamore would intersect with the planned McCollister Boulevard. Miklo
said it would intersect with Sycamore just south of the current city limits. He said the connection of
McCollister Boulevard and Sycamore Street wouldn't happen for a number of years, and improvements of
Sycamore Street to McCollister Boulevard would be a separate project.
Eastham asked about the function of McCollister Boulevard. Miklo said McCollister would serve as a ring
road around the entire city.
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 4
Eastham said if the Sycamore Street program would be approved; there would be no connection between
Sycamore Street and McCollister Boulevard. Miklo said a major project like McCollister Boulevard must be
done in pieces. Miklo said that the Sycamore Street improvements are necessary because of current
development occurring around Sycamore Street.
Miklo said some other projects under consideration are traffic safety issues on Mormon Trek Boulevard and
Melrose Avenue, Burlington Street around the new university recreation center, and around the proposed
Hieronymus Square. Brooks asked if there is a commitment by the University to help fund street
improvements around the new university recreation center. Miklo said there are negotiations going on
between the City and the University. Brooks asked if the Burlington Street improvements would be part of
the next fiscal year. Miklo said fiscal year 2010 would be more likely because it would be around the time
Hieronymus Square and the recreation center would be completed.
Smith asked if there is a ranking for the 10 or 11 listed projects. Miklo said no, but the list does suggest
which projects should be funded earlier in the 5-year Capital Improvements Program. He said the Sycamore
Street improvements have been scheduled for fiscal year 2009, and there has been some question if the
project could be bumped back for other improvement projects. He said staff has advised the City Manager
that the timing of the project should stay where it is. Brooks added that development has been tied to the
Sycamore Street improvements; he believes the project should be advanced. Eastham asked if there would
be adequate funding for the Sycamore Street and Burlington Street improvements in the same fiscal year.
Miklo said it depends how other projects get moved around.
Miklo said that staff is looking for feedback from the Commission that is a general list of project priorities over
the next 5 years.
Brooks said he sees a large amount of pedestrian traffic along South Riverside Drive. He asked if there is a
plan for some type of a pedestrian connection in that location. Miklo said there is not and believes the
Commission should put it on their list if they think it is a priority. He added that a trail along Highway 1
should be added due to recent large scale developments like The Lodge.
Smith asked about the proposed bridge over the railroad track on 15` Avenue. Miklo said that project is on
the list and could possibly obtain federal funding. He added that if federal funding does not come through,
then the project would have to be from the local level.
Smith asked when the Commission's input would be needed. Miklo said the input could be taken at the next
meeting and won't be submitted to Council until after January 1, 2008.
Brooks said the University is looking at renovating buildings around the Linn Street Pedestrian Corridor. He
said the University and the City need to continue talking to make sure there is a financial commitment by the
University and that the project goes through. Miklo said staff has that as a priority because residents and
business owners said that area could act as an economic development tool for that neighborhood. He added
that it would link the area to downtown.
Brooks asked Miklo to explain the property for Near Southside multi-use/commercial/workforce
housing/parking facility. Miklo said that would be a parking ramp similar to the Court Street Transportation
Center. He said that staff believes this project should proceed because of development interest in the area.
Eastham asked if program includes a northeast fire station. Miklo said it is in and unfunded year. Freerks
said it is not an issue of construction costs, but it more an issue of staffing.
Brooks asked if there were any additional street improvement plans that could be listed. Miklo said staff has
been looking at 420`h Street because the current Industrial Park has been mostly built out. He said there
would need to be a sewer line, storm water management, and a greenbelt in the area north of 420'h Street to
separate the industrial and residential uses.
Freerks said that there was money put away for infill on sidewalks. She asked how that is done. Miklo said
that is in the budget and done on an annual basis. He said sidewalk safety issues are taken care of first and
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 5
then the network is extended each year. Eastham asked if the Central Planning District was part of the
sidewalk infill. Miklo said the Central Planning District is well served by sidewalks. Eastham said he thought
that was an issue in the public input part of the Central Planning District. Miklo said there are a few spots on
Rochester Avenue.
Shannon asked about the status of Foster Road between Dubuque Street and Prairie Du Chien Road. Miklo
said it would be a collector street and would be built when the area is developed.
Eastham suggested putting a Geographic Information System on the funding list. He said a GIS capability
substantially increases a community's ability to do land use planning in a variety of ways. Smith asked if
there could be a partnering opportunity between the City and the County for a GIS system. Miklo said there
IS.
Smith said each Commissioner should come back to the next meeting with a top 10 list and see how they
match.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES:
Motion: Brooks made a motion to approve the October 18, 2007 meeting minutes as typed. Smith
seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0 (Koppes absent).
ADJOURNMENT:
Motion: Smith made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:25 p.m. Plahutnik seconded the motion. The
motion carried on a vote of 6-0 (Koppes absent).
Minutes submitted by Doug Ongie
S:\PCD\Minutes\P&Z\2007\11-15-07.doc
O
.N
.~
E
U 'a
~ O
C ~
c ~
N v o
~ C N
rn~
c 'a
- c
~~ d
c;
R Q
a
~_
U
3
0
C7
Z_
H
W
W
J
Q
O
LL
X X X p X X X
o X X X X X X X
of
o
r
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
N
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
01
x x x x x x o
x o x x x x x
x x x x o x x
n
X X X ~ X X
X p X X X
~ x x x x o x x
n
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
M
~
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
w
~'
'
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
v
a 0 X X X X X X
~ x x x x x x o
M
~-
~
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
M
N X X X ~ ~ O X
r
~
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
N
r X X X x X X X
~
~ O
~ ~
.- 00
o N
~ 0
.- 00
O ~-
` .
~ ~n ~n .n u~ ~n ~n u~
~ W o 0 0 0 0 0 0
y
o
E
R
y
Y
fA
d Y
aC+ C
O
~
° ~
~ y
~ a
o ~ ~
r r
E
E m w t~ Y a rn tn
Z m U Q w ~ O H
X X X X X
o ~ p
X X X X ~ X
~
n X X X X W
0 w
0 X
°' x x x o o X o
X X p X X X X
0
M
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
v
~ x o x x x x x
N x x x o x x x
N
r X X X X X ~ X
~ O ~ OO N 0 00 ~
~.~
~ - .-
~ ~
~ O
~ ~-
~ ~ O
~ ~
~
F-w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N
V1 Y_
C C
O
y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
E ~
~
m
v
W d
~
li
0
`1 t
!a
d ~
s
N .~
E
y
z m U Q ui ~ O F=
N
U
X
W
c ~ c
~ ~ ~
dQQ
II II II
T W
YXOO
5b 13
MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2007
SENIOR CENTER, ROOM 202
APPROVED
MEMBERS PRESENT: Esther Baker, Michael Brennan, William Downing, Pam Michaud, Jim Ponto,
Ginalie Swaim, Tim Toomey, Tim Weitzel
MEMBERS ABSENT: Alicia Trimble
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Sunil Terdalkar
OTHERS PRESENT: Hottie Allen, Helen Burford, Mary Bennett, Jeremy Patterson, Marybeth
Slonneger, William Wang
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Weitzel called the meeting to order at 6:12 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA:
Terdalkar said that the Parks and Recreation Commission held a meeting at 5:00 to discuss a potential
location for the Wetherby House to be moved to. He said that Mary Bennett gave a presentation to City
Council at which the City Council directed the petitioner to provide additional information about the
project: what steps are necessary to move the house, the restoration work needed, and what the City
would be expected to contribute.
