Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-02-01 Bd Comm. minutes.% j) MINUTES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION JANUARY 5, 1983 12:00 P.M. CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Orelup, Walker, Maxwell I MEMBERS ABSENT: None — --- i STAFF PRESENT: Carroll i SUMMARY OF RELEVANT DISCUSSION: Old Business- The meeting was called to order at 12:00 p.m.. The Commission was informed that the City would not be appealing the decision of the court in the Evans case which specified that Evans be ireturned to the rank of Sergeant and negated the Commission's decision that Evans be reviewed by the Commission after 18 months as a Police Officer for reinstatement to the rank of Sergeant. The Commission discussed the petition forwarded by members of the Fire Department which asked that the Commission schedule promotional testing for Fire Lieutenant and Battalion Chief. Carroll stated that a letter and agenda for this meeting had been sent to the President of the Fire Union inviting interested Fire Department employees to this Commission meeting. The Commission requested that the minutes show that no Fire Department employees were in attendance at the meeting. Carroll explained that there had been a misunderstanding concerning the fee structure of the Fire Service Extension - actually they charge $100 per trip rather than $100 per test as had been understood. In the past tests for Lieutenant, Captain, and Battalion Chief had all been given on one day, thus saving $200 in fees; however, Carroll received comments from the test administrator concerning that system of administration, indicating that, especially for those that take two or three of the tests at one time, results were not always as good due to mental fatigue. Carroll stated that employees of the Fire Department are interested in, having standing lists for promotional positions at all times rather than letting the lists lapse, especially since the Chief generally makes short term or acting appointments from the current lists for a particular position. Carroll recommended that the written test for Lieutenant be scheduled as soon as the Commission will have time to also conduct the interviews for this position, but she felt that the test -for Battalion Chief be further evaluated to see whether it would actually be the best selection instrument for this position. The Battalion Chief test is more heavily weighted toward supervisory and administrative questions rather than technical questions, and perhaps an evaluation of this knowledge could be better obtained through an assessment center alone. IQ 2. i tdICAOEILtdED BY � 1. —DORM-MICR6LA9_ .� CEDAR RAPIDS DES'MOIRES MINUTES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION JANUARY 5, 1983 PAGE 2 The Commission discussed reports of employee dissatisfaction at the lack of Commissioner presence at tests and informal requests that the Commission spend some time getting to know more about the Police and Fire Departments and employees. Commissioners will attempt to pay more attention to both areas. The Commission discussed the effects of the type of testing we are now involved in which is more time consuming and sometimes conflicts with the unavoidable time commitments of the Commissioners' professions. The Commission also discussed reports of employee concerns that favoratism not be a factor in promotional decisions following the Commission's selection procedures and certification of lists. Carroll stated that although the Commission has no involvement in appointment of employees, the selection procedures proposed, including assessment centers, should yield better information about applicants than that previously available and will be a' major criteria in making appointment decisions. Entry Level Firefighter Testing: Carroll stated that a new list for the position of Firefighter was requested by the Fire Chief, the old first list having been exhausted, and the second list not valid because the first was not exhausted within a year, according to Civil Service code. The Commission agreed that the position be posted for three weeks, with the written test conducted Saturday, February 5, 1:00-5:00 p.m., Iowa City Recreation Center, and that agility test be given Sunday, February 6, from 8:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m. at the Iowa City Recreation Center. As previously, the written test will include.the MMPI administered by Dr. Jake Sines (pass -fail Category IV), and the IPMA Firefighter exam with a weight of 30 percent of total score. The agility test, purchased from APQTC, will total 40 percent of total score, and those applicants falling below the national norms established by APQTC will be eliminated for further consideration. The interview will comprise 30 percent of total score and will be conducted Saturday, March 5, starting at 8:30 a.m. and on the evenings of March 7 and 8 starting at 6:00 p.m., with the last interview beginning at 9:30 p.m. The Commission prefers to interview 25 applicants or less, depending on a natural break in the applicant scores. Carroll will relay the Commission's request that current Fire Department employees attend the interviews to assist the Commission. Fire Captain Testing; The Commission discussed the assessment center schedule for the Fire Captain position. All Commissioners will attend during the week of January 24 as their professional commitments permit. As requested by the consultant, two Fire technical experts - the Captain Fire Marshal and a Division Chief from the City of Davenport will be participating as assessors, as well as one member from the City staff. The Commission will meet to certify the Fire Captain list Saturday, February 5, at 10:00 a.m. ----- --- _..._ i 141CROFILMED BY 1" ""DORM -MIC Rd/L AB CEDAR RAPIDS DES 1401YES aa. J MINUTES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION JANUARY 5, 1983 PAGE 3 I Fire Lieutenant Testing: Carroll was requested to schedule the examination for the position of Fire Lieutenant as soon as the Fire Service Extension would be available and allowing for sufficient announcement time. (Test will be conducted Thursday, February 10 at 1:00 in the Central Fire Station All Purpose Room.) Dates of evening interviews of successful applicants will be scheduled at a later date. Police Captain Testin The assessment center for the position of Police Captain remains scheduled for the week of March 14. A meeting to evaluate educational efforts, past performance and community involvement and to certify a Captain list has been scheduled for Saturday, March 26 at 11:00 A.M. Police Sergeant Testing: The Commission discussed a written exam for the position of Police Sergeant which was developed by McCann Associates, and approved its use. The exam will be given on Friday, Marctr 11, the time and place to be announced. A mini assessment center for this position remains to be developed and will be given near the fourth week in March. An evaluation of educational efforts, past performance and community involvement will be conducted on the evening of Monday, April 11, with certification of the list conducted an the evening of April 12. The meeting was adjourned at 1:10 p.m. i MIC........-J OFILMED RY -� �..1'.. JOAM--MICR4/CAB"' 1 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I ia.. i CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION ACTIVITIES JANUARY 24-28 Assessment Center for Fire Captain - See schedule attached 8:30 a.m.-5:30 p.m. FEBRUARY 2 Application period for firefighter closes 7:30 Applicant orientation session - City Council Chambers FEBRUARY 5 Civil Service Commission meeting to certify 10:00 a.m. Fire Captain - Rec Center Room B* 1:00-5:00 Written test administered for Firefighter - Rec Center Social Hall FEBRUARY 6, Agility test administered for Firefighter - 8:00 a.m. Rec Center Gym FEBRUARY 10 Written test for Fire Lieutenant - Central 10:00 a.m. Central Fire Station - All Purpose Room MARCH 5 Firefighter interviews - Rec Center Room A* 8:00 a.m.-4:30 p.m. MARCH 7 Firefighter interviews - Library Room B* 8:00-10:00 P.M. MARCH 8 Firefighter interviews if needed - Library 6:00-10:00 Room B* MARCH 11 Police Sergeant written test - Rec Center 2:00-5:30 p.m. Social Hall MARCH 14-18 Police Captain assessment center - location to 8:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m. be scheduled - revised schedule will be sent MARCH 26 Police Captain - review of education, perfor- 11:00 a.m. mance, involvement - certification - Rec Center, Room A* MARCH 29-31 Police Sergeant mini assessment center - locations to be scheduled - revised schedule to be sent APRIL 11 Police Sergeant - review of education, perfor- 7:00 p.m. mance involvement (certification?) Legal Library* APRIL 12 Police Sergeant certification? - if needed - 7:00 p.m. Legal Library* *Commissioner presence required. 1 MICROFILMED BY -DORM -MIC R#L A: B-- - 1 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I0_Q 4 MINUTES OF THE IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT COMMISSION MEETING Iowa City Civic Center January 12, 1983 Members Present: Redick, George, Schmeiser, Tiffany I Members Absent: Saeugling I Staff Present: Zehr, Brown Guests Present: B. Neuzil Acting Chairman George called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. The minutes of the December 16, meeting were considered and commissioner Schmeiser moved to change-"--- -- the seventh paragraph to read as follows: "Commissioner Scheimeise indicated he had been asked about relocation of the NDB to a point somewhere northeast of the airport for better use as an approach to runway 24, but Zehr explained that placement on the field at the approach end of 35 will provide four instrument approaches instead of only one, and it was decided that Location would be more desireable. It was also noted that our request for an ILS/MALS approach for runway 24 has been indefinitely suspended with the FAA's increasing emphesis on Microwave Landing Systemafts)." The minutes were approved as amended. i Manager Zehr presented the bills for the month and explained them briefly. The bills were approved for payment as presented.' Zehr presented the finalized budget as recieved from the Finance Staff. It included the expanded service request for $20,000 for a used snow blower. It was noted the the budget hearing with Council saturday morning was changed from 9:00 to 7:45. All members present indicated that they would attend the meeting. T -hangar construction by the Airport Commission versus private construction was discussed at Length and it was decided that if the demand exists the Commission should build the hangars with GO bonds and that private building of hangars should only be codaidered as a last resort. Zehr was instructed to advertise the commisssios's intents and report back next month with the results of the hangar demand. Zehr reported that AGRI Services had paid a majority of it's rent due and that they wanted to negotiate a new lease for one half of the office space. The commission will consider the request under the following conditions: 1) the balance of the rent due is paid 2) a security deposit of $850 be established 3)First months rent paid in advance 4) Documentation of the AGRI grant be made available. Zehr and Brown were instructed to proceed under those guidelines. There was no Chairman's report or public input. Zehr reported he was drafting a letter to the FAA opposing the installation of the proposed TV tower 3 mile east of Williamsburg as a safety hazard to local VFR airtraffic and instrument landing at the Cedar Rapids Airport. The commission members discussed the hazards of the TV tower and will. also be sending letters to the FAA. A grant from the Aeronautics Division of the Iowa DOT is being secured for a recorder for the pilots briefing room in the terminal building to record AM Weather for pilots weather briefings. Zehr reported he had been asked to accept the position of Secretary/Treasurer for the Iowa Airport Executives Association. The commission members supported his appointment. The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m. 1*13 141CROFILMED BY '"---.--"JORM-MICRbLAB- LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES 1401RE5 j MINUTES HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION DECEMBER 20, 1982 7:30 P.M. IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY, ROOM B MEMBERS PRESENT: Barcelo, Watson, Jordison, Futrell, Johnson, Turner, Raupp, Gill MEMBERS ABSENT: Portman (EXCUSED) STAFF PRESENT: Williams, Helling, Behrman GUESTS PRESENT: Anne Scupham, Gerry Felton RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: None. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY MANAGER AND STAFF: None. SUMMARY OF RELEVANT DISCUSSION: 1. Meeting called to order by Chairperson Watson at 7:35 p.m. 2. The minutes of November 22, 1982, were amended as follows: Page 1 - Watson suggested that the feasibility of using the Senior Center for meetings by Iowa City Boards and Commissions be explored. Page 2 - Turner suggested that a table be placed in front of the Council Chambers to create a more informal atmosphere for an informal City Council meeting. Johnson moved and Jordison seconded that the minutes of November 22, 1982, be approved as amended. The motion carried unanimously. 3. Gerry Felton, a newly appointed member of the Commission, was introduced. Members of the public introduced themselves. Iva Hilleman, 411 S. Summit Street, criticized the Chairman of the Human Rights Commission for having allowed applause at the public hearing on the non-discrimination ordinance. Watson agreed that he should have attempted to discourage applause. 4. Complaints pending: a. E/S, 5-13-8002 and 5-19-8003. No activity. B. E/S, 6-9-8004. Gill reported that the team had not yet met but planned to meet shortly. 1 MICROFILMED BY L _l DORM --MIC Rf�L A B- - CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES f L 1a4 WWA F/ Human Rights Commission December 20, 1982 Page 2 .5. Cases in Legal: Three cases are in Legal. 6. Cases Open: Three cases have been opened. 7. Cases Closed: a. E/A&D, 5-6-8102 and 8102. Jordison stated that no probable cause had been found. 8. Educational Projects: a. Community Outreach Committee -- Committe Report. Raupp reported that the Committee had drafted a simple mailer, incorporating comments which had been received from Commission members. Raupp suggested that the mailer not be sent out until other prominant public outreach issues are settled. Raupp stated that both he and Johnson, the only members of the Community Outreach Committee, had reached a consensus not to mail the document out at this time but will continue to "fine tune it" and get it ready. Barcelo pointed out that such a document was needed for the public as it was difficult to give talks and not leave a brochure behind. Raupp explained that this was not meant to be a brochure but was a targeted document for the business community. Raupp expressed concern at the timing of sending a message to the business community regarding employment applications and discrimination during the period in which the non-discrimination ordinance was being reviewed. Watson asked when the mailer would be ready. Raupp asked when the Commission felt it would be a good time to resume this type of targeted campaign and suggested that it wait until after the ordinance is revised. Watson pointed out that the Commission had not suggested any substantial changes in the area of employment. Raupp stated that, with all the publicity the revisions to the non-discrimination ordinance were receiving, the community may be hostile about this document. Raupp stated that it was not a good time to be effecting that type of relationship with the business community. Futrell stated that she was willing to wait but commented that there was no way of knowing how long this process could go on. Futrell expressed concern of waiting too long but suggested that the Commission see the final draft of the mailer and reassess the situation within the next two months. Futrell stated she did not wish to wait until the following May to send out the mailer. Raupp emphasized that sending the mailer at this time might constitute reaching out into a relatively perturbed and hostile community and it would be better to wait. Turner stated that it would be a good time to mail out the document as it dealt with a relatively low-key issue. Johnson suggested that the Commission wait two months prior to mailing the mailer. Watson urged that the Committee proceed with a final draft which could be printed and the Commission could then decide when to mail it. Barcelo stated that she ia4 1 - i 141CROFILIIED BY ; -'JOR M""M IC REIL AB1 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I �� Human Rights Commission December 20, 1982 Page 3 was not afraid to mail out the mailer because of timing, stating that she did not sense the type of hostility to which Raupp referred. Gill moved that the Commitee proceed with the printing of the brochure. Jordison seconded the motion. Raupp stated that he saw no point with going ahead with the printing of the brochure when the Commission did not know the climate of the audience receiving the brochure; Raupp emphasized that he did not feel that now was the proper time for such a mailer. Gill stated that the intent of the motion was to go ahead with the printing as soon as possible. Jordison agreed. The motion carried unanimously. Watson asked that the Commission see the final draft of the mailer at the next meeting. Raupp stated that that would happen if possible. Watson asked what the barrier might be and Raupp stated that it was a question of having the time. Johnson indicated that the mock up of the mailer would be the earliest stage and the Committee was near that point now. Watson urged that the Committee get the mock up of the mailer to staff in time for the next meeting. Williams asked that she recieve it at least a week prior to the meeting. j b. Speaker's Bureau - Update list: i Williams explained what the Speaker Bureau was, stating that she had received everyone's preference for subjects to discuss except the new member's which she could receive next month after they