Terdalkar said that a proposal will be submitted to the City Manager, who will eventually contact the City
Council. He said that Friends of Historic Preservation is also working to come with the costs of moving the
house and the future restoration. Terdalkar said that within a couple of days more should be known about
the kinds of financial resources available and the actual costs.
Weitzel said that apparently some of the Commission members have toured the house and found very
little left intact of the original structure. Terdalkar said he was told that there is still some original fabric left
of the building. He said that the original clapboard is still there.
ITEMS OF CONSIDERATION:
Certificate of Appropriateness.
829 Kirkwood Avenue. Terdalkar said that this is a local landmark property that was built in 1874. He said
that the applicant requests replacement of the existing limestone foundation with a new concrete
foundation and would also use limestone veneer outside by saving the existing stone.
Terdalkar said the applicant would also like to replace most of the basement windows and install at least
one egress window; depending on the layout of the basement, the applicant may need more than one
egress window. Terdalkar said the applicant also proposes to repair the existing exterior brick walls. He
said there is quite a bit of damage to be seen, especially the pointing where the mortar is loose. Terdalkar
said it is more evident in the places where additions were put on the building.
Terdalkar showed photographs of where there are joinery problems where additions were put on. He said
there is also uneven settling of the different structures that has caused some damage. Terdalkar said that
the effect of water has also caused problems.
Terdalkar stated that staff is not comfortable at this point approving the replacement, as staff has not
seen any report or structural review of the basement. He said that given the magnitude and significance
of the structure, the Commission should have a preservation architect or engineer with experience in the
preservation of brick buildings and masonry structures give an opinion. Terdalkar said that if there is
enough evidence to support the application, the guidelines recommend that the appearance of the
foundation as existing be matched with regard to material, size, color, composition, and joint profile.
Historic Preservation Commission
November 7, 2007
Page 2
Regarding window replacement, Terdalkar said that he has not seen any information regarding materials
or sizes. He said the applicant did identify the locations of the windows and openings that need to be
replaced. Terdalkar said that where an egress window is installed, construction of the window well should
be matched to the existing foundation, which is the historic foundation, not the one that is being replaced.
He said staff recommends deferral of the application until receiving additional information about the
foundation as well as a structural report.
Patterson said he is a structural mover and would be doing the work on this project. He said that he has
spent two years in New Orleans to move and save historical structures. Patterson said that Eric
Hindrichson from Shive-Hattery visited the property and said that this needs to be done. Patterson said
that Eric Hindrichson recommends new concrete footings and a reinforced foundation under the house to
save the structure. Patterson presented a letter from Mr. Hindrichson to the Commission.
Patterson said that he is not an engineer, but the engineer who looked at this recommends replacing the
whole basement. Patterson said that radon is another issue for the owner, because this house has open,
dirt floors.
Patterson said he plans to bore cut every hole to save all of the bricks that can be saved, and beam it,
and take pressure. He said that he will dig up the limestone foundation, core bore cut it, and then save it
so it can be reused. Patterson said that he is required to pour two-foot footing for stability. He said that he
will pour all clean rock underneath this and will have to lay atwelve-inch wall to hold the weight of the
building. Patterson said that this structure probably weighs around 850 tons.
Patterson said the problem is that this is an old foundation, although it was state of the art when it was
built in the 1870s. He said there is no footing underneath the building, and there is a huge amount of
moisture underneath the building.
Patterson said that he specializes in historic structures. He said his company owns the second biggest
unified jack machine in the world. Patterson said that it is pressure pointed so that one can control every
tweak at every point. He said that he can fine tune everything. Patterson said that with this technology, he
can pressure one corner that may only weigh five tons, while the next corner may weigh 40 tons. He said
that after locking these pressures off and hitting a valve, they all go up at the same time.
Downing asked if a radon test had ever been done in the house. Patterson said that he never did one, but
he would be concerned about radon if he lived in this house.
Brennan said the application mentions lowering the floor and asked if that is feasible. Patterson said that
he does not have a choice but to lower the floor, because he can't get underneath and excavate without
making it at least 8'/z to nine feet. He said that without doing this, one can't make it livable. Patterson said
that there is no mortar left on the foundation; it has all deteriorated. He said there is no strength to it; it is
dilapidated and gone.
Patterson said that a basic wood frame house would settle with no problems. He said that with brick, any
movement in stone or masonry structures is a terrible thing. Patterson said there is not forgiveness with
brick, concrete and stone; they can't bow and deflect.
Patterson said that Mr. Allen is his masonry contractor and has been in the masonry business for 40
years. He said that Allen will go in and relay and re-tuckpoint any bricks that have fallen out.
Weitzel said that the letter from the Shive-Hattery consultant recommends that a footing be installed to
stop the differential settling but makes no comment about the likelihood of collapse. Patterson said that
he cannot predict when the building will collapse but said that he has never had a house collapse when
he has moved it.
Weitzel asked Patterson what would happen with the chimney after the move. Patterson responded that
he uses a banding system to clamp the chimney and is able to save 99% of the chimneys that are there.
He said the same functionality will be there after the move.
Historic Preservation Commission
November 7, 2007
Page 3
Miklo said that staff had asked for some information about the structural stability of the building and had
not received it before tonight's meeting. He suggested that if the Commission was inclined to approve
this, it could be subject to evaluations and conversations with the engineer, given that the engineer's
report was just received.
Weitzel said that the Commission looks at this from both sides. He added that the Secretary of the Interior
Standards say to do the least amount possible to get the building to be preserved.
Miklo said that this sounds like a laudable project. He said there has been some neglect to the building in
the past, and the present owner wants to invest in the building and stabilize and improve it. Miklo said
staff does not necessarily object to the project but needs more information to form a recommendation.
Brennan said that replacing the foundation is not prohibited or disallowed under the guidelines. He said
that the exterior appearance can be restored more or less to what it is now or perhaps what it was when it
was built, and that is the purview of the Commission -the exterior appearance, not whether the
absolutely original foundation stays in place or not. Brennan said the main question is whether this can
be done while preserving the exterior appearance, and it sounds like it can be. He said that what
condition the foundation is in does not necessarily bear on whether the Commission should approve this
or not.