had time to give the subject some thought. Barcelo reported that she had been invited to a meeting between the University of Iowa, Mary Neuhauser, and Neal Berlin. The meeting was held to discuss joint efforts which could be made by the City and the• University to help make the City more receptive and hospitable to minorities and non -Americans. Barcelo stated that, in light of socio- economic conditions there could be some social problems in the future and Iowa City was doing what they could do to ward off similar types of incidents (as in Ottumwa) from occurring in Iowa City. Williams stated that at this time they were attempting to get a feel from the minorities and foreigners in the community on how they perceive the community of Iowa City. Williams stated that an informal survey would be done and urged the Commission members to let her know if they would be interested in participating in such a survey. Old Business: a. Ordinance revisions - discussion of. Watson stated that he would like to have a general discussion of the public hearing and of the written comments received by the Commission. Watson further stated that he had some written changes to propose, some of them technical, but would first like to hear comments from the Commission. Watson stated that the only negative comment received concerning the hearing had been the applause issue. la�f m cRorILIIED By 11_ "DORM-MICR46LA13' CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES i I I Human Rights Commission December 20, 1982 Page 4 Johnson stated that he thought the Commission was a long way from submitting a final document to the City Council. Watson urged that the Commission prepare suggestions for further revisions, stating that they had worked hard to go to the public hearing with a well- prepared set of documents and the same should be done for the City Council. Watson agreed with Johnson, stating that the Commission needed to have its language, not the intent, of the revisions checked by the legal staff. Watson reported that he had received a letter from the Chair of the Housing Commission'asking them to table the discussion on the revisions in the area of' housing until the Human Rights Commission met with them. Johnson stated that, if this Commission is truly concerned about human rights, then they must be more concerned than just getting the revisions to the City Council. Johnson urged that the Commissioners take the time to have their terminology checked and to also meet with the Housing Commission. i Watson pointed out that, one primary role of the Commission, is its concilatory role and potential respondents are property owners and landlords, therefore the Commission must maintain the image that it works fairly and objectively when revising the ordinance or they won't be effective with the public. Jordison agreed that some of the terminology in the revisions could be improved. Johnson urged that the legal staff review the terminology to make sure the revisions are not ambiguous. Futrell disagreed, stating that while it is possible the Commission may have to take more time to digest the input from the public hearing and to meet with the Housing Commission, the Commission is a voluntary Commission, composed of laypeople to safeguard parts of the community and not bound to produce perfectly worded documents for the City Council to act on. Futrell stated that their responsibility was to give City Council direction and let the City Council assess the legal details. Futrell added that she did not feel the burden of responsibility was on the Human Rights Commission to make sure all provisions were perfectly legal. Futrell expressed the concern that legal cannot interpret a document until it had received some type of policy direction from the City Council. Futrell stated she was willing to do more work on the revisions, but did not want the Commission to get into the trap of "legal perfect". language. Johnson stated that he understood that the lawmaking body was the City Council but perhaps a work session with someone from the legal staff would aid the Commission members in making their final revisions. Helling stated that he could arrange for Dave Brown to meet with the Commission in such a work session. Watson stated that the Commission could submit a final draft with changes and then meet with Dave Brown. Johnson suggested that Futrell meet with Brown to discuss the intent and to qet proper wording. Futrell again stated that she was not sure it was appropriate for the legislative committee to do that work. Johnson pointed out that the phrase "the presence and absence of dependents" had meant minors to him, but he now knew that that i included the elderly. Futrell stated that that was the intent of the revision. lQV IAICROEILWED BY L` JORM MIC ROLAB` j '� I+ CEDAR RAPIDS DES MO18ES r j Human Rights Commission December 20, 1982 Page 5 Raupp asked the meaning of City Human Rights Commission it was missing one word - "dreadful" report. the memo dated December 16 from the Iowa to the legal staff. Watson stated that "draft." Raupp stated that it was a Watson stated that the Commission was now trying to come up with revisions based on the input received from the public hearing, and would meet with the Housing Commission prior to the next meeting, and with Dave Brown to review terminology. At the January meeting, the Commission would make further changes and then send the final draft to the City Council. Futrell agreed with everything Watson said except the part about legal. Futrell stated that she still felt it was the responsibility of the City Council to decide whether or not they wanted to go along with the intent of the revisions. Futrell stated that she had assumed all along that the City Council would send the revisions to the legal staff. Helling pointed out that usually, when a Board or Commission makes a recommendation to revise an ordinance, it is usually received in the form in which it is recommended for passage, having already been reviewed by the legal staff. Raupp asked for- a sense of direction, stating that he had heard several views ranging from wonderful to terrible concerning the revisions at the public hearing. Raupp asked if the Commission was proceeding to meet with housing and the legal staff to improve the probability of passing the revisions or were they going into thse meetings with an open mind. Johnson stated that his intent was to make more clear what the Commission was voting on and expressed the preference for an unedited version of the revisions. Johnson stated that at some point, the Commission could still debate the merits of intent prior to going to the City Council. Raupp stated that he had come away from the public hearing thinking that the Commission had not gone into some of the issues raised. Raupp stated that the dialogue concerning children in apartment houses had pursuaded him that this was a new kind of issue, stating that the Commission was using terms that did not have a clear meaning. Raupp stated that the word dependent was used but meant children; sexual orientation was used and meant homosexuals. Raupp stated that the Commission should discuss whether they think the balance of rights needs to be corrected. Raupp stated that there had been evidence articulated to say that this document (the revisions) should never see the light of day. Raupp urged that the Commission to discuss the substantive issues prior to sending any revisions to the City Council. Gill stated she had received a different impression. Gill stated she had come away from the public hearing more strongly in favor of approving these revisions, stating that she felt most of the substantive issues had already been discussed. Barcelo agreed with Gill. Barcelo stated that the Commission has concentrated on some areas more than others. Both sides at the public hearing had been articulate and new perspectives had been gained, particularly in the area of children in apartments. i RICROFILME0 9Y I- -"DORM"MICR6LAB- -' 1 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I I � taV f J L- Human Rights Commission December 20, 1982 Page 6 Watson stated that he had reservations about two of the changes, asking what the Commission wished to do with any proposed revisions discussed at this meeting. Johnson stated that the Commission had met and voted to hold the public hearing on the proposed ordinance and he seemed to hear the consensus to further refine the ordinance, either through the efforts of legal staff or Commission members. Watson suggested that the members discuss their changes and the Commission as a body could then decide. Johnson stated that it would be more prudent to still work through the structure of the legislative committee. Johnson stated that suggestions raised tonight should be given to the legislative committee for them to draft proposed changes, and then reviewed by the Commission at a later meeting. Gill stated that that would be a good suggestion especially as the Commission would meet with the Housing Commission. Futrell stated that tonight's proposals could be heard and suggested that the legislative committee meet with the Housing Commission rather than the entire body of the Commission. Watson stated that, while the Housing Commission had invited the entire Human Rights Commission, he liked the idea of the legislative committee meeting with the Housing Commission. Johnson stated that, in fairness to the public, any action discussed tonight simply reflects the fact that the Commission listened to their comments at the public hearing. Watson referred to the yellow sheet distributed at the public hearing: Under "definition of age," - Watson stated that he thought the revisions wanted to define an adult. Raupp agreed there was a problem with the definition of age. Watson explained that if someone 17 files a complaint on the issue of age they would not be covered by the ordinance unless they were considered an adult. However, a 17 year old Black alleging discrimination in the area of employment could file on the basis of employment discrimination. Watson stated that the definition for disability in housing differed from the definition used under the area of disability. Futrell stated that the housing definition of disability was concerned with the physical structure of the facilities while the definition of disability used in the revision was broader. Johnson supported the notion to make the City ordinance conform to the State and Federal definition unless there was a reason for strengthening it. Raupp pointed out that both definitions were used by the Federal government. Regarding the issue of the "bona fide clause in the area of employment": Watson stated that this inclusion of the bona fide clause had been brought to their attention by Bob Schneider at the public hearing. If left out, the law would not compel the employment of unqualified handicapped persons; if left in, it might continue the stereotype of a disabled person. Schneider had argued that such a special section was unnecessary. Watson had explained that the inclusion of the bona fide clause would make this area consistent with state law. Gill stated that she agred with Schneider's comments, stating that this negative type of wording focuses on the disability. Watson stated that it did give the employer a loophole and the issue should be further studied. j;� i MICROFILMED BY �- -JORM MICRbLAO'- -' CEDAR RAPIDS • DES M0I4ES f I iaI/ 1 �, r V1 Human Rights Commission December 20, 1982 Page 7 Watson stated that the Commission had received no comments on the change in definition of sexual orientation. Raupp stated that such language was "double speak"; the Commission meant homosexuality. Jordison stated that sexual orientation is not just homosexuality. Watson pointed out that maybe some of the reasons the Commission did not have the time to discuss the issue of dependents, etc. was because it spent so much time discussing sexual orientation. Watson stated that a great deal of comments had been received (both pros and cons) on the issue of marital status, especially its definition. Watson suggested that the Commission delete the section they added "this also includes the presence or absence of dependents." Watson argued there were four reasons not to include children in this definition: 1) The lifestyle argument; infringement on the rights of peace and quiet. (In the case of children whose lifestyles are not containable, children directly conflict with the lifestyle of people who have a preference for quiet. Unlike noisy neighbors who can be stopped by the police, children cannot be.) 2) the issue of safety: children can place unreasonable hardship in terms of insurance; and 3) the inappropriateness of construction and the lack of play facilities: this was more of an economic argument, as there were parks in the City. 4) the damage and wear and tear argument: Watson stated that he did not fully support this argument as unreasonable damage was more like the type caused by drunken students. Watson stated that the lifestyle argument and the issue of safety convinced him that this was not a minor change. Children do not have equal rights nor equal responsibilities, and they do outgrow childhood, this is not a permanent condition. Jordison agreed with Watson that the definition of marital status should not include dependency and that should be in a separate section. Turner agreed that the issue of dependency should be in a separate section. Raupp moved that the last sentence be deleted from marital status. Watson pointed out that the Commission had already decided to send all suggestions to the Committee. The motion failed for lack of a second. Gill stated that she did not support the lifestyle argument. On the basis of civil rights in general, that type of argument could be used to discriminate against all. Gill stated that the safety argument could also be used against disability. Turner stated that there were several speakers at the public hearing asking for help in this area and agreed that some section dealing with the issue of dependents should be included. Turner stated that she did not think that it belonged with marital status and the word dependent needed to be further defined. Johnson stated that he did not feel that the presence or absence of dependents was an area the Commission should include in its proposed revisions. With regard to the remaining part of the definition of marital status, Johnson stated that he has not seen a preponderance of evidence that discrimination exists due to one's being married, single, divorced or separated. i MICROFILMED BY 1' -JORM -MICR6LA13 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOMES i laq J Human Rights Commission December 20, 1982 Page 8 Watson stated that the Commission had received a letter from a mother renting for 13 years who had never had a problem renting while married. Now that she is a single parent, she is having difficulty renting. Watson argued that the function of singleness, and not dependence, had affected this woman's ability to find housing. Johnson argued that the definition of marital status included everybody if the section discussing dependents was deleted. Turner stated that the Commission often forgot that there were sometimes a good, valid reason why a child could not live in a certain place. Turner reminded the members that no one is ever obligated to accept a member of a protected class. Watson stated that it was his understanding that including this section in housing was to prohibit landlords from advertising "for singles only" or for "marrieds only". Turner stated that this tended to confuse the issue, pointing out that a landlord can refuse people on other grounds. Johnson again pointed out that it was difficult for him to support the change to the ordinance that has "the presence or absence of dependents" in the definition of marital status.However, once that was deleted, there was not much left to say. Futrell stated that she was still hearing about problems in that area but felt it was a mistake to put both marital status and dependents together. Futrell stated that the members needed to weigh which part of the community needed protection in the area of housing and children. Futrell stated that she would still like to see the revisions as stood in that section sent to the City Council for more discussion. Jordison agreed. Williams stated that, in the last two years, the City had received 11 complaints regarding marital status; 8 on the basis of children. Watson stated that it was a decisive issue as people who feel they want to have a lifestyle without children are strongly against including children as a protected class under housing. Watson stated that, in the area of employment, no comments had been received except with regard to the new section, D7. In the area of housing, the most negative comments had been the addition of children. Watson suggested that the Commission redefine the term "source of income", stating that it would be better to use the term "public assistance source of income" and to add a definition "the income and support derived from any federal, state or local agency...". Watson pointed out that the way it was currently phrased protects criminals,' etc. It was not the intent of the civil rights law to protect criminals. Johnson urged that the Commission opt for specificity in a protected class rather than the use of generalities. Watson stated that much comment both pro and con had been received in this area, those in support of including "source of income" assumed it meant public assistance. Jordison clarified an early comment, stating that she did not feel that marital status needed to be separated from dependents. In the area of credit, Watson stated that a few letters had been received and specific suggestions made. Watson stated that the phrase "objective determination" meant something legally which the Commission may not have intended. Scupham suggested that the term 1 i 141 CROS IE14E0 BY i 1. -JORM-MICR46LAB 1 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES HOMES ►a1/ J Human Rights Commission December 20, 1982 Page 9 "fair and reasonable" be used rather than "objective determination", as that meant