Miklo said he agreed that the real concern is that something be done that does not cause further
structural problems. He said whether the basement is converted to livable space or not is not a major
concern.
Miklo said that the other issue concerns the window replacement, as the owner has still not submitted a
brand name or materials. He said the Commission may want to defer that aspect until the information is
available or until the applicant, chair and staff agree on a window that meets the guidelines.
Patterson said that the foundation reconstruction process will take about 2'/z months. He said that a snow
load causes more of a problem. Patterson emphasized that Wang, the owner, wants to do what is right for
this structure, but this is a long process. He said that there is a lot of time to discuss the window plans.
Downing asked who would design the foundation wall. Patterson said that Eric Hindrichson of Shive-
Hattery and Allen would be working on the foundation wall. Downing asked how the reclaimed stone
would be supported. Allen said that he'll come up with atwelve-inch block and catch the inside with an
eight-inch block with afour-inch ledge to carry the stone. He said that where the stucco is, there should
be enough stone to carry around, if the owner approves, to blend it in all around.
Allen said he agrees with Patterson. He said the brick is cracking and moving, and the stairway is
impassable. Allen said the house may last 20 years, but it is gradually setting. He said that it can be
temporarily patched up, but that is not going to help it.
Wang, the owner of the house, said he moved into the house six years ago. He said that the first thing he
did was fix the roof. Regarding the basement, Wang said that there is one big area of the room that is wet
every week. He said that it will be a major problem in another five to ten years, so he needs to do
something now. Wang said that the best technology allows him to do this in one shot, with everything
raised up and with everything joined tightly.
Weitzel asked if the drainage will be taken care of at the same time the foundation is poured. Wang
confirmed this.
Weitzel said that he has read about this, and the segmental process has the problem of differential
settlement as the load is put on the different sections. He said that in general, if the whole thing is lifted up
at once, it's a better way to go.
Historic Preservation Commission
November 7, 2007
Page 4
Patterson said that he has that house insured for $600,000. He said that he is not a gambler, and he
never does something that he thinks is not going to be the right thing. Patterson said this technology is
the best way to move this house.
Regarding the windows, Wang said that he intends to use the same size, style, and color as that shown
on the first floor, the double hung egress window. Weitzel said the Commission likes to see the window,
at least the visible part of the window well portion, lined with the same material as the foundation, so in
this case, either limestone or brick for the first 18 to 24 inches. Wang agreed and said he told the
contractor this same thing.
Allen said that wherever the windows would be longer than they are now, he would bring the rock up to
match the rock that goes around. Allen asked what the Commission recommends for window wells.
Weitzel replied that usually the Commission recommends poured concrete with lining of brick or stone,
where it's adhered to the actual poured well.
Allen said that he has used Anamosa stone, but it would look different than the other block. He said he
could bring cement block up and then the last couple of feet put rock on it. Weitzel said that one could
use the regular concrete and just face it with a veneer. He said then there is a superior structure for soil
movement and there is still the look. Allen said he would bring it up to ground level so that there would be
no water. Weitzel agreed it could be brought up the side and then over the top.
Allen asked how much room is needed for access. Weitzel suggested contacting Housing Inspection
Services for this information. Terdalkar replied that the size of the egress window should be 24 inches by
22 inches at least; that's the clear distance. He said that depending on the type of window, one would
need a window well at least three feet wide to give enough room for someone to get out of the opening.
Regarding the plans for the project, Terdalkar said there is a mention of reconfiguring the entryway. He
said that plan also needs to be provided to staff for details. Allen said that Wang would like to have
another entryway out to the south. Wang agreed that he would like to have a door on the back side of the
house.
Terdalkar asked if the plan also includes reconfiguring the existing door on the west side. Wang said
there would be no change to that door. Allen said there would be two access doorways, plus an access
window on the east side.
MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 829 Kirkwood
Avenue for putting in a new foundation to be faced with reclaimed stone to get the current look,
with the windows and the new door to meet the guidelines and be approved by staff and the chair.
Swaim seconded the motion.
Ponto said that a house of this weight not having regular footings is not good for long term stability, and
he is in favor of putting in something solid. Weitzel said that when using the Secretary of the Interiors
Standards, what the Commission looks at is to be as sensitive as possible, especially for landmarks, to
the existing structure and to do the minimal necessary. He said that if this can be done it would be a good
thing. Weitzel said he is not certain that this is absolutely necessary, since he is not an engineer, but at
some point that is the landowner's prerogative to do this. He said the owner has undertaken a lot of roof
work and did use cedar shingles when other types of shingles could have been applied, which is a sign of
authenticity and commitment to this building.
Ponto pointed out that the owner will save the existing stone and cut it to use it as a veneer to put on so it
will look the same. Weitzel said that will save the appearance, but one will lose the historic nature of the
basement, which is not necessarily anything the Commission can control. He said that he would actually
like to have a little discretion for staff to consult with the engineer. Ponto said he could add that to the
motion to give the option for staff to consult.
AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION: Ponto moved to add to the motion an option for staff
consultation with the project engineer.
Historic Preservation Commission
November 7, 2007
Page 5
Michaud said the Commission has not seen interior photographs to document water damage to the
basement. Miklo said he did not believe that was necessary. He said that staff's concern about this was to
consult with the engineer to make sure there is no further damage to the building.
Patterson pointed out that the time frame for this project is limited. Miklo said staff could have a decision
next week. Wang said that he and his family would be staying at a hotel until the project is completed.
Downing pointed out the importance of keeping the building heated.
Swaim said she appreciated staffs evaluation in not seeing any particular structural faults. She said that,
however, if there is the technology and the kind of foundation that will help this house last another 100
years that will be an investment in the integrity of the building.
Weitzel pointed out that this is limestone, and limestone with a lot of water ends up removing the
limestone, ending up in decay. Swaim said that if the brick problems are related to the foundation, then
that will only get worse if nothing is done.
Wang said that he redid the kitchen two years ago. He said that in that time, the kitchen has already
settled, as evidenced by the ever-increasing gap between the refrigerator and the ceiling.
The motion carried on a vote of 7-1, with Toomey voting no.
Wetherby House. Bennett, Slonneger, and Burford discussed the status of the Wetherby House and the
options for saving it. Slonneger said that the Committee to Save Wetherby House (CSWH) has been
formed to save the house, and $7,000 has been donated to that cause. She said that Jean Lloyd-Jones
and Mike Wright are the two co-chairs of that committee.
Slonneger stated that the committee would be sending a large, designated mailing regarding the house
and would also be canvassing the neighborhood this weekend, hopefully with a brochure about the
house. She said that CSWH would have articles coming out in Friday's paper about the house. Slonneger
added that the Johnson County Historical Society is coming on board as a caretaker for future
maintenance of the house.