a specific set of factors. Raupp asked how the terms "fair and reasonable" could be used in the determination of one's credit worthiness. Raupp asked if there was anything to which the legal department or an investigator could refer. Williams stated that she did not know. Watson stated that case law in this area would probably be developing as the mentally disabled is a protected class in the area of credit under other codes. Johnson stated that he believed there were two types of mentally disabled persons; those who should be denied credit and those who should not. Johnson urged .that the committee work with legal to define the differences between those two. In the area of housing, Watson stated that people expressed the fear that they would have to rent to anyone regardless of anything. Watson pointed out that this section did not restrict the right to set a fair and reasonable criteria regarding the income, damage deposit, the number of persons, etc. Watson stated that he had drafted a letter, refereed to by Raupp as "dreadful" as a response to the memo from the Legal Department regarding the inclusion of mental disability. Watson stated that the City Attorney's opinion regarding language to protect people with mental disabilities in the area of credit have been an opinion of why the Commission shouldn't include it. Watson stated that the City Attorney had written the opinion without an essential piece of information. Johnson urged that this letter not be mailed as he hoped these issues would come out in the work sessions with the legal staff. Johnson stated that he preferred to have the legislative committee sit down with the legal staff. Watson stated that his concern was that this legal opinion would be sent to the City Council and be used against the passage of these revisions. Johnson argued that the letter would only invoke a less than desirable result. Raupp stated that it was an exercise in ventilation, with a variety of misspellings and the use of poor grammar. Raupp stated that the assertion that certain essential information was not available to the City Attorney is inappropriate. Johnson stated that he assumed that the legal staff will make every attempt to draft the intent of the Commission. Raupp stated that he opposed the document outlining the proposed changes to the ordinance in its entirety. Futrell stated that the legislative committee will meet in early Jauary with notes from this discussion, material received from the public, and public hearing notes, and will come up with its best understanding of desired revisions for discussion at the next Commission hearing. Futrell clarified the fact that no final changes would be made prior to the Housing Commission meeting. l_ i MICROFILMED BY �. 1-JORMMICR#LJABCED AR RAPIDS - DES Mi f cal/ t J Human Rights Commission December 20, 1982 Page 10 b. Civic Center Handicapped Accessibility Update - Johnson moved and Jordison seconded that this discussion be tabled as it had just been received. The motion carried unanimously. C. Civic Organization Committee Update - Raupp stated that this committee had met and a replacement for Jordison was being requested as her term had expired. Raupp suggested that a female be appointed to the committee. Johnson stated that the chair would exercise its prerogative and make an appointment after January 1. 10. a. Form letters to Respondents and Complainants - Discussion of: Johnson moved and Raupp seconded that this discussion be tabled and placed first on the agenda on the next meeting. The motion carried unanimously. 11. Staff Report: The staff report was reviewed. 12. Next commission meeting: January 24, 1983 Public Library Room B Agenda setting: January 16, 1983 13. The meeting adjourned at 9:47 P.M. Taken by: Sara Behrman I i j MINUTES IOWA CITY RIVERFRONT COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 1983 IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER - LAW LIBRARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Lewis, Oehmke, Rausch, Boutelle, Horton, Willis MEMBERS ABSENT: Sokol, Fountain, Cleland i STAFF PRESENT: Moen, Lundell, Schmadeke GUESTS PRESENT: Gillies, Monson SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Lewis at 7:30 p.m. The Riverfront Commission members, staff personnel and guests introduced i 'themselves. The minutes of November 17, 1982, were reviewed. Horton indicated his name was omitted from the list of members either present or absent and he noted it should have been listed with those members absent. Moved by Horton and seconded by Oehmke to approve the minutes as corrected. The motion was carried unanimously. Discussion of Proposed Transit Building and the Salt Pile Relocation John Lundell, JCCOG Transportation Planner, Chuck Schmadeke, Public Works Director, and Kevin Monson, Transit Facility Project Architect, were present to describe the proposed transit garage and the site plan for accessory structures located in the City maintenance yard. Lundell described the process used to select the site for the transit garage and indicated that the maintenance yard, located on the corner of Highways 218 and 6 was regarded most suitable over five other potential sites that were considered. Once the site was selected, Lundell indicated that it was considered advisable to locate the new building in proximity to existing service buildings on the site. Monson reviewed the site plan with the Commission and described the needs and requirements of the transit structure. He indicated that it was necessary to permit the buses to circulate around the entire structure. This constraint along with existing circulation requirements, the location of the truckwash and the location of the sanitary sewer dictated the location of the proposed transit facility. He also indicated that consideration was given not to encroach onto Sturgis Ferry Park property. In regard to the concern expressed for the vista from the park to the Johnson County Courthouse, Monson explained that the proposed structure would be approximately 100 feet lower than the Courthouse tower and that the tree line alone was higher than the structure. Monson also indicated k lag � 1 i 141CROFILBYEI i JOR M��-M L CEDAR RAPIDS f MINUTES IOWA CITY RIVERFRONT COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 1983 PAGE 2 that due to the success of the test piles driven, the site selected appears suitable. Schmadeke described the portion of the site plan concerning the location of the salt bin and accessory storage structures. He pointed out that these structures have been relocated west of their original location on the plan to accommodate the Riverfront Commission's objective to maintain ia 100 foot vegetative buffer between the Iowa River and any development. He showed that trees would be planted along the southern and a portion of the western edges of the storage area in order to screen the area from the park. The southern and western borders of the area would also be fenced. Schmadeke indicated that the proposed location for the storage area was selected because of the desire to keep the salt bin out of the south and I west views from the transit building. Boutelle indicated that it was advisable not to add to the dismal appearance of the storage yard and the view from Highway 218. It was described that the .new facility will be equipped with an oil reclamation system to remove oil from any solution entering the sanitary sewer. Because no vehicles are expected to be stored or maintained outside the structure, there should be no impact on the storm sewer which drains into the river. Moen pointed out that the corner edges of the asphalt surface between the Iowa River and the transit building have been rounded to achieve a larger vegetative buffer. Lewis inquired whether the asphalt surface would be curbed and Schmadeke responded that it would not be in order to maintain a sheet draining system on that surface. It was recommended that additional vegetation beyond the asphalt may be worthwhile to assist in cleansing the runoff from the asphalt surface. In response to the question, Schmadeke indicated he would have no objection to a path along the River, behind the storage yard and transit facility. Monson pointed out that construction on the transit facility is scheduled for April, 1983, and Schmadeke indicated that if the City Council approves the Public Works Department's CIP regarding a covered salt storage facility, funds would be available after July 1, 1983. Willis moved and Boutelle seconded that the site plan, as submitted, is not inconsistent with the policies of the Iowa City Riverfront Commission and be approved. The motion passed unanimously. Oehmke moved and Rausch seconded that consideration be given to planting screening materials along the river bank between the accessory storage structures and the Iowa River. Schmadeke conferred with Gillies and indicated that the Public Works Department would cooperate with Project GREEN in determining suitable plant materials for that area. The motion passed unanimously. i 14ILROFIE14Eo BY I 1 JOR M—'MICR L4[i- % CEDAR RAPIDS • DES'MOVIES ,r I ia5 