Burford said that Marlin Engels has been hired to document the house by compiling a complete historic
and archaeological commentary. She added that on Friday at 12:30 p.m. at the house the asbestos siding
will be removed to see if an original front door will be revealed.
Burford said that the CSWH has discussed the viability of the house itself and has spoken with a house
mover, engineers, and architects regarding what would need to be done to the house. She said that the
committee has walked through the process regarding the building permit and the moving permit. Burford
said that two recommended sites will be discussed further at the committee's meeting later in the
evening.
Bennett said the estimate for moving the house is approximately $30,000, and half of that could
potentially come from an HRDP grant. She said that it might cost as much as $75,000 for restoration and
long-term maintenance.
Bennett said the CSWH is still looking for a location for the house and spoke to the Parks and Recreation
Commission at its meeting earlier in the evening. She said those Commission members are adamant
about having public input on the issue, especially from those neighbors who might be in the vicinity of the
house. Bennett said that therefore in the next few days there will be a campaign to get some input from
the Goosetown Neighborhood and from people who live near the Reno Street Park.
Bennett said there will be a meeting with the Parks and Recreation Commission at 6:00 p.m. next
Wednesday to look for a resolution about the potential location of the house. She said that if it is defeated
by the Parks and Recreation Commission, there is still the option of going to the City Council. Slonneger
added that the two City Council members-elect, Hayek and Wright, are in support of saving the house.
Historic Preservation Commission
November 7, 2007
Page 6
Weitzel said that because this item is not on the Commission's agenda, the Commission could pass a
resolution of support but it might need to occur at a future meeting. Bennett asked if the Commission
could provide a letter of support to show that another sector is in support of saving this truly significant
house.
Weitzel asked if the Commission could provide a letter of support without having this item on its agenda.
Miklo said that this could be considered a public discussion item so that the Commission might be able to
provide a letter of support, although he would confirm this with the City Attorney's Office.
Ponto asked how this fits into the owner's timeline. Bennett said that one of the owner's conditions is that
the committee have a solid plan in place and is showing progress. She added that the CSWH has
concrete analysis by professionals, and the owner seems to have some leeway but not a lot.
Weitzel said that one can see that there is public support for this, with the CSWH set up and donations
already under way. He said that is a very positive sign and asked Commission members if there is
consensus for a letter of support.
Brennan asked if the letter would support the move or support a move to a particular location or
something else. Weitzel said the Commission could discuss the terms of the letter. Brennan said he is
hesitant about that, because the item is not on the agenda. He said that part of an open process is public
notice and public meetings and discussions. Brennan noted that there was at last one person at the least
meeting who was opposed to a move to the Reno Street Park. Weitzel said the support letter could omit a
specific location and be a very general letter of support.
Weitzel said there is some concern on the part of Commission members about the cost and amount of
restoration that would need to take place. He said that if people are willing to undertake that, however,
that is not the Commission's purview. Michaud asked who would own the structure. Bennett said that it
would be owned by the City, and the Johnson County Historical Society would be responsible for its
upkeep. She added that the Johnson County Historical Society has a good track record on managing
properties in comparable situations.
Weitzel said that in the past, the Commission has approved the concept of writing a letter, which was then
written by the chair and staff and then circulated for approval. Bennett said she would like to at least have
a letter of support in time for the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting next Wednesday. Weitzel
said the Commission should be able to give verbal approval of the concept, without a specific location
being specified. He said that as far as a letter being written, people seem to want to make it an agenda
item in order to have a vote.
Swaim said that she would be comfortable with whatever staff and the chair would pull together in a
general letter of support. She said the letter could be a broad letter of support suggesting that all avenues
be explored. Terdalkar said he would check with the City Attorney's Office regarding compiling a letter.
The consensus of the Commission was for staff and the chair to draft a letter of support to be reviewed by
the City Attorney's Office before being sent. Weitzel said that the CSWH has seen the Historic
Preservation Commission's support and can therefore verbally report back that support to other
commissions.
Bennett, Slonegger, and Burford asked that the letter be addressed to the Committee to Save Wetherby
House.
OTHER
Weitzel said that in December or early January, the Commission holds a work session to compile a work
plan and submit it to City Council. He added that last year's work plan consisted mostly of updating the
Preservation Plan. Weitzel said that one item of interest is the CLG grant from the State Historical
Society, which should be announced around January 15`h. He suggested that a survey of the near south
side to look for potentially eligible properties and potential districts be considered in the work plan.
Historic Preservation Commission
November 7, 2007
Page 7
ITEMS OF CONSIDERATION:
Certificate of Appropriateness
1012 East Washington Street. Terdalkar said that the owner of this property was served notice by the
Housing Inspection Division to remedy a situation identified as potentially hazardous. He said that the
structure seems to be an original structure and is shown on the 1920 Sanborn Map and listed as "two-
story auto."
Terdalkar showed photographs of the property and stated that it is certainly in a condition that requires
immediate attention. He said there was some tornado damage to the property. Terdalkar said that one
opinion was that the structure can be braced from inside and can be fixed; it is not gone beyond repair.
He said that in recent years, the owner put a new foundation in this structure that could be reused, and
there may be a need to repair one or two of the piers in the foundation.
Swaim asked if the building was leaning in two directions, as it appeared in the photograph. Terdalkar
said it is not leaning in two directions; it is leaning to the north only.
Terdalkar said the criteria for outbuilding demolition are the condition of the structure, integrity of the
structure, and architectural significance. He said that in terms of architectural integrity, this is probably
one of the better structures that the Commission has reviewed so far.
Terdalkar said that after the tornado, the owner approached the City and was advised to apply for grant
money. He said this would probably have qualified for the HRDP grant because of age and significance.
Terdalkar said the owner did not apply and has not addressed the issue since then. Weitzel said that after
July 1, the money was no longer available as it was appropriated back by the State.
Swaim asked if it is likely this building was originally a barn and then used for an auto in 1920 and after.
Terdalkar said that he thought that was likely. Weitzel agreed that this could have been a horse barn.
Swaim said that the fact that this was a barn makes it seem even more important.
Terdalkar said that the building needs work to make it accessible and usable. Weitzel said the owner has
been cited with a dangerous structure, so he needs to do something to remedy it. Terdalkar said that
something needs to be done very quickly.
Weitzel said that one of the remedies is to demolish the building, but the Commission has purview to
evaluate the significance because it's in a historic district. Terdalkar said that the Housing Inspection
Services' notice is to remedy the situation, so the options are to repair it to make it stable or demolish it.
Downing said that either way, it's an expense to the owner. Baker asked if the owner has indicated any
interest in restoring the building. Terdalkar said that the day he met with the owner, the owner was not
interested in saving the building. He said the application does not contain much information, and the
owner did not apply for an HRDP grant.