J J i MINUTES IOWA CITY RIVERFRONT COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 1983 PAGE 3 Status of the Model Conservation Easement Moen pointed out that the Model Conservation Easement has been reviewed by the current staff of the City Legal Department and approved by the staff in December. Effort now is being made to get the model easement on the City Council Agenda for Council approval. Boutelle stated that the question must be resolved as to how the Riverfront Commission will get other jurisdictions to participate. Boutelle suggested and the Commission agreed that the model Conservation Easement be submitted to the Johnson County Council of Governments for review. Once the Riverfront Commission has the endorsement of the City Council, it was recommended that other agencies become informed. If a brochure is designed to inform landowners of conservation easements, it would be valuable to list public and private agencies which endorse the concept. Status of the River Bank Trail at Napoleon Park Moen read the December 15, 1982, Parks and Recreation Commission minutes regarding Napoleon Park. Willis elaborated on those minutes indicating that the Parks Department expressly will not commit funds to that project. That department, however, specified that Parks and Recreation equipment could be utilized once the plans for the trail are to be executed but project initiation and execution are to come from the Riverfront Commission. Willis commented that concerns he recalled hearing at the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting included the mosquito problem along the river, the private property consideration, cost considerations and the question of maintenance. Boutelle remarked that with encouragement, several organizations may be interested in participating in this "self-help" type of project. She noted that would be a good indicator of the public's interest in a nature trail in Napoleon Park. Lewis encouraged the Commission members to think about groups or agencies that may be interested. Willis commented' that interbody dialogue may be improved if the Commission had some cost figures in mind. It was recommended that Dennis Showalter, Parks Department Director, be invited to the February meeting to discuss the trail and estimated costs. Discussion of the River Corridor Overlay Zone (ORC) Moen explained that the proposed zoning ordinance, of which the River Corridor Overlay Zone (ORC) is an element, is scheduled to be presented for Council approval sometime during the summer -fall period. By the March, 1983 meeting, the Riverfront Commission should be prepared to make a recommendation to the Council regarding this element of the proposed zoning ordinance. las i I' L 7 i 141CROFILMED BY l "'JO RIVI--MIC ROL40" ' I CEDAR RAPIDS DES 14018[5lid I i c -- MINUTES IOWA CITY RIVERFRONT COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 1983 PAGE 4 Moen discussed the ramifications of the Special Provision section (page 4) of the River Corridor Overlay Zone noting that as an incentive to maintain the portion of a residentially zoned parcel of land, located in the River Corridor Overlay Zone, undeveloped, the owner/developer would be permitted to develop the remainder of the parcel according to the broader Planned Development Housing Overlay Zone (OPOH) regulations without following the usual course of applying for a change in zoning. This element would, in effect, eliminate the concept of "due process." Horton commented, however, that the site plan must be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission and only if the plan would meet the OPOH requirements would the plan be approved. Some protection, then, is automatically afforded. Lewis recommended that each Commissioner become acquainted with the elements of the River Corridor Overlay Zone and be prepared to discuss it in more detail in February. Capital Improvement Program (FY84-88) Copies of the Rocky Shore Bikeway CIP submitted by the Public Works Department and copies of the River Corridor Buffer and Trail System CIP as presented by the Department of Planning and Program Development were distributed to the Commission members. Moen confirmed that the Public Works Department had relied upon the specifications for the Rocky Shore Drive Bikeway Project as prepared by Shive-Hattery and Associates. Commission members were gratified to know of the commitment made by the Public Works Department to this project and pleased that the CIP reflects that the project is to be funded during the next fiscal year. Moen reviewed the River Corridor Buffer and Trail System CIP with the Commission. Horton moved and Oehmke seconded to approve the River Corridor Buffer and Trail System Capital Improvement Program as submitted. The motion passed unanimously. Public Discussion Moen noted that the City has responded to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' concern regarding the removal of natural vegetation along the Coralville Reservoir which affects erosion control and creates the illusion of private property. Copies of the letter from Mayor Neuhauser to Colonel B. Slofer were distributed to the Commission members. Moen indicated that Peg McElroy of the Mayor's Youth Program contacted her to inform her of funds that may be available to hire students to work on conservation related projects. If the grant is approved, funds would be used to hire 18 students to work for a seven week period from June 13 through the end of July. Funds may also be utilized to offset the cost of the services of supervisors directing the students. Moen was directed by the Commission to notify McElroy that, although the Commission hasn't identified a specific project, the Commission would be interested in participating in the program. 17.5 141CRor ILMED BY 1 1 L J` —NORM MICR MINES CEDAR RAPIDS � DES MINES J MINUTES IOWA CITY RIVERFRONT COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 1983 PAGE 5 Moen read a letter from Dan Cleland, a Riverfront Commission member, recommending that if the. Commission selects not to meet the first Wednesday of the succeeding month, that an alternate date be selected at the close of the preceding month's meeting. He noted that often a week's notice of the meeting date is not sufficient. The Commission concurred with this recommendation and further instructed Moen to notify Commissioners not present at a meeting as to the date of the next scheduled meeting. The next meeting of the Riverfront Commission will be held on February 2, 1983.• Meeting adjourned 9:20 p.m. Minutes submitted by Monica Moen. MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 1982 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Horton, Jordan, Seward, Jakobson, Baker, Scott MEMBERS ABSENT: Blank STAFF PRESENT: Franklin, Knight, Boyle, Boothroy, Behrman RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: 1. Z-8112. That the application submitted by Robert Wolf for the annexation and rezoning from County CH to RMH or RIB of approximately 37.5 acres east of Scott Boulevard be denied. 2. Z-8221. That the application submitted by Holly Properties/Grand ries for the rezoning of certain property located at 655 Highway 6 ,Bypass East and known as Fleetway Stores from M1 to C2 be approved. 3. 5-8223. That the application submitted by Tom Wegman for approval of the prelim nary plat of Prairie View Estates, Part One, located north of I-80 and east of Prairie du Chien Road be approved subject to the following: 1) waiver of the 60 foot right-of-way width on Kyle Drive subject to a variance being granted by Johnson County Board of Adjustment, 2) waiver of the Rural Design Standards rural road cross-section to permit a six inch stone base and chipseal surface, and 3) subject to final approval by the Engineering Division of the preliminary stormwater management calculations. 4. 5-8225. That the application submitted by Moreland, Apel, Haeseneyer, and RTTTe� for the approval of a preliminary and final LSRO, Iowa -Illinois Manor, located at 505 Burlington Street be approved; the Planning & Zoning Commission recommends that the City Council waive the requirement regarding contours under the powers granted in Section 27-59 of the Municipal Code. 5. The Planning & Zoning Commission recommends that the City Council recommend to the City/County Urban Fringe Committee that the proposed rezoning of certain property on the west side of Dubuque Street and just north of the city limits from C1 to C2 is inappropriate for that property and that the City support the City/County Urban Fringe Committee discussion of potential downzoning of that property. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Seward called the meeting to order. The minutes of December 2, 1982, were reviewed and Franklin suggested that the following change be inserted on page two, fourth paragraph: ."According to the DEQ, there was insufficient water pressure to accommodate lines and fire hydrants." Horton moved and Jordan seconded that the minutes of December 2, 1982, be approved as amended and that the minutes of November 4, 1982, be approved as circulated. The motion carried unanimously. MICROFILMED BY 1 _DORM---MICRbLA13 1 CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOINES 1 a15Q.