Terdalkar said that he spoke with the building inspector, who felt that metal braces could be used to
straighten and save the building. Terdalkar said that if the owner wants to make the building usable, he
can still keep the building on the site.
Weitzel said the Commission should discuss the significance of the building, because if the structure is
not significant, there is no point in making the owner maintain it. Swaim said that the building seems to
have significance. Weitzel said that there is a demolition by neglect ordinance that requires homeowners
to keep their buildings in a state of repair. He said that if the Commission finds the building to be
significant, the demolition option would be off the table. Weitzel said the owner would then be forced to
repair the building or face fines.
Ponto said that it should be relatively inexpensive to brace the building to stabilize it, although it would
cost a lot more to restore the building. Miklo said that if the building is at least stabilized, a new owner in
Historic Preservation Commission
November 7, 2007
Page 8
the future might appreciate the building and restore it to use it for storage. He said that realistically, if the
Commission doesn't allow demolition, the owner will probably do the minimum to stabilize the building,
thereby potentially saving it for a future owner.
MOTION: Swaim moved to deny a certificate of appropriateness for the demolition of an
outbuilding at 1012 East Washington Street. Michaud seconded the motion. The motion carried on
a vote of 7-0.
Weitzel pointed out that the demolition was denied because of the historic significance and the venerable
nature of the structure.
Downing asked what recourse the owner would have regarding this decision. Weitzel said the
Commission's decision may be appealed to the Board of Adjustment.
PUBLIC HEARING ON DRAFT PRESERVATION PLAN:
Public hearing open:
Public hearing closed.
Michaud asked about suggestions that vinyl windows be reevaluated. Weitzel said there are
recommendations in the Preservation Plan update that the Commission retook at how windows are
treated in conservation districts and that there be some leniency.
Terdalkar said the packet includes a memorandum with two potential amendments to the plan. He said
that one amendment would be to add a paragraph to objective nine, goal two, to consider a revision to the
design guidelines to allow more flexibility in terms of materials. Terdalkar said another recommended
addition to goal one would extend the period of survey as we move forward in terms of the buildings that
meet the 50-year threshold. He said that as the threshold is moving, the Commission would also
reevaluate its position in terms of what is significant and what should be surveyed.
Weitzel said that he would also like to see the Commission adopt a standard procedure to evaluate
previously unconsidered substitute materials so that the process is not always so ad hoc. He said the
Commission should be proactive, not reactive, in adopting substitute materials. Weitzel suggested the
Commission look to the Historic Trust Forum, preservation architects, etc.
Terdalkar said there is a lot to look at in terms of revising the guidelines. He said that the process after
the tornado recovery was helpful to get some of the projects moving faster, and that could be
incorporated in the guidelines. Terdalkar said the Commission should look at revisions of the guidelines
realistically, not just for materials or small changes. Miklo said the Preservation Plan refers to potential
amendments to the guidelines in several places.
Michaud stated that she is very concerned about environmental impact. She said that if there are green or
recycled products, perhaps those could be used rather than less durable products such as wood. Swaim
asked if the Commission wanted to be that specific. She said that until those materials are truly tested
and there is some guidance from the Trust or the Secretary of the Interior, the Commission's job is to
work with the historic guidelines.
Weitzel said that the National Trust online forum has discussions about many topics, including substitute
materials. He said that the National Trust really doesn't like vinyl, because it's not a renewable resource
and doesn't last that long. Weitzel said that one of the greenest things an owner can do is to replace a
window that is in place. He said there is a wealth of data on that.
Miklo said that the draft Preservation Plan is being considered and adopted by the Commission, and the
details will come in the guidelines. He said the plan would then be forwarded to the Planning and Zoning
Commission and from that Commission to the City Council for approval.
Weitzel said he feels the staff memorandum with the amendments should be adopted and included in the
Preservation Plan. He said he felt that it covered most of Ponto's concerns, and Ponto agreed.
Historic Preservation Commission
November 7, 2007
Page 9
MOTION: Michaud moved to adopt the amendments to the Preservation Plan as proposed in
staffs November 7`h memorandum. Ponto seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-
0, with Brennan not votinq on this motion because he was briefly out of the room.
MOTION: Swaim moved to recommend the draft Preservation Plan, as amended at tonight's
meeting, to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Brennan seconded the motion. The motion
carried on a vote of 7-0.
Minutes for October 11, 2007.
Weitzel said that he had typographical corrections to submit.
Baker said that on page one, in the second paragraph under Certificate of Appropriateness, the last
sentence should read, "...sill of the windows will..."
Brennan said that on page eight, in the second to last paragraph, "1920" should be changed to "1930."
Weitzel said that on page five, in the second full paragraph, last sentence, "CRF 38" should be changed
to "36 CFR Part 800."
MOTION: Baker moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's October 11,
2007 meeting, as amended. Downing seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0.
OTHER:
Discussion of a proposed telecommunication tower located on Hawk Ridge Drive.
Terdalkar showed the location of a telecommunications tower to be located on Hawkridge Drive and
Highway One. He said that the most notable historic structure nearby is at 747 Benton Street. Terdalkar
said that the distance between the properties is fairly significance, and the topography is such that the
house is not visible from the site.
Terdalkar referred to a report from architectural historian Patricia Eckhart noting that the tower's
construction will not have an adverse effect. He said that it will be a stealth tower in that it will be installed
on a light pole. Terdalkar said that the light pole will be 50 feet in height. Miklo said there is a height limit
of 35 feet for the lamp. Terdalkar said the owner has not yet applied for a special exception. Miklo said
that staff would suggest through the special exception process that the light be mounted no higher than
35 feet.
Terdalkar said that a letter to the State Historical Society and to the applicant would need to be drafted in
order to state the Commission's opinion. The consensus of the Commission was to draft a letter stating
that the Commission finds no adverse effect so long as the tower is a stealth tower and the light is
mounted at 35 feet or less.
Swaim stated that the awards program went quite well.and was handled very efficiently. She said that the
remarks were good and to the point, and the focus was on the buildings rather than on people walking
across a stage.
Weitzel said that some Commission members' terms would expire next year. He said that officer elections
would also need to be held early next year.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte
s/pcd/mi ns/hpG2007/11-07-07. doc
c
0
.N
N
.~
O
U
c
O ~
~ O
~ N
N ~
~ ~ O
~o~~
= Z d
C
O
.N
N
~~ 'a
U ~
m
c ~
o i.
a~
i ~°o
~ N
d ~
L .F
a Q
.O
~..
N_
X X X ; ; X X X ~ >G X
O X ~ >C ~ ~ >C >C >C JC X X
N
~ X ~
O X X X X X X X
o X X >G ; ; >C X X ~ ?C >C
,
'"
a >G >C ; ; ; ; X X' SG ~ >G X
~ ~
x x ~ ~ w
o
x
x W
o
x
x
x
,
x x o x x x x o x
~' >C O ~ ; ~ w
O ~C X >C >C >G X
~o ~ ~ ~
N
o
x
O ~
~ ~
~ ~
~
0
0
M
v, X X ; 0 >C ~ X X X X
v x 0 ~ p X >C Q >C X X
~ ~
N
7
X
x ~
i ~
i
i
X
0
X
x
X
X
x
~ O X x O O x X X ~ X O
, ~
o X x x ~
i x o X X x ', X x
N
~ ;? v
o oo
0 r
0 o
- r
0 oo
0 rn
0 r
0 a~
0 o
- o~
o o0
0
n
F.,,
~ rn
N
M rn
N
M ~
N
M a
N
M o,
N
M o~
N
M a~
N
M a~
N
M o~
N
M o~
N
M a~
N
M o~
N
M
~
~
d
Y
C
~
~
t
C
;
G
C :a
~
U
t
~
.~+
C
~
~
~
~
E'
~
+N+
c
C
z a~ w` U C C7 ~ ~ a°O ~: E- E 3
L
~ ~
~ ~
~ a~
N
C ~
~ a0i ~ O O
~~¢zz
y II II ~ ',~ i
~xooz ;
FINAL/APPROVED
POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES -December 12, 2007 5b ,14
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Michael Larson called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Elizabeth Engel, Loren Horton, Donald King
MEMBERS ABSENT: Greg Roth
STAFF PRESENT: Staff Kellie Tuttle, Legal Counsel Catherine Pugh (5:36 p.m.)
STAFF ABSENT: None
OTHERS PRESENT: Captain Tom Widmer of the ICPD; and public, Caroline Dieterle and Dean
Abel
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
None.
CONSENT
CALENDAR Motion by Engel and seconded by Horton to adopt the consent calendar as
presented or amended.
• Minutes of the meeting on 10/16/07
• ICPD General Order 95-01 (Emergency Operation of Police Vehicles)
• ICPD General Order 99-01 (Police Vehicle Pursuits)
• ICPD General Order 99-10 (Domestic Violence)
• ICPD General Order 99-11 (Arrests)
• ICPD General Order 99-12 (Field Interviews and "Pat-Down" Searches)
• ICPD General Order 00-08 (Weapons)
• ICPD General Order 07-03 (Fiscal Management)
• ICPD Standard Operating Guideline 07-04 (Mobile Data System)
• ICPD Department Memo 07-45
• ICPD Use of Force Report -August 2007
• ICPD Use of Force Report -September 2007
King had a question on General Order 95-01(Emergency Operation of Police
Vehicles) and 99-01 (Police Vehicle Pursuits) regarding whether the Community
Service vehicles were part of the Police Department. Widmer stated that they are
part of the police department; however they do not use them to pursue. They
technically could be, but they are operated by non-sworn persons. Generally the
vehicles are used for traffic control, hauling barricades, etc. but they are equipped
with emergency lights because of being used for traffic control. Community Service
vehicles are authorized to use their lights to get to a location quickly, because they
are considered an emergency vehicle.
Also on General Order 99-10 (Domestic Violence) on page 14.10 (J -Officer
Training), King was wondering how often officers have to go through training.
Widmer explained that there are provisions to have a certain number of hours every
three years. That training is generally taken care of through MATS (Multi Agency
Training System) training. All law enforcement officials in Johnson County get
together for a three day session and run the same training which lasts for 5
consecutive weeks in January. Widmer explained that they track the hours of
training and always meet the minimum but generally go well above and beyond the
required number of hours for training. Also anyone in a specialty position would
receive additional training.
Motion carried, 4/0, Roth absent.
PCRB
December 12, 2007
Page 2
OLD BUSINESS None.
NEW BUSINESS Changes necessary by 11/6 election -Pugh stated that the amendments to the
Charter were passed at the November election. She also informed the Board that
the City Council had passed the ordinance (07-4296) that amended the section of
the City Code to make it consistent with the Home Rule Charter at their December
11th meeting. Pugh said she would be in contact with the City Attorneys office to
make the necessary changes. The SOP's (Standard Operating Procedures) will be
the biggest change to see what process the Board will go through to exercise the
subpoena power and then the additional changes regarding the community forums.
Pugh will most likely come up with a draft of the SOP's and then have the Board
review them and request any changes or make recommendations at that time.
PUBLIC
DISCUSSION Caroline Dieterle announced that she had submitted a letter to the City Council and
copied the Board regarding the revisions and had not realized that they were already
passed. In the letter she had suggested that if there was public concern regarding
an issue, that there could be something in the ordinance that if 25 people signed a
request asking for a public forum on the issue that the Board would be required to
have one. Pugh suggested that if there,was a concern that public could come to a
meeting and request a forum during public discussion time. Another point in the
letter Dieterle said was that when the Police Department receives internal complaints
that do not go through the PCRB that it would be beneficial to the Board if they
received something showing those complaints. Pugh stated that the Board currently
receives a report from the Police Department on a regular basis that shows the
complaints filed internally with the department and also the complaints filed with the
PCRB. The report is not in detail but does give a brief synopsis and the status of the
complaint. Dieterle's final point in the letter was that it appeared that the PCRB was
currently not given the identity of the complainant or the officers involved in an
incident, which would limit their knowledge of repeated complaints against officers or
by any one complainant. Her suggestion was to assign a code number to each
officer and each complainant so that over time the Board would be able to track a
pattern while the identities were still protected. Pugh explained that the Board does
know the identity of the complainant, but not the officer. Widmer stated that the
Police Department has a system where they assign a number to the officer that is
given to the PCRB for complaints, but they also have an internal system called the
Internal Warning System where they track anything from sick leave to complaints per
officer looking for early warning signs. Abel wanted to know if the numbering
system for the officers was consistent so that if an officer was named in a complaint
and then named in another complaint, the Board would be able to track that one
particular officer had been involved in two complaints. Pugh reminded Abel that the
Board looks at each complaint independently, not taking anyone's history into
account and that the Board does not have any disciplinary power over officers. The
Board is responsible for reviewing the complaint, reviewing the Chief's report, and
agreeing or disagreeing with the Chief's findings. Abel requested that it be verified
that. the numbering system for the officers is consistent. Staff will follow up and verify
procedure.
PCRB
December 12, 2007
Page 3
BOARD
INFORMATION
STAFF
INFORMATION
Widmer reported back to the Board regarding his follow up with the directive "should"
and "shall". Widmer found in the Rules and Regulations (section 10.42) for ICPD the
definition of "shall/will" means that the action is mandatory. "Should" (section
100.44) is an advisory, not mandatory.
Horton had an adjustment to the member phone list. Pugh and Larson also had
updates.