* J PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 1982 PAGE 2 There was no public discussion of any item not included on the agenda. ZONING ITEMS: Z-8112. Public discussion of an application submitted by Robert Wolf for the annexation and rezoning from County CH to RMH or R1B of approximately 37.5 acres east of Scott Boulevard (deferred from June 17, 1982). Franklin explained that the request from Bob Wolf for annexation and rezoning of property east of Scott Boulevard was deferred at a June meeting to December. There had been no changes in the circumstances involving this application. The Comprehensive Plan Update recommends no annexation in the area until the sewer issues are resolved and until the City/County Urban Fringe Committee has agreed upon a development policy for the area. Since neither of these issues have been resolved, the staff recommendation for denial of the application remains unchanged. Franklin stated that the applicant has again requested a deferral for six months or indefinitely. Seward stated that the Commission could either defer until a time as yet unspecified or take action at this time. Jakobson stated that she assumed the applicant wished deferral of this item until such time as the City/County Urban Fringe Committee developed a policy recommendation. Jakobson expressed reluctance to further defer this item. Jakobson moved that this item be approved and stated that she would vote against this motion. Horton seconded the motion. j Scott asked if there had been any indication from the applicant as to why he wished' this item be deferred again. Franklin stated that perhaps the applicant anticipated a solution to the sewer problem. Scott stated that, if the motion was defeated, the applicant could always refile. Seward wondered if he could receive a refund. Franklin stated that refunds were no longer given. Knight stated that the applicant could request a waiver of the fee from the City Council. Seward questioned whether there was any advantage to tabling this item to give the applicant notice that they would be taking action. Knight indicated that the Commission had been clear at its informal meeting that action would be taken tonight. Motion failed 0-6. Jakobson moved that this application be denied. Horton seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Z-8221. Public discussion of an application submitted by Holly Properties/ Grand Properties for the rezoning of certain property located at 655 Highway 6 Bypass East and known as Fleetway Stores from M1 to C2; 45 -day limitation period: 01/05/83. Knight reviewed the staff report, stating that the applicant is requesting a rezoning from M1 to C2 to reflect the commercial use of the property. The Comprehensive Plan currently has a land use designation of "land consumptive" commercial for this property with the land directly to the east being designated as general commercial. The draft Comprehensive Plan Update proposes that this entire area be placed in the general commercial category. It appears that the site in question can be rezoned to C2 without requiring the Plan to be amended or the Update adopted prior to such action. This is true because the Comprehensive Plan has never been interpreted to be site specific. A second question MICROFILMED BY "DORMMIC R46L A13 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES !d01NE5 iasou J PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 1982 PAGE 3 regarding the proposed rezoning concerns its potential impact on surrounding land uses. Because the majority of land uses in the area are of a commercial nature, and since adjoining land is zoned C2, it appears that the proposed rezoning would create no negative impacts on the surrounding landowners. Further, the current use of this site is commercial in nature and therefore the rezoning acts only to recognize the existing use and will not result in any drastic change. Therefore, the staff recommends that the rezoning from M1 to C2 be approved. There was no public discussion on this item. Horton moved that the Commission recommend approval of this item. Jordan seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Jakobson stated that she was always reluctant to vote on a rezoning at the first meeting at which it was discussed, preferring to have at least two meetings. i 2-8222. Public discussion of an application submitted by Dorothy M. Maher for j the rezoning of certain property located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Gilbert and Burlington Streets from C2 to CBS; 45 -day limitation period: 01/12/83. Knight reviewed the staff report, stating that the applicants are requesting a rezoning from C2 to CBS to permit a multi -family residential use of the property. While multi -family residential uses are permitted in a C2 zone, CBS zoning provides for a greater density of development. The current Comprehensive Plan designation for the site is mixed use residential/ commercial. This designation is also proposed in the Comprehensive Plan Update which is currently under review. A rezoning to CBS would, therefore, be compatible with the Comprehensive Plan's recommended land use. Further, the rezoning acts to promote the Plan's objective of providing high density housing close to the Central Business District. The proposed rezoning is also appropriate because of the location' of the site, the zoning, and use of surrounding land. Staff recommends that the rezoning from C2 to CBS be approved. There was no public discussion. Horton asked how many buildings were on the parcel and was told there were four. Jakobson moved that this item be deferred until the next regular formal meeting on January 6, 1983. Horton seconded the motion. Baker asked if there was any reason why the Commission should not defer this item. Seward explained that, as s a matter of policy, the Commission likes the opportunity for public discusion on two occasions and only extraordinary circumstances would occasion adherence to that policy. non - The motion carried unanimously. Z-8223. Public discussion of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for the rezoning of certain property from C2 to CBS located immediately south of property owned by Dorothy M. Maher under consideration for rezoning. Knight reviewed the staff report, stating that the City of Iowa City is proposing to rezone certain property, which they own and currently use for S torage of pipes, from C2 to CBS. The purpose of the proposed rezoning is to permit the sale of this land for redevelopment as multi -family residential la5a 1. I r 111CROF1 LIdED DY ; 1. 'JORM-MICR46LA13 % CEDAR RAPIDS • DES M019ES r J PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 1982 PAGE 4 housing. Development in this manner is consistent both with the surrounding use of the land and with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for this area is mixed use residential/commercial. The rezoning conforms with this recommendation. Staff recommends that the rezoning be approved. There was no public discussion. Scott moved that this item be deferred until January 6, 1983. Baker seconded the motion. i Baker stated that he found the proposal very attractive and hoped to see it approved unanimously at the next meeting. Jakobson agreed that there was a possibility of new housing and that the City would get income from this + proposal. Baker stated that he was resigned to the possibility of more apartments and found the fact that the City would receive income attractive, as it was exactly what the City should be.doing. The motion carried unanimously. `i SUBDIVISION ITEMS: S-8223. Public discussion of an application submitted by Tom Wegman for approval of the preliminary plat of Prairie View Estates, Part 1, located north of I-80 and east of Prairie du Chien Road; 45 -day limitation period: 12/30/82; 60 -day limitation period: 01/14/83. Knight reviewed his memo, stating that a revised preliminary plat submitted by the applicant corrected the majority of deficiencies and discrepancies noted in the staff report dated December 2, 1982, and dealt with the staff's concerns regarding the proposed emergency access to Prairie du Chien Road at the northwest corner of the tract. The applicants are requesting that the 50' right-of-way be approved for the western portion of Kyle Drive as shown on the plat. The applicant has applied to the Johnson County Zoning Board of Adjustment for a variance to the setback requirements for the existing house and staff recommends that, if the Commission decides to consider waiving this requirement, the waiver be made subject to a variance being granted by the Johnson County Board of Adjustment. The applicant has stated that no fire hydrants are proposed; however, if desired, they are willing to enter into an agreement with the City to have fire such times as city hydrants installed ein accordance t standards tywatersuppliesare being madeavailable be t ableto the subdivision. Finally, the emergency access easement which was proposed in the northwest corner of the tract has been removed ishown with the followinghe notationlat : Syrilst Street will 1 h not be improved has beenfor vehicular access until the grade and/or the alignment of Prairie du Chien Road is substantially improved." Staff finds that this alteration adequately meets the concerns about the use of any emergency access easement as a permanent point of ingress and egress. It should be noted, however, that at such time as the Plat is submitted for Lot 25, this street will not be acceptable as a means of secondary access unless it has been approved in accordance with the the note. Therefore, as stated in the staff report, unless a realignment of Prairie du Chien Road occurs, secondary access will again be a critical concern in �IdICROF ILIdED BY 1 —'DORM -MICR6LAB" J CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 9 i I PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 1982 PAGE 5 reviewing any proposed resubdivision of Lot 25. In summary, Knight stated that all deficiencies and diescrepancies noted on the staff report have been resolved j except the question of th 60' right-of-way width on Kyle Drive. This could be waived by the City Council, and if the Commission takes action on this item, a j recommendation should be made regarding that requirement. In addition, a recommendation should be made regarding the waiver of the Rural Design Standards for a rural road to permit a six inch stone base and chipseal surface. Finally, any action taken should be subject to final approval by the Engineering Division of the preliminary stormwater management calculations. There was no public discussion. --- Baker pointed out that the staff did not seem as concerned about the problems of secondary access as in the first staff report. Knight agreed, stating that, right now, the only location for secondary access would do more damage than good; the problem could become critical with further development since Syril Street is not intended to provide for secondary access until such time as it is improved. Scott questioned whether or not the issue of secondary access should be included in the motion if it puts pressure on the County. Scott expressed a preference not to include secondary access as part of the motion. Knight agreed that it was not critical now but it would become so when Lot 25 was subdivided. Boyle pointed out that an expression of concern in a motion would not necessarily bind a subsequent Planning & Zoning Commission. Scott moved that this item be approved subject to: 1) waiver of the 60' right-of-way width on Kyle Drive subject to a variance being granted by the Johnson County Board of Adjustment, 2) waiver of the Rural Design Standards for a rural road to permit a six inch stone base and chipseal surface, and 3) final approval by the Engineering Division of the preliminary stormwater management calculations. Jakobson seconded the motion. Seward indicated that he would abstain because the applicant was a client. The motion carried 4-1-1; Baker'voted no and Seward abstained. Baker stated he was not completely comfortable with the question of secondary access and the reasons for the waivers. S-8224. Public discussion of an application submitted•by Beverly Enterprises Tor approval of a preliminary large scale residential development plan to permit construction of a 16 -unit congregate care facility at 605 Greenwood Drive; 45 - day limitation period: 01/15/83. Knight reviewed the staff report stating that, the applicant, Beverly Enterprises, is requesting approval of a preliminary LSRD plan to permit the construction of a 16 -unit congregate care facility on the same tract of land as the nursing home is located. Staff recommends that the preliminary LSRD plan be deferred and upon resolution of the concerns stated in the staff report and the deficiencies and discrepancies listed, the staff would recommend that this item be approved. Knight stated that he had discussed the submission of a combination preliminary and final plat with the applicant. The Commission would have to wait until the Board of Adjustment acts upon a variance request concerning the Tree Ordinance requirements. The applicant has waived the 45 day asp i IdICRDEILMED BY 1. —JOR M--MICR�LAB"- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES i / PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 1982 PAGE 6 limitation period and staff recommends that this item be deferred until the first meeting in February. Knight stated that, while the letter waiving the 45 - day limitation period had not yet been received he should have it prior to the next meeting. There was no public discussion. Seward stated it would be appropriate to defer this item until the January 6th meeting. Scott moved and Jakobson seconded that this item be deferred until January 6, 1983. The motion carried unanimously. S-8225. Public discussion of an application submitted by Moreland, Apel, Haeseneyer and Miller for the approval of the preliminary and final LSRD, Iowa - Illinois Manor, located at 505 Burlington Street; 45 -day limitation period: 01/19/83. Franklin referred to her memo dated December 16, 1982, which stated that all of the deficiencies and discrepancies on the Plan noted in the staff report dated December 16, 1982, have been satisfied and resolved. The necessary legal papers have been submitted and approved by legal staff., Existing contours have not been shown on the Plan as specified under the LSRD provisions; however, proposed site development contours have been shown. However, given the flatness of the lot, it was not a critical factor. The staff recommends that the Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the preliminary and final LSRD and that the requirement regarding contours be waived under the powers granted in Section 27-59 of the Municipal Code. Boyle asked if the legal papers had been corrected to show Lot 26 rather than Lot 28. Franklin stated that it had. John Moreland, applicant, thanked the staff for all their efforts, and stated that he would be proud to take a 6-0 vote to the City Council. Jakobson moved that the Commission recommend approval of the plan and that the City Council waive the requirements regarding contours under the powers granted in Section 27-59 of the Municipal Code. Baker indicated that he would vote in favor of this item since he felt apartments were ideal for this area, but expressed the feeling that the parking was not adequate. Baker stated that he had no problems with the particular plat;and,the applicant should be commended for his efforts. Jakobson agreed with Baker's comments about the developer's cooperation, stating that he had made concessions to the City that would help the City improve that area. Seward indicated that he was abstaining because the applicant was a client of his. The motion carried 5-0-1; Seward abstained. OTHER BUSINESS: 1. Public discussion of a proposed rezoning of certain property on the west side of Dubuque Street and just north of the City limits from Cl to C2. Jordan stated that the Johnson County Planning and Zoning Commission had held its meeting on the previous Monday and had referred this item to the City/County Urban Fringe Committee. Jordan reviewed comments made to him by residents of the area, stating that people had expressed their confidence that this item would be defeated. Seward asked if the Commission needed to request more staff assistance or could a 1 i 141CROFILMED BY 1. _-JORMMIC R(JL AB- - .r CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES t Ia1$a PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 1982 PAGE 7 recommendation to the City/County Urban Fringe Committee be made at this time. Boothroy reported on what had occurred at the last meeting of the City/County Urban Fringe Committee and stated that there would probably be a meeting after January 1; the Commission's comments could be made at that time. Seward expressed a preference to dispense with this item prior to the new year. .Scott stated that he could not support the rezoning. Seward stated that it would be appropriate to recommend that the area be downzoned.- Scott moved that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the City Council recommend to the City/County Urban Fringe Committee that the proposed rezoning of certain property on the west side of Dubuque Street and just north of the city limits from Cl to C2 is inappropriate for that property and further, that the City support the City/County Urban Fringe Committee discussion of the potential downzoning of that property. Jordan seconded the motion. Baker stated that he was in accord with Scott's comments. Jakobson stated that, one of the reasons for considering downzoning in this area was due to the fact that it was the only entrance into the City undeveloped commercially and it was desirable to leave it as such. The motion carried unanmously. The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m. Taken by: ora ehrp n,inut Faker 19 4 Approved by: i MICROFILMED BY 1_ JORM -MICR6LAB'- JJ r CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I 115 d