Pugh updated the Board that she had the opportunity to do a couple of newspaper
interviews and one radio interview around the time of the election regarding the
proposed changes to the Charter. Tuttle announced to the Board that Dieterle had
dropped off an article that was previously mentioned at the 10/16 meeting and that it
was available to them.
TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change)
• January 8, 2008, 5:30 PM, Lobby Conference Room
• February 12, 2008, 5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Room
• March 11, 2008, 5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Room
• April 8, 2008, 5:30 P.M., Lobby Conference Room
Horton announced that he will be late to the January 8th meeting.
ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by Horton and seconded by King.
Motion carried, 4/0, Roth absent. Meeting adjourned at 6:04 P.M.
~°ox
zz~~ro
0 o a a ~
c~ c~
~~ ~.~~
~ ~ C~7
~~ c
~s ~
or
d r~ ~ xr r~~ ~~
~
'
' c ~' va c ~ ~ a, ~, °'
`~ y
o. ~ ~ 7~ ~ r° ~ ~
x - ~ ~ ~
~ ~~
~ x
o
0
0
0
o
b
~
~ •
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
O O '-'
~ ~ ~ ~ k
N
~ ~ ~y
7 ~ ~ y
7 W
O
~ ~'C ~'C ~'C ~'C N
~ (17 N
~i ~ ~ ~ ~ W
O W
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O C
J
' 7 a a a ~ N
~C yC ?C ~'C t~
o
~
~ y
7 yy
a ~ 77
r~ ~ A
i ~
~'C ~'C O
C~7 ~'C 'C i O
~
i H:.
W
O
C7 ~ ~ i ~
N
y
M"j
~--\ -~y
~./
yy
`~• ~
fQ
d O ~
~ ~
/ O
b
r
~I
I~
H
Z
C
0
5b 15
MINUTES
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
December 12, 2007
FINAL
MEMBERS PRESENT: David Bourgeois, Craig Gustaveson, Margie Loomer, Matt Pacha, Phil
Reisetter, Jerry Raaz, John Watson, John Westefeld
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ryan O'Leary
STAFF PRESENT: Mike Moran, Terry Robinson, Terry Trueblood
GUESTS PRESENT: Dianna Harris
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
Moved by Gustaveson, seconded by Reisetter to extend the agreement as written through
June 13, 2009 with DogPAC relative to operation of the Thornberry Off-Leash Dog Park,
and continue the 90% /10% revenue sharing between DogPAC and the City. Unanimous.
Moved by Westefeld, seconded by Reisetter, to recommend adoption of the Recreation
Division fees and charges for FY09 and tentative proposals for FY10 and FY11 as
presented. Unanimous.
Moved by Gustaveson, seconded by Bourgeois, that the Commission support the initial
concept to accept donated parkland property from George and Christiane Knorr located at
Highway 218 and Dane Road pending final review of legal documents including the
proposed stipulations. Unanimous
OTHER FORMAL ACTION TAKEN
Moved by Reisetter, seconded by Bourgeois to approve the November 14, 2007 minutes as
written. Unanimous.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION:
None
CONSIDER RENEWAL OF AGREEMENT WITH DOGPAC RELATIVE TO
OPERATION OF THORNBERRY OFF-LEASH DOG PARK AND REVENUE
SHARING:
The current agreement expires December 31, 2007. Trueblood reviewed the agreement with
Commission members. The agreement as written states that 90% of the revenue generated from
the dog park fees goes to DogPAC. These fees are collected and provided to the City and
deposited with the City Finance Department. On a quarterly basis, the City issues a check to
DogPAC in an amount equal to 90% of the fees collected. This money is used by DogPAC to
Parks and Recreation Commission
December 12, 2007
Page 2 of 6
benefit the Thornberry Off-Leash Dog Park or development of other dog parks in the City. Raaz
asked for the total dollar amount collected for the past year. Trueblood reported that the City has
paid about $25,000 to DogPAC to date. Raaz requested that we require an annual audit from
DogPAC to show that the money is being spent specifically for dog park purposes.
Moved by Gustaveson, seconded by Reisetter to extend the agreement as written through
June 13, 2009 with DogPAC relative to the operation of Thornberry Off-Leash Dog Park,
and continue the 90% /10% revenue sharing between DogPAC and the City. Unanimous.
Moved by Raaz, seconded by Bourgeois, to require DogPAC to provide the Commission
with an annual financial report. Unanimous.
DISCUSSION ABOUT POSSIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING A SMALL DOG PARK IN
SCOTT PARK:
Trueblood reported that DogPAC is in agreement with staff recommendation that a small dog
park be established in Scott Park. The staff proposes that this be located in the southeast corner
of the park as this area is adjacent to farm land and also a considerable distance from the nearest
residential area. This would be an approximately three-acre fenced in area. Trueblood asked for
discussion only tonight. This item will be placed on the January, 2008 meeting agenda, and this
gives enough time to notify the neighborhood that this item will appear on the agenda. Westefeld
discussed parking concerns for Scott Park, stating that there seems to be different levels of
enforcement. Trueblood stated that there would be a need for increased signage. He will also
check to see why there is no parking allowed on the dam area of Scott Boulevard, as there is
sufficient space to do so.
CONSIDER PROPOSED RECREATION DIVISION FEES AND CHARGES:
Trueblood reviewed the proposed fees and charges for FY09 with the Commission. Of note are
increased fees for field rentals, swimming classes due to Red Cross fee increases, potters studio
cards, summer camp and adult cultural programs. Although there are not many increases, the
department is still able to meet the 40% guideline. Pacha asked Tammy Neumann if there is an
increase in Farmers Market Revenue. Neumann reported that due to the expanded size of the
market on Saturdays, that yes, there is an increase in revenue for this program.
Moved by Westefeld, seconded by Reisetter, to recommend adoption of the Recreation
Division fees and charges for FY09 and tentative proposals for FY10 and FY11 as
uresented. Unanimous.
BUDGET UPDATES AND DISCUSSION:
Trueblood presented items of interest included in the proposed operating budget to the
Commission. He also reviewed the CIP project priorities that were adopted by the Commission
at the November 14, 2007 meeting. He also reminded Commission that the funding years reflect
tentative recommendations of the staff CIP Committee, noting that due to some funding
Parks and Recreation Commission
December 12, 2007
Page 3 of 6
constraints, they will likely change prior to being submitted to the City Council. Some discussion
incurred regarding these projects. Trueblood mentioned one new project that may be added to
this list in the amount of $75,000. This project includes replacement of the roof and rafters on
the old park shop located in City Park, and rebuilding a retaining wall immediately south of the
building. This shop is currently divided in two parts -one part being used for equipment storage,
the other for public rental purposes. Raaz asked for an update on the Sand Lake Recreation Area
Development project and also asked for explanation of the multi-year funding process.
Trueblood explained that this project must be done in phases sue to funding constraints, and the
fact that all the funding is not in place as yet. Reisetter asked about the Recreation Center Roof,
thinking that this project had already been complete. Trueblood explained that it has not been
done as the City was waiting for the insurance company to settle. Trueblood will present this
priority list to City Council in January at a special work session.
Trueblood asked Robinson and Moran to talk about their operating budgets for FY09. Robinson
discussed the increase in temporary staff budget due to the increased need for summer/seasonal
help. He further explained that when the Union changed the timeline for seasonal employees
from nine to seven months it made it more difficult to hire staff. He also discussed the need for
the CBD/Forestry division to hire contracted workers to help with the increase in work load,
especially during the emergency weather situations that have occurred over the past year.
Moran discussed the affect of the increase in minimum wage on his budget, explaining that it not
only means an increase for those that are currently paid at that level, but it will mean an increase
across the board. This will cost approximately $50,000 for the remainder of this fiscal year and
$100,000 next fiscal year. Also affecting his budget are the costs for background checks which
are required for both temporary employees and volunteers. He also noted that due to recent
issues at the Recreation Center the department has added more cameras (nine total) to the Robert
A. Lee Community Recreation Center building and will be doing the same at the Mercer Park
Aquatic Center/Scanlon Gymnasium in the near future. He also mentioned that the lifeguard
chairs are due for replacement to meet necessary guidelines and that these will cost
approximately $9,000. Westefeld asked what kind of issues are occurring at the Recreation
Center. Moran reported that there has been an increase in the number of fights and thefts at both
facilities. These cameras will record and allow backup and copying onto DVD's for the police
department to review when necessary. Trueblood noted that the Library and Transit Departments
are also having problems with some of the same individuals.
CONSIDER RECOMMENDING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATED PARKLAND
PROPERTY FROM GEORGE AND CHRISTIANE KNORR:
Included in the Commission packets was a letter from George Knorr offering to donate 19.2
acres of land located between the new 218 Highway and Dane Road to the City with certain
guidelines to be followed. In summary these guidelines include that the land should be kept by
the City and made available to the people as a park and that it not be resold for profit or other
reasons. Knorr would like to create a "life estate" that allows him to continue the care of the
property as long as he is fit to do so. He is asking that the City maintain the prairie, shrubs, and
trees and that the City will inform him about planned improvements such as trails etc. Also that
Parks and Recreation Commission
December 12, 2007
Page 4 of 6
the City advise or assist him in stewardship of the land; that certain tax consequences be
explored separately, and that the park be named the "George and Christiane Knorr Park" or the
"Knorr Prairie Park." Raaz asked if there is a park deficit in this area of town. Trueblood said it
is not included on the N.O.S. district maps as it was only recently annexed. Raaz also asked
about access to the park. Trueblood stated that access will be via Dane Road and that there could
be a small parking area added. Raaz asked how binding these requirements are and if there is a
possibility of a trail being placed here. Trueblood stated that the intent is that these guidelines
would be followed forever and that yes, a trail can be added. This letter has been forwarded to
the City Attorney's office to be used as a basis for a legal document. Acceptance of the property
and stipulations will need to be approved by the City Council. Staff recommends acceptance.
Moved by Gustaveson, seconded by Bourgeois, that the Commission support the initial
concept to accept donated parkland property from George and Christiane Knorr located at
Highway 218 and Dane Road pending final review of legal documents including the
nronosed stipulations. Unanimous.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS:
Moved by Raaz, seconded by Reisetter to re-elect Matt Pacha as Chair and John Westefeld
as Vice-chair for 2008. Unanimous.
MASTER PLAN UPDATE:
Trueblood reported that Leisure Vision will be sending out a survey to approximately 2500
households after the first of the year. They hope to have results within six to eight weeks, with a
minimum of 500 respondents. Trueblood will put together a proposed schedule of the remainder
of the process and report back to the Commission in January.
COMMISSION TIME/SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
Gustaveson discussed the process that the Downtown Association has gone through over the past
two years getting holiday lights and decorations placed downtown. He thanked the City staff and
MidAmerican Energy for their help with this process.
CHAIR'S REPORT
Pacha expressed his thanks to staff for the food provided at tonight's meeting and wished
everyone a Merry Christmas.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Request for Cell Phone Tower Placement: Trueblood has recently been contacted by an Iowa
Wireless representative to discuss the possibility of placing a "monopole" cell tower in Willow
Creek Park. This representative says that he believes a 50-foot pole will be sufficient; however,
the engineering work has not been done yet. Trueblood told him that he would discuss their
Parks and Recreation Commission
December 12, 2007
Page 5 of 6
proposal at this meeting to find out from Commissioners if they are willing to consider it. Raaz
stated that he would like to keep the discussions at a minimum on this project as the recent
request took a lot of time to resolve. Gustaveson suggested that there be a subcommittee created
to discuss such issues. Trueblood reminded members that officially appointed subcommittees
are required to follow open meetings laws. It was determined that a subcommittee will be
appointed and meet and discuss this item and report back to the Commission.
Elks Club Trail Status: Due to recent bad weather, the walk that was scheduled with engineers
has been postponed. Trueblood will report at next meeting.
Boathouse: Plans and specifications are 75% completed. He will be meeting with the University
staff next week to discuss.
Sand Lake Recreation Area Development: Trueblood reported that the City has purchased an
additional 30 acres of land to add to this development.
Senior Center: The Acting City Manager asked Trueblood and staff to again meet with the
Director of the Senior Center and their staff to talk about the sharing of services between the two
departments and to look at new endeavors that the two departments could work on jointly. He
will keep the Commission apprised.
Recreation Program Supervisor Position: Trueblood and Moran will be conducting interviews
this week for the Program Supervisor opening due to Bill Blanchard's retirement. There is a
retirement open-house scheduled for Bill on Friday, December 28 from 1-4 pm in the Social Hall
of the Recreation Center. All Commissioners are invited.
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Bourgeois, seconded by Raaz to adjourn the meeting at 6:45 p.m. Unanimous
Parks and Recreation Commission
December 12, 2007
Page 6 of 6
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2007
NAME TERM
EXPIRES o
^"
~
N e
~
M o
'"
~
~ ~
~
~p ^~
~
[~
ao
pp ~
~
O~ °
o
.r o
~
~
N
..
David
Bour eois
1/1/11
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
Craig
Gustaveson
1/1/11
X
O/E
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Margaret
Loomer
1/1/08
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
Ryan
O'Lear
1/1/10
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O
Matt
Pacha
1/1/09
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Jerry
Raaz
1/1/08
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
Phil
Reisetter
1/1/09
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
John Watson
1/ 1/ 11
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
John
Westefeld
1/1/10
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
KEY: X =
0=
O/E _
NM =
LQ =
Present
Absent
Absent/Excused
No meeting
No meeting due to lack of quorum
